quote:
From 1935 up through 1965 (Tulane's final year in the SEC, and one year after GT left the SEC)... Auburn had an overall record of 174-133-19. Not great, but not terrible. But they also had the 1957 National Title in hand which was more than most other SEC programs could claim at that time.

From 33 to 65, Auburn had a losing record to SEC teams, by a substantial margin. Why would you change standards mid-stream? Because Auburn had a killer record against the collection of weaklings that SEC teams played non-conference, are we to supposed they were upper tier? A 21.5% winning percentage against teams that finished in the AP poll, below the standard you blasted Florida for.

This post was edited on 1/19/16 at 9:24 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by TheDude321

Member since Sep 2005

3170 posts

Posted on 1/20/16 at 4:30 pm to boxedlunch

quote:
From 33 to 65, Auburn had a losing record to SEC teams, by a substantial margin. Why would you change standards mid-stream?

Maybe he realized that he had weakened his earlier argument that Georgia was courageous for playing Auburn and Florida in the SEC's early years while LSU must have been dodging them by playing Ole Miss and Tulane instead.

The fact of the matter is that Ole Miss and Tulane had 9 SEC titles combined during that era while AU and UF had just 1 SEC title combined (up until the 1980s)--and by today's standards would actually have had 0 titles since SEC teams on NCAA probation can no longer compete for the conference crown.

Could Georgia have actually been the school during that era that dodged the stronger teams of the conference in order to play the weaker teams? I'm just sayin'...