Started By
Message
2004 National Chumps= USC?
Posted on 5/21/10 at 12:45 pm
Posted on 5/21/10 at 12:45 pm
LINK
This brings up some pretty good points. If USC does in fact lose their '04 title, should the AP give it to Auburn?
This brings up some pretty good points. If USC does in fact lose their '04 title, should the AP give it to Auburn?
8
Posted on 5/21/10 at 12:47 pm to gorillaballin
No
Posted on 5/21/10 at 12:48 pm to AHM21
Well we all knew how the Gumps were going to respond
Posted on 5/21/10 at 12:48 pm to AHM21
So Germans, it turned itself into weiner schnitzel in leiderhosen.
Posted on 5/21/10 at 12:49 pm to gorillaballin
Don't make the gumps go crazy again.
Their "professional" writers on BOL are already worried about it.
LINK
Their "professional" writers on BOL are already worried about it.
LINK
This post was edited on 5/21/10 at 12:50 pm
Posted on 5/21/10 at 12:49 pm to gorillaballin
quote:
Well we all knew how the Gumps were going to respond
If that's how Auburn wants to claim their first title since 1957, then go right ahead.
Posted on 5/21/10 at 12:49 pm to LA kid but AU fan
ha my bad, haven't been on sec board lately
Posted on 5/21/10 at 12:53 pm to AHM21
quote:
If that's how Auburn wants to claim their first title since 1957, then go right ahead.
Cause we all know that Bama in all of their glory would not accept such a frivolous championship....
at you.Posted on 5/21/10 at 12:56 pm to Aubie83
You can laugh all you want. I just know it'd be funnier to me to see Auburn run along and try to claim the 2004 title 7-10 years after the fact. If the title is vacated, it should be awarded to the national runner up. Based on the fact that they played for the national title, that would be Oklahoma.
Posted on 5/21/10 at 12:57 pm to AHM21
Whatever hypocrite...1941 called...they want their championship back....loser... at you again...
at you again...
Posted on 5/21/10 at 12:57 pm to gorillaballin
It would not bother me if they gave it to Auburn. I thought Auburn was the best team anyway. I would say the success the SEC has had in BCS games since AU got screwed would justify my opinion. After all they went 13-0 and 9-0 in the SEC. I can put my hate aside and say that is fuking strong.
Posted on 5/21/10 at 1:00 pm to SabanIsAGod
quote:
It would not bother me if they gave it to Auburn. I thought Auburn was the best team anyway. I would say the success the SEC has had in BCS games since AU got screwed would justify my opinion. After all they went 13-0 and 9-0 in the SEC. I can put my hate aside and say that is fuking strong.
+1, OU doesn't deserve shite
Posted on 5/21/10 at 1:01 pm to gorillaballin
Very germans but everybody even Auburn fans think the title should be just vacated with no national champion being crowned that year. OTOH, '03 LSU should be given the entire share of the national championship. If there was no USC, '03 would have been universally regarded as the best team in college football that year.
This post was edited on 5/21/10 at 1:03 pm
Posted on 5/21/10 at 1:01 pm to Aubie83
quote:
Whatever hypocrite...1941 called...they want their championship back....loser... at you again...
So you're trying to justify Auburn claiming the 2004 title by bringing up 1941? Doesn't Auburn claim the 2004 national title in their media guide, awarded to them by Golf Digest.
If I'm wrong, forgive me. But I do know that Jordan Hare has a flag flying that says "2004: The Perfect Season."This post was edited on 5/21/10 at 1:02 pm
Posted on 5/21/10 at 1:02 pm to gorillaballin
Auburn would have curbstomped OU just like USCheat did. Hell, maybe even worse. Caddy and Ronny would have eaten that OU defense alive IMO.
But you gotta figure if USC does get stripped, OU will unfortunately get the nod.
But you gotta figure if USC does get stripped, OU will unfortunately get the nod.
Posted on 5/21/10 at 1:02 pm to Bench McElroy
quote:
everybody even Auburn fans think the title should be just vacated with no national champion being crowned that year.
I don't agree with that statement...most Auburn fans have said otherwise...
Posted on 5/21/10 at 1:06 pm to Aubie83
There was an Auburn poster who said he didn't even want a ceremony if Auburn is awarded the title. Just give it away at halftime and get it over with. I don't know how any program can be satisfied with being awarded a national title five years after the fact. It's like being the silver medalist given the gold medal after the gold medalist is stripped of the medal. Yes, the silver medalist get the gold but it's just not the same. All the enjoyment of winning it live was taken away.
Posted on 5/21/10 at 1:07 pm to gorillaballin
Yes, give it to Auburn.
Posted on 5/21/10 at 1:07 pm to Bench McElroy
Exactly. Who the hell cares
Posted on 5/21/10 at 1:10 pm to AHM21
quote:
If that's how Auburn wants to claim their first title since 1957, then go right ahead.
Auburn 2004 - undefeated
Alabama 2009 - undefeated
Stripped of all subjective awards, honors, and "championships," please tell me what the difference between these two seasons is?
Each school has one undefeated season in the last decade. Auburn was awesome when Bama was down. Now Bama is awesome and Auburn is a little down.
Seems pretty square. You people are ridiculous to keep this petty shite going.
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News