Started By
Message
re: Who's Georgia's biggest rival?
Posted on 1/22/18 at 10:38 am to DawgsLife
Posted on 1/22/18 at 10:38 am to DawgsLife
quote:
Dude. Your fans try to claim titles when you finished ranked #3! Years when you were on probation for cheating.
Polls are beauty contest...even the BCS formula and now the CFP is a beauty contest to some degree. Being ranked #3 doesn't mean you don't have a claim on #1 some seasons.
quote:
Please explain how you claim a title when you finished ranked #3, or you didn't play in the title game. Auburn fans have reduced themselves down to UCF levels, and you can't even claim superiority to them.
I have said multiple times...I do not claim them. However, in 1983, 1993, even in 2004 and 2010 Auburn has been selected National Champions. What that tells us about each season is Auburn's on the field performance was good enough to be in consideration. Finishing ranked #3 doesn't change the on the field performance. Case in point we finished #2 in 2013, but due to the system in place no selector would choose Auburn based on what happened on the field. IMO the same is true of 2004 even though we were selected champion by a selector. 1983 and 1993 are different the play on the field and the system in place is based on human opinion and politics. One poll isn't any more worthy than another no matter how much anyone suggests that it is. In 1983 the title for some selectors awarded to Miami the crown simply because of the value the Orange Bowl brought to the media outlets that season. In 1983 a blind assessment of team records would have given either Nebraska or Auburn the title 100% of the time. If you punished teams for late season loses over early season loses as was the custom of the time, then 100% of the time Auburn would win the title.
Again the point of it all isn't to claim those titles, but to pretend as if in 1983, 1993, 2004 and 2010 Auburn's on the field performance wasn't worthy of championship consideration is to neglect that selectors actually chose Auburn champions those seasons. Since 1980 what selectors judged a season for uga as championship worthy? Maybe you finally realize the point when you figure out that answer.
1
Posted on 1/22/18 at 10:46 am to DawgsLife
quote:
1913-The Billingsley Report named Auburn posthumously National Champions while using a new metric...margin of victory. however, using their primary metrics the Billingsley Report named Chicago the National Champions.
By the way, Chicago played a much tougher schedule, and also went undefeated. If you can't understand the Northern bias in The Billingsley Report I can't help you. I guess we are to assume Ohio State played a tougher scheudle than bama this year as well.
1957-Legitimate. Auburn recognizes this one.
1983-Was not named national Champions by the UPI OR the AP Polls. Auburn was selected National Champion that season...assuming the AP or UPI has more merit is based on ignorance.
2004-Did not play in the national Championship game. USC was disqualified from the title for cheating, and Auburn fans want to claim it because they "might" have beaten Oklahoma. Auburn was also selected National Champion this season, IMO it shouldn't be counted since the formula for selecting a team had been agreed upon prior to the season. It still is a note worthy season, because Auburn did everything it could do to win a title. The error was in the system.
2010-Legitimate. The school recognizes this one.
The "weak" one you mentioned.(1993) You think? You were on probation for cheating. Yeah. Again Auburn was selected. I wouldn't claim 1993. However, it was selected and did everything a team could do that season to win the title. What we know about that season...Notre Dame, Florida State and Nebraska all lost a game...Auburn never lost and beat the same Florida opponent FSU played in a similar fashion.
It is also important to understand what Auburn did to be on probation. Similar infractions in our modern era result in a player losing a few games and coaches being fired. Teams are not put on probation for a player receiving benefits not connected to recruiting. In 1993 a non-probation Auburn would have been undefeated in the Sugar Bowl likely trouncing an undefeated WVU team while the other undefeated would have lost to one loss FSU in the Orange Bowl. It's unlikely that Auburn wouldn't have been awarded the poll selection you mentioned. ;)
To be clear two polls being accepted as the standard doesn't mean the system wasn't broken. Even the NCAA knew it and that is why they don't recognize football champions but do list teams who were selected in specific years.
Sadly, it isn't much better now. The CFP may be an improvement on the Poll Era or the BCS Formula but a jackass can see the problems inherent in the system. In a perfect world a playoff should be defined by teams who earned the right to play in it...thanks to Notre Dame being conferenceless we have to create a system where human beings susceptible to bias pick the worthy contenders.
This post was edited on 1/22/18 at 10:55 am
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:13 am to Tigerman97
quote:
Polls are beauty contest...even the BCS formula and now the CFP is a beauty contest to some degree.
I can agree with this to an extent.
quote:And yet you have been arguing their legitimacy to the claims. Why?
I have said multiple times...I do not claim them.
quote:
However, in 1983, 1993, even in 2004 and 2010 Auburn has been selected National Champions.
2010 is legit. Teh others were named by obscure publications. I mean we can all find more titles if we look for anybody and everybody that named us National Champions.
If you want to argue you had very good teams that year....go for it. Nobody can disagree with that. if you want to argue they were National Champions, then you have a lot of problems on your hands.
I mean, UCF was named National Champions this year, too. Do think anybody takes that seriously. At all? it's silly for any Auburn fans to make arguments for those teams....based upon "somebody" named them a national Champion.
I mean, you have made the argument that Auburn is the better program based on these seasons, that you came close. Do you really want Georgia fans to start saying we came close in some years therefore we are the better program?
I've never understood the fascination with "We won 7 National Championships! Look at us!" The only thing that matters is what happened this year. What happened last year, 10 years ago...37 y=ears ago is immaterial.
It doesn't make a team valid this year.
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:16 am to Tigerman97
quote:
To be clear two polls being accepted as the standard doesn't mean the system wasn't broken.
It might have been broken, but it was the system. just because you disagree with the results, doesn't mean you toss out the results and crown your own favorite team. It was still the accepted system.
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:16 am to DawgsLife
quote:
Teh others were named by obscure publications. I mean we can all find more titles if we look for anybody and everybody that named us National Champions.
As I said before, you're really not knowledgeable enough to command my time, but I will note as I am sure you are not aware of, Auburn was named the national champ by more selectors than anyone in 1983.
People who try to say AU was not the true champ in 1983 are either ignorant or have an agenda. This is not even an opinion. It is an objective fact when considering the 1983 season. Period.
This post was edited on 1/22/18 at 11:17 am
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:16 am to wareagle9
quote:
Who's Georgia's biggest rival
Dentists
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:17 am to DawgsLife
quote:
doesn't mean you toss out the results and crown your own favorite team
I mean, certain SEC teams have already done that.
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:19 am to Tigerman97
quote:
Sadly, it isn't much better now. The CFP may be an improvement on the Poll Era or the BCS Formula but a jackass can see the problems inherent in the system. In a perfect world a playoff should be defined by teams who earned the right to play in it...thanks to Notre Dame being conferenceless we have to create a system where human beings susceptible to bias pick the worthy contenders.
Well. I think it is working great, personally. The goal is to have the four best teams in the playoffs.
I think we had the four best teams in the playoffs. Georgia beating Oklahoma and Alabama beating Clemson seems to bear this out. Both teams (Alabama and Georgia) had bad match ups, and most people thought they would get beat.
It's also why I didn't have a problem with Alabama playing LSU in the Championship game in 2011. I felt they were the two best teams in the country. Isn't that the goal of having a Championship game? having the best two teams play each other?
This post was edited on 1/22/18 at 11:40 am
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:21 am to DuncanIdaho
quote:
I mean, certain SEC teams have already done that.
I know Alabama takes a lot of flack for that, but if you throw out all the contested Championships, they would still have more than anybody else.
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:21 am to DawgsLife
quote:
if you throw out all the contested Championships, they would still have more than anybody else.
Exactly. Then why try to fool people into thinking there are more?
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:22 am to roadGator
quote:
Who's Georgia's biggest rival
quote:
Dentists
Pretty sure we don't play or compete with dentists.
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:23 am to DuncanIdaho
quote:
Exactly. Then why try to fool people into thinking there are more?
You'd have to ask them, that. I guess the same reason we have had some Auburn fans trying to claim 3-4 titles that they don't have?
It's all dumb, imo. Like I said....what does it matter?
It only matters to people who worry about what some other fan base thinks of them.
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:25 am to DawgsLife
quote:
Pretty sure we don't play or compete with dentists.
Too scared to put them on your schedule.
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:27 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
As I said before, you're really not knowledgeable enough to command my time,
And yet, here we are for the second or third day.
quote:
Auburn was named the national champ by more selectors than anyone in 1983.
And you still don't get it. it isn't a popularity contest. It isn't determined by the number of publications. It is determined by the accepted method. Did the AP or UPI name them Champions?
quote:
People who try to say AU was not the true champ in 1983 are either ignorant or have an agenda.
Aren't you the one that just got through saying you were not claiming those years? And yet you say this?.
ETA
And by the way...Miami was named National Champions by more publications than Auburn was. (Miami was also named NC by the AP and UPI...the accepted sources.
On the bright side, the New York Times named Auburn.
This post was edited on 1/22/18 at 11:32 am
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:30 am to DawgsLife
I claim 1983 all day every day because we were the best team in the country that year and it isn't really debatable
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:32 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
I claim 1983 all day every day because we were the best team in the country that year and it isn't really debatable
The AP and UPI would debate it with you. But if you claim it, then I guess it is settled.
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:34 am to wareagle9
It's got to be Auburn, right? They've played them more than Georgia Tech and the series is substantially more competitive.
I view the Georgia-Georgia Tech rivalry as similar to LSU-Tulane. It's there, but mainly for old-timers.
I view the Georgia-Georgia Tech rivalry as similar to LSU-Tulane. It's there, but mainly for old-timers.
Posted on 1/22/18 at 11:37 am to LSUbase13
quote:
It's got to be Auburn, right? They've played them more than Georgia Tech and the series is substantially more competitive.
I view the Georgia-Georgia Tech rivalry as similar to LSU-Tulane. It's there, but mainly for old-timers.
Florida is #1 or biggest. Some fans would argue GT. Almost all consider Auburn #3.
Posted on 1/22/18 at 12:03 pm to DawgsLife
I don't really care where UGA fans put their theoretical rankings. I agree that in a bubble, AU should be #3. You guys are #2 for us, obviously, because we don't have a third team that remains a real rival. I guess LSU is about as close as we come? Although Arkansas would obviously love to be on that list, for some reason.
But, in practice, Auburn is probably closer to #1 or #2 for a great many UGA fans. I'm not claiming you're obsessed with us, but in Atlanta there are a ton of AU people and we're far more relevant to your every day life than UF and even Tech, a lot of the time.
TLDR: Auburn may rightfully be #3, but a lot of the time we're getting the #1 treatment from the heart of UGA's footprint (Atlanta).
But, in practice, Auburn is probably closer to #1 or #2 for a great many UGA fans. I'm not claiming you're obsessed with us, but in Atlanta there are a ton of AU people and we're far more relevant to your every day life than UF and even Tech, a lot of the time.
TLDR: Auburn may rightfully be #3, but a lot of the time we're getting the #1 treatment from the heart of UGA's footprint (Atlanta).
Posted on 1/22/18 at 12:15 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
don't really care where UGA fans put their theoretical rankings. I agree that in a bubble, AU should be #3. You guys are #2 for us, obviously, because we don't have a third team that remains a real rival.
And there are no ways to really tell. It's a great rivalry that is super close. Honestly? After thinking about it, I would probably put Auburn #2 on the list and drop GT.
quote:
because we don't have a third team that remains a real rival.
I would have thought LSU? Do you guys not really get fired up about them?
quote:
TLDR: Auburn may rightfully be #3, but a lot of the time we're getting the #1 treatment from the heart of UGA's footprint (Atlanta).
Yep. It's all individual opinion, and like many have said in this thread, Auburn is probably #2. It's a good rivalry.
Page 10 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News