| FTBL why has AU won 6 in a row?

[It Takes Eleven]

Gosh, this thread is making me homesick.

I miss living in Alabama and messing with Barners.

Amen.

 

[Nate]

I know its terrible and bad and so forth.. but I had to..

So in browsing the mugshots for surrounding counties this morning I found this.. this thread is teh first thing I thought of

 

[bamanaf]

Yep, animal sodomy is a felony.

RTR

 

[Guest]

Yep, animal sodomy is a felony.

RTR

Not in Lee County where puppy love has a whole new meaning.

 

[bear facts]

I know its terrible and bad and so forth.. but I had to..

So in browsing the mugshots for surrounding counties this morning I found this.. this thread is the first thing I thought of

Nate, I bet her/his name is Pat . . . named, of course, after Pat, not Sullivan nor Dye nor Nix, but simply Pat.

 

[TWJUA]

If I was a AU fan, I would be pissed that this whole run we had, 6 wins over Alabama, 10 win seasons, streaks, great players, all that, and nothing but 1 SEC championship to show for it. Thats it. Bama won that in 1999 almost by accident. I mean they should have had a 3-4 SEC champiosnhip run, or at least in the game, and 3-4 BCS bowl game (Orange, Sugar, Rose, Fiesta) appearences.

Underachivers, that program is as a whole.

 

[circledrill]

Underachivers, that program is as a whole.

No offense, but what does it say if an underachieving program has beaten you 6-in-a-row and you had to hire a rockstar coach just to beat this underachieving team?

I guess you guys did not watch football in 2004 when AU went undefeated and went "only" to the Sugar Bowl?

Do you not remember that the whole reason that happened was simply that there were 3 undefeated teams that year and AU started lower in the polls?

Do you not remember that at that time, pre-season polls counted in the BCS? Do you not remember that the BCS has changed since then and does not come out until later in the season and all teams have played several games by then?

AU being left out of a MNC shot in 2004 had nothing to do with R.E.S.P.E.C.T. or anything other than simply bad luck. That is all it was. The only way it would have turned out different would be if AU started that season ranked #1 or #2 and did not lose.

We are not the ones that have our idol quoted as talking about "laundromats in Tuscaloosa" claiming us number one so we claim a retro-active national championship.

Give me a break. You won't find 1 out of 100 AU fans that claim a MNC in 2004 like you guys do with your laundromat NCs.

 

[CrimsonPirate]

I wish I did, but I am stuck in reality working for a living. I graduated about 11 years ago.

You have been drinking that Lanett/Chattahoochee water too long

Nah, Kc...he's only been in Lanett less than 10 years. But, he moved there from Opelika. That might be the problem.

 

[Guest]

That is so funny, you claim a recruiting title with out wining on the field. I love it. Please win on the field before you brag about anything. I will give you the recruiting championsip every year as long as you do not beat us on the field.

Nominated

Listen up asshat. Don't come around here baiting and acting like a 12 year old. Go on back to the Barn and bone up on your animal husbandry and what-not.
We didn't claim the recruiting title. There is no such thing. Many recruiting publications just said we had a good class. We happen to be proud of our good recruiting class. You, on the other hand, have no class.
The last 10 or so years have been an outright embarrassment to our program, probation or not. I certainly hope it changes. Now back to the pasture with you, laddy!!

 

[Guest]

Underachivers, that program is as a whole.

No offense, but what does it say if an underachieving program has beaten you 6-in-a-row and you had to hire a rockstar coach just to beat this underachieving team?

I guess you guys did not watch football in 2004 when AU went undefeated and went "only" to the Sugar Bowl?

Do you not remember that the whole reason that happened was simply that there were 3 undefeated teams that year and AU started lower in the polls?

Do you not remember that at that time, pre-season polls counted in the BCS? Do you not remember that the BCS has changed since then and does not come out until later in the season and all teams have played several games by then?

AU being left out of a MNC shot in 2004 had nothing to do with R.E.S.P.E.C.T. or anything other than simply bad luck. That is all it was. The only way it would have turned out different would be if AU started that season ranked #1 or #2 and did not lose.

We are not the ones that have our idol quoted as talking about "laundromats in Tuscaloosa" claiming us number one so we claim a retro-active national championship.

Give me a break. You won't find 1 out of 100 AU fans that claim a MNC in 2004 like you guys do with your laundromat NCs.

beat it.

 

[TerryP]

I normally avoid conversations like this because I find them to be a colossal waste of my time. That is, until I see something said that goes over the line of what is true and what one chooses to believe is true.

It's apparent you have a degree of self-importance seen only when you look in the mirror because those outside of the small world you live in see nothing more than a desire to be considered relevant.

Without further adeau, let's consider...

Underachivers, that program is as a whole.

No offense, but what does it say if an underachieving program has beaten you 6-in-a-row and you had to hire a rockstar coach just to beat this underachieving team?

Wrong. The decision made to release Shula had nothing, I repeat nothing to do with the record versus Auburn. It was due to off-the-field issues that were not only out of control, but quickly becoming a serious issue.

I guess you guys did not watch football in 2004 when AU went undefeated and went "only" to the Sugar Bowl?

Do you not remember that the whole reason that happened was simply that there were 3 undefeated teams that year and AU started lower in the polls?
Do you not remember that at that time, pre-season polls counted in the BCS? Do you not remember that the BCS has changed since then and does not come out until later in the season and all teams have played several games by then?

AU being left out of a MNC shot in 2004 had nothing to do with R.E.S.P.E.C.T. or anything other than simply bad luck. That is all it was. The only way it would have turned out different would be if AU started that season ranked #1 or #2 and did not lose.

No, I didn't watch that game. I don't watch but two Auburn games a year. When you play us and when you play LSU. Understand, while what happens in Tuscaloosa may be of interest to you, what happens in West Opelika means noting to me. Nothing.

You can tell yourself it was due to where you started in the polls. That did have some weight in the matter. However, what carried as much weight, if not more in the eyes of the voters, can be summed up with two words.

The Citadel.

We are not the ones that have our idol quoted as talking about "laundromats in Tuscaloosa" claiming us number one so we claim a retro-active national championship.

Give me a break. You won't find 1 out of 100 AU fans that claim a MNC in 2004 like you guys do with your laundromat NCs.

Dude, the 2004 PNC is listed in your own school/program's media guide. Need I remind you of your national championship parade? The trophy? The rings?

IF you are going to bring your dog into this little fight/discussion make sure you bring something other than your "shitzu."

 

[Guest]

Underachivers, that program is as a whole.

No offense, but what does it say if an underachieving program has beaten you 6-in-a-row and you had to hire a rockstar coach just to beat this underachieving team?

I guess you guys did not watch football in 2004 when AU went undefeated and went "only" to the Sugar Bowl?

Do you not remember that the whole reason that happened was simply that there were 3 undefeated teams that year and AU started lower in the polls?

Do you not remember that at that time, pre-season polls counted in the BCS? Do you not remember that the BCS has changed since then and does not come out until later in the season and all teams have played several games by then?

AU being left out of a MNC shot in 2004 had nothing to do with R.E.S.P.E.C.T. or anything other than simply bad luck. That is all it was. The only way it would have turned out different would be if AU started that season ranked #1 or #2 and did not lose.

We are not the ones that have our idol quoted as talking about "laundromats in Tuscaloosa" claiming us number one so we claim a retro-active national championship.

Give me a break. You won't find 1 out of 100 AU fans that claim a MNC in 2004 like you guys do with your laundromat NCs.

I am going to revive an old custom from TI.

Moooooo!

 

[Swamptick]

I guess you guys did not watch football in 2004 when AU went undefeated and went "only" to the Sugar Bowl?

The truest sign of irrelevance. Had it been Alabama there is no doubt we would have been in the NC game.

You also claim that we have questionable NC. Ha! Shows how little you actually know. Alabama COULD lay claim to 16 National Championships but we only claim those that were voted on by the national sporting press powers of the time. Do some history or would that involve to much reading?

Be proud that you beat us 6 years in a row with poor coaching, the worst sanctions EVER handed down to a team that was still allowed to play and TONS of instability. I guess that will be the only time you can beat us that much in a row.

Don't forget in that same time we also have multiple losses to OTHER crappy teams like Auburn.

By the way, how did that recruiting class make you feel? If I was an AU fan I would be hanging my head in shame that the "rockstar" Alabama hired beat the crap out of you despite having gone 7-6. What a shame.

 

[Argo]

I normally avoid conversations like this because I find them to be a colossal waste of my time. That is, until I see something said that goes over the line of what is true and what one chooses to believe is true.

It's apparent you have a degree of self-importance seen only when you look in the mirror because those outside of the small world you live in see nothing more than a desire to be considered relevant.

Without further adeau, let's consider...

Underachivers, that program is as a whole.

No offense, but what does it say if an underachieving program has beaten you 6-in-a-row and you had to hire a rockstar coach just to beat this underachieving team?

Wrong. The decision made to release Shula had nothing, I repeat nothing to do with the record versus Auburn. It was due to off-the-field issues that were not only out of control, but quickly becoming a serious issue.

I guess you guys did not watch football in 2004 when AU went undefeated and went "only" to the Sugar Bowl?

Do you not remember that the whole reason that happened was simply that there were 3 undefeated teams that year and AU started lower in the polls?
Do you not remember that at that time, pre-season polls counted in the BCS? Do you not remember that the BCS has changed since then and does not come out until later in the season and all teams have played several games by then?

AU being left out of a MNC shot in 2004 had nothing to do with R.E.S.P.E.C.T. or anything other than simply bad luck. That is all it was. The only way it would have turned out different would be if AU started that season ranked #1 or #2 and did not lose.

No, I didn't watch that game. I don't watch but two Auburn games a year. When you play us and when you play LSU. Understand, while what happens in Tuscaloosa may be of interest to you, what happens in West Opelika means noting to me. Nothing.

You can tell yourself it was due to where you started in the polls. That did have some weight in the matter. However, what carried as much weight, if not more in the eyes of the voters, can be summed up with two words.

The Citadel.

We are not the ones that have our idol quoted as talking about "laundromats in Tuscaloosa" claiming us number one so we claim a retro-active national championship.

Give me a break. You won't find 1 out of 100 AU fans that claim a MNC in 2004 like you guys do with your laundromat NCs.

Dude, the 2004 PNC is listed in your own school/program's media guide. Need I remind you of your national championship parade? The trophy? The rings?

IF you are going to bring your dog into this little fight/discussion make sure you bring something other than your "shitzu."

Things to add to the list of "please get your facts straight".

1. The BCS has NEVER been released before October. This did not start the year after AU was left out of the BCS game. This started with the inception of the BCS standings.

Since I'm sure you're going to spin and spin until I provide proof, here is a link to the FIRST BCS release in 2004.

Facts.com

So, in 2004 when the first release of the BCS was issued, Auburn was already in 4th place.

 

[BamaPride]

I guess you guys did not watch football in 2004 when AU went undefeated and went "only" to the Sugar Bowl?

The truest sign of irrelevance. Had it been Alabama there is no doubt we would have been in the NC game.

No doubt Alabama would have been in the NC game? I'm not so sure about that. It would have been tough for anyone to jump either of those teams.

 

[Guest]

Underachivers, that program is as a whole.

No offense, but what does it say if an underachieving program has beaten you 6-in-a-row and you had to hire a rockstar coach just to beat this underachieving team?

I guess you guys did not watch football in 2004 when AU went undefeated and went "only" to the Sugar Bowl?

Do you not remember that the whole reason that happened was simply that there were 3 undefeated teams that year and AU started lower in the polls?

Do you not remember that at that time, pre-season polls counted in the BCS? Do you not remember that the BCS has changed since then and does not come out until later in the season and all teams have played several games by then?

AU being left out of a MNC shot in 2004 had nothing to do with R.E.S.P.E.C.T. or anything other than simply bad luck. That is all it was. The only way it would have turned out different would be if AU started that season ranked #1 or #2 and did not lose.

We are not the ones that have our idol quoted as talking about "laundromats in Tuscaloosa" claiming us number one so we claim a retro-active national championship.

Give me a break. You won't find 1 out of 100 AU fans that claim a MNC in 2004 like you guys do with your laundromat NCs.

LOL reading that dropped my IQ to your level...you got me...

1 in a 100,huh.....Peoples national championship? Parade on John Deer equipment? Any of that ring a bell?

At least people outside of Alabama voted to give them the national championships....

 

[Guest]

I guess you guys did not watch football in 2004 when AU went undefeated and went "only" to the Sugar Bowl?

The truest sign of irrelevance. Had it been Alabama there is no doubt we would have been in the NC game.

No doubt Alabama would have been in the NC game? I'm not so sure about that. It would have been tough for anyone to jump either of those teams.

Think ya needed to read just a little bit farther to get his point?

 

[Swamptick]

I guess you guys did not watch football in 2004 when AU went undefeated and went "only" to the Sugar Bowl?

The truest sign of irrelevance. Had it been Alabama there is no doubt we would have been in the NC game.

No doubt Alabama would have been in the NC game? I'm not so sure about that. It would have been tough for anyone to jump either of those teams.

Of course it is all speculation but given the name that Alabama has (for better or for worse) it is likely we would have jumped OK for the 2nd spot. When Alabama is doing well we do tend to get alot of respect at that point nationaly.

 

[circledrill]

I guess you guys did not watch football in 2004 when AU went undefeated and went "only" to the Sugar Bowl?

The truest sign of irrelevance. Had it been Alabama there is no doubt we would have been in the NC game.

No doubt Alabama would have been in the NC game? I'm not so sure about that. It would have been tough for anyone to jump either of those teams.

Thank you. That's all I'm trying to say. Unless Alabama started 1 or 2 in the polls in 2004, you would have been in the same boat as Auburn, period.

I have been around here for a while as some of you know, and I try to always be respectful and not just trolling or trash talking.

 

[TerryP]

I guess you guys did not watch football in 2004 when AU went undefeated and went "only" to the Sugar Bowl?

The truest sign of irrelevance. Had it been Alabama there is no doubt we would have been in the NC game.

No doubt Alabama would have been in the NC game? I'm not so sure about that. It would have been tough for anyone to jump either of those teams.

Thank you. That's all I'm trying to say. Unless Alabama started 1 or 2 in the polls in 2004, you would have been in the same boat as Auburn, period.

I have been around here for a while as some of you know, and I try to always be respectful and not just trolling or trash talking.

I never went to any "People's National Champion" celebration. But what is the difference in that and some of the NC's that Alabama claims? You say you have 12 MNC's. Why doesn't every source agree? How is it that some reputable sources say 6 or 7 or 8? Because MNC's are just that...mythical national championships...there is a subjective component to them. They are not won and lost on the field.

Surely you can't be serious?!?

If I may refresh your memory, the PNC championship should have been awarded to USCw that year because they were leading in the poll UNTIL the site owner decided to roll back the date to where Auburn was leading the poll.

Golf Weekly said you were national champions.

Versus, football publications, AP and the UPI were declaring Bama as champs. HUGE difference.

You know the answer to the question you put up, some say only AP championships count. Others include AP and UPI. However, if you look at the NCAA site you'll see they say we've been selected as champs more times than the University of Alabama chooses recognize.