Started By
Message
re: Miami '01 vs Alabama '09
Posted on 2/11/10 at 10:42 am to nativetiger
Posted on 2/11/10 at 10:42 am to nativetiger
that SOS.. citadel and same ppg is getting to ya now, aint it?
Posted on 2/11/10 at 10:44 am to Alahunter
Not at all....our SOS was better than OU's and USC's in '04....
It was just a media stunt to focus on one game rather than the whole season....they had their minds made up that they wanted Carroll v. Stoops in that game and there was not going to be any other scenario.
It was just a media stunt to focus on one game rather than the whole season....they had their minds made up that they wanted Carroll v. Stoops in that game and there was not going to be any other scenario.
Posted on 2/11/10 at 10:47 am to nativetiger
quote:
t was a point poorly made by the media who was seizing on the flimsiest of evidence to deny us a shot in the big game.
The schedule rankings that year showed that our schedule was tougher than OU's and USC's......
Tha hell? Where did you pick that nugget up at? Auburn Undercover?
The difference in schedule strength was almost negligible, but it was there...and schedule strength was a component of the BCS...so it wasn't "an excuse" that edged Auburn out.
Auburn's primary problem was their ranking in the preseason polls. I personally consider football's preseason polls to be one of the biggest shams in college sports. Teams are given the inside track to a title based on pure the speculation of a pack of sportswriters. The first baby step to getting a semi-worthy field of NC candidates is to have the first poll come out after they play three games. App State - Michigan is one of the best examples to use in demonstrating the futility of the preseason opinion.
Posted on 2/11/10 at 10:48 am to nativetiger
quote:
Aren't you guys playing a team in it's first year of a football program this year?
That's embarrassing for a defending "national champion."
You act like you want to be taken seriously, then you say stupid shite like this....
Posted on 2/11/10 at 10:49 am to DvlsAdvocat
quote:
Auburn's primary problem was their ranking in the preseason polls. I personally consider football's preseason polls to be one of the biggest shams in college sports. Teams are given the inside track to a title based on pure the speculation of a pack of sportswriters. The first baby step to getting a semi-worthy field of NC candidates is to have the first poll come out after they play three games. App State - Michigan is one of the best examples to use in demonstrating the futility of the preseason opinion.
I agree with this.....
Posted on 2/11/10 at 10:50 am to nativetiger
IMO the first poll shouldn't come out until October.
Posted on 2/11/10 at 10:51 am to DvlsAdvocat
quote:
You act like you want to be taken seriously, then you say stupid shite like this....
Is it not true?
Is the "stupid shite" not the playing of a team in it's first year of playing football?
Embarrassing for a school the stature of alabama, no?
Posted on 2/11/10 at 10:59 am to nativetiger
Did you feel the same way about Auburn playing UAB? Samford? Ball State?
Its the economic reality of NCAA football. What part of that do you not understand?
Its the economic reality of NCAA football. What part of that do you not understand?
Posted on 2/11/10 at 11:00 am to DvlsAdvocat
None of those teams were in their first year of a program.
Sorry, but this is an indefensible position for alabama.....there is already a thread on the front page about this, so I will post in that one on this subject from now on......
Sorry, but this is an indefensible position for alabama.....there is already a thread on the front page about this, so I will post in that one on this subject from now on......
Posted on 2/11/10 at 11:02 am to nativetiger
quote:
Is the "stupid shite" not the playing of a team in it's first year of playing football?
Embarrassing for a school the stature of alabama, no?
If GSU doesn't take on a top tier D1 team, they have no way of making money for the year. Also, playing a high-profile team, in a game that will be televised is massive for GSU, even if they are nothing but cannon fodder.
Posted on 2/11/10 at 11:43 am to bamawriter
Regarding the cmparison between 04 Auburn and 09 Alabama- as has been noted, Alabama averaged the same number of points scored and given up per game. However, the competition was not the same. Alabama beat 2 top 5 teams to Auburn's 0
Alabama beat 3 top 10 teams, to Auburn's 2. Alabama beat 5 top 20 teams, to Auburn's 4. Alabama beat 10 bowl eligible teams to Auburn's 7. Also, the average rank of teams beaten (that finished ranked) was 10 as was Auburn's. Points being equal. Alabama played against the harder schedule.
Alabama beat 3 top 10 teams, to Auburn's 2. Alabama beat 5 top 20 teams, to Auburn's 4. Alabama beat 10 bowl eligible teams to Auburn's 7. Also, the average rank of teams beaten (that finished ranked) was 10 as was Auburn's. Points being equal. Alabama played against the harder schedule.
Posted on 2/11/10 at 11:45 am to nativetiger
quote:
Not at all....our SOS was better than OU's and USC's in '04....
False
USC and OU were 1 and 2 in the computers
Posted on 2/11/10 at 11:49 am to usc6158
quote:
USC and OU were 1 and 2 in the computers
I decided to deduct points from USC based on the fact that you were cheating the whole time.....
Q: Do you think USC can win without cheating?
Follow up Q: Do you think Lane K. will be anything other than a disaster at USC?
TIA
Posted on 2/11/10 at 11:50 am to nativetiger
quote:
nativetiger
so bitter
Posted on 2/11/10 at 11:51 am to usc6158
usc6158
Q: Will you quit watching college football when USC gets the death penalty for cheating?
Q: Will you quit watching college football when USC gets the death penalty for cheating?
Posted on 2/11/10 at 11:53 am to nativetiger
quote:
Q: Will you quit watching college football when USC gets the death penalty for cheating?
With the Pac-10's TV deal, it's hard as hell to watch USC anyway.
Posted on 2/11/10 at 11:53 am to nativetiger
Popular
Back to top


2


