Started By
Message
re: Many schools have been gypped out of national titles, but 1983 Auburn was one of the worst
Posted on 6/28/23 at 10:32 pm to MetroAtlantaGatorFan
Posted on 6/28/23 at 10:32 pm to MetroAtlantaGatorFan
quote:
Well that's the thing, basically anything that's not BCS or CFP is mythical.
One could even say any playoff system that relies on the opinions of people to determine who participates, is still questionable.
0
Posted on 6/28/23 at 10:39 pm to Oklahomey
If you’re an Oklahoma fan and you don’t include 2004, you didn’t learn your lesson from the arse beating you took in Miami. Sooners had no business playing in that game.
Posted on 6/28/23 at 10:41 pm to cmayes56
quote:
But in 66, Bama was the 2 time defending champion.. Ranked #1 in the first poll.. went undefeated and finished 3rd. That’s unprecedented
1964 was fresh on voters minds. It evened out.
Posted on 6/28/23 at 11:03 pm to AUTiger789
Different story. Three P5 programs went undefeated. USC and Oklahoma were preseason #1 and #2. OU had the 2003 Heisman winner and 2004 Heisman runner-up. USC was the defending co-national champion with the 2004 Heisman winner.
You can’t determine OU’s position on being in the game based on the result. No one knew it would unfold like that. Auburn was just unfortunate. OU also played no FCS programs.
You can’t determine OU’s position on being in the game based on the result. No one knew it would unfold like that. Auburn was just unfortunate. OU also played no FCS programs.
Posted on 6/28/23 at 11:11 pm to JetDawg
Osborne could've won the title had he elected to tie the game with an XP.
Nebraska was considered so good that year that part of the reason Miami was voted champ is because they beat a team many considered unbeatable. There was talk about that Nebraska team the way USC was talked about going into the 2005 season and during the season as well.
Texas did beat Auburn fairly handily as they were leading 20-0 at. halftime, but statistically, it was fairly close and probably turned on two ints by the Auburn QB as Texas had 0 turnovers in the game.
Definitely a case for Auburn.
Nebraska was considered so good that year that part of the reason Miami was voted champ is because they beat a team many considered unbeatable. There was talk about that Nebraska team the way USC was talked about going into the 2005 season and during the season as well.
Texas did beat Auburn fairly handily as they were leading 20-0 at. halftime, but statistically, it was fairly close and probably turned on two ints by the Auburn QB as Texas had 0 turnovers in the game.
Definitely a case for Auburn.
This post was edited on 6/28/23 at 11:12 pm
Posted on 6/28/23 at 11:17 pm to cajunbama
quote:
Auburn got arse pounded by Texas
We lost 20-7 in the second game of the season to a team that ended up going undefeated in the regular season.
Yea, that's really getting our arse pounded (we did play like shite and still only lost by 13 points).
You are proving once again that you are one dumbass mother fricker.
Posted on 6/28/23 at 11:21 pm to Foy
quote:that would be seven including '57 and 2010
Yes. If we claimed them like other schools we'd have 6. Damn respectable for the non-state school.
Posted on 6/28/23 at 11:23 pm to JetDawg
Relax. The New York Times named Auburn national champs and that's all the news that's fit to print.
This post was edited on 6/28/23 at 11:24 pm
Posted on 6/28/23 at 11:58 pm to SummerOfGeorge
Agreed. 1941 is garbage. I almost feel like Bama clings to 1941 because of the way we got hosed in '66 and '77.
Posted on 6/29/23 at 12:22 am to JetDawg
They honestly should claim it. It’s not like the east coast libs that make up the AP poll really know all that much about football anyway
Posted on 6/29/23 at 1:54 am to JetDawg
AU got dominated by TX. They would have gotten the same by Nebraska or Miami. They barely squeaked by an average Mich team. If they wanted to make a statement then that would have been the time.
This post was edited on 6/29/23 at 1:59 am
Posted on 6/29/23 at 2:25 am to JetDawg
Tennessee was screwed outright for the 1939 title.
The 1939 Vols were also the last team in NCAA history to go undefeated, untied, and unscored upon in the regular season. But finish the regular season at #2. 1938 and 1940 UT was national champions. Don’t make sense how your the champs in 1938 and possibly the greatest defensive team ever doesn’t lose or give up a point does it win it again.
The 1939 Vols were also the last team in NCAA history to go undefeated, untied, and unscored upon in the regular season. But finish the regular season at #2. 1938 and 1940 UT was national champions. Don’t make sense how your the champs in 1938 and possibly the greatest defensive team ever doesn’t lose or give up a point does it win it again.
Posted on 6/29/23 at 4:45 am to AUTiger789
quote:
Bama lost to Texas in a bowl game. Arkansas went undefeated and won their bowl game.
Bowl games did not hold the same weight in 1964 as they do now. They were seen as exhibition games to reward players for a good season rather than as games that actually mattered. There's a reason why schools such as Notre Dame habitually declined bowl invitations until they started counting toward the national championship picture.
Posted on 6/29/23 at 5:22 am to AUTiger789
quote:
Bama claims 1941 which is absolutely laughable.
1941 is now and forever more claimed by State.
Posted on 6/29/23 at 5:26 am to Oklahomey
Yeah 2004 Auburn team was stacked.
Posted on 6/29/23 at 5:54 am to Killean
quote:
Probably should mention that #2 Texas beat Auburn and their only loss was 10-9 to Georgia in the bowl game.
Not to mention Miami's win over Nebraska was a big deal.. they were undefeated and had beaten the holy frick out of most of their opponents.
Auburn was probably lucky to be ranked #3. Texas should have been ranked over them.
What time is it in Dallas? 10-9!
That Cotton Bowl win was GLORIOUS. I was working in Texas at the time and the Texas fans were PISSED off about playing UGA because UGA was not good enough and when they beat the brakes off UGA they would not get a boost toward the natty. It was on TV, radio and in newspapers...they were being denied a chance to win a natty by having to play lowly UGA.
I was working for my Uncle in Galveston and he was a big UGA fan...he had a game watching party at his house and the place was full of Longhorn fans...and me and my Uncle. They were all convinced they could not lose to UGA and when the beat the brakes off lowly UGA they would not get any kind of boost and would be denied a natty...it was a foregone conclusion. When John Lastinger toted the ball across the goal line you'd have thought CBS had televise Bevo getting anally raped by an elephant...those Longhorn fans in attendance were STUNNED that the mighty, undefeated Longhorns could lose a game to no account UGA. In the post game interview Texas' coach made his case for the natty despite the loss, saying the better team did not win the game...when Vince Dooley was asked about it he replied "where I come from the winning team is the better team....".
Posted on 6/29/23 at 6:19 am to koreandawg
quote:
Osborne could've won the title had he elected to tie the game with an XP.
Nebraska was considered so good that year that part of the reason Miami was voted champ is because they beat a team many considered unbeatable. There was talk about that Nebraska team the way USC was talked about going into the 2005 season and during the season as well.
Texas did beat Auburn fairly handily as they were leading 20-0 at. halftime, but statistically, it was fairly close and probably turned on two ints by the Auburn QB as Texas had 0 turnovers in the game.
Definitely a case for Auburn.
In the era Nebraska and Oklahoma had one game a year, against one another, that would be considered a game against anyone that was anything better than average. In 1983 Nebraska's regular season opponents winning % was .507. The best 3 teams they beat in the regular season had a record of 24-12-1. They had a 4 week stretch before the Oklahoma game against opponents with 16-28-1 records. There loss to Miami wasn't as unexpected as it was made out to be...they had played a weal schedule against teams that also played a weak schedule, as was the case for both Nebraska and Oklahoma in that era. Nebraska's recent results are indicative of what they would have always been had they played in a conference that had better than average competition...
Posted on 6/29/23 at 6:24 am to AUTiger789
quote:
Bama won the 1978 UPI title because it was awarded BEFORE its bowl game loss
What? Alabama beat then #1 Penn State 14-7 in the Sugar Bowl in 1978.
Posted on 6/29/23 at 6:25 am to JetDawg
04 Auburn got raped. The NCAA just HAD to have their USC / OU title game that they got gyped on the year before to decide the "real" champions of the BCS Era.
04 auburn would have skull fricked either one of them.
04 auburn would have skull fricked either one of them.
Posted on 6/29/23 at 6:27 am to cajunbama
Auburn had played the toughest schedule in the nation, including nine bowl teams, eight of which were ranked in the top 20 (five in the top ten), and two teams Auburn faced would compete against each other in the 1983 Florida Citrus Bowl (Tennessee won the game against Maryland 30–23).
This post was edited on 6/29/23 at 6:32 am
Page 4 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News