[jlb1705]

The 2002 season has been completely mythologized. People seem to remember the trophy and the celebration, and forget the very real issues and limitations that team had. The fact that they were able to overcome those things to go undefeated and win the title was amazing and has to count for something if you're trying to compare then and now, but to say that 2007 is not as good because you haven't seen those intangibles is not fair to this year's team because they haven't had those same limitations in their path. I think the fact that they don't have those limitations in the first place is a plus, and it serves to me as evidence that this year's edition is better equipped to make a title run than the 2002 team was. Will they end up with the same result? That remains to be seen. I think this year's team has faced shorter odds from the outset in the pursuit of a national championship.

My view on this is reflected in my choices for who I'd take unit by unit. The only units I'd take from 2002 over this year's edition without hesitation are DL and PK. FB and TE I think are a push. For everything else I'd take the units on this year's team.

That's not to say that there aren't plenty of individual players on that 2002 team that wouldn't have a place on this year's team - Mike Doss comes to mind immediately. He was the heart and soul of that team - but the secondary as a whole is much better now than it was then. There is better depth and it is better in coverage. I can down the line on some of the other units - on the whole I think this is a much better situation than it was during the 2002 season.