Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
Pat Dye Field => War Damn Eagle => Topic started by: AUChizad on January 31, 2014, 11:13:01 AM
-
http://auburn.247sports.com/Article/Auburn-may-recognize-more-National-Championships-174444 (http://auburn.247sports.com/Article/Auburn-may-recognize-more-National-Championships-174444)
Recognizing the champions
Bryan Matthews
AUBURN, Ala. -- Flags representing Auburn’s National Championships in 1957 and 2010 have flown over Jordan-Hare Stadium for the past three seasons.
Auburn came up just seconds short of winning the 2013 BCS National Championship, but that doesn’t mean there won’t be new National Championship banners raised for the Tigers’ home-opener against Arkansas Aug. 30.
Auburn athletic officials are considering recognizing as many as seven more national championship teams.
“If other schools are using these same polls to declare a national championship, we should at least consider it,†Auburn athletics director Jay Jacobs said. “I don’t think there’s a better time for the Auburn family to consider it than right here at the end of the BCS era.
“As we transition into another playoff format for the national champion, I just think we need to look hard at it.â€
The 1910, 1913, 1914, 1958, 1983, 1993 and 2004 teams are all under consideration. Each finished undefeated or won the conference championship, or both. All were recognized as national champions by at least one national selector, which are used by other schools to recognize National Championships.
The facts are laid out quite thoroughly by Michael Skotnicki in his book, Auburn’s Unclaimed National Championships, which was published in 2012.
“Texas A&M decided upon entering the SEC that they would add the 1919 and 1927 titles,†Skotnicki said. “Minnesota added the 1904 title last summer. USC added the 1939 title in 2004. Ole Miss claims three national titles and not one is AP, Coaches’ Poll or BCS.
“Why should Auburn be any different? In this day and age, why should Auburn be so stuffy about it?â€
For Jacobs, the teams with the strongest cases are 1913, 1983 and 1993. He was a starting offensive linemen for the 1983 team, that finished 11-1 including a Sugar Bowl win over Michigan.
“Those three teams are listed in the NCAA record book as champions. It’s hard to dispute the NCAA record book,†Jacobs said. “The former players that have been on those teams, they all support it as I do from playing in ’83.â€
Jacobs also feels strongly about the 2004 team, which finished 13-0 but was denied a chance to play in the BCS Championship game after both USC and Oklahoma finished undefeated.
USC won the game handily, but was stripped of the title after being hit with NCAA sanctions.
“The 2004 team are national champions,†Jacobs said. “I just find it hard for us to not recognize teams in the same manner that sister institutions have given the same criteria.â€
“There is no national champion in 2004, and I think there should be,†said Skotnicki, who holds two degrees from Auburn and is currently a practicing lawyer in Birmingham.
Texas A&M used retroactive rankings by the National Championship Foundation, Billingsley Report and Sagarin to officially recognize the 1919 and 1927 national titles two years ago. In 2012, Minnesota used Billingsley to recognize the 1904 national title.
USC used the Dickinson system to recognize its 1939 title. Ole Miss cites Berryman, Dunkel and Sagarin for its 1959 title, five selectors including Billingsley for 1960, and Litkenhous for 1962.
Alabama also cites different selectors for many of its national championships before 1961 including Football Annual, Billingsley and Helms in 1925, Helms in 1926, the Davis Poll in 1930, Dunkel, Williamson and Football Thesaurus in 1934, and Houlgate in 1941. The 1941 Alabama team finished 9-2 overall, 3rd in SEC and 20th in AP poll.
To this point, Auburn only recognizes the AP national championship in 1957 and the consensus national championship in 2010.
“We’re so competitive. We compare ourselves to other schools,†Jacobs said. “If they’re counting something that we’re not counting, and we’re on equal footing, wouldn’t it be wise to count it.
“I think it’s something we need to consider right now. It’s been talked about here and there, but lets get it out there now and look at it and see what we should do.â€
Jacobs and athletic department officials have already taken steps in researching and evaluating each team. Skotnicki met with Auburn officials last summer, and Jacobs said the athletic department’s Recognitions Committee is looking into it.
“We don’t have a timeline,†Jacobs said. “It won’t be an athletic director decision, it will be an Auburn decision. It will be an Auburn family decision. I want to hear from the Auburn people.â€
Since publishing his book, Skotnicki has had positive feedback from a lot of Auburn people including a descendent of Legare Hairston, who was the starting quarterback of the 1914 team.
Hairston’s grandson attended one of Skotnicki’s book signings.
“His grandfather would tell him stories of how he scored the winning touchdown in the game against the Carlisle Indians,†Skotnicki said. “It means something to those people. The book meant a lot to him to see his grandfather get recognition as the quarterback on a national championship team, and I think they deserve that.
“I think they should finally get the rings and the recognition they’ve earned.â€
Jacobs said he’s very appreciative of the work Skotnicki did writing his book and making a very compelling case for Auburn’s unclaimed national championships.
“It’s right there, nothing but facts. It’s awful hard to argue against facts,†Jacobs said.
Here’s a quick summary of the seven Auburn teams being considered as National Champions...
1910: Finished 6-1 and SIAA co-champions. Outscored opponents 176-9. Recognized national champion by Maxwell Ratings and Kyle Matschke. Coached by Mike Donahue.
1913: Finished 8-0 and SIAA champions. Outscored opponents 203-13. Recognized national champion by six selectors including Billingsley Report, Howell’s Power Ratings, Hatch Mathematical Rankings and Kyle Matschke. Recognized by the NCAA. Coached by Mike Donahue.
1914: Finished 8-0-1 and SIAA champions. Outscored opponents 193-0. Recognized national champion by Howell. Coached by Mike Donahue.
1958: Finished 9-0-1. Outscored opponents 173-62. Recognized national champion by Montgomery Full Season Championship. Coached by Shug Jordan.
1983: Finished 11-1 and SEC Champions. Outscored opponents 311-186 against the fifth-toughest schedule in college football history. Recognized national champion by 10 selectors including N.Y. Times, Billingsley, Massey, Howell and Hatch. Recognized by the NCAA. Coached by Pat Dye.
1993: Finished 11-0. Outscored opponents 353-192. Recognized national champion by four selectors including National Championship Foundation. Recognized by the NCAA. Coached by Terry Bowden.
2004: Finished 13-0 and SEC Champions. Outscored opponents 417-147. Recognized national champion by Darryl Perry and GBE College Football Ratings. Coached by Tommy Tuberville.
-
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO....... :facepalm:
-
I can definitely see 1913, 1983 and even possibly 1993. The rest? Meh.
-
So Tater tot can now claim he's a NC winning coach? Damn, Akron got a hell of a coach!
-
I can't see any of them. Fuck that.
-
Meh, fuck it.
Other schools (read not just Bama) do this all the time. As the article mentions every one has merit, and every one was awarded a National Championship by some legitimate poll.
The two I'm least crazy about are 93, because we were on probation, and 04 because there was a BCS National Championship game and we didn't get to play in it. Granted, that was some bullshit AND the team who won later had to vacate the title.
It would have been better if we had just come off a legitimate championship from a win in Pasadena and said "Well, while we're putting up banners in Jordan Hare..."
But oh well. I'm ok with it.
-
Meh, fuck it.
Other schools (read not just Bama) do this all the time. As the article mentions every one has merit, and every one was awarded a National Championship by some legitimate poll.
The two I'm least crazy about are 93, because we were on probation, and 04 because there was a BCS National Championship game and we didn't get to play in it. Granted, that was some bullshit AND the team who won later had to vacate the title.
It would have been better if we had just come off a legitimate championship from a win in Pasadena and said "Well, while we're putting up banners in Jordan Hare..."
But oh well. I'm ok with it.
Good point about losing this year's NC. Looks bad. Real bad.
Hey we lost but not really because we're Auburn and we've really won NCs in these years. Roll Eagle. It's fucking bammerish as hell.
-
The two I'm least crazy about are 93, because we were on probation
Do you have an issue with 57?
-
Do you have an issue with 57?
Shut up Woody Hayes
-
Good point about losing this year's NC. Looks bad. Real bad.
Hey we lost but not really because we're Auburn and we've really won NCs in these years. Roll Eagle. It's fucking bammerish as hell.
This right here. Especially the timing.
-
If other schools are using these same polls to declare a national championship, we should at least consider it,†Auburn athletics director Jay Jacobs said. “I don’t think there’s a better time for the Auburn family to consider it than right here at the end of the BCS era.
“As we transition into another playoff format for the national champion, I just think we need to look hard at it.â€
What the hell does this even mean?
-
The way I see it is what does it matter iffin they are all mythical pre-bcs anyway? Other schools do it and if it helps with recruiting, I'm o.k. with it. I do think some of those are legitimate arguments but haven't studied it enough to know which ones.
I'm no Jacobs fan but I think it's good for him to bring it up for discussion. I don't know who should make the final decision. The board? The pres?
If something this trivial can help with recruiting, go for it. Do I really buy in? No but it's not for me. It's about convincing a 17 year old kid why he should come to AU and more championships could help. It's perception. Ex: I bet the recruits UA is signing this year truly believe that Bama has 14 football national championships.
-
Not just no, but Hell NO!
-
Not just no, but Hell NO!
Listen to him. He's pre-med
-
If other schools are using these same polls to declare a national championship, we should at least consider it,†Auburn athletics director Jay Jacobs said. “I don’t think there’s a better time for the Auburn family to consider it than right here at the end of the BCS era.
“As we transition into another playoff format for the national champion, I just think we need to look hard at it.â€
What the hell does this even mean?
I think he meant now that the subjective eras of bowl tie ins and even the BCS are over and we are headed for a little less subjective way of crowning a champion, we might as well be subjective ourselves.
Even the BCS era was more subjective than a playoff. Before you shoot me, I realize that picking teams 1-4 is almost as bad, but at least they get to play it off from there.
-
I don't really like doing it because when Ole Miss just out of the blue started claiming three national championships back in the mid 90s I was like:
:haha: :rofl: :bs: :rofl: :haha:
I said then that NOBODY would ever accept that fraud because they'd never ever, ever, ever won one. But the Rebel Black Bear fans took it to heart. They raised flags. Printed banners. Got t-shirts. Put it on their team trucks. Put it on cups, hats, mugs, shot glasses, notebooks .. pretty much everywhere they could.
I still said nobody would buy it. I was wrong.
I've seen people on this board mention Ole Miss' "three titles" as if they were universally accepted.
To my amazement I watched one of their games this season and heard the announcers refer to the school's "three national titles" as if it were unanimous and gospel.
It doesn't have to be true. Just say it and it will eventually become fact. So... I don't want to do it, but if we do we need to unify behind it and say it as if it's a long-known fact. We have to embrace it if the powers who be decide this is our path.
-
Got 9?
-
The way I see it is what does it matter iffin they are all mythical pre-bcs anyway? Other schools do it and if it helps with recruiting, I'm o.k. with it. I do think some of those are legitimate arguments but haven't studied it enough to know which ones.
I'm no Jacobs fan but I think it's good for him to bring it up for discussion. I don't know who should make the final decision. The board? The pres?
If something this trivial can help with recruiting, go for it. Do I really buy in? No but it's not for me. It's about convincing a 17 year old kid why he should come to AU and more championships could help. It's perception. Ex: I bet the recruits UA is signing this year truly believe that Bama has 14 football national championships.
We're the anti-bammer. We don't lie to ensure recruiting goes the way we need it to go in order to not harm ourselves. We don't claim national championships to validate our existence.
Auburn University was thriving as an average top tier football program. Our numbers were sky high starting back in early 2000 and through the Tuberville years. Not once did we attribute our university funding, population, and reputation on the quality of our football team. It was a focal point of our culture, but not the reason for being. It's why we focus on family and not one head coach and not one football team and not a select few seasons that featured our best football teams.
But at Alabama, they've seen vast improvements to their university and time and time again, I hear them credit Nick Saban's arrival as the reason. It's their head coach. It's their football team. It's all they have.
Let's be honest, their claim to fame as an academic institution is their law school and their business school. Not all lawyers and business men are scumbags, but I'd say there are ample more examples of shitty, arrogant, blowharded individuals coming from those colleges than there are coming from the engineering, agriculture, nursing, pharmacy, and veterinarian schools at Auburn. That is if we're comparing the two university's best college programs.
So, no, Jay Jacobs, we don't need to look at what everyone else is doing. Sure, we don't have as much consistent success as other schools. But we have more class. We don't have as many national titles as other schools. But we have more unity and bonding.
How often do you hear alums talking about moving back to Auburn one day? How many people showed up to send off a couple of plants? How often do you hear about Auburn fans and Auburn alums getting arresting for harming others over the result of a football game? How many pages would an "Isolated Incidents" thread be if it were focused on Auburn?
We are very, very different from most big time sports schools. It's what makes us different and special. It's why everywhere we go, the opposing fans speak of the classiness and generosity of Auburn people. If we start adopting the ways of other schools, we'll become more like other schools.
Because what honestly will come of this? Just more ammo to brag and fight on shows like Finebaum and message boards like the SECRant and more cause for fist fights in bars and anger and vitriol and eventually leading to piling it on and on and on and suddenly we have our own Harvey Updykes.
-
I think he meant now that the subjective eras of bowl tie ins and even the BCS are over and we are headed for a little less subjective way of crowning a champion, we might as well be subjective ourselves.
Even the BCS era was more subjective than a playoff. Before you shoot me, I realize that picking teams 1-4 is almost as bad, but at least they get to play it off from there.
What the hell does this even mean?
-
The only argument that I've seen is that it would look bad coming off the BCS natty loss and it looks Bammerish. Anything else? Then to address the first one, we just wait a year or so.
All I want to know is what the upside/downside is. The biggest upside I see is it helping in a small way with perception and recruiting. The biggest downside is that it's Bammerish? Is that all?
Give me a more compelling reason.
-
What the hell does this even mean?
He thinks you're gonna shoot him.
-
We're the anti-bammer. We don't lie to ensure recruiting goes the way we need it to go in order to not harm ourselves. We don't claim national championships to validate our existence.
Auburn University was thriving as an average top tier football program. Our numbers were sky high starting back in early 2000 and through the Tuberville years. Not once did we attribute our university funding, population, and reputation on the quality of our football team. It was a focal point of our culture, but not the reason for being. It's why we focus on family and not one head coach and not one football team and not a select few seasons that featured our best football teams.
But at Alabama, they've seen vast improvements to their university and time and time again, I hear them credit Nick Saban's arrival as the reason. It's their head coach. It's their football team. It's all they have.
Let's be honest, their claim to fame as an academic institution is their law school and their business school. Not all lawyers and business men are scumbags, but I'd say there are ample more examples of shitty, arrogant, blowharded individuals coming from those colleges than there are coming from the engineering, agriculture, nursing, pharmacy, and veterinarian schools at Auburn. That is if we're comparing the two university's best college programs.
So, no, Jay Jacobs, we don't need to look at what everyone else is doing. Sure, we don't have as much consistent success as other schools. But we have more class. We don't have as many national titles as other schools. But we have more unity and bonding.
How often do you hear alums talking about moving back to Auburn one day? How many people showed up to send off a couple of plants? How often do you hear about Auburn fans and Auburn alums getting arresting for harming others over the result of a football game? How many pages would an "Isolated Incidents" thread be if it were focused on Auburn?
We are very, very different from most big time sports schools. It's what makes us different and special. It's why everywhere we go, the opposing fans speak of the classiness and generosity of Auburn people. If we start adopting the ways of other schools, we'll become more like other schools.
Because what honestly will come of this? Just more ammo to brag and fight on shows like Finebaum and message boards like the SECRant and more cause for fist fights in bars and anger and vitriol and eventually leading to piling it on and on and on and suddenly we have our own Harvey Updykes.
THIS...BOOM
/end discussion
-
What the hell does this even mean?
I really don't know
-
I don't really like doing it because when Ole Miss just out of the blue started claiming three national championships back in the mid 90s I was like:
:haha: :rofl: :bs: :rofl: :haha:
I said then that NOBODY would ever accept that fraud because they'd never ever, ever, ever won one. But the Rebel Black Bear fans took it to heart. They raised flags. Printed banners. Got t-shirts. Put it on their team trucks. Put it on cups, hats, mugs, shot glasses, notebooks .. pretty much everywhere they could.
I still said nobody would buy it. I was wrong.
I've seen people on this board mention Ole Miss' "three titles" as if they were universally accepted.
To my amazement I watched one of their games this season and heard the announcers refer to the school's "three national titles" as if it were unanimous and gospel.
It doesn't have to be true. Just say it and it will eventually become fact. So... I don't want to do it, but if we do we need to unify behind it and say it as if it's a long-known fact. We have to embrace it if the powers who be decide this is our path.
The only thing I will add to this is that I have a huge penis.
-
It doesn't have to be true. Just say it and it will eventually become fact. So... I don't want to do it, but if we do we need to unify behind it and say it as if it's a long-known fact. We have to embrace it if the powers who be decide this is our path.
This.
But. The first got 9? I see, I will punch a bitch in the face. She might whip my ass, but it will be worth it!
-
The only thing I will add to this is that I have a huge penis in my mouth and butt.
fixt.
-
fixt.
Hey now. I don't have anything in my mouth.
-
I just want everyone to know that you're are invited to my house this weekend as I raise three banners for winning the national championship in something at sometime. Light h'orderves will be served.
edit: I am aware of the difference between your and you're, but my fingers are not.
-
I just want everyone to know that your are invited to my house this weekend as I raise three banners for winning the national championship in something at sometime. Light h'orderves will be served.
'Scuse me, sir. I was told there would be punch and pie
-
Why don't we just go ahead and give Jake the Heisman while we are at it.
-
I just want everyone to know that you're are invited to my house this weekend as I raise three banners for winning the national championship in something at sometime. Light h'orderves will be served.
edit: I am aware of the difference between your and you're, but my fingers are not.
You're are one of my favorite posters.
-
You're are one of my favorite posters.
Your crazy. Their's better ones.
-
No. We ain't them.
-
Agree with Snags, Godfather, THS and the Wench.
Fuck this shit...in the ear.
-
Jay Jacobs :facepalm:
-
Agree with Snags, Godfather, THS and the Wench.
Fuck this shit...in the ear.
Some people are into that sort of thing. It has its own lubricant.
-
Glad were doing it. What's the worst that will happen, media & gumps talk shit about it? Atleast we get to determine the topic this time.
-
God I hope this happens.
-
Not all lawyers and business men are scumbags, but I'd say there are ample more examples of shitty, arrogant, blowharded individuals coming from those colleges than there are coming from the engineering, agriculture, nursing, pharmacy, and veterinarian schools at Auburn. That is if we're comparing the two university's best college programs.
What about architecture?
(Or is that excluded by the "blowharded individuals" limitation?)
-
The only argument that I've seen is that it would look bad coming off the BCS natty loss and it looks Bammerish. Anything else? Then to address the first one, we just wait a year or so.
All I want to know is what the upside/downside is. The biggest upside I see is it helping in a small way with perception and recruiting. The biggest downside is that it's Bammerish? Is that all?
Give me a more compelling reason.
That's enough of a reason for me.
-
That's enough of a reason for me.
Fuckin A, Cotton.
-
Fuckin A, Cotton.
Jay is about to squander every bit of goodwill he has clawed back over the last year.
He says it's a family decision? LIGHT. HIM. UP.
Twitter. Facebook. Emails. Let him know. WE AREN'T THEM.
This SUCKS.
-
God I hope this happens.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dckSQeB3LRc# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dckSQeB3LRc#)
-
Got 9?
Hey Jumbo's pussy does...#yol9
-
I don't really like doing it because when Ole Miss just out of the blue started claiming three national championships back in the mid 90s I was like:
:haha: :rofl: :bs: :rofl: :haha:
I said then that NOBODY would ever accept that fraud because they'd never ever, ever, ever won one. But the Rebel Black Bear fans took it to heart. They raised flags. Printed banners. Got t-shirts. Put it on their team trucks. Put it on cups, hats, mugs, shot glasses, notebooks .. pretty much everywhere they could.
I still said nobody would buy it. I was wrong.
I've seen people on this board mention Ole Miss' "three titles" as if they were universally accepted.
To my amazement I watched one of their games this season and heard the announcers refer to the school's "three national titles" as if it were unanimous and gospel.
It doesn't have to be true. Just say it and it will eventually become fact. So... I don't want to do it, but if we do we need to unify behind it and say it as if it's a long-known fact. We have to embrace it if the powers who be decide this is our path.
Ditto
-
I'd atleast claim the ones that the NCAA claims that Auburn has...not sure why it's taken this long to claim those.
NCAA: "Hey Auburn, you have 5 National Championship."
Auburn: "No, we only have 2. We don't want anyone, from around the Country, thinking that we've actually had good teams in the past."
-
God I hope this happens.
You shut your dirty whoreish mouth.
-
I'm sensing a bit of a "Creed" movement here.
"Auburn is more than football."
Auburn gets beat by Vanderbilt
"Fuck me, I'm going to light myself on fire and jump off a bridge...if that doesn't kill me, then I'll find someone else to root for."
^Any of that sound familiar?^
You claim the National Championships that the NCAA says that you have. That shouldn't even be a question as to if they should be claimed. One thing I can guarantee you, all of the bama media will trash Auburn for doing so...then in the exact same breath they'll claim 15 National Championships. Which will put an even bigger spotlight on the instate media to show everyone on the outside just how retarded they actually are. Auburn's claims would be NCAA recognized, uat's additional claims have never been recognized, but yet they sell the recruits on it.
-
:facepalm: Stick to matters that improve the program Jughead.
-
NCAA: "Hey Auburn, you have 5 National Championship."
?
http://www.ncaa.com/history/football/fbs (http://www.ncaa.com/history/football/fbs)
-
?
http://www.ncaa.com/history/football/fbs (http://www.ncaa.com/history/football/fbs)
Skreetz, motherfucker.
-
?
http://www.ncaa.com/history/football/fbs (http://www.ncaa.com/history/football/fbs)
Yeah, but how accurate is that? I mean, they forgot the * next to 2010 afterall.
-
Y'all mad over some meaningless shit that serves nothing but benefit us in recruiting.
It's not Bammerish because there WILL NOT be "Got 9" shirts. I can 100% assure you of this. THAT's the difference in Auburn & Alabama. Nothing will be different besides some extra flags in Jordan Hare and a recruiting advantage.
And I'm pretty sure that site is only listing what the schools themselves claim. They have Bama down for 13. Apparently only two were too ridiculous for the NCAA to even include on that list.
For those that missed it the first time:
For Jacobs, the teams with the strongest cases are 1913, 1983 and 1993. He was a starting offensive linemen for the 1983 team, that finished 11-1 including a Sugar Bowl win over Michigan.
“Those three teams are listed in the NCAA record book as champions. It’s hard to dispute the NCAA record book,†Jacobs said. “The former players that have been on those teams, they all support it as I do from playing in ’83.â€
-
(http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u1/miked0003/1622874_10202602283073276_1090215289_n1_zps4ebd31e2.jpg) (http://s164.photobucket.com/user/miked0003/media/1622874_10202602283073276_1090215289_n1_zps4ebd31e2.jpg.html)
-
Y'all mad over some meaningless shit that serves nothing but benefit us in recruiting.
It's not Bammerish because there WILL NOT be "Got 9" shirts. I can 100% assure you of this. THAT's the difference in Auburn & Alabama. Nothing will be different besides some extra flags in Jordan Hare and a recruiting advantage.
Does it really matter if it's on a shirt? I thought the whole point of making fun of Alabama for claiming mythical championships was because they were claiming mythical championships, not just because they put them on shirts. Is it okay for them to worship Bear, so long as they don't put him on a shirt?
-
Does it really matter if it's on a shirt? I thought the whole point of making fun of Alabama for claiming mythical championships was because they were claiming mythical championships, not just because they put them on shirts. Is it okay for them to worship Bear, so long as they don't put him on a shirt?
That's the point. There will be no worship. There will be no obsession. Auburn people will not bring it up at every possible chance and get in arguments defending them.
-
That's the point. There will be no worship. There will be no obsession. Auburn people will not bring it up at every possible chance and get in arguments defending them.
I need a nap. Somebody tell me a bedtime story about the '13 team.
-
That's the point. There will be no worship. There will be no obsession. Auburn people will not bring it up at every possible chance and get in arguments defending them.
Bologna. Boloney. Baloanee.
This is the start of obsession. You think Alabama fans started out as seeds? They were cultivated by little bits of bullshit like this over the years.
Sure, we won't be as bad. We'll still be light years ahead of them as civilized people. But I don't like claiming mythical championships when we've spent decades now lambasting them for doing so.
-
I need a nap. Somebody tell me a bedtime story about the '13 team.
There once was a RB named Tre Mason who kicked more ass than Patrick Swayze in Roadhouse...
-
That's the point. There will be no worship. There will be no obsession. Auburn people will not bring it up at every possible chance and get in arguments defending them.
If all 15 championships were legitimate, would it be okay to put them on a shirt?
I obviously have no dog in this fight, but from my perspective, the underlying issue was that not all of the championships were legitimate. They were laying claim to something that didn't actually exist. Sure, they obnoxiously reference it and "worship" it, but if they were legitimate, would there be anything for you to make fun of? "Look at those damn bammers, all proud and shit of the 15 national championships that they earned." Sounds silly, does it not? But if you still think that you would make fun of UA for celebrating championships that they earned, then you may need to take a second look at your "Fear the Thumb" apparel. Y'all legitimately won those consecutive games, but come on...worshipping it on a shirt?! DAMN BARNER!
Aside from that, in order for Auburn's national championship claims to boost recruiting or otherwise be a benefit for the school, you're going to have to tout your claims. Do you think coaches and players are going to tell recruits behind closed doors about their national championships, but not print shirts, make signs, reference them in conferences, etc? Is there not a public aspect of recruiting in which you have to make your school widely respected in order to get recruits' interest in the first place? I don't see how you can claim this will help recruiting, but at the same time act like it's just a clandestine operation that won't be boldly claimed in public by the school and its fans.
-
If all 15 championships were legitimate, would it be okay to put them on a shirt?
I obviously have no dog in this fight, but from my perspective, the underlying issue was that not all of the championships were legitimate. They were laying claim to something that didn't actually exist. Sure, they obnoxiously reference it and "worship" it, but if they were legitimate, would there be anything for you to make fun of? "Look at those damn bammers, all proud and shit of the 15 national championships that they earned." Sounds silly, does it not? But if you still think that you would make fun of UA for celebrating championships that they earned, then you may need to take a second look at your "Fear the Thumb" apparel. Y'all legitimately won those consecutive games, but come on...worshipping it on a shirt?! DAMN BARNER!
Aside from that, in order for Auburn's national championship claims to boost recruiting or otherwise be a benefit for the school, you're going to have to tout your claims. Do you think coaches and players are going to tell recruits behind closed doors about their national championships, but not print shirts, make signs, reference them in conferences, etc? Is there not a public aspect of recruiting in which you have to make your school widely respected in order to get recruits' interest in the first place? I don't see how you can claim this will help recruiting, but at the same time act like it's just a clandestine operation that won't be boldly claimed in public by the school and its fans.
There are a few Bama claims that are absolute trash. Where they finished 4th in conference, 21st nationally and somehow claim it. The ones Auburn is wanting from what Ive seen are ones where they were either undefeated or shafted and were awarded it by a notable publication like Billingsley (before the AP). They aren't just off the wall made up championships. 1983 was a shaft job...so was 2004 to a lesser degree. And I think the 1913/14 ones were awarded by Billingsley (not sure though) and were undefeated.
-
There are a few Bama claims that are absolute trash. Where they finished 4th in conference, 21st nationally and somehow claim it. The ones Auburn is wanting from what Ive seen are ones where they were either undefeated or shafted and were awarded it by a notable publication like Billingsley (before the AP). They aren't just off the wall made up championships. 1983 was a shaft job...so was 2004 to a lesser degree. And I think the 1913/14 ones were awarded by Billingsley (not sure though) and were undefeated.
The problem is that there were multiple polls present during that time. In 1983, for instance, Auburn was not ranked #1 by the AP or coaches poll. Auburn was a one loss team and was ranked behind Miami and Nebraska (also one loss teams) in both polls. Is there an argument that Auburn should have been national champions? Sure, but there wasn't any one organization/poll that awarded a championship at that time. Thus, claiming them would require the arguments and debates that Chizad is attempting to claim won't happen with Auburn fans.
Claim them if you want, but I don't see how Auburn fans could have made fun of Alabama for all of these years for claiming those championships that are not unanimous, but then turn around and do the same thing. You can try to claim that it won't be "worshipping" or "obnoxious," or that certain claimed championships are more legitimate than UA's because of X reason, but a spade is a spade no matter its size. They weren't championships that were unanimously decided by a singular governing body, and if you're going to make fun of a school for stooping to the level of claiming those debatable championships, then you can't hold your head high when you decide to do the same.
-
The problem is that there were multiple polls present during that time. In 1983, for instance, Auburn was not ranked #1 by the AP or coaches poll. Auburn was a one loss team and was ranked behind Miami and Nebraska (also one loss teams) in both polls. Is there an argument that Auburn should have been national champions? Sure, but there wasn't any one organization/poll that awarded a championship at that time. Thus, claiming them would require the arguments and debates that Chizad is attempting to claim won't happen with Auburn fans.
Claim them if you want, but I don't see how Auburn fans could have made fun of Alabama for all of these years for claiming those championships that are not unanimous, but then turn around and do the same thing. You can try to claim that it won't be "worshipping" or "obnoxious," or that certain claimed championships are more legitimate than UA's because of X reason, but a spade is a spade no matter its size. They weren't championships that were unanimously decided by a singular governing body, and if you're going to make fun of a school for stooping to the level of claiming those debatable championships, then you can't hold your head high when you decide to do the same.
Please, let this be.
-
Just because our neighbor did a shitty job paving their driveway doesn't mean I shouldn't pave mine. Its not like we are claiming titles where we lost 2 games & finished 3rd in the SEC. Polls are biased. If you think a bunch yankees writers from the AP are the only ones that can determine what teams are worthy of being called champions, then so be it.
-
Whatever the PTB officially decide to do, we have to embrace it. If Bama fans, Ole Piss fans or any other groups want to mock, we can't agree with them. Has to be united.
This is one of those "the bus has left the station, you need to be on it" things.
-
Whatever the PTB officially decide to do, we have to embrace it. If Bama fans, Ole Piss fans or any other groups want to mock, we can't agree with them. Has to be united.
This is one of those "the bus has left the station, you need to be on it" things.
This is what Auburn is worst at.
See divided bitching over The Creed, Never to Yield, The Bunker, AUFamily, etc.
There's a delusional sunshine & rainbows segment of the fan base, then there's the reactionary self loathers that are our own worst enemy.
Not a lot of rational middle grounders, unfortunately.
-
Might I add that they are not definitively raising a banner for each of those seven years.
Those are the ones that are candidates for possibly being added.
When Michael Skotnicki wrote Auburn's Unclaimed National Championships, it got people thinking about the subject, and a significant portion of the Auburn fanbase started pressuring Jacobs to at least consider adding some of these. The book gives a pretty thorough and compelling argument for doing so. If you're not on board, then I suggest you read it. Jacobs didn't just pull this out of his ass.
-
Might I add that they are not definitively raising a banner for each of those seven years.
Those are the ones that are candidates for possibly being added.
When Michael Skotnicki wrote Auburn's Unclaimed National Championships, it got people thinking about the subject, and a significant portion of the Auburn fanbase started pressuring Jacobs to at least consider adding some of these. The book gives a pretty thorough and compelling argument for doing so. If you're not on board, then I suggest you read it. Jacobs didn't just pull this out of his ass.
I have read it and I'm not on board.
-
Exactly how does it help us with recruiting?...cause I think that is bullshit.
-
Exactly how does it help us with recruiting?...cause I think that is bullshit.
I heard Rashaan Evans' grandfather was going to send his grandson to the school whose coach could dance the longest while the their National Championship teams were being listed.
-
2014 - On the road to TEN!
-
Exactly how does it help us with recruiting?...cause I think that is bullshit.
You don't think Bama's six out of the last seven #1 recruiting classes in a row has anything at all to do with the pitch that "If you come here, you'll win a championship because we have a bazillionty"?
-
You don't think Bama's six out of the last seven #1 recruiting classes in a row has anything at all to do with the pitch that "If you come here, you'll win a championship because we have a bazillionty"?
Same pitch Shula made.
-
You don't think Bama's six out of the last seven #1 recruiting classes in a row has anything at all to do with the pitch that "If you come here, you'll win a championship because we have a bazillionty"?
No I don't, I think it has to do with them winning current National Championships in the modern era, and them sending a billion players to the NFL.
-
Why claim shit we didn't win, it's fucking retarded. I am claiming your house in NOLA Chizad, It is now mine, get out!
-
I have read it and I'm not on board.
This.
I can't/won't claim this crap because it will render me a hypocrite for the shit I give/gave bama fans. My hypocrisy, unlike Doc Holliday's, knows some bounds.
-
No I don't, I think it has to do with them winning current National Championships in the modern era, and them sending a billion players to the NFL.
Because yeah, some 17 year old punk is gonna be impressed with a national championship from 1914 that we just found in grandma's attic.
-
Why claim shoot we didn't win, it's fudgeing retarded. I am claiming your house in NOLA Chizad, It is now mine, get out!
While I'm pretty middle of the road in this debate and pretty much don't care, I don't agree that it's something that we didn't win. I mean, it may only be someone like the Sporting News or the Montgomery Independent but there are some (if not all) of those years that somebody awarded us their national championship.
In other words, they do exist. It's simply a matter of whether or not we claim them.
-
Why claim shoot we didn't win, it's fudgeing retarded. I am claiming your house in NOLA Chizad, It is now mine, get out!
1910 Is iffy. Only lost one game -- the only points surrendered all season -- to Texas. Harvard was undefeated, but several of their "games" were against themselves. Harvard vs. Harvard Law. For that reason they shouldn't be considered.
1913 is not debatable. We should count that.
1914 I wasn't there. But I don't want it. AU tied Georgia 0-0. Illinois was undefeated.
1958 I have a problem with because we didn't win the SEC (doesn't stop Bama, I know because they didn't win the league in about half they claim, but still). LSU won the SEC, won the Sugar Bowl and finished 11-0. Don't care what service awarded it, it's not our title to claim even if we did go 9-0-1.
1983 Won't argue if that one ends up in the plus column. The only problem is that the media yanked their peckers out and splooged all over the greatest game ever played in the history of college football and boosted Miami from fifth to first. I've read reports before that many of the voters said if they'd waited until Sunday to cast their vote rather than jerking off over the 'Canes in the immediate afterglow of that game, they would have voted for Auburn.
1993 Not interested in this one. I find the "probation" exclusion laughable particularly in light of the fact that all of Alabama's recent success occurred while they were on probation for SMU-level sanctions.
2004 It hurt, but it's not ours to take. Would we have beaten USC? Yep. Oklahoma, too. But we didn't get a chance to prove it. Can't rewrite history.
So I'd only consider 10, 13 and 83 if it were my choice to make. I can see cases for 93 and 2004. Can't see any reason to even entertain 1914 and 58.
Will do a lot of
:facepalm:
if those are legitimized in any way.
BTW, this is the reason I don't want to do any of it:
http://blogs.ajc.com/junkyard-blawg/2014/02/01/auburns-not-the-only-one-with-unclaimed-national-championships/ (http://blogs.ajc.com/junkyard-blawg/2014/02/01/auburns-not-the-only-one-with-unclaimed-national-championships/)
My son and I were discussing this and we concluded that the Georgia team with the strongest claim (in this newfound loose Auburn fashion)
"Loose Auburn fashion"? REALLY? We are the only ones NOT doing it for Christ's sake. It's not "our" fashion, newfound or otherwise. We've just been penalizing ourselves by being honest.
-
1910 Is iffy. Only lost one game -- the only points surrendered all season -- to Texas. Harvard was undefeated, but several of their "games" were against themselves. Harvard vs. Harvard Law. For that reason they shouldn't be considered.
1913 is not debatable. We should count that.
1914 I wasn't there. But I don't want it. AU tied Georgia 0-0. Illinois was undefeated.
1958 I have a problem with because we didn't win the SEC (doesn't stop Bama, I know because they didn't win the league in about half they claim, but still). LSU won the SEC, won the Sugar Bowl and finished 11-0. Don't care what service awarded it, it's not our title to claim even if we did go 9-0-1.
1983 Won't argue if that one ends up in the plus column. The only problem is that the media yanked their peckers out and splooged all over the greatest game ever played in the history of college football and boosted Miami from fifth to first. I've read reports before that many of the voters said if they'd waited until Sunday to cast their vote rather than jerking off over the 'Canes in the immediate afterglow of that game, they would have voted for Auburn.
1993 Not interested in this one. I find the "probation" exclusion laughable particularly in light of the fact that all of Alabama's recent success occurred while they were on probation for SMU-level sanctions.
2004 It hurt, but it's not ours to take. Would we have beaten USC? Yep. Oklahoma, too. But we didn't get a chance to prove it. Can't rewrite history.
So I'd only consider 10, 13 and 83 if it were my choice to make. I can see cases for 93 and 2004. Can't see any reason to even entertain 1914 and 58.
Will do a lot of
:facepalm:
if those are legitimized in any way.
BTW, this is the reason I don't want to do any of it:
http://blogs.ajc.com/junkyard-blawg/2014/02/01/auburns-not-the-only-one-with-unclaimed-national-championships/ (http://blogs.ajc.com/junkyard-blawg/2014/02/01/auburns-not-the-only-one-with-unclaimed-national-championships/)
"Loose Auburn fashion"? REALLY? We are the only ones NOT doing it for Christ's sake. It's not "our" fashion, newfound or otherwise. We've just been penalizing ourselves by being honest.
I'm right where you are on this.
The only thing I'd add is that 2004 becomes less controversial when you factor in that USC was ineligible and has forfeited the entire season, including the championship. Officially. No one claims it. There was one undefeated team that year, excluding them, and it was us.
Also agree that as is the case with most things, Auburn will be disproportionately criticized for what otherwise should be considered less egregious than what Alabama is doing.
Let alone the greater point that we have in no way committed to claiming any of these, and it is very very unlikely that we claim all of them.
-
There was one undefeated team that year, excluding them, and it was us.
UTAH forgot one.
-
1910 Is iffy. Only lost one game -- the only points surrendered all season -- to Texas. Harvard was undefeated, but several of their "games" were against themselves. Harvard vs. Harvard Law. For that reason they shouldn't be considered.
1913 is not debatable. We should count that.
1914 I wasn't there. But I don't want it. AU tied Georgia 0-0. Illinois was undefeated.
1958 I have a problem with because we didn't win the SEC (doesn't stop Bama, I know because they didn't win the league in about half they claim, but still). LSU won the SEC, won the Sugar Bowl and finished 11-0. Don't care what service awarded it, it's not our title to claim even if we did go 9-0-1.
1983 Won't argue if that one ends up in the plus column. The only problem is that the media yanked their peckers out and splooged all over the greatest game ever played in the history of college football and boosted Miami from fifth to first. I've read reports before that many of the voters said if they'd waited until Sunday to cast their vote rather than jerking off over the 'Canes in the immediate afterglow of that game, they would have voted for Auburn.
1993 Not interested in this one. I find the "probation" exclusion laughable particularly in light of the fact that all of Alabama's recent success occurred while they were on probation for SMU-level sanctions.
2004 It hurt, but it's not ours to take. Would we have beaten USC? Yep. Oklahoma, too. But we didn't get a chance to prove it. Can't rewrite history.
So I'd only consider 10, 13 and 83 if it were my choice to make. I can see cases for 93 and 2004. Can't see any reason to even entertain 1914 and 58.
Will do a lot of
:facepalm:
if those are legitimized in any way.
BTW, this is the reason I don't want to do any of it:
http://blogs.ajc.com/junkyard-blawg/2014/02/01/auburns-not-the-only-one-with-unclaimed-national-championships/ (http://blogs.ajc.com/junkyard-blawg/2014/02/01/auburns-not-the-only-one-with-unclaimed-national-championships/)
"Loose Auburn fashion"? REALLY? We are the only ones NOT doing it for Christ's sake. It's not "our" fashion, newfound or otherwise. We've just been penalizing ourselves by being honest.
Again none of that does anything for us, as a team, as a university, as fans.
-
Please, let this be.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTjJTsrglDA#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTjJTsrglDA#ws)
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTjJTsrglDA#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTjJTsrglDA#ws)
I didn't know you speak Mandarin. I eat their oranges.
-
http://orangeisourcolor.com/2014/02/03/auburns-new-claims-to-old-national-championships-whats-really-going-on-here/ (http://orangeisourcolor.com/2014/02/03/auburns-new-claims-to-old-national-championships-whats-really-going-on-here/)
Auburn’s New Claims to Old National Championships—What’s Really Going on Here?
Auburn will soon claim new national championships for select seasons from its history. We don’t know when; we don’t how many. What we do know is that, according to athletics director Jay Jacobs, the wheels are turning.
Another thing we know is that some Auburn people are not happy about it. In Jacobs’ latest comments, he said he doesn’t want this major change in Auburn’s tradition—and if you’re reading this, you likely know not claiming national championships is by all means an Auburn tradition—to be solely his decision.
It won’t be an athletic director decision, it will be an Auburn decision. It will be an Auburn family decision. I want to hear from the Auburn people.
Jacobs wants to hear from the Auburn people? Well, here’s an example (http://trackemtigers.com/?p=24656) of what some Auburn people are saying:
Please stop considering to claim these titles. Auburn has earned just two football national championships, 1957 and 2010. Auburn is a great place with a great tradition, and great family. Auburn does not need to claim extra titles to be great . . . Extra past titles will not give Auburn future titles. Auburn is not like other schools who have already claimed bogus titles. Don’t let Auburn be bogus.
The above complaint is a serious one. The writer is concerned that claiming additional titles will change something about the integrity of Auburn’s identity. I held this position—or some form of it—for many years. Really, I’m only letting go of my opposition to claiming championships ex eventu because it appears change is coming, and there’s no stopping it.
At the same time, I find it very easy to get on board, especially after having a few months to contemplate Michael Skotnicki’s argument that we aren’t claiming additional championships for the sake of our pride, but rather to appropriately celebrate the sacrifice and success of our players who earned such recognition.
Of course, if the seasons in question are only “bogus†championships, then we don’t owe our players the recognition that goes with winning true championships. This point brings us to what the controversy is really all about—an ideological/historiographical shift in Auburn’s philosophy.
(http://orangeisourcolor.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/shift.jpg?w=700&h=466)
For years Auburn’s position has been one of accommodation. We have accommodated those who believe only the AP or BCS can name a national champion. More so, we have accommodated the Auburn people who want to avoid comparison to Alabama’s late-modern ex eventu claims.
We’re now talking about correcting that bias against ourselves. We’re looking at our history more objectively, without the influence of accommodation, to tell the story of Auburn football in a way that more closely matches what actually happened on the field of play.
I respect and value the position of anyone who opposes new/old championships on the grounds of preserving Auburn’s integrity. I do not, however, believe we must continue our policy of accommodation in order to do so.
Jacobs’ new interest in claiming old championships is consistent with his recent decisions to have Auburn tell our own story. In the wake of our failed 2012 football season, there were some who wanted to kick Auburn while we were down. Selena Roberts accused us of academic fraud, and ESPN said our football program had a legal drug epidemic. In the past, Auburn might have employed a storm shelter response to such negative publicity. Jacobs stood up and said No! (see Auburn’s responses here (http://www.auburntigers.com/digital/z_auburn_statement.html) and here (http://www.auburntigers.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/040413aaa.html))
Now Jacobs seems to be saying Yes to those who want to celebrate Auburn’s greatest teams in terms that more accurately convey the program’s historical success.
If you don’t like what is getting ready to happen, I respect your dissent. I encourage you, nonetheless, to consider whether Auburn’s policy of accommodation is one that needs to continue.
Auburn needs to do the right thing for Auburn.
War Eagle!
-
Chizad Article
I still don't agree with it. The only people still living to celebrate could be the 1983 team. The rest of it is just pontificated bloviated nonsense.
-
I still don't agree with it. The only people still living to celebrate could be the 1983 team. The rest of it is just pontificated bloviated nonsense.
If there's a 1983 National Championship party in New Orleans I'll be there. I think we should all wear the same things we wore in 1983.
-
If there's a 1983 National Championship party in New Orleans I'll be there. I think we should all wear the same things we wore in 1983.
Chizad could wear his mom's placenta.
-
Chizad could wear his mom's placenta.
That was 82, brah. I'd wear diapers, which is fine too.
-
If there's a 1983 National Championship party in New Orleans I'll be there. I think we should all wear the same things we wore in 1983.
My velcro parachute pants do not even come close to fitting any longer!
-
If there's a 1983 National Championship party in New Orleans I'll be there. I think we should all wear the same things we wore in 1983.
Does OshKosh make adult XXL?
-
Does OshKosh make adult XXL?
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41VK5WWVHuL.jpg)
-
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41VK5WWVHuL.jpg)
Then I'm in. If I wore that to work I would be the hero of all the space nerds.
-
Then I'm in. If I wore that to work I would be the hero of all the space nerds.
King of the dipshits.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-sSxS2S-kGMc/UVH-KFZBRjI/AAAAAAAAAFc/CL7wTGxS1II/s1600/Farmer+Ted.PNG)
-
King of the dipshoots.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-sSxS2S-kGMc/UVH-KFZBRjI/AAAAAAAAAFc/CL7wTGxS1II/s1600/Farmer+Ted.PNG)
It's good to be the king of the nerds.
http://www.tigersx.com/forum/index.php?topic=23053.0 (http://www.tigersx.com/forum/index.php?topic=23053.0)