Started By
Message
0
Posted on 1/8/13 at 7:06 am to TeLeFaWx
quote:
And they got lucky with scheduling.
You think aTm didn't benefit from Bama getting taken to the wire the week before with LSU?
Posted on 1/8/13 at 7:21 am to tiger1014
If they beat Sumlin, then I'll call 'em a dynasty 
Posted on 1/8/13 at 7:28 am to tiger1014
No.
Anyone with an ounce of objectivity would say they are definitely a dynasty. It's like EA Sports NCAA FB irl
Anyone with an ounce of objectivity would say they are definitely a dynasty. It's like EA Sports NCAA FB irl
Posted on 1/8/13 at 7:38 am to InLesWeTrust
I'm feel sorry for your father Nancy. 
Posted on 1/8/13 at 7:42 am to C
quote:
4 BCS game wins
They have three(all nattys), they lost the Sugar Bowl to Utah remember?
Posted on 1/8/13 at 7:54 am to AUtigerNOLA
quote:
they lost the Sugar Bowl to Utah remember?
opps... well still impressive...
Posted on 1/8/13 at 7:59 am to C
quote:
... well still impressive...
No doubt. Dynasty.
Posted on 1/8/13 at 8:04 am to tiger1014
meh
First of all, I talk a lot of smack on here and enjoy starting shite. I do realize how meaningless this forum is, and, in the big scheme, how trivial football is.
Secondly, congratulations to Alabama b/c they thoroughly whipped Notre Dame. What sticks out to me is the fact that LSU and UGA came within razor-thin margins of beating Alabama. Texas A&M did beat them. That tells me the margins b/w programs w/in the SEC are close ... much closer than the margin b/w the SEC and the rest of college football.
I may start buying into this "SEC SEC" stuff. It appears that the SEC teams eat their own, kill each other during the regular season, and through that competition, forge one champion that really can't be touched by the rest of the NCAA. (Last yr, that team was my alma mater -- yes I actually attended and graduated from the school -- LSU). Which is why LAST YEAR sticks in my craw. THIS YEAR, Alabama was the best team.
Message to LSU fans - stop saying stupid shite, stop bashing the coaches, b/c it only hurts your team. LSU is RIGHT THERE and needs to keep pressing. The margin, actually, is razor thin.
First of all, I talk a lot of smack on here and enjoy starting shite. I do realize how meaningless this forum is, and, in the big scheme, how trivial football is.
Secondly, congratulations to Alabama b/c they thoroughly whipped Notre Dame. What sticks out to me is the fact that LSU and UGA came within razor-thin margins of beating Alabama. Texas A&M did beat them. That tells me the margins b/w programs w/in the SEC are close ... much closer than the margin b/w the SEC and the rest of college football.
I may start buying into this "SEC SEC" stuff. It appears that the SEC teams eat their own, kill each other during the regular season, and through that competition, forge one champion that really can't be touched by the rest of the NCAA. (Last yr, that team was my alma mater -- yes I actually attended and graduated from the school -- LSU). Which is why LAST YEAR sticks in my craw. THIS YEAR, Alabama was the best team.
Message to LSU fans - stop saying stupid shite, stop bashing the coaches, b/c it only hurts your team. LSU is RIGHT THERE and needs to keep pressing. The margin, actually, is razor thin.
Posted on 1/8/13 at 8:12 am to Barry Badrinath
quote:
No.
Anyone with an ounce of objectivity would say they are definitely a dynasty. It's like EA Sports NCAA FB irl
You can't restart your xbox when Johnny Football is up 20-0 in the first.
Posted on 1/8/13 at 8:12 am to lsutothetop
This is exactly how I feel. If Alabama had gone undefeated the last two years, then I would feel comfortable with the Dynasty tag. But in all reality, bama was really fortunate to be there these last two years. Dominoes just fell the right way for us. Now if Bama can put together another undefeated Championship season, then yes this is a modern day Dynasty.
Posted on 1/8/13 at 8:13 am to tiger1014
No
to bama
to bamaPosted on 1/8/13 at 8:17 am to tiger1014
Nebraska is on the phone, they just said quit losing in the regular season. Not a dynasty.
Posted on 1/8/13 at 8:17 am to Lg
quote:
If Alabama had gone undefeated the last two years, then I would feel comfortable with the Dynasty tag. But in all reality, bama was really fortunate to be there these last two years. Dominoes just fell the right way for us
All true, but so what? I mean look, I'm an LSU fan/alum, I can't stand Alabama, but I recognize that winning close games (ag. LSU, ag. UGA) doesn't happen by accident. If you're a horse racing fan, remember Affirmed and Alydar? Both great champions, but Affirmed always came out by a head. The fortunate thing for football fans is that there's "always next year" and as an LSU fan, I'm excited about the recruiting class that the Tigers appear poised to reel in, and I'm looking forward to eliminating the razor thin margin b/w the two programs next year.
Posted on 1/8/13 at 8:23 am to TigerJeff
quote:
They are clearly the dominant team in CF, nobody else is close. Dynastic.
For the love of God, make it stop. Yes, they are a very very very good football team. They are lucky to be in the last two NCG. They could have easily lost to us and Georgia this year. No they did not lose and won, hats off to them.
It is very impressive to win the last 3 out of 4 regardless of how you look at it.
Posted on 1/8/13 at 8:30 am to tiger1014
quote:
Saban is simply the best
Without a doubt.
Posted on 1/8/13 at 8:31 am to tiger1014
Sports media wants Dynasty to sell the Gumps all they can! And they will ride that money train as long as they can.
Posted on 1/8/13 at 8:34 am to Arkansasrazorback
quote:
False. They were not the second best team either year.
Eh, they were last year. Certainly not this year.
Posted on 1/8/13 at 8:38 am to Froman
lol, no they weren't. This thread is hilarious..
Posted on 1/8/13 at 8:44 am to TigerJeff
It's less "winning the close games" (which they did, and you can't take that away no matter how it's rationalized) and more "controlling your destiny to the title game."
I feel confident saying that anybody short of Kentucky or a Mississippi school controls their destiny in the SEC. If any program can go 13-0 in the SEC at this point, they will probably be playing for the title. And when we're talking about an elite program like Alabama, that's true every year.
In other words, the Tide controlled its own destiny from the outset in each of their title runs. In 2009, they went undefeated and never relinquished control, including vanquishing fellow SEC unbeaten Florida in their final test before the championship game. Do it again, or maybe even twice, in a five-year span - and be competitive for the title in the other two years - and you have to be acknowledged as a dynasty. The Tide has the competitive bit; they got knocked out in early November in 2010 and early December in 2008, but they were competing all the way through. But they lost in 2011 and 2012, and needed the following to get back to those games:
* Oklahoma State to lose to Iowa State in 2011
* Stanford to lose to Oregon in 2011
* Texas A&M to lose to Florida in 2012 to even have a shot at the CONFERENCE title
* Oregon to lose to Stanford in 2012
* Kansas State to lose to Baylor in 2012
And again, I take nothing away from Alabama. These breaks happen, and when they got their chance, they capitalized, and won their titles. This is not to say that Alabama doesn't deserve their titles. It's only to say that they needed outside help to get 2/3 of them. When that's the case, I don't think you're in the realm of the mid-90s Nebraska or 50s Oklahoma, those kinds of dynastic runs.
They are close, and their run is among the best, but a dynasty implies unchallenged domination, and Alabama can't claim that. It's not even their fault that they can't, really - there is no such thing as unchallenged domination in the twenty-first century SEC. But without it, they aren't a dynasty in my mind.
ETA: Anyone arguing that Alabama wasn't the best team in 2009, 2011 or 2012 needs to stop
I feel confident saying that anybody short of Kentucky or a Mississippi school controls their destiny in the SEC. If any program can go 13-0 in the SEC at this point, they will probably be playing for the title. And when we're talking about an elite program like Alabama, that's true every year.
In other words, the Tide controlled its own destiny from the outset in each of their title runs. In 2009, they went undefeated and never relinquished control, including vanquishing fellow SEC unbeaten Florida in their final test before the championship game. Do it again, or maybe even twice, in a five-year span - and be competitive for the title in the other two years - and you have to be acknowledged as a dynasty. The Tide has the competitive bit; they got knocked out in early November in 2010 and early December in 2008, but they were competing all the way through. But they lost in 2011 and 2012, and needed the following to get back to those games:
* Oklahoma State to lose to Iowa State in 2011
* Stanford to lose to Oregon in 2011
* Texas A&M to lose to Florida in 2012 to even have a shot at the CONFERENCE title
* Oregon to lose to Stanford in 2012
* Kansas State to lose to Baylor in 2012
And again, I take nothing away from Alabama. These breaks happen, and when they got their chance, they capitalized, and won their titles. This is not to say that Alabama doesn't deserve their titles. It's only to say that they needed outside help to get 2/3 of them. When that's the case, I don't think you're in the realm of the mid-90s Nebraska or 50s Oklahoma, those kinds of dynastic runs.
They are close, and their run is among the best, but a dynasty implies unchallenged domination, and Alabama can't claim that. It's not even their fault that they can't, really - there is no such thing as unchallenged domination in the twenty-first century SEC. But without it, they aren't a dynasty in my mind.
ETA: Anyone arguing that Alabama wasn't the best team in 2009, 2011 or 2012 needs to stop
This post was edited on 1/8/13 at 8:45 am
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News