Started By
Message
re: Auburn won't claim National Championships
Posted on 5/27/15 at 5:57 pm to RollTide1987
Posted on 5/27/15 at 5:57 pm to RollTide1987
Sometimes all it takes is a competent offensive coordinator. It's laughable that some use previous year outcomes only when convenient to their argument.
2
Posted on 5/27/15 at 5:57 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
Auburn 2004 was definitely the second best team in the country. Wide margin though between them and the Champions.
Posted on 5/27/15 at 5:58 pm to AUbagman
quote:
It's laughable that some use previous year outcomes only when convenient to their argument.
Yep. Rolltide87 likes to ignore reality though. Too much bammer in him.
Posted on 5/27/15 at 5:59 pm to JuiceTerry
Well, that is your opinion. One I suspect you would struggle to back up but you are certainly entitled to it never the less.
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:00 pm to JuiceTerry
Wide margin? Have you even examined the schedule or the box scores of the USC games that year? You do realize how many top-25 teams AU beat that year, correct? The resume alone should have put AU there. The media wanted what the media wanted, point blank. They took their preseason 2 and ran with it.
This post was edited on 5/27/15 at 6:01 pm
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:01 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
Nothing wrong with being great, sometimes there is just somebody greater. War Eagle, though. That was a great team.
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:04 pm to AU24
13-0, nothing to show.
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:07 pm to hg
quote:
Why would they claim 2004?
Because they earned it.
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:07 pm to JuiceTerry
USC/AU both played VT that year. AU was never losing, USC was losing most of the game. According to Bama fans, that was a meaningless bowl game for AU since they weren't playing for the title, at least that's what you guys say after a bowl loss.
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:08 pm to Korin
quote:
13-0, nothing to show.
Besides an SEC title, BCS bowl win, and 4 1st round draft picks, sure.
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:10 pm to JuiceTerry
quote:
Auburn 2004 was definitely the second best team in the country. Wide margin though between them and the Champions.
Yea how could we have hung with that powerhouse that squeaked past Oregon State, Stanford, Cal, Virginia Tech, UCLA??
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:11 pm to AUbagman
Eleven point wins are almost 4 times better than 3 point wins, broseph. Terrible argument. 
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:15 pm to AUbagman
quote:
hey took their preseason 2 and ran with it.
In OU's defense they didn't drop a single game that season, and beat almost all of their opponents convincingly. It sucks that there were 3 undefeated teams at the end of the regular season, but you can't penalize OU for going undefeated.
This post was edited on 5/27/15 at 6:20 pm
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:16 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Auburn might have been there had they not shite the bed in '03. Also beating a 6-win and unranked Alabama team by a mere 8 points didn't help your case either.
Haha we beat like 5-6 teams in the top 10, and dominated a few.
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:16 pm to JuiceTerry
I can tell you watched neither game.
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:17 pm to JuiceTerry
Honestly, just claim it. That way yall can shut up about the bammers and still pale in comparison.
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:17 pm to AUbagman
quote:
Besides an SEC title, BCS bowl win, and 4 1st round draft picks, sure.
Print the shirts?
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:19 pm to Carolina Tide
quote:
It sucks that there were 3 undefeated teams at the end of the regular season, but you can't penalize OU for going undefeated.
If voters had looked at quality wins during the season, it would have been easy to penalize OU. But they didn't. Most stuck with their original prediction.
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:20 pm to Korin
quote:
Print the shirts?
Sure, if you're into that kind of thing.
Posted on 5/27/15 at 6:20 pm to PeaRidgeWatash
quote:
If USC gets to for 03, Auburn should for 04
Page 2 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News