Started By
Message
re: Can Saban go 10-2 at Bama in 2008?
Posted on 6/17/08 at 8:51 pm to Ross
Posted on 6/17/08 at 8:51 pm to Ross
quote:
I do think he is a great recruiter, but if he doesn't win more this year - like at least 8 - he will lose some of his success and momentum in recruiting
didn't he sign like 35 players this year?
what happens when the recruits start seeing this?
LSU will have a top 5 if not the top class in 2009,
so maybe Lester can recruit to?
0
Posted on 6/17/08 at 9:10 pm to xiv
quote:
If Saban is the guy who can get the great talent that makes him look like a great coach, doesn't that just make him a great coach, period?
how many 11 win seasons or less than 3 loss seasons has he had in his 20-odd years as a coach?
Posted on 6/18/08 at 12:50 am to BamaScoop
quote:
I think what people fail to realize is that Auburn is just Auburn and beating Alabama is enough for them. Nobody really expects greatness from Auburn because they have never achieved it and they will always just be the other team in Alabama. Those are just the facts.
Some will point to AU's recent success as an argument against this
one, but
the fact
remains: the
University of Alabama is the program that almost
everyone outside of the state associates with (the state of) Alabama.
Posted on 6/18/08 at 10:16 am to Acrostic Juan
quote:
the fact
remains: the
University of Alabama is the program that almost
everyone outside of the state associates with (the state of) Alabama.
Not really. Any knowledgeable college football fan that is not clueless knows that AU has been the better team for the last quarter century. 25 years and counting. As for a college football fan that doesn't know this, who cares, they are ignorant and don't know much about college football if they haven't been paying any attention for over 25 years.
Posted on 6/18/08 at 10:25 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
Any knowledgeable college football fan that is not clueless knows that AU has been the better team for the last quarter century. 25 years and counting. As for a college football fan that doesn't know this, who cares, they are ignorant and don't know much about college football if they haven't been paying any attention for over 25 years.
eh, I'm pretty sure the outside world associates UA with football championships. I'm not sure they associate AU with football championships. I agree Auburn has had the better program in recent history, but just being better than Alabama isnt going to get you far. Until Auburn gets some championship hardware, I'm not sure they can overtake Alabama as the most recognized program in the state. not trying to flame, just my (biased) opinion
Posted on 6/18/08 at 10:51 am to bamaatlsu
quote:
eh, I'm pretty sure the outside world associates UA with football championships. I'm not sure they associate AU with football championships. I agree Auburn has had the better program in recent history, but just being better than Alabama isnt going to get you far. Until Auburn gets some championship hardware, I'm not sure they can overtake Alabama as the most recognized program in the state. not trying to flame, just my (biased) opinion
Maybe. But I suppose I would prefer seeing my team win in my lifetime and beat my rival most of my life than hear my daddy tell me about how we were better once upon a time.
Posted on 6/18/08 at 10:51 am to bamaatlsu
quote:
eh, I'm pretty sure the outside world associates UA with football championships. I'm not sure they associate AU with football championships. I agree Auburn has had the better program in recent history, but just being better than Alabama isnt going to get you far. Until Auburn gets some championship hardware, I'm not sure they can overtake Alabama as the most recognized program in the state. not trying to flame, just my (biased) opinion
Well anytime we have a national championship caliber team, we find some way to not win the title. (1983-screwed,1993-probation,2004-screwed)
And I might just point out the 1983 screwjob might have actually been worse than the 2004 screwjob.
This post was edited on 6/18/08 at 10:58 am
Posted on 6/18/08 at 10:58 am to Cornholio
quote:
Thats funny you gumps have the balls to come on here and talk shite about the team who has handed you fools your asses 6 years in a row. You gumps are not in a position to talk shite about anyone. You idiots should concentrate on beating ULM and hoping your coach doesnt leave you soon.
Do you ever say anything useful?
Let me re-phrase that...do you have any new material? Or is ULM and Saban leaving all you have?
This post was edited on 6/18/08 at 11:03 am
Posted on 6/18/08 at 11:13 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
yeah, i guess its all relative. I wouldnt trade anything for the 92 Championship, but I might reconsider that statement if we lose in T-town to you guys this year. let's hear about '83, I've never heard the story from an auburn fan's perspective
Posted on 6/18/08 at 11:23 am to RockyStop
quote:
Or is ULM and Saban leaving all you have?
I realize this is some old material but it is some pretty damn good matrial. Losing to ULM is not something UAT will live down for a couple of years.
Posted on 6/18/08 at 11:25 am to Purple Spoon
quote:
Losing to ULM is not something UAT will live down for a couple of years.
The 07 season is over and that loss with it.
Posted on 6/18/08 at 11:28 am to bamaatlsu
I will cut and paste. I have made a few posts on tg about it...
AU - 1983
AU beat the number #2, #4, #7, #10, #11, #17, and #18 teams in the country that year (lost to number #6 TX in the second game of the year) They finished behind a team with the same one loss record that did not beat a RANKED team all year and lost to the only one they played as well as a team that was 1-1 against ranked teams.
Check out this link. From 1979 -2000 (when they changed the calculation making comparisions from earlier time periods impossible) only 3 teams (not just national champs, but all teams in college football) had a higher "power" ranking than 1983 AU. They were '91 Washington, '95 Nebraska, and the '96 Gators. In '83 it was not even close.
To say Nebraska should have been number one makes no sense. How do you rank a team number 1 that did not beat a ranked team all year and LOST to the ONLY ranked team they played?? You can call that OB "one for the ages" but fact is that was the 4th or 5th best team in the country playing the 5th or 6th best team. Period. What was Miami's signature win that year? Beating the #18 team in the country by 1 point? How about Nebraska? Their biggest win of the year was beating an 8-4 team. Meanwhile AU beats 4 top ten team and 7 top 20 teams ALL ranked higher than ANY team Neb or Mia beat the entire season (except for the Orange Bowl where the two overhyped, overranked teams met).
Sure Neb looked good on paper with Rozier, Turner, etc but they never proved a damn thing on the field. Yeah, they beat the hell out of some of the worst teams in the country. As far as I am concerned they were 0-1 (their record against top 15 teams). There is really no way in hell to make a case for '83 Nebraska over AU unless you want to base your argument soley on playing poor competition and one over hyped bowl game.
You could try to make a case for UM who was 1-1 against the top ten that year (or 0-1 if you do not count the bowl game against Neb who proved nothing by playing no one all year), but I think AU at 4-1 against the top ten is a hell of a lot stronger. Then if you want to look at common opponents for AU and Mia that year there was one. AU won, Mia lost.
What more does it take than playing the toughest schedule (#1) in the country vs. Mia playing the #17 and Neb playing #39 when all have the same record? Common opponents? AU has that one down too.
Don't see where there is any room for arguement here. AU may have taken it in the arse harder than any team in the history of college football (since the NC has been crowned after the bowl game) that year. Much worse than '04 where AU only lost a shot at playing for the NC against a strong USC team.
To summarize, AU is ranked #3 in the country going into the bowls, after playing one of the toughest schedules in the history of college football, and beat Michigan. #1 and #2 lose and #5 (Miami - who played one ranked team the entire regular season and lost - UF who AU beat) jumps to number 1.
AU - 1983
AU beat the number #2, #4, #7, #10, #11, #17, and #18 teams in the country that year (lost to number #6 TX in the second game of the year) They finished behind a team with the same one loss record that did not beat a RANKED team all year and lost to the only one they played as well as a team that was 1-1 against ranked teams.
Check out this link. From 1979 -2000 (when they changed the calculation making comparisions from earlier time periods impossible) only 3 teams (not just national champs, but all teams in college football) had a higher "power" ranking than 1983 AU. They were '91 Washington, '95 Nebraska, and the '96 Gators. In '83 it was not even close.
To say Nebraska should have been number one makes no sense. How do you rank a team number 1 that did not beat a ranked team all year and LOST to the ONLY ranked team they played?? You can call that OB "one for the ages" but fact is that was the 4th or 5th best team in the country playing the 5th or 6th best team. Period. What was Miami's signature win that year? Beating the #18 team in the country by 1 point? How about Nebraska? Their biggest win of the year was beating an 8-4 team. Meanwhile AU beats 4 top ten team and 7 top 20 teams ALL ranked higher than ANY team Neb or Mia beat the entire season (except for the Orange Bowl where the two overhyped, overranked teams met).
Sure Neb looked good on paper with Rozier, Turner, etc but they never proved a damn thing on the field. Yeah, they beat the hell out of some of the worst teams in the country. As far as I am concerned they were 0-1 (their record against top 15 teams). There is really no way in hell to make a case for '83 Nebraska over AU unless you want to base your argument soley on playing poor competition and one over hyped bowl game.
You could try to make a case for UM who was 1-1 against the top ten that year (or 0-1 if you do not count the bowl game against Neb who proved nothing by playing no one all year), but I think AU at 4-1 against the top ten is a hell of a lot stronger. Then if you want to look at common opponents for AU and Mia that year there was one. AU won, Mia lost.
What more does it take than playing the toughest schedule (#1) in the country vs. Mia playing the #17 and Neb playing #39 when all have the same record? Common opponents? AU has that one down too.
Don't see where there is any room for arguement here. AU may have taken it in the arse harder than any team in the history of college football (since the NC has been crowned after the bowl game) that year. Much worse than '04 where AU only lost a shot at playing for the NC against a strong USC team.
To summarize, AU is ranked #3 in the country going into the bowls, after playing one of the toughest schedules in the history of college football, and beat Michigan. #1 and #2 lose and #5 (Miami - who played one ranked team the entire regular season and lost - UF who AU beat) jumps to number 1.
Posted on 6/18/08 at 11:31 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
AU beat the number #2, #4, #7, #10, #11, #17, and #18 teams in the country that year (lost to number #6 TX in the second game of the year) They finished behind a team with the same one loss record that did not beat a RANKED team all year and lost to the only one they played as well as a team that was 1-1 against ranked teams.
Check out this link. From 1979 -2000 (when they changed the calculation making comparisions from earlier time periods impossible) only 3 teams (not just national champs, but all teams in college football) had a higher "power" ranking than 1983 AU. They were '91 Washington, '95 Nebraska, and the '96 Gators. In '83 it was not even close.
To say Nebraska should have been number one makes no sense. How do you rank a team number 1 that did not beat a ranked team all year and LOST to the ONLY ranked team they played?? You can call that OB "one for the ages" but fact is that was the 4th or 5th best team in the country playing the 5th or 6th best team. Period. What was Miami's signature win that year? Beating the #18 team in the country by 1 point? How about Nebraska? Their biggest win of the year was beating an 8-4 team. Meanwhile AU beats 4 top ten team and 7 top 20 teams ALL ranked higher than ANY team Neb or Mia beat the entire season (except for the Orange Bowl where the two overhyped, overranked teams met).
Sure Neb looked good on paper with Rozier, Turner, etc but they never proved a damn thing on the field. Yeah, they beat the hell out of some of the worst teams in the country. As far as I am concerned they were 0-1 (their record against top 15 teams). There is really no way in hell to make a case for '83 Nebraska over AU unless you want to base your argument soley on playing poor competition and one over hyped bowl game.
You could try to make a case for UM who was 1-1 against the top ten that year (or 0-1 if you do not count the bowl game against Neb who proved nothing by playing no one all year), but I think AU at 4-1 against the top ten is a hell of a lot stronger. Then if you want to look at common opponents for AU and Mia that year there was one. AU won, Mia lost.
What more does it take than playing the toughest schedule (#1) in the country vs. Mia playing the #17 and Neb playing #39 when all have the same record? Common opponents? AU has that one down too.
Don't see where there is any room for arguement here. AU may have taken it in the arse harder than any team in the history of college football (since the NC has been crowned after the bowl game) that year. Much worse than '04 where AU only lost a shot at playing for the NC against a strong USC team.
To summarize, AU is ranked #3 in the country going into the bowls, after playing one of the toughest schedules in the history of college football, and beat Michigan. #1 and #2 lose and #5 (Miami - who played one ranked team the entire regular season and lost - UF who AU beat) jumps to number 1.
Sounds like a pretty legite argument.
Posted on 6/18/08 at 11:37 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
In short, Auburn lost to #6 Texas to start off the season. For some god forsaken reason, we had an awesome season, worthy of AT LEAST the #2 spot, but we got screwed on that and got to play in the Sugar Bowl ranked #3 and playing against #8 Michigan. We beat Michigan; #2 Texas lost to #7 Georgia; and #1 Nebraska lost to #5 Miami. Let's also throw in the fact that both Miami and Nebraska played EXTREMELY weak schedules. So, somehow, after #1 and #2 lose, #3 Auburn(whose fans pretty much are taking to the bank we are the National Champions) gets absolutely screwed as we are named #2 with Miami jumping from #5 to #1.
Or we can listen to Tiger n Miami AU83 who gave a much more detailed account.
Or we can listen to Tiger n Miami AU83 who gave a much more detailed account.
This post was edited on 6/18/08 at 11:39 am
Posted on 6/18/08 at 11:38 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
thx for the info. i guess the 'two-point try' gets all the attention when anyone mentions '83. Wow, didn't realize AU played that tough of a schedule. Wikipedia says Miami was ranked #4 going into the bowls, but it doesnt say which poll is being referred to. I assume that means AU was right behind them (in that poll anyways) because it says losses by Texas and Illinois launched them into the no. 1 spot.
This post was edited on 6/18/08 at 11:40 am
Posted on 6/18/08 at 11:41 am to RockyStop
quote:
The 07 season is over and that loss with it.
How long did the UAB loss stick with Saban at LSU?
Posted on 6/18/08 at 11:45 am to Ross
quote:
3 Auburn(whose fans pretty much are taking to the bank we are the National Champions)
I'm sorry. I just chuckled b/c that is the ultimate 'screw' job. 04 was one thing, but for the fans to believe they just won the NC and then get it handed to someone else? wow, i wouldnt wish that on my worst enemy. well, maybe 
i'm surprised this doesnt get mentioned more oftenPosted on 6/18/08 at 11:49 am to bamaatlsu
quote:
thx for the info. i guess the 'two-point try' gets all the attention when anyone mentions '83. Wow, didn't realize AU played that tough of a schedule. Wikipedia says Miami was ranked #4 going into the bowls, but it doesnt say which poll is being referred to. I assume that means AU was right behind them (in that poll anyways).
Neither Miami or Nebraska deserved ANYTHING after the schedules they played. It was an absolute sham.
Nebraska played one ranked opponent their entire season. #17 Penn State. They beat them 44-6. However, their schedule outside of that game is complete garbage. Not one ranked team outside of Miami who they played for their bowl game.
Miami lost to #7 Florida in their first week. Auburn beat this very same Florida team. They did play West Virginia who finished ranked #17 however. Outside of that, they played no ranked opponent aside from Nebraska in the bowl game.
Posted on 6/18/08 at 11:52 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:I agree. Virtually every computer system retroactively has Auburn #1, and none of them I've seen (and I'm obsessed with them) have Nebraska #1.
AU - 1983
Posted on 6/18/08 at 12:56 pm to xiv
Throw in the fact that AU had the #1 scoring defense in the country that year and a backfield that featured 3 NFL backs - Lionel James, Tommie Agee, and Bo Jackson (running the wishbone).
This was arguable Bo's best year at AU (In 1983, as a sophomore, Jackson rushed for 1,213 yards on 158 carries, for an average of 7.7 yards per carry, which was the 2nd best single-season average in SEC history (min. 100 rushes). In the 1983 Auburn-Alabama game, Jackson rushed for 256 yards on 20 rushes (12.8 yards per carry), which at the time was the sixth-most rushing yards gained in a game in SEC history and the 2nd best yard-per-rush average in a game (min. 20 attempts) in SEC history. Auburn finished the season with the Sugar Bowl, where Jackson was named Most Valuable Player).
In case no one remembers James, here is what he did his second year in the NFL:
"In the 1985 season James set the NFL record for all purpose yards (combined yards rushing, receiving, and returning kicks) in the history of the NFL with 2,535 yards. That same season he also set the record for receiving yards by a running back with 1,027 yards. On November 10th of that same year he had his best day as a pro versus the Los Angeles Raiders. He gained 345 all purpose yards including a career best 168 yards receiving and scored the winning touchdown in overtime."
And Agee:
Jackson gives credit for much of his college success to Agee, a great runner and blocker, that went on to play for seven years in the NFL for Seattle, Kansas City, and in 2 Super Bowls with the Dallas Cowboys being used as a back up for Daryl Johnston who primarily did the blocking for Emmitt Smith. Agee was also was a special teams player.
This was arguable Bo's best year at AU (In 1983, as a sophomore, Jackson rushed for 1,213 yards on 158 carries, for an average of 7.7 yards per carry, which was the 2nd best single-season average in SEC history (min. 100 rushes). In the 1983 Auburn-Alabama game, Jackson rushed for 256 yards on 20 rushes (12.8 yards per carry), which at the time was the sixth-most rushing yards gained in a game in SEC history and the 2nd best yard-per-rush average in a game (min. 20 attempts) in SEC history. Auburn finished the season with the Sugar Bowl, where Jackson was named Most Valuable Player).
In case no one remembers James, here is what he did his second year in the NFL:
"In the 1985 season James set the NFL record for all purpose yards (combined yards rushing, receiving, and returning kicks) in the history of the NFL with 2,535 yards. That same season he also set the record for receiving yards by a running back with 1,027 yards. On November 10th of that same year he had his best day as a pro versus the Los Angeles Raiders. He gained 345 all purpose yards including a career best 168 yards receiving and scored the winning touchdown in overtime."
And Agee:
Jackson gives credit for much of his college success to Agee, a great runner and blocker, that went on to play for seven years in the NFL for Seattle, Kansas City, and in 2 Super Bowls with the Dallas Cowboys being used as a back up for Daryl Johnston who primarily did the blocking for Emmitt Smith. Agee was also was a special teams player.
Page 3 of 6
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News