Started By
Message
Add the banners!!
Posted on 10/27/23 at 9:05 am
Posted on 10/27/23 at 9:05 am
Auburn has now claimed more titles per the NCAA:
1913, 1983, and 1993
I’m not sure why they didn’t add 2004.
1913, 1983, and 1993
I’m not sure why they didn’t add 2004.
8
Posted on 10/27/23 at 9:08 am to Fearless_and_True
1913 and 1983 should have been on the books for a while.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 9:15 am to Fearless_and_True
Posted on 10/27/23 at 9:16 am to Fearless_and_True
quote:Because this isn't Tuscaloosa.
I’m not sure why they didn’t add 2004.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 9:45 am to awestruck
quote:
Because this isn't Tuscaloosa.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 9:45 am to awestruck
quote:
Because this isn't Tuscaloosa.
We finished the year undefeated.
Oklahoma did not.
USC title was stripped.
What hurts us is we had a close win vs. Va Tech, but we finished #2 in the BCS poll
Posted on 10/27/23 at 9:46 am to Fearless_and_True
quote:
Oklahoma did not.
USC title was stripped.
There is some serious messed up logic in that thinking baw.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 9:54 am to LanierSpots
quote:
There is some serious messed up logic in that thinking baw.
Not really. 2004 accomplished more than 1993 did. It really exposes how silly national championship claims were pre-playoff.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 10:22 am to StringedInstruments
Posted on 10/27/23 at 10:41 am to StringedInstruments
quote:
It really exposes how silly national championship claims were pre-playoff.
All the playoffs did at this point was change the teams competing for a championship from 2 to 4. Very little difference has happened. BCS got it right the majority of the time anyway. The playoff has been fun for us but basically useless in changing the narrative
If we are going to say USC doesnt deserved the championship they won on the field because they had illegal players playing for them, then we cant ding Oklahoma for losing to those illegal players. Cant have it both ways
Either way, Auburn did not win the Championship that year. No matter how much we wanted it to be so or how much we thought we would have if allowed to play USC or Oklahoma
Posted on 10/27/23 at 12:38 pm to Fearless_and_True
quote:
What hurts us is we had a close win vs. Va Tech, but we finished #2 in the BCS poll
When VTech was a hellagood program too. But Auburn controlled that Sugar Bowl pretty well. Never gave VTech an opening to get a lead.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 12:53 pm to Fearless_and_True
quote:
What hurts us is we had a close win vs. Va Tech
You know who also had a close win vs VT that year? USCheat, except they needed a phantom PI call to come from behind and win. Auburn never trailed against them.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 12:57 pm to LanierSpots
quote:
Either way, Auburn did not win the Championship that year. No matter how much we wanted it to be so or how much we thought we would have if allowed to play USC or Oklahoma
I agree with all of this but my inner Allbarn still made me downvote you.
It is what it is.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 1:03 pm to SECdragonmaster
quote:
I agree with all of this but my inner Allbarn still made me downvote you.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 1:24 pm to SECdragonmaster
Yeah I’m fine with claiming the older ones but not years after the BCS championship game was created
Posted on 10/27/23 at 1:27 pm to auburnnyc94
We were screwed in 2004.
I'm all for it.
I'm all for it.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 1:32 pm to auburnnyc94
What about the bcs provided unquestionable legitimacy in your eyes?
Posted on 10/27/23 at 1:33 pm to RandySavage
There was a championship game and we didn’t even play in it. We did get screwed, but again, there was a championship game and we didn’t even play in it.
I also don’t believe Utah should claim 2004.
I also don’t believe Utah should claim 2004.
Posted on 10/27/23 at 1:52 pm to Fearless_and_True
quote:
Auburn has now claimed more titles per the NCAA:
1913, 1983, and 1993
I’m not sure why they didn’t add 2004.
This was discussed a bit yesterday. The NCAA recognizes certain organizations that name a NC at the end of the college football season. Those organizations include Billingsley (1913), The New York Times (1983) and The National Championship Foundation (1993). That is why those AU NCs are all included on the NCAA website.
Unfortunately, no NCAA recognized organization awarded Auburn the NC in 2004. Sucks. But that is what this is based on.
Here is the link.
LINK
This post was edited on 10/27/23 at 1:56 pm
Posted on 10/27/23 at 1:57 pm to auburnnyc94
Sure but based on completely subjective factors just like all the pre bcs titles
Page 1 of 2
Latest Auburn News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News