tOfficial Auburn Superthread

[TROJAN-MAN]

LFOL..

 

[potzer25]

Frankly, 41 was most legit them some of the others because it was not retroactive. However, the resume is what people look at and it was after the AP poll, which some people mistakenly think was the start of the "championships".

Got 12? Here's how Alabama bumped up its claim to a dozen national titles | al.com

 

[TROJAN-MAN]

I could NEVER understand any Organization or agency awarding 2 teams as NC when one beat the other, yet are considered equal. I guess these are the same nimrods who have determined that hand held cell phone use is the culprit in accidents, However, to use of " Hands Free " devises are much better. Never considering these same dumb fucks just can't drive & talk

 

[boxedlunch]

Got 12? Here's how Alabama bumped up its claim to a dozen national titles | al.com

I'm aware of the story. Doesn't change the fact that it wasn't retro like some of the other titles.

 

[BamaTee1]

Here it is...
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2013/FBS.pdf

This has the higher count of "championships"...

You're first post has a link that includes Auburn looking at 1910,1913 and 1914 YET according to your link above NCAA doesn't show Auburn with a championship acknowledgment in 1910 or 1914 YET shows Alabama with several in 1966 which they do not claim. What's with that? Barner's always seem to have these answers and give Bama a hard time on this subject yet...?

Most everyone agrees after 1936, and the beginning of poll era, it was three polls, AP, UPI and BCS and includes the coaches poll that counted. Why is Auburn looking at naming championships after beginning of poll era yet none of these are acknowledged by polls, but instead, by some BS publication? Not surprised!

Didn't golf digest name the 2004 team?

 

[RobToxin]

Didn't golf digest name the 2004 team?

I thought the Aggies already claimed that one.

 

[BamaTee1]

In reality, we should wipe out all NC claims pre BCS, simply b/c #1 and #2 rarely ever faced each other for the NC.

Hard to buy into this when college football is all about the tradition, pageantry and heated debates on who would really win a certain game if played. Those discussions are known to go for hours around the water cooler! Alabama has been on the short end several times because of this but I accept it.

Bama was flat out robbed in 1966 of NC but 1977 was just about as bad.

November 26..#2 Alabama crushes Auburn 48-21 but drops to #3. Bama then beats #8 Ohio State in the Sugar Bowl 35-6 but Notre Dame leaps from #5 to #1 after beating #1 Texas 35-10 but only because Texas had 5 turnovers and their two best players were injured, Earl Campbell and Johnny Lam Jones.

Notre Dame's only loss that year was to unranked Ole Miss 20-13, a team Bama had easily defeated 34-13.

Bama's only loss was earlier in the season @ #14 Nebraska 31-24 but beat several ranked teams including #1 USC.

Interesting note. In the first week #1 Oklahoma barely beat Vanderbilt 25-23. A team that had finished 2-9 the previous year.

I hated this when it happened but it is just one part of college football that makes it so great!

 

[outofyourmind]

Hard to buy into this when college football is all about the tradition, pageantry and heated debates on who would really win a certain game if played. Those discussions are known to go for hours around the water cooler! Alabama has been on the short end several times because of this but I accept it.

Bama was flat out robbed in 1966 of NC but 1977 was just about as bad.

November 26..#2 Alabama crushes Auburn 48-21 but drops to #3. Bama then beats #8 Ohio State in the Sugar Bowl 35-6 but Notre Dame leaps from #5 to #1 after beating #1 Texas 35-10 but only because Texas had 5 turnovers and their two best players were injured, Earl Campbell and Johnny Lam Jones.

Notre Dame's only loss that year was to unranked Ole Miss 20-13, a team Bama had easily defeated 34-13.

Bama's only loss was earlier in the season @ #14 Nebraska 31-24 but beat several ranked teams including #1 USC.

Interesting note. In the first week #1 Oklahoma barely beat Vanderbilt 25-23. A team that had finished 2-9 the previous year.

I hated this when it happened but it is just one part of college football that makes it so great!

Too bad ESPN wasn't around back then. You know, to push you over the top.

 

[BamaTee1]

Too bad ESPN wasn't around back then. You know, to push you over the top.

I know because those NC blowouts were all because of ESPN. Thanks ESPN! Dah-dah-da-da-dah-da-da-dah-dah-dah :rollseyes:

 

[boxedlunch]

You're first post has a link that includes Auburn looking at 1910,1913 and 1914 YET according to your link above NCAA doesn't show Auburn with a championship acknowledgment in 1910 or 1914 YET shows Alabama with several in 1966 which they do not claim. What's with that? Barner's always seem to have these answers and give Bama a hard time on this subject yet...?

Most everyone agrees after 1936, and the beginning of poll era, it was three polls, AP, UPI and BCS and includes the coaches poll that counted. Why is Auburn looking at naming championships after beginning of poll era yet none of these are acknowledged by polls, but instead, by some BS publication? Not surprised!

Didn't golf digest name the 2004 team?

That was my point. NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY claims title int he same category as 1910 and 1914. Auburn would open themselves up as a total laughing stock if they did so. Even now, a lot of Auburn people claim they "could claim 9 if they did it like other schools did". That's bunk. Their 9 include a ton of "titles" unlike what no other school claims, which selectors with zero credibility.

Historically, after 1936, the title people claimed were the AP, the Coaches Poll, Football Writers and National Football Foundation. Not many people realize that the FW and NFF has as much credibility as the AP or the Coaches back in the day, but they did. So schools claiming those are on solid ground. The schools claiming others past 1936, and particularly past 1970 are rare, but growing.

 

[HuskerOC]

Welcome to Alabama, home of the last 100 straight college football national champions.

 

[charlie42s]

If Auburn really wants to make some points, post banners with their undefeated seasons and label them, "NCs we do NOT claim". Football fans would love them.

 

[KansasSooner]

Maybe claiming fake championships is what David Boren (OU President) meant when he said he didn't want OU in the SEC because it isn't our culture.

 

[outofyourmind]

If all it takes to claim an NC is an undefeated season then go ahead and throw in an extra 10 for Oklahoma.

 

[boxedlunch]

If all it takes to claim an NC is an undefeated season then go ahead and throw in an extra 10 for Oklahoma.

10?

 

[Wild Turkey]

In high school my basketball coach (who is still coaching on his 38th season) refused to put banners on the gym wall said we weren't going to be a program that looked to the past but the future. We would travel and see all these other schools with banners everywhere and we didn't understand why he wouldn't put them up and thought it was because he was cheap.

Now I get it people are too focused on this stuff that is done and can't be changed instead of being focused on what we can do today. I can remember walking into a gym seeing just a couple of banners and thinking "this team isn't that good" then getting our butt kicked because we underestimated the team. Wish I had been mature enough to really grasp the wisdom of his decision.

There is a price for vanity and the bill will become due at some point.

 

[BamaTee1]

So I guess your coach was right and all others wrong (who hung banners)?

 

[UNA Lion]

Lol. '41...

For the record: I don't like it. Only 1913 would be ok.

Many Bama fans don't approve of the '41 claim.

 

[4down20]

Many Bama fans don't approve of the '41 claim.

I don't mind it that much. The AP poll back then was so biased that math polls were probably the most accurate. There are things about 41 that don't make sense if you look at the details, but you can say the same thing about the AP poll pretty much every year back then.

If nothing else it's a chance to point out to folks that the AP poll was horrible for many years.

 

[potzer25]

There is no logical argument for '41.