tOfficial Auburn Superthread

[bamabear82]

Bama fans need not post in this thread

Pffft. awwbun fans have been talking shit for years about claiming titles, don't think yer not gonna hear about it now.

 

[The Crimson King]

Pffft. awwbun fans have been talking shit for years about claiming titles, don't think yer not gonna hear about it now.

I know.......I don't like it

 

[Mistaken4193]

The only one Auburn should have a right to claim IMO is the 1983 title(they deserved that one). The '93 team was on probation. And Idk enough about the 1913 team to comment on them.

 

[Wild Turkey]

The only one Auburn should have a right to claim IMO is the 1983 title(they deserved that one). The '93 team was on probation. And Idk enough about the 1913 team to comment on them.

Yeah because we didn't earn the right in 2004. Once USC vacated it should have gone to Auburn no other organization/process doesn't go to the runner up. The MNC has always been a beauty contest and even those give the crown to the runner up once the top spot is vacated.

You don't go undefeated in the SEC and not deserve the shot.

 

[TexasExes98]

Yeah because we didn't earn the right in 2004. Once USC vacated it should have gone to Auburn no other organization/process doesn't go to the runner up. The MNC has always been a beauty contest and even those give the crown to the runner up once the top spot is vacated.

You don't go undefeated in the SEC and not deserve the shot.

SEC wasn't even the best conference in '04, so yes, you can go undefeated in the SEC back in '04 and not deserve a shot, especially when the two teams who played for the BCS title were #1 and #2 all season long. USC would have spanked that ass anyway....

 

[pennstatenut]

Yeah because we didn't earn the right in 2004. Once USC vacated it should have gone to Auburn no other organization/process doesn't go to the runner up. The MNC has always been a beauty contest and even those give the crown to the runner up once the top spot is vacated.

You don't go undefeated in the SEC and not deserve the shot.

So let me get this right. You think you should leap up to #1 because another team was ineligible but the team they beat who was #2 should fall because they lost to the ineligible team? Is that right?

 

[Wild Turkey]

SEC wasn't even the best conference in '04, so yes, you can go undefeated in the SEC back in '04 and not deserve a shot, especially when the two teams who played for the BCS title were #1 and #2 all season long. USC would have spanked that ass anyway....

Hypothetical thinking at best.

 

[bamafan4evr12]

BYU was worse. Nothing like being a double digit favorite and getting your ass handed to you. Oh wait, that didnt happen to Texas last yr

Did I hurt your feelings?

 

[Wild Turkey]

So let me get this right. You think you should leap up to #1 because another team was ineligible but the team they beat who was #2 should fall because they lost to the ineligible team? Is that right?

Oklahoma shouldn't have been there period but please feel free to make an argument for them and look stupid...free country.

 

[The Crimson King]

Most people don't know this

The 2004 Bowling Green Game

The fact that Auburn did not get to play Bowling Green—a team originally on their schedule but later swiped by another program—is far more significant to Tigers history than you may realize. And it gets even stranger than that.

Everyone remembers 2004. Auburn went undefeated but finished third in the BCS rankings after the conference title games were played, and thus were left out of the national championship game in favor of Southern Cal and Oklahoma. One major reason often cited for Auburn being ranked below the Sooners was Auburn’s strength of out-of-conference schedule compared with OU’s. In particular, people point to the fact that Auburn played the “lowly” Citadel.

But why was the Citadel on Auburn’s schedule? They were a last-minute replacement after one of Auburn’s original non-conference opponents, Bowling Green, was paid to drop Auburn and play them instead. This was a good and relatively highly-regarded Bowling Green team—and the head coach was none other than Urban Meyer! Thus the Falcons boosted their new opponent’s strength of schedule and hurt Auburn’s when they took the money and switched.

What team paid Bowling Green to drop Auburn and play them instead? Why, Oklahoma, of course.

The Ten Best Auburn Games that Never Happened | The War Eagle Reader

 

[Codaxx]

Oklahoma shouldn't have been there period but please feel free to make an argument for them and look stupid...free country.

Why? OU and USC were considered the 2 best teams all year. It was a preordained title game. USC was bringing back most of a team that won the AP title. OU brought back most of the team that lost to LSU in the title game. Just looked up SOS and USC finished 7th, OU 13th, and Auburn 60th according to Sagarin. Really is not much to bitch about here at all. SEC only had 4 ranked teams. It wasn't the strongest year in the SEC. I think all of those are pretty solid arguments. You can rewrite the history, but in December of 2004 there was not a huge argument for Aubun

 

[bamafan4evr12]

Oklahoma shouldn't have been there period but please feel free to make an argument for them and look stupid...free country.

OU may not have deserved to be there, but they were. Auburn has no claim to 04. And before you deflect I know you're going to say Bama claims titles

 

[The Crimson King]

The '83 team beat #5 Florida, #7 Maryland, #4 Georgia, #19 Alabama, and #8 Michigan in it's last 5 games. Florida destroyed Miami that year

 

[Codaxx]

Most people don't know this




The Ten Best Auburn Games that Never Happened | The War Eagle Reader

OU played and rolled Bowling Green, Houston, and Oregon. Auburn play La-Monroe, La Tech, and the Citadel. Not like they were playing an AQ school.

 

[The Crimson King]

 

[The Crimson King]

OU played and rolled Bowling Green, Houston, and Oregon. Auburn play La-Monroe, La Tech, and the Citadel. Not like they were playing an AQ school.

Bowling Green went 9-3 that year and won a bowl game

 

[pennstatenut]

Oklahoma shouldn't have been there period but please feel free to make an argument for them and look stupid...free country.

What's stupid is trying to claim a championship you never even played in.

 

[Codaxx]

Bowling Green went 9-3 that year and won a bowl game

And OU rolled them. Even if you had BG, it was Houston and Oregon vs JV LA schools. None were particularly good that year, but at least OU played an AQ school. Like I said, it didn't matter. USC v OU was billed the game of the century by October. Auburn would have had to of had the greatest schedule of all-time to break that media lock.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Oklahoma got their ass kicked. Auburn ended up number two once USC vacated it should have been awarded to us we beat every team in front of us including Tenn twice (10-3 but two losses were to Auburn otherwise a top 5 team) Auburn won their games it is that simple there is no valid reason not to award it.

 

[The Crimson King]

And OU rolled them. Even if you had BG, it was Houston and Oregon vs JV LA schools. None were particularly good that year, but at least OU played an AQ school. Like I said, it didn't matter. USC v OU was billed the game of the century by October. Auburn would have had to of had the greatest schedule of all-time to break that media lock.

By 16 points.

There was a .035 difference in the BCS standings between Auburn and Oklahoma. There was also only a difference in the coaches poll of 24 votes