DISQUS

Jason · 1 year ago

The NCAA has no control over the BCS or Bowl games. When OU was forced to vacate their wins, they did not vacate their win over Oregon at the Holiday Bowl.

Since you are bringing up What if scenarios with the Reggie Bush scandal, lets explore what might happen if that happened at a different school. Would Alabama or Oklahoma get the death penalty if it had been them?

I'm anxious to see if the NCAA is going to just slap USC's wrists or if they'll hit them where it hurts. Vacating wins is pretty meaningless at this point.

War_Eagle_Atlanta · 1 year ago

They do have control over regular season games, and if their victories were forced to be vacated, only a pompous ass would still proclaim themselves as champions. And as I have stated many times, the NCAA does not sanction a Div 1-A NC. It's the domain of the independent selectors, most notably, the AP and the BCS.

TigerEducated · 1 year ago

Uhh...Beavis...What Athletic program on the FBS level would actually still proclaim a national title if they vacated all their regular season W's (Other than 'Bama)?

I don't think that AU is anything other than the People's Champion (;-) WEA) for '04, but to think everyone'd still think SC's Numero Uno after it comes out that Reggie was getting pizznaid all the way back to 2004 is el stupido...

War_Eagle_Atlanta · 1 year ago

Who's going to fill it it, TE? National champions, like political power, hate a void...

TigerEducated · 1 year ago

NCAA doesn't award 'em, and-much like they will from their '04 title if proven they knew of wrongdoing and/or they have to dq bush-they'll still retain the wire service titles...

AUtigerman · 1 year ago

personally i dont care if they award it to Auburn. Id just like to see the premadonas put on probation. Unfortunately big money drives this train.

Id like to see USC denied a bowl bid this year and then go undefeated be a nice De Ja Vu

fosterkeats · 1 year ago

The thing is, no one gives a shit about Auburn...

Lennie Collins · 1 year ago

Hey Jason...if this was Oklahoma (Can't speak for Alabama) the majority of college football fans would be calling for the Death Penalty! Oklahoma would have been tried, denied, and fried by now!

WestCoaster · 1 year ago

Wow, I can see this thread getting ugly pretty fast...

Also, I am by NO MEANS a USC homer as they are probably one of my least favorite teams, but what happened to innocent until proven guilty? While I think there was shady business going on, nothing regarding the school has yet to be proven concretely.

Lastly, this whole suggestion coming from a huge Auburn fan doesn't really sit well with me. It almost seems as if USC's possible guilt is simply being used as a platform to award Auburn an MNC that they have always felt shafted about. Moreover, using ranked teams as an argument for strength of schedule does not seem like a legitimate tool due to the fact that the article previously argues that the only reason Auburn didn't get to play in the Orange Bowl was due to its initial low ranking. I don't think it's fair to validate ranking when they suit an argument while devaluing them when they don't.

War_Eagle_Atlanta · 1 year ago

Please read the disclaimer in the first paragraph about this thread being extremely presumptive and predicated on USC's alledged complicity and kindly include a disclaimer in your own comments that your reading comprehension is at or below a 6th grade level...

Please do not go into the specifics of who and who not should have gone to the Orange Bowl that year. That isn't the intent of the article and I address that.

Is it self-serving that I'm an Auburn fan? Man, more things get by you than do the Vanderbilt secondary...

TigerEducated · 1 year ago

He should change his name to Don Quixote with all the windmills he's flailing at...

WestCoaster · 1 year ago

Haha. Too ridiculous. Just jumping into a conversation to put me down.

"BC" · 1 year ago

you're a bad poster.

just an observation.
NOT A PERSONAL ATTACK.
IM NOT SAYING YOU LACK THE EDUCATION REQUIRED.
AND IM CERTAINLY NOT SAYING THE PAC-10 IS OVERRATED.

my bad man. i forgot you hate all caps.

WestCoaster · 1 year ago

I guess everyone is allowed their own opinion. Thanks for your input.

Ben Prather · 1 year ago

Again, we have credibility from the takes one to know one philosophy

TigerEducated · 1 year ago

Sort've like you jumping into my conversation with BC the other day to get a shot in at the state of Louisiana?

Your hypocrisy knows no bounds...

I'm going to learn you up right here, West Coaster....You've got some good insights, and you'll be fine here, but the way you keep trying to get digs in at me, you'll be reminding us all of that gallant Knight from Monty Python...You remember the one that said, "It's just a flesh wound! Come back...I'll bite your knees off!"

WestCoaster · 1 year ago

I did not jump into your convo with BC. Read again.

When did I say ANYTHING about Louisiana?

I am not trying to get digs at you. I could care less, but you are trying way too hard to try to attack me. Just cool it, please.

TigerEducated · 1 year ago

WestCoaster,

My humblest of apologies, sir...I was confusing your comments with those of the poster named as Observer...

He was the one who jumped in, and ever since then, I've been mistakenly pointing my invective engine at you...

Once again, my humblest apologies...I assure you I mean you no harm, chief...

-Gary-

"BC" · 1 year ago

HAHAHAHAHA!!!
this is possibly one of the funniest things ive seen on this site!
not funny to you yet? just go back and read all of the things TE has said to this guy over the last couple of days. its hilarious!

certainly not a proud moment for Mr. Educated.
i would LOVE to see you and Observer go at it. but unfortunately, he doesnt post very often.

TigerEducated · 1 year ago

BC,

I'm not sure about this...But, I'm sure some intrepid member such as yourself could do the legwork if they were so inclined.

Again, don't hold me to this, but...I'm not sure I've ever posted that I didn't consider myself human, and capable of mistakes...

I made one...I'm also confident and comfortable enough with myself to be able to admit to it when one is made.

I was in the wrong.

You do realize that about half of what I post here is what most would consider a "schtick" to get a grin out of most folks? All the hyperbole and superfluous language I lace my posts with is designed to make people smile, perhaps get a snicker out of a few folks...

Sort've like the way your barber gets a snicker every time you walk in to get that Pomeranian that's perpetually hiding underneath your hat groomed once every few weeks?

OU_Ron · 1 year ago

" Pomeranian", I'm still laughing, it must be working....

War_Eagle_Atlanta · 1 year ago

Haha! Remember that time you got 'cyclone' mixed up with 'tornado' rather than 'typhoon'? Boy, that was funny!!!

Clemson_Joe · 1 year ago

Wow. What a terrible case of mistaken identity. Oh well. At least that got cleared up.

I will say that you did remain pretty calm through all of the bashing. I cannot say that I would've done the same.

OU_Ron · 1 year ago

The Author said this thread was purely speculative , hell it's something to chat about.....we all know it won't happen...so why should the thread get ugly.

Lennie Collins · 1 year ago

Can't we all just get along? Listen to the words of Rodney King!

OU_Ron · 1 year ago

" Listen to the words of Rodney King! " Lennie, while he was getting the hell beat out of him or after.........

Lennie Collins · 1 year ago

OU Ron...afterwards! We all should know not to run from the police let alone being drunk and running from the police.

WestCoaster · 1 year ago

I don't think this thread should get ugly. I just said that I could see that happening, that's all.

AUtigerman · 1 year ago

This isnt Auburns first trip to the "Deny them the title dance" If Auburn fans are a bit bitter you dont have to look too far back to see why. Not includng the 2004 team.

1983 Auburn was ranked #3 going into the Sugar Bowl, Miami was #5 they beat #1 Nebraska on a last second play , # 2 Texas got beat by Georgia , Auburn Beats Michigan,
Instead of #3 going to #1 #5 "since its Miami" jumps over Auburn and Nebraska just falls to #2

By the way Michigan was ranked # 4 if i remember right. They were no slouch.

Lennie Collins · 1 year ago

I will say t again in this thread...USC will not be punished!

kpwalker · 1 year ago

No USC will not be truly punished like the Sooners would be. The playing field is not level when you talk about the USCs and NDs. I'm not comfortable with OU as the champion that year even though they lost to a cheating USC team. That season is gone now. let everyone with a legitimit gripe proclaim themselves champion that year. Until a playoff is instituted we do that anyway. Many teams that are not so great to begin a season are as good as any at the end so we never know who truly is the best. We can argue til the cows come home but thats what I guess this blogging is all about

JB · 1 year ago

I agree.....no punishment for everyones favorite national championship thiefs

OU_Ron · 1 year ago

OU had their chance and lost, it doesn't matter if USC cheated about anything, OU got beat by better players, it would surprise me if any Sooner fan would stake claim to the NC even if it was available......JMO

kpwalker · 1 year ago

No I don't think OU was the champ that year. You are right we don't have a gripe about it. We were beat. But if cheating doesn't matter then USC can be the Champ or Auburn or anyone else that had a good record and didn't play these two teams during the year because there is no playoff.

OU_Ron · 1 year ago

I agree about a playoff, in fact I think everyone on this blog will agree, bur let's just say there was a playoff in 04 and USC came out on top after all games were played and crowned Nat'l Champs, and now in 08 the Bush/USC thing comes up and it's decided that USC knew that Bush was taking money from whoever, we still have the same problem----USC won with better players, I'm not saying that they should get away with cheating, but how can you take it away from the players who didn't have anything to do with it.

Hell, I may not be explaining it right, I guess the NC should be shared with all the undefeated teams that year, that suggestion is as good as any.....

Lennie Collins · 1 year ago

Playoffs? Playoffs? Playoffs? Did you say playoffs?

GA_Boy · 1 year ago

I am with Lennie on this one. I don't see anything happening to USC. But since this is a hypothetical, I definitely think that they have to go with AU and the MNC that year. They already have the rings to with it so what's the big deal?

GO DAWGS

Lennie Collins · 1 year ago

I will be 100% hypothetical on this one even though I was early and realistic too! The NCAA will tell USC next time do it on the down low and move the next recruit 's family you do that for out of state!

"BC" · 1 year ago

haha.
TOTAL HOMER THREAD WEA!!!

i knew it was yours right when i came to the sight.

now. ill tell you "why the hell not?"
they didnt beat the best team in the country, which was USC.
whether some dude bought RB and his family dinner at applebees and a new escalade or not makes NOOOO difference on the field.

First of all, i don't have ANY problems whatsoever with people outside the university (including boosters) giving players gifts AFTER they sign.
Second, i don't think it's right at all to put an asterisk next to USC's national championship. They won it on the field. They were the best team in the country in 2004, hands down.

Did Auburn deserve a shot?
hell yeah.
but they didnt get it, and to even say that auburn should jump oklahoma to get the crown is ludicrous.

elgringoflaco · 1 year ago

I love that it's the Alabama fan that all-out supports pay-for-play. Roll Tide!

TigerEducated · 1 year ago

[Guffaw]I just spit Diet Barq's Root Beer all over the monitor of my VAIO[/Guffaw]

AUtigerman · 1 year ago

I dont remember them beating us so they sure didnt win it on the field

War_Eagle_Atlanta · 1 year ago

This is not about whether Auburn deserved a shot. USC is removed from the equation by forces beyond their control. Who is left standing? The void will be filled. Auburn won't come out initially and claim it, but there will be some who will want to thrust it upon them--not all, but some, and I see nothing wrong with receiving it.

Things would be vastly different had we lost a game, but you couldn't ask for a more deserving team if the title's going to be defaulted to them...

"BC" · 1 year ago

you obviously didnt read my post up until the last paragraph.

nobody can win a national championship by default.
especially in a system where you have a national championship game. which auburn wasnt even invited to play in.
and if a team is defaulted a championship, id say utah has just as much claim to it as auburn has.

its USC's NC and always will be. nobody's taking that trophy from their locker room.
USC won it.
they were the champs in '04.
end of discussion.

War_Eagle_Atlanta · 1 year ago

You are oh-so wrong, BC...

There are many national titles out there for 2004. If USC is forced to vacate theirs, which are the two most legitimate ones, all Auburn has to do is claim that our once inferior national titles received that year are now legit in light of the latest events. Somebody did vote us national champions, but they haven't near the clout of the AP and BCS titles...

You should know this, because this is how Alabama has worked for decades... Do you need reminding?

TigerEducated · 1 year ago

You beat me to that one...

They claim Ovaltine's National Title in 1922...

The very definition of shameless....

AUtigerman · 1 year ago

WEA
I dont think BC is old enough to remember when Bama was any good.
So to remind him of a national championship that he knows nothing about is kind of pointless.
Prehaps his Dad or Grandpa could remind him of the good ple days

"BC" · 1 year ago

well if by good you mean National Championship, then no, i was only 3 when we won in 1992.
but by that same reasoning, auburn has NEVER been good in your lifetime. unless of course, you vividly remember that '57 team. i dont know how old you are.

if by good, you mean SEC championships, then yes, i distinctly remember stomping florida to win it in 1999.

and if by good, you mean, a 10-win season, then look no further than 2005.

great post tigerman!!!

AUtigerman · 1 year ago

Honestly i was refering to the arrogant rants you so frequently slant towards Auburn. As if your beloved Tide were so much better then them.
In your life time is refering to the fact that in your life time Bama dosent even hold a winning record against AU. In your life time AU has consistantly been the better team. Even in the 10 win season of 05 your refering to you were beating by the two better teams in the west us and LSU.

So in your life time , My daugters life ,and now my Grandsons lifetime AU is the better team from the fine state of Alabama.

In this lifetime what goes around comes around and now i am enjoying the fact that AU is the better team.

"BC" · 1 year ago

well thats a matter of opinion.
yes, in the iron bowl series, over my lifetime, auburn holds a two game lead.
however, in my lifetime, alabama holds the lead in National Championships 1-0, and conference titles 2-1.

so, if it was up to me, id take a national title and SEC championship over 2 iron bowl victories anyday.
but maybe you would choose otherwise.

War_Eagle_Atlanta · 1 year ago

Grandpa, tell me 'bout the good old days...

"BC" · 1 year ago

look man.
alabama, according to college football warehouse, has the ability to claim 25 NCs. however, the university recognizes less than half of them. however you want to spin it, you could look at Notre Dame or Michigan's 11 claimed NCs and probably find some of those that you want to discredit. its just the way it worked back then.
good ol' honest auburn though. they only claimed one.
you wouldn't want to ruin that reputation by claiming one in 2004 now would you??

War_Eagle_Atlanta · 1 year ago

BC, you need to quit smoking that smack that Jimmy Johns sold you before he got taken down by the Tuscaloosa 5-O. The bigger question is why Alabama doesn't claim a title every time one selector out of dozens gives them the nod...They're leaving half of their so-called titles on the table...

I've already discredited everyone's national titles already. Where have you been?

"BC" · 1 year ago

Hey WEA,
off topic, but i wanna hear your take on the brawls happening on the Auburn practice field.
apparently one of the few 4-star freshman you got, was jumped, and is now looking to play elsewhere.

War_Eagle_Atlanta · 1 year ago

Do you think that fights on the practice field only occur at Auburn? DeRon Furr is leaving because he wanted to play QB and they moved him to defense this summer. Can't say I blame the kid. It's his dream he's chasing...

And our 3 star kids seem to be having their way with your 5 star kids here of late, wouldn't you say?

"BC" · 1 year ago

not sure i follow.
so you think Furr being gang-banged by the upperclassmen had nothing to do with him looking to play elsewhere?
and no, i think fights on the practice field not only happen at Auburn, but anywhere that a team doesn't have good team chemistry.
i know for a fact there haven't been any fights on the Alabama practice field.

second, we have only one 5-star player that has played in an iron bowl. him being, of course, Andre Smith. predicted to be a top 5 pick in the NFL draft after his Junior season in 2008.
so again, im not sure i get what you mean in your second paragraph.

also. check out this breaking news.
yet another auburn player gets injured due to a fight!
whats goin on down on the plains???

A few quickie notes from Friday morning's practice:

* Freshman defensive back Marcus Jemison injured his left foot after a scuffle with fullback John Douglas. Jemison left the injury tent in crutches, his foot in an air cast, and climbed into a university van.

Auburn coach Tommy Tuberville said it was an ankle injury, but he didn't know how serious it was. Tuberville said he was not concerned that the injury appeared to be caused in the midst of a fight.

"Every play's a fight," he said.

AUtigerman · 1 year ago

i guess your still upset about the six posted on you arent you

"BC" · 1 year ago

not really man.
im not a big fan of living in the past. however, im AM concerned about the present and future.
concerned about the fact that Auburn's recruiting class is almost completely full and it looks as though yall will be lucky to finish in the top 20 this february.
while, on the other side of the state, alabama is the leader for 4 5-star prospects (Dre Kirkpatrick, Nico Johnson, Tana Patrick, Kendall Kelly), and is expected to finish in the top 5.
but if you insist on talking about the past....

AUtigerman · 1 year ago

BC

It hasnt made a difference up to this point. Dispite what youve been told. Bama hasnt been short on the recruiting trail the last five years.

In fact they have finished in the top 15 in recruiting every year the last five years. It just hasnt shown on the field.

I dont care if you get all 5 star players it means absolutely nothing if you cant make it work on the field.

If you want to claim that youve out recruited us so be it. Thats nothing new,been that way forever and probably always will be. But in your life time not your Grandpa or your Daddys lifetime ,AU has been a better team the Alabama.

"BC" · 1 year ago

laughable. you made that ENTIRE comment without using one key ingredient - FACTS.
so ill provide them for you.

and get all of your little auburn buddies to read this too, because apparently most of them dont know this either.
in response to the "Alabama always out-recruits Auburn, Tubby just knows how to spot talent and coaches em up reeeel nice" argument:

in years '05, '06, and '07, auburn has finished with a higher recruiting ranking than alabama ala Rivals.com
AKA - your sophomores, juniors, and seniors.

and in 2005, our senior class, we WERE out of the top 15 in recruiting.

and of course, the fact that were out-recruiting you RIGHT NOW, hasnt shown on the field yet, because our true freshman class, has yet to play you yet.
but of course we'll see what they do come november.

AUtigerman · 1 year ago

Well this seems pointless arguing with a Bammer.
The truth is Bama hasnt been able to convert what most teams in the nation would consider top level recruiting into top level winning. 5 or 6 top twenty classes and only one top 25 finish and that year you lost to AU and LSU.

TigerEducated · 1 year ago

Ask him who owned, ran, and VISIBLY over-ranked Alabama recruits at Rivals...

That's right, none other than one of the BIGGEST BAMA HOMERS ANYWHERE ran Rivals...

Using Rivals rankings to accurately portray any athletes the Tide have is a joke, and any athletes that don't sign with them are routinely-and have routinely in the past-been degraded, quite literally...

They signed a kid in Saban's first class that went from no stars to 2 stars THE NEXT DAY...It's laughable that he's talking FACTS in one message, and then completely leaving out the fact that his entire argument is predicated on a site that's degree of slant towards his team's favor in terms of its subjectivity is not even up for debate.

"BC" · 1 year ago

TE, although it is very kind of you to try and back Mr. Tigerman. However, by not reading our argument prior to posting, you did just the opposite.

TE, youre starting to slip, on a regular basis, and it seems you may be loosing your edge.

Mr. Tigerman was trying to argue that Auburn, although not out-recruiting Alabama, still fielded the better teams.
i simply stated that he was in the wrong, and that in '05, '06, and '07, Auburn had a higher ranked recruiting class than Alabama ala Rivals.com.

You brought up an excellent point to strengthen my argument. The one guy who supposedly oversees all of the players' rankings, is a TOTAL bama homer.
And in spite of being a "bama homer," in those years, he STILL ranked Auburn's class higher than Alabama's.

case closed.

TigerEducated · 1 year ago

You're such a boob, BC...

If you can't depend on him to rank 'Bama accurately, then how can you depend on him to rank anyone accurately?

It's been proven the guy is unreliable...It's like that Nader book, Unsafe At Any Speed, BC...You simply can't trust recruiting rankings...

They're idiotic, subjective, and completely beholden to other Bama boobs, such as yourself...

I'll put it to you like this...Trindon Holliday has made play after play after play for this LSU team...He lead the conference in Kickoff Return average, and he is a dynamite player for us in specific situations...

Yet, there were two teams who offered him scholarships at the FBS level:

Duke, and LSU...

Duke rescinded theirs to a track-only scholarship...

LSU kept after him, and even though nobody had heard of him, even though he was tiny, and even though he was considered a nobody...We kept after him, signed him, and he became a BEAST for our team, thank you very much...

Sort've like Jacob Hester, who went over 1,000+ yards for us last year with all the talent in our backfield...

Rivals had him as a 2* coming out...

The point is that you can't trust the rankings, period...

BC, by now you should know that I don't slip. I'm a human being...Just a man...I'm just a man that owns you...and I'm just a man whose a fan of a team that owns yours...

I'm loud. I'm proud. Get used to me...

TampaGator · 1 year ago

Disagree.

BC was right; you bolstered his point.

You can't continuously slam Rivals for over-inflating 'Bama recruits, then deny that 'Bama's recruiting classes were inferior to AU's, when UA's were continously ranked below AU during that period in question--despite the artificial infation they enjoyed due to Rival's bias.

...and yeah, of course recruiting anaylses are subjective and imperfect; but to attempt to illustrate that with one simple case in point is essentially meaningless. Anyone could lay out about 1,000 such cases; it would make no difference, since everyone knows that they are speculative and imperfect--almost by definition. That doesn't render recruiting rankings irrelevant; merely imperfect. In the aggregate, the recruiting rankings tend to be relevant, and more accurate than not; at the very least, the shed some light on propects' potential.

...and as for Rival's being discredited completely--that doesn't follow automatically, and you've shown nothing other than a confict of interest with regards to UA. Hence they can be discredited in terms of UA only, due to conflict of interest--but even then, only to the upside, not downward. In other words, any downward inclination of their recruiting rankings of UA would serve almost as an admission against their self interest--certainly NOT something to be discredited due to conflict of interest. The converse may also apply to AU, their arch rival (hence any downward inclination to the rankings of AU, could be mitigated by Rival's bias; upward inclination...an admission against self interest).

Judgment: for Plaintiff...'er, Bleed Crimson...

...for which let execution issue forthwith, and without day.

b/t/w: you don't own BC; the kid holds his own quite well with you (can't really say the same re. LSU/UA).



GO GATORS!!

TigerEducated · 1 year ago

Hey, TampaGator...BC left a $20 by the bedstand, and he wrote his # in lipstick on the mirror in the hotel room...

Dude, if you can't tell that Rivals would inflate Alabama, and denigrate LSU and/or Auburn, to the betterment of Alabama, there's no real use going any further with the conversation.

Bama cheats, they basically owned the de facto recruiting service that everyone uses, so any statistics or evaluations based on that are inherently biased and inherently unreliable, unless you're looking in terms of the most general variety, sir.

You take from it what you will, but I'll leave it at this...I know now why Kevin didn't wanna make this place into a recruiting information repository...

AUtigerman · 1 year ago

Actually i hope Bama continues to use
rivals as a recruiting tool.

They obviously do and are quite proud of it. Even posting it on there web site.
My point was that dispite finishing in what rivals says is top 20 classes they cant seem to break a top 25 ranking.

Porcine · 1 year ago

You noticed that too, huh?

JB · 1 year ago

Maybe the national cha,pionship will be awarded to who ever finished 2nd in the BCS ranking....it could be AUB, idk i dont fell like looking it up

Ben Prather · 1 year ago

The rankings after the bowls had Auburn #2, Oklahoma #3, Utah #4. Some disagreement on #3 and #4 existed, but #1 and #2 were consistent.

If USC loses the championship it should be Auburn's.

The better question would be what happens if Bush loses the Heisman.
It looks like Vince Young would be next in line to claim it.

Clemson_Joe · 1 year ago

Ridiculous. Move on.

Porcine · 1 year ago

And we thought Bama fans were living in the past.

TigerEducated · 1 year ago

Dammit...Just when I was beginning to forget you were a Tider...

Where's our boy BigTide at, dammit?

Porcine · 1 year ago

Estoy confusado.

WestCoaster · 1 year ago

Whatever. I don't know why you're taking what I said so personally. I was just making a speculative point, just like yourself. Stop with the personal attacks. I know putting someone down like that over the internet must make you feel really good, but quite frankly, it is silly.

I put in my two-cents, just like you did in writing out the whole article above. Maybe you should be willing to listen to the opinion of others, even if you don't agree with them, as much as you are willing to voice them.

And I never said it was self-serving that you were an Auburn fan.... Don't be so defensive. I just don't understand how you could not see how someone wouldn't think you were exercising some sort of prejudice as an Auburn fan. Honestly...

Clemson_Joe · 1 year ago

Excellent point.

TigerEducated · 1 year ago

Admonishing someone to cease the personal attacks by personally attacking them and inferring an id-fueled motivation for the attack?

(Insert aforementioned hypocrisy knows no bounds statement)

xoxoxoxox,

-TE-

War_Eagle_Atlanta · 1 year ago

My only personal attack on you was the well-crafted one about the reading comprehension disclaimer. It scores more points for it's creativity than a regular personal attack.

There is little doubt in that article that I have a self-serving agenda. My agenda isn't the point. The point is who's going to fill the void if this happens? Answer that, WC...

Clemson_Joe · 1 year ago

Give it to undefeated Utah. Maybe they should leapfrog everyone.

Maybe we should all just move on and use this memory to fuel the fire to gain a playoff.

JB · 1 year ago

This just in...the BCS has decided to award the NC to Notre Dame because they looked like they needed it..............

Ben Prather · 1 year ago

Even I wouldn't say something that ridiculous. Utah could have beaten all but two teams in 2004.

USC and Auburn.

Clemson_Joe · 1 year ago

Well, to me, this entire concept is ridiculous. If USC is stripped, don't give it to anyone. Giving it to Utah uses the same logic as giving it to Auburn. They didn't lose to anyone that year, so how can you be absolutely sure that they would have lost to any team?

Ben Prather · 1 year ago

Upon further review, I have in fact said things this ridiculous.

Auburn has the advantage over Utah of being #2 in the final polls.

How can you be absolutely sure Arkansas would have lost to LSU in 2007? I am talking about reasonable estimates of the odds of the outcome of a hypothetical game.

Clemson_Joe · 1 year ago

I have to admit, I'm a little out of it right now, but I don't get it. I did win $300 on that game though.

Regan · 1 year ago

WEA, I believe that it should be put in terms of context: The BCS.

The BCS rankings are supposed to pit the two best teams in CFB against each other for the title game. IF we treat the Bowl season as a mythical "Week 18" for determining the teams that would play for the NC, we would find Southern California ranked #1 and Auburn ranked #2.

Both teams would be major BCS conference undefeated champions.

Thus, if Southern California were to lose the 2004 MNC, then it is only logical for Auburn to legitimately claim it.

BTW, in my proposed "Anti-Playoff" system for a post-season, Auburn would have played Oklahoma with the winner facing off against Southern California, effectively being a "Plus-One" for the 2004 season.

A "True Playoff" would destroy the sport as we know it and what was left wouldn't be any better. It disturbs me that this isn't more clear, but I digress.

amp · 1 year ago

'BLEED CRIMSON'

"nobody can win a national championship by default.
especially in a system where you have a national championship game. which auburn wasnt even invited to play in.
and if a team is defaulted a championship, id say utah has just as much claim to it as auburn has."

so since USC wasn't invited to play in the BCS National Title game in 2003, they shouldn't claim a title?

JB · 1 year ago

NO THEY SHOULDN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

JB · 1 year ago

I still dont understand how, in an era that has a sanctioned national championship game, how someone who DOESNT PLAY IN IT can claim any part......other than the media's WEST COAST BIAS...figures, they favor USC so uch

"BC" · 1 year ago

absolutely not.

you caught on nicely.

Regan · 1 year ago

In other words, I'll back ya on it. :)

Mars · 1 year ago

Auburn in 2004 wasn't even as good as Utah.

OU_Ron · 1 year ago

Man, you just made a new friend by the name of Ben, are you mad at Oklahoma also....

1Tomcat · 1 year ago

Look who was the author of this thread? O.K.
personal agenda-No
interesting topic-Yes!!!
Beatin the dead horse/Drum -we need a playoff campaign jump on!! O.K.
Alternative motives?-who Knows?
Hey WEA-got to mess with ya a little-right
Ok I'm convinced - AU 04 Champ-okay-sorry Urban Meyer fans/Utah, USC/Carrol
Hookem-Horns

War_Eagle_Atlanta · 1 year ago

Biased with a personal agenda? Yes. But I'd be making the same argument if Auburn wasn't involved...

But the real issue isn't playoffs or who should have played in the Orange Bowl that year. The issue is who going to be defaulted the MNC IF USC is required to vacate it. It's that simple.

You have 5 choices: 1) No one 2) Auburn 3) Utah 4) Auburn and Utah 5) Team to be named later

And when I say 'defaulted', I don't mean that there's going to be some big ceremony. Either team will just have to openly and conspicuously claim it and after a few years it will become written into the record...

Ben Prather · 1 year ago

I vote #2.