Started By
Message
re: Iron Bowl margin of victory
Posted on 11/23/14 at 3:49 pm to bamasgot13
Posted on 11/23/14 at 3:49 pm to bamasgot13
quote:
So he'll have as many losses to AU at Bama as he has national championships at Bama? I think I'll get over it fairly quickly.
No, he'll be .500 versus Auburn at Alabama: 2007, 2010, 2013, 2014*.
1
Posted on 11/23/14 at 3:54 pm to Cumulonimbus
quote:
No, he'll be .500 versus Auburn at Alabama: 2007, 2010, 2013, 2014*.
I actually forgot about 2007.
Auburn wins and we are tied.
Posted on 11/23/14 at 3:55 pm to truetigerfan1975
quote:
truetigerfan1975
Your GIF sucks. What are you on like a 1999 Gateway desktop? I'd post one of Jameis Winston beating Auburn but honestly don't care enough to do so.
Posted on 11/23/14 at 3:56 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
Because the only AU teams Saban has managed to beat have been bad teams while good AU teams always beat good Bama teams.
Yes, exactly what I said. Alabama is always good and Auburn is sometimes good.
Posted on 11/23/14 at 3:59 pm to LanierSpots
quote:
If Auburn wins the game this year, Saban will be 4-4 against us. How will you feel about that?
Auburn has won one national title since 1957. I'll still be loling.
Posted on 11/23/14 at 4:02 pm to Chronic
quote:Yet bammer is 4-8 against Auburn over the last 12 years
Yes, exactly what I said. Alabama is always good and Auburn is sometimes good.
Posted on 11/23/14 at 4:03 pm to Chronic
quote:
Auburn has won one national title since 1957. I'll still be loling.
If you base that on National Championships then that is correct. But shouldn't a team with that many championships and the best coach be able to be better than .500 against their in state rival who has been so bad and good?
The weird thing about the rivalry is if we asked 100 people about the Iron bowl who are not SEC fans, they would say Alabama has dominated the rivalry . Which we know is not really the case.
If we asked the same 100 people which games do they remember, they would say 2013 and 2010
Posted on 11/23/14 at 4:03 pm to Chronic
quote:Basically a fluke considering Auburn is better in literally every other category over the last 30 or 35 years
Auburn has won one national title since 1957. I'll still be loling.
Posted on 11/23/14 at 4:04 pm to auburnphan23
quote:
Yet bammer is 4-8 against Auburn over the last 12 years
Stop moving the goal posts. That's all you ever do, auburnphag. Why don't you talk about all-time records while you're at it?
Posted on 11/23/14 at 4:06 pm to Chronic
quote:
Stop moving the goal posts.
I think you did that first.
We were talking about the Saban era and you brought up the Auburn Natty record
quote:
Auburn has won one national title since 1957. I'll still be loling.
This post was edited on 11/23/14 at 4:07 pm
Posted on 11/23/14 at 4:08 pm to auburnphan23
quote:
Basically a fluke considering Auburn is better in literally every other category over the last 30 or 35 years
Really? Since 1979 (35 years ago) both teams have the same number of SEC titles. Of course, if you extend that to 40 years or 45 years it's no longer a competition, but I don't move the goal posts like you do, auburnphag.
And in that same 35 year period, Alabama has five times as many national titles as Auburn. lol.
Big fluke, huh?
This just goes to show that Alabama is Auburn's Super Bowl. When Auburn beats us they rarely go on to do shite. Alabama beats Auburn and it's just another win like any other.
This post was edited on 11/23/14 at 4:10 pm
Posted on 11/23/14 at 4:18 pm to Chronic
quote:
Really? Since 1979 (35 years ago) both teams have the same number of SEC titles. Of course, if you extend that to 40 years or 45 years it's no longer a competition, but I don't move the goal posts like you do, auburnphag. And in that same 35 year period, Alabama has five times as many national titles as Auburn. lol. Big fluke, huh? This just goes to show that Alabama is Auburn's Super Bowl. When Auburn beats us they rarely go on to do shite. Alabama beats Auburn and it's just another win like any other.
Or it shows bama teams don't have the balls to win when it counts against good AU teams. I think that is closer to the truth considering "never again" and blah blah blah. Beating AU is all that matters to bama coaches as they get fired when they lose, even when they win every other game during the season (Curry 1989).
Also, lets go the other way and look at the last 30 years instead.
SEC championships:
AU - 7
Bama - 5
Undefeated seasons:
AU - 3
Bama - 2
IB Wins:
AU - 16
Bama 14
Go back 32 years and it is AU 18 wins, bama 14.
Posted on 11/23/14 at 4:22 pm to Weagle25
quote:Why would you be used to good teams, using your data?
2008 we were awful. Tubbs got fired.
2009 we were decent but nothing special. Lost by 5 on a late drive
2010 Cam & Fairley ripped y'all's heart out.
2011 once again. Not so good.
2012 3-9
2013 Kick six.
2010 and 2013 were the only AU teams that are as good as we're used to.
Posted on 11/23/14 at 4:25 pm to JuiceTerry
quote:
Why would you be used to good teams, using your data?
Because football was played before 2008
But troll on...
This post was edited on 11/23/14 at 4:27 pm
Posted on 11/23/14 at 4:26 pm to Chronic
So your big proof that the difference in national championships is not a fluke is that both teams have the same number of conference championships over the last 35 years. I am sure that makes perfect sense to a typical bammer.
Fluke = backing in the championship game without winning the west in 2011, Colt McCoy getting injured in 2009, Auburn being left out after going undefeated in 2004, and Miami jumping over Auburn after the bowl games in 1983
Fluke = backing in the championship game without winning the west in 2011, Colt McCoy getting injured in 2009, Auburn being left out after going undefeated in 2004, and Miami jumping over Auburn after the bowl games in 1983
Posted on 11/23/14 at 4:28 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
IB wins:
Last 10 years
AU - 6
Bama - 4
Last 15 years:
AU - 9
Bama - 6
Last 20 years:
AU - 11
Bama - 9
Last 25 years:
AU - 13
Bama - 12
Last 30 years:
AU - 16
Bama - 14
Since Pat Dye arrived at AU in 1981:
AU - 18
Bama - 15
Now if you want to go back to the 1970s, we will start talking about how a 40 year home field advantage for bama is probably the only reason bama even leads the overall series at all.
Or we can just agree that for last 3.5 DECADES AU has been better than bama. Longer than most on the Rant have probably been alive.
Last 10 years
AU - 6
Bama - 4
Last 15 years:
AU - 9
Bama - 6
Last 20 years:
AU - 11
Bama - 9
Last 25 years:
AU - 13
Bama - 12
Last 30 years:
AU - 16
Bama - 14
Since Pat Dye arrived at AU in 1981:
AU - 18
Bama - 15
Now if you want to go back to the 1970s, we will start talking about how a 40 year home field advantage for bama is probably the only reason bama even leads the overall series at all.
Or we can just agree that for last 3.5 DECADES AU has been better than bama. Longer than most on the Rant have probably been alive.
This post was edited on 11/23/14 at 4:32 pm
Posted on 11/23/14 at 4:30 pm to auburnphan23
Fluke= Auburn backing in to the game last year. Although losing it was not a fluke. Everyone said you would lose, and you did.
Posted on 11/23/14 at 4:34 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:23 years before Pat Dye arrived:
Since Pat Dye arrived at AU in 1981:
AU - 18
Bama - 15
Bama - 19
AU -
Posted on 11/23/14 at 4:38 pm to JuiceTerry
Since that was before I was alive, that's fine by me.
Of course the 40 year home field advantage is the main reason bama leads the series. No way in hell bama leads the series if the games were home and home since 1960.
Of course the 40 year home field advantage is the main reason bama leads the series. No way in hell bama leads the series if the games were home and home since 1960.
Posted on 11/23/14 at 4:39 pm to JuiceTerry
You are trying too hard
Page 2 of 4
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News