Started By
Message
re: 2004 Alabama vs. Auburn Highlights
Posted on 8/27/15 at 5:55 pm to Pavoloco83
Posted on 8/27/15 at 5:55 pm to Pavoloco83
quote:
I think getting our shite pushed in by USC two years in a row the years prior is what REALLY did us in
Did you watch the 2002 game?
0
Posted on 8/27/15 at 6:05 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
Didn't Kirk claim if we beat what was like the 6th ranked UGA team at the time, he'd move us to 2nd?
Then we win in what was a dominating performance, and he backed out?
There was so much disgusting garbage from the media that season. They simply didn't want us in. Still can't forget that Bill Plaschke article.
Posted on 8/27/15 at 6:08 pm to RollTide1987
I was at that game (it was UGA's bye week) sitting with some auburn buddies. I believe the away section was under the national championship flags at BD, and I remember one of the flags was really low hanging and in my drunken state ripped off like a 12" portion of it. Memory is fleeting but I WANT to say it was '41, which would be the best one for it to be honestly 
Posted on 8/27/15 at 6:08 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
Memory is fleeting but I WANT to say it was '41, which would be the best one for it to be honestly
a Freudian grab, if you will.
Posted on 8/27/15 at 8:01 pm to RandySavage
quote:
I'd love to know the ages of people posting in this thread. 2004 is the most hilarious example of revisionist history I've ever seen. It's truly amazing how easily the media is able to manipulate morons.
I was 17. I remember it very vividly. Of the three teams, Oklahoma actually had the toughest schedule (14th). Auburn's non-conference opponents were laughable. Playing the Citadel as well as the struggle in the first half against Alabama doomed ya'll.
Posted on 8/27/15 at 8:07 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
I remember it very vividly
quote:
Oklahoma actually had the toughest schedule
They played one, ONE, 1, uno, un team that finished the season ranked.
quote:
Playing the Citadel
So your honest opinion is that had Bowling Green not backed out of our game to play Oklahoma we would have been chosen ahead of them to play for the title?
quote:
the struggle in the first half against Alabama doomed ya'll.
Interesting. One bad half of the entire season would doom us but OU giving up 35 points in back to back weeks late in the season isn't an issue? Sounds right.
Posted on 8/27/15 at 8:07 pm to TheJones
You're just trying too hard. That's not a true statement. All evidence suggests it would have been a great game.
Posted on 8/27/15 at 8:17 pm to AUbagman
The thing is, I get it. Somebody had to be left out and whoever it was was going to be screwed. It was the nightmare scenario made possible by the broken system that existed.
If people wanted to say they started 1 and 2 or that they thought they were the best teams then fine I can accept that.
The thing that pisses me off is the beyond retarded excuses they tried to drum up to promote their agenda. Every single one of the is so easily rebuffed by anyone with a brain but here we are 11 years later and the dumb dumbs keep spouting the same crap Kirk Herbstreit told them all those years ago.
If people wanted to say they started 1 and 2 or that they thought they were the best teams then fine I can accept that.
The thing that pisses me off is the beyond retarded excuses they tried to drum up to promote their agenda. Every single one of the is so easily rebuffed by anyone with a brain but here we are 11 years later and the dumb dumbs keep spouting the same crap Kirk Herbstreit told them all those years ago.
Posted on 8/27/15 at 8:28 pm to Pavoloco83
quote:
I loved the 2004 iron bowl. Croyle is still picking grass out of his hair...
That's interesting because Croyle didn't even play in the 2004 Iron Bowl. Auburn was locked in a battle with the one and only Spencer Pennington that day.
Posted on 8/27/15 at 8:33 pm to RandySavage
quote:
I'd love to know the ages of people posting in this thread. 2004 is the most hilarious example of revisionist history I've ever seen. It's truly amazing how easily the media is able to manipulate morons.
48
Please help point out the revisionist history examples.
Posted on 8/27/15 at 8:37 pm to RollTide1987
Bama fans celebrated only losing by 10 or whatever for years afterwards. It was pretty interesting how excited they were not to get blown out even though they were at home and the game was over by the start of the 4th.
Posted on 8/27/15 at 8:41 pm to RandySavage
I get it too, but that's why the system was flawed. They started 1&2, and finished so, but they both struggled against worse teams than AU did. It boiled down to what the media wanted. I mean the best they have is a bad half of ball against UA and a cupcake game? Empirical evidence suggests AU/USC would have been the game, considering USC played VT and was losing most of the game. People love to point at the final score (although it wasn't a significant difference), but they disregard Tubs and his tendancy to sit on a lead and let the D win the game.
It just bugs me that USC is made out to be this unbeatable team, especially if you go back and look at the outcomes of their games and/or watched them.
It just bugs me that USC is made out to be this unbeatable team, especially if you go back and look at the outcomes of their games and/or watched them.
Posted on 8/27/15 at 9:25 pm to AUbagman
I don't get why everyone thinks USC would have killed auburn. We might have lost the game but I guarantee it would if been a much better game than Oklahoma. Our d was legit and we had a powerful offense.
Posted on 8/27/15 at 9:34 pm to borotiger
quote:
Please help point out the revisionist history examples.
USC was the greatest team ever. Nobody could match them. Auburn played the weakest schedule. Auburn struggled in the first half against alabama so that's why they didn't make it. USC won in 2003 so of course they would have won in 2004. Tuberville didn't blow teams out enough...
Look at USC's regular season, they won like 5 one possession games. Several against very bad teams. Going on performance during the season it probably should have been Auburn vs. Oklahoma.
This post was edited on 8/27/15 at 9:38 pm
Posted on 8/27/15 at 9:36 pm to gstiger2233
quote:
I don't get why everyone thinks USC would have killed auburn.
Because people are stupid and that game against Big Game Bob is probably the only USC game 90% of those morons saw all season.
Posted on 8/28/15 at 8:20 am to RandySavage
quote:
USC was the greatest team ever. Nobody could match them. Auburn played the weakest schedule. Auburn struggled in the first half against alabama so that's why they didn't make it. USC won in 2003 so of course they would have won in 2004. Tuberville didn't blow teams out enough...
That's not revisionist history. Those are actual things that were said at the time, and some of it was BS. It being BS does not make it revisionist history today.
Posted on 8/28/15 at 8:48 am to BowlJackson
quote:
Why not? In retrospect we now know that Auburn had more and better NFL talent than USC who was supposed to be tGOAT
Well they beat us in 2002 and in 2003 we lost 23-0 in Jordan-Hare
Voters were 1) tired of the match-up and 2) valued Oklahoma's brand. Oklahoma pitted against USC was a better story and would have drawn in more viewers.
Those are the facts
Auburn put it together in 2004 but since we lost to USC 23-0 at home the year before we didn't get the benefit of the doubt. There was no intrigue in a rematchPosted on 8/28/15 at 8:52 am to The Spleen
Fair enough except for the USC being the greatest team ever part. That was not being said until after they smashed Oklahoma.
Posted on 8/28/15 at 8:53 am to RandySavage
The weak schedule one is the worst. Oklahoma played a schedule almost devoid of ranked teams and somehow had a highly ranked schedule. Auburn beat what, 5-6 teams when those teams were ranked in the top 10, and blew out at least 2 of them.
Posted on 8/28/15 at 8:55 am to TheJones
It was the end of Auburn's run of being something of a regional power. It returned us to the national scene and now we're getting a lot more benefit of the doubt.
It sucks that 2004, which was such a solid team, got screwed, but it's still paying dividends.
It sucks that 2004, which was such a solid team, got screwed, but it's still paying dividends.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News