Started By
Message
re: The BIG 6 vs The BIG 6 ALL-TIME
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:04 am to TouchdownTony
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:04 am to TouchdownTony
quote:
Even though AU won the first game they were viewed as the "heathen" as Gay Telese put it. It was a 2nd rate school with 2nd rate students and we knew we were on the cusp of becoming a national player. We didnt run, we just knew that we were gonna be THE team and didnt want you to be connected to us as we looked down on the Ag school with each its non law, non medical students.
Dam almighty....Auburn has had the same reputation for 115 years! I guess that is the one thing consistent about the AU program.
0
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:07 am to Crimson Wraith
quote:
We were 3-2-1 vs you guys up through 1907
Why would you start counting in 1902 when the series began in 1893?
Auburn led 7-4-1 when you guys ran away
LINK
quote:
Winning % from 1908-1947:
Yes, we've established you guys benefited from not having to play Auburn.
quote:
We won national titles in 1925, 1926, 1930, 1934 and 1941. During the same period you guys won zero
Again, not sure where you get this from. You count 1941 where Bama lost 2 games and finished 3rd in conference and somehow that's a "legit" title for you, but Auburn is undefeated in 1913 and 1914, voted National Champion both... But that doesn't fit your agenda
It's clear that Bama benefited from not having to play a superior Auburn program during the 19teens. If you had you never gain the recognition to get invited to the Rose Bowls in the 20's you built your program on. In turn you are never able to attract Paul Bryant to play from out of state. Without being an alumni he never coaches your team and you never gain the clout necessary to hire Nick Saban.
It's all but indisputable that if Bama hadn't run away in 1907 that Alabama likely never wins a single National Championship ever.
Not sure why you guys are getting so offended. I'm not trying to take anything away from your accomplishments. It's already happened and over with. You should embrace the fact the you are where you are today, and your program is built from being cowards early on.
This post was edited on 8/12/16 at 8:39 am
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:10 am to BowlJackson
quote:
Before the SEC was split into divisions scheduling was left more to the school's than the conference and every team had several annual rivals.
Auburn's annual rivals were Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, and Florida.
Alabama annually played Vanderbilt, Ole Miss, and Mississippi State
Auburn went decade long stretches without playing Vanderbilt or Ole Miss.
Alabama went decade long stretches without playing Georgia or Florida
Sounds like some spinning right there. The overall total big 6 games played between bama & auburn is only 19 games over like 120 years of football.
Tennessee wasn't an annual rival of Auburn. You played 51 times. Bama has played UGA more times than you've played Tennessee. The only real argument you have is that Auburn played UF a lot. Which I actually think use to be a great game to watch.
Auburn and State are an annual rival and most of the games were played in Birmingham or Auburn. State has played Auburn more times than Bama's played ole miss. But keep on minimizing. I appreciate the downvote.
This post was edited on 8/12/16 at 9:05 am
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:13 am to Crimson Wraith
1941? Bwahahahaha
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:15 am to Cdawg
quote:
The only real argument you have is that Auburn played UF a lot. Which I actually think use to be a great game to watch.
In addition to knocking UT out- the UF game is a helluva lot sexier sounding now than it was from 1900-1990. About the time UF got good, AU quit playing them as much. And agree, those AU/ FU games were awesome to watch. Much like the AU/ LSU game (usually).
That said, AU plays the #1 and #3 team every year. That counts for something imo.
This post was edited on 8/12/16 at 8:17 am
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:16 am to AU24
quote:
1) Alabama 211-136-18 - 57.8%
2) Auburn 182-187-15 - 47.4%
3) UGA 163-172-15 - 46.0%
4) Florida 151-165-17 - 46.9%
5) Tennessee 118-137-16 - 43.4%
6) LSU 106-135-13 - 41.7%
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:16 am to BowlJackson
quote:
Yes, we've established you guys benefited from not having to play Auburn.
Auburn fans are still as delusional as ever I see. You should be thankful Auburn didn't play Alabama, or else the series would mirror LSU's record vs Alabama. Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:18 am to BowlJackson
quote:
Dodging Auburn to make the schedule easier allowed them to make their first run at national success in the 20's, which is the foundation on which their program is built.
That is some impressive spin
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:25 am to Gary Busey
Look, you may an argument that Bama still has their pre-WW2 success if you had played Auburn in that time period. There's room for debate there.
But two documented and indisputable facts are the reasons that Alabama went out and hired Bear Bryant and Nick Saban. To end the bleeding of long losing streaks to Auburn. Without those two men, who are 100% responsible for bringing Alabama it's modern day success, Alabama is basically the Minnesota of the South.
You're welcome for saving you from being Minnesota South.
But two documented and indisputable facts are the reasons that Alabama went out and hired Bear Bryant and Nick Saban. To end the bleeding of long losing streaks to Auburn. Without those two men, who are 100% responsible for bringing Alabama it's modern day success, Alabama is basically the Minnesota of the South.
You're welcome for saving you from being Minnesota South.
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:28 am to AU24
Mizzou is 11-11 vs the Big 6 all time
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:32 am to TheDude321
I have a ranking of the toughest SOS all-time. Here is the formula (using FINAL AP rankings for each year since 1936):
25 points for each game played against a #1 team
24 points for each game played against a #2 team
23 points for each game played against a #3 team....
1 point for each game played against a #25 team
So with that, here are the programs ranked by toughest SOS since 1936:
1. Notre Dame- 4,642 points
2. Florida- 4,467 points
3. LSU- 4,271 points
4. USC- 4,237 points
5. Michigan- 4,227 points
6. Alabama- 4,214 points
7. Tennessee- 4,205 points
8. Texas- 4,184 points
9. Auburn- 4,045 points
10. Arkansas- 3,944 points
12. Missouri- 3,885 points
14. Texas A&M- 3,872 points
19. Kentucky- 3,819 points
24. Mississippi St.- 3,692 points
27. Vanderbilt- 3,593 points
28. Georgia- 3,549 points
31. Ole Miss- 3,312 points
34. South Carolina- 3,148 points
25 points for each game played against a #1 team
24 points for each game played against a #2 team
23 points for each game played against a #3 team....
1 point for each game played against a #25 team
So with that, here are the programs ranked by toughest SOS since 1936:
1. Notre Dame- 4,642 points
2. Florida- 4,467 points
3. LSU- 4,271 points
4. USC- 4,237 points
5. Michigan- 4,227 points
6. Alabama- 4,214 points
7. Tennessee- 4,205 points
8. Texas- 4,184 points
9. Auburn- 4,045 points
10. Arkansas- 3,944 points
12. Missouri- 3,885 points
14. Texas A&M- 3,872 points
19. Kentucky- 3,819 points
24. Mississippi St.- 3,692 points
27. Vanderbilt- 3,593 points
28. Georgia- 3,549 points
31. Ole Miss- 3,312 points
34. South Carolina- 3,148 points
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:33 am to BowlJackson
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the stereotypical Auburn fan.
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:36 am to BowlJackson
quote:
Why would you start counting in 1902 when the series began in 1983?
You mean 1893? Stassen's statistics on that formula page go back to 1902. That's where the stats came from. Never seen that site you linked before.
The AL legislature knew the "cow college" needed to play BAMA to gain national exposure, that's why the series was forced to restart. As others have pointed out, the series would be much more in BAMA's favor today had we played those missing 41 years when our winning % (76.6) was #2 in the nation and the cow college's winning % (58.4) was #77.
As far as 1941 goes, Houlgate was/is a nationally recognized poll and they named BAMA #1. What poll recognized the barn for 1913 and 1914?
Being undefeated doesn't mean anything. We were undefeated in 1897, 1936, 1945, and 1966, but weren't awarded national titles.
You guys claim 1993 and you were on probation. You were also on probation in 1957, which you also claim.
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:37 am to TheTideMustRoll
I said indisputable and apparently I was right. Typical Bama fan, can't argue facts and resorts to name calling.
I take it you agree that without Auburn Bama is the Minnesota of the South? I haven't seen any "Thanks for not letting is become irrelevant in modern history and be know as Minnesota South" cards at the local Halmark, but that's okay because I like handmade ones more anyway.
I take it you agree that without Auburn Bama is the Minnesota of the South? I haven't seen any "Thanks for not letting is become irrelevant in modern history and be know as Minnesota South" cards at the local Halmark, but that's okay because I like handmade ones more anyway.
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:38 am to madmaxvol
quote:
1) Alabama 211-136-18 - 57.8%
2) Auburn 182-187-15 - 47.4%
3) UGA 163-172-15 - 46.0%
4) Florida 151-165-17 - 46.9%
5) Tennessee 118-137-16 - 43.4%
6) LSU 106-135-13 - 41.7%
Tennessee's winning percentage is 46.7% on the field, 46.9% officially.
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:42 am to BowlJackson
quote:
Bama is the Minnesota of the South
You a cold-hearted straight-up killa Bowl. Fricking Minnesota? Dam
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:43 am to BowlJackson
So the series stopped in 1908 just a few years before Alabama got really good, was on hiatus for decades, and then suddenly, just as Alabama's first run as a national power was coming to an end, there was pressure to bring the game back? Hmmm... if I didn't know any better, I'd think it was Auburn who was actually afraid to play the game. But of course, that can't be true. BowlJackson said so.
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:46 am to Crimson Wraith
quote:
1893? Stassen's statistics on that formula page go back to 1902. That's where the stats came from. Never seen that site you linked before.
Yes thank you. Dyslexic moment. Well now you've heard of winsipedia. You can find 100% head-to-head program comparisons and all-time series records there. But feel free to keep using your incomplete site since it fits your narrative more.
quote:
You guys claim 1993 and you were on probation. You were also on probation in 1957, which you also c
Auburn does not claim 1993. But feel free to keep making things up to fit your points, you're on a roll with it.
Take up 1957 with the AP. That was who decided the National Champion then. Being on probation in those days didn't make a difference in those days since bowl games were glorified exhibitions that didn't factor into the national championship. But you already knew that being a fan of a school that had been voted national champion in years in which you lost your bowl game.
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:49 am to WorkinDawg
quote:
You a cold-hearted straight-up killa Bowl. Fricking Minnesota? Dam
Cold but almost certainly true. Ask yourself, how many national championships in modern times do you see Bama winning without Bryant or Saban?
No Bama fan will argue that those two coaches weren't hired in response to Auburn taking an upper hand in the rivalry. They can't because it's documented.
Posted on 8/12/16 at 8:54 am to BowlJackson
quote:
But two documented and indisputable facts are the reasons that Alabama went out and hired Bear Bryant and Nick Saban. To end the bleeding of long losing streaks to Auburn.
Yes, Alabama went out of its way to hire two of the GOAT coaches because of Auburn. Not because of the 4 total wins in 3 years Alabama endured under Whitworth, or the 26-23 record Shula had. Thanks for clearing that up for us
Page 3 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News