Started By
Message
re: 1983 Auburn Tigers: The biggest hosing in modern CFB history
Posted on 6/23/17 at 6:20 pm to RollTide1987
Posted on 6/23/17 at 6:20 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Unless it was against LSU in the Sugar Bowl. They did pretty well in those games.
Might be the only bowl games that Nebraska won that decade. While you speak the truth in regards to LSU, you absolutely lost your first argument that beating Nebraska was a that big a deal in the 1980's. 1970's? Yes. 1990's? Yes. But not the 1980's. Nebraska wasn't as good in the 80's as it was in the 70's or the 90's.
1
Posted on 6/23/17 at 6:24 pm to Ross
Miami would've lost 2-3 games in the SEC that year. The 1983 version of the SEC might've been the best conference ever......at least up to that point in history. The 1983 SEC was the first conference to ever win five(5) bowl games.I'll argue that Auburn,Florida,Georgia, and Alabama would've all beaten Miami in 1983. LSU finished LAST in the SEC in 1983 and beat Washington.....the 3rd place Pac-Ten team.
Posted on 6/23/17 at 6:28 pm to tigerburningbright75
quote:
While you speak the truth in regards to LSU, you absolutely lost your first argument that beating Nebraska was a that big a deal in the 1980's
I never argued that. You have me mistaken for someone else. In Nebraska's defense, two of their post season bowl games that decade were against the eventual national champion and three others were against the team that finished #2.
This post was edited on 6/23/17 at 6:32 pm
Posted on 6/23/17 at 6:30 pm to Ross
quote:
1983 Auburn Tigers: The biggest hosing in modern CFB history
Only 34 years ago. Seems like 100.
Posted on 6/23/17 at 6:31 pm to BowlJackson
quote:
Can't answer that because that was 8 years before I was born
Love how some of the Auburn posters are terrified to have an opinion on games and teams that happened before they were born because it would nullify their belief that Auburn is Alabama's equal since Bryant retired.
Posted on 6/23/17 at 6:38 pm to I-59 Tiger
quote:They were ranked #1 in the preseason poll. They dropped to #3 (behind #1 Michigan St and #2 UCLA) the following week, before they had even played a game, and bounced between #3 and #4 the rest of the season.
Two things to keep in mind if anyone looks at 1966 Alabama: 1. They started off pre-season #1 and did not lose a game
Also, the Notre Dame-Sparty game was on November 19th, when the two teams were #1 and #2 and combined for 41 of the 43 first place votes cast in that week's AP poll (Bama and Arkansas had one each). And Bamas schedule was far from impressive - at that time, of their 8 opponents only Ole Miss was guaranteed a winning record at 6-2 (they had just beaten the Vols, who were 5-3).
Another forgotten factor: Bama was on NCAA probation for the 1966 season. Sure, it was for a joke of a violation (too many scholarshipped players practicing at the same time, or something equally foolish) and resulted in no major sanctions - but it very likely factored into the voting.
Posted on 6/23/17 at 6:45 pm to FearlessFreep
quote:
but it very likely factored into the voting.
Freep I understand you know trivial knowledge like this supposed probation thingy, but how could you possibly know it factored into the voting? I didn't even know about this?
How could you know some secondary level thing like this, that I'm guessing most people didn't even know, influenced how the voters voted?
This post was edited on 6/23/17 at 6:47 pm
Posted on 6/23/17 at 7:27 pm to llfshoals
quote:
Did they win their conference? No.
Did you score a touchdown? No.
Both teams looked like shite.
I guess you don't recognize Alabamas 2011 title then?
Posted on 6/23/17 at 7:57 pm to RandySavage
Three teams got screwed in 1983 IMO.
1.Nebraska solely for having to play Miami on its home field.
2.Texas for not getting the matchup it deserved
3.Auburn for playing the toughest rated schedule of the decade and getting jumped by a team being pushed by the media.
Miami was being pushed as a the Cinderella upstart much like Boise State was pushed as legit a few years back. After the dust settled, Auburn clearly was the team that got screwed. However, the bowl the ins killed any chance of a true national championship game which would have been Nebraska and Texas.
1.Nebraska solely for having to play Miami on its home field.
2.Texas for not getting the matchup it deserved
3.Auburn for playing the toughest rated schedule of the decade and getting jumped by a team being pushed by the media.
Miami was being pushed as a the Cinderella upstart much like Boise State was pushed as legit a few years back. After the dust settled, Auburn clearly was the team that got screwed. However, the bowl the ins killed any chance of a true national championship game which would have been Nebraska and Texas.
Posted on 6/23/17 at 8:07 pm to cajunbama
Yeah it couldn't possibly be because most people know jack shite about the rosters of teams from half way across the country that played a decade before you were born...
Everything just has to revolve around Bama
#InsecureU
Everything just has to revolve around Bama
#InsecureU
Posted on 6/23/17 at 8:12 pm to RandySavage
quote:BCS trophy in the Bryant museum. I'll take the word of the people who awarded the trophy.
I guess you don't recognize Alabamas 2011 title then?
You're just pissed nobody thought the barn worthy of the title. They finished 3rd dude, 3rd.
It's not like it was even close.
Posted on 6/23/17 at 8:13 pm to Ross
quote:
However, for some, it is a big deal that Texas lost the last game of the season to #7 Georgia. The same Georgia team that, as mentioned above, Auburn defeated in the game before the Iron Bowl in 1983.
Doesn't matter. Texas played AU head-to-head--and won. Why disregard that and try to ride Georgia's coattails?
Posted on 6/23/17 at 8:18 pm to TheDude321
Because their resume is inferior to Auburn's and it's not just those two teams in consideration, head to head isn't the deciding factor.
This post was edited on 6/23/17 at 8:19 pm
Posted on 6/23/17 at 8:32 pm to Ross
There's no way Miami should have moved to #1 based on a failed OPTIONAL 2 point try by Nebraska. That game was almost certainly a tie game if Nebraska had just kicked the ball.
Auburn was certainly strong that year, running through the SEC gauntlet of Tennessee, Florida, Georgia and Bama. I remember the Tennessee game in Knoxville and just couldn't believe how y'all blew out a really good team up there
Auburn was certainly strong that year, running through the SEC gauntlet of Tennessee, Florida, Georgia and Bama. I remember the Tennessee game in Knoxville and just couldn't believe how y'all blew out a really good team up there
Posted on 6/23/17 at 8:47 pm to TheDude321
quote:
Doesn't matter. Texas played AU head-to-head--and won. Why disregard that and try to ride Georgia's coattails?
Auburn is 2006 National Champs. We beat Florida head-to-head--and won. Why disregard that and try to ride Arkansas' coattails?
Posted on 6/23/17 at 9:16 pm to Ross
This would be why the BCS was implemented, before the BCS it was a clusterf**k of epic proportions.
Posted on 6/23/17 at 9:26 pm to BowlJackson
quote:
Auburn is 2006 National Champs. We beat Florida head-to-head--and won.
Auburn was 11-2 in 2006. Florida was 13-1. That's the difference. Every team that finished in the Top 5 in 1983 finished with one loss. Hardly a comparable scenario even if you were just being sarcastic.
Posted on 6/23/17 at 9:38 pm to cajunbama
quote:Hell, I don't know anything for sure. Like everyone else ITT, I'm just speculating.
Freep I understand you know trivial knowledge like this supposed probation thingy, but how could you possibly know it factored into the voting? I didn't even know about this? How could you know some secondary level thing like this, that I'm guessing most people didn't even know, influenced how the voters voted?
But the truth was, there were a lot of people associated with college football - many of them sportswriters - who didn't care for Bryant. Like I said, the NCAA case against Bama that year was bullshite, mist likely trumped up because they knew Bryant and Co. were providing illegal benefits but couldn't prove it.
Anyway, '66 wasn't the epic hose job you make it out to be. If anything, it's kinda like what happened to AU in 2004 - the most influential people in the sport picked out the two teams they wanted to see ranked at the top, knowing they would play for the championship at seasons end (only it was a game already on the schedule).
This post was edited on 6/23/17 at 9:39 pm
Posted on 6/23/17 at 9:40 pm to RightWingTiger
quote:
This would be why the BCS was implemented, before the BCS it was a clusterf**k of epic proportions.
BCS formula would have put Nebraska vs Auburn for the National Championship.
Miami wouldn't have even made a 4 team playoff
Posted on 6/23/17 at 9:54 pm to BowlJackson
quote:
BCS formula would have put Nebraska vs Auburn for the National Championship.
How do you figure? Texas finished the regular season #2 and undefeated.
Page 5 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News