re: Auburn would have won 2004 natty

Auburn is the 2004 champion though

quote:

---

here is the plastic trophy awarded by the 13 year old Opelika boy

---

quote:

---

USC handily beat that V Tech team

---

Lol, VT had the lead in the 4th Q and Southern Cal didn't go up by 2 scores until less than a minute left.

Anyone who brings up the 2003 USC/Auburn game as a reason why Auburn would have gotten their teeth kicked in the next year is a certified mouth breather.

The Gulf Coast Offense Al Borges was running in 2004 was nothing like the 2003 Auburn offense. 2004 was averaging 50 more yards per game and Campbell's QBR was 40 points higher in 2004. I know this is SECR, it is the off-season, and it is fun to shite on your rivals, but to be dismissive of Auburn's chances in 2004 vs. USC is retarded.

quote:

---

This subject always brings out the clowns, the coach of Virginia Tech said auburn was better than usc. We dominated that game until the last 5 min. They were beating usc in the second half and about to extend their lead until a universally criticized offensive pass interference changed the game.

Auburn playedmore top 15 teams than usc and Oklahoma combined and won them all convincingly after the lsu game. Usc had several more close calls than auburn against worse competition.

---

Are you being serious? You are saying Frank Beamer decided auburn should have been in the national championship game and that's good enough for you?

Sagarin said auburn's SOS wasn't as difficult as Southern Cal's or Oklahoma's.



JHowell said auburn's SOS wasn't as difficult as Southern Cal's or Oklahoma's.



Several other well-respected rating services did also. In fact, all of them did.

But you have decided that because Frank Beamer played So. Cal the first game of the season and then auburn the last game of the season, he is the ultimate arbiter of who should have and shouldn't have been in the NC game.

Frank Beamer knew auburn was better because Frank Beamer knew that So. Cal during their first game of the season against Virginia Tech was exactly the same strength So. Cal team as it was during its last game of the regular season. That is how football works. Teams don't improve during the long season because that would be crazy.

Beamer knew shite. And you have the nerve to say this thread is bringing out the clowns. You are the clown, clown.

Is that even really a question honestly? Even being on the rant main page lol. cheers

I'm confused. I thought Auburn won the 2004 natty.

Go back and watch that National Championship game between SC & OU....I did a few years back...literally future NFL studs on every play, both teams. OU was no slouch that year...the system did suck back then, but SC and OU might have dog walked you that year.

quote:

---

I think USC had a few all Americans on that defensive line.

---

I'm not arguing that Auburn definitely would have won. Football is a game of matchups. USC might have beaten Auburn, but my argument is that USC should never have been in the game at all considering what we know now. (Illegal players that vacated the title) In an ideal world it would have been Auburn vs. Oklahoma.

USC had too much speed against all the teams they played. The 2004, AU team had more. Those MF’s were FAST !