Started By
Message
re: 2004 Alabama vs. Auburn Highlights
Posted on 8/28/15 at 8:48 am to BowlJackson
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 rematch
2
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.
Posted on 8/28/15 at 8:57 am to TheJones
Just to prove how terrible a point that is, we lost worse to UGA and LSU in 2003 than we did to USC, how'd that work out for them in 2004?
As for the second part of your post, I don't think anyone doubts that. However, what does that say about the legitimacy of the system when "intrigue" matters more than reality?
Like I posted yesterday I understand somebody had to get left out. I just wish they would have said "we feel like like USC and Oklahoma are the two best teams". Even though they wouldn't have had any good argument other than opinion to back that up I could at least respect. It was/is the ridiculous attempts to justify their opinion that irk me to this day. Bringing up our schedule (which was the most difficult), what happened in 2003 (which is completely irrelevant), or the fact we had one bad half the entire season (when USC had multiple games where they struggled against bad teams) is just pathetic.
The whole thing is/was a joke.
As for the second part of your post, I don't think anyone doubts that. However, what does that say about the legitimacy of the system when "intrigue" matters more than reality?
Like I posted yesterday I understand somebody had to get left out. I just wish they would have said "we feel like like USC and Oklahoma are the two best teams". Even though they wouldn't have had any good argument other than opinion to back that up I could at least respect. It was/is the ridiculous attempts to justify their opinion that irk me to this day. Bringing up our schedule (which was the most difficult), what happened in 2003 (which is completely irrelevant), or the fact we had one bad half the entire season (when USC had multiple games where they struggled against bad teams) is just pathetic.
The whole thing is/was a joke.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News