- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 8/19/25 at 3:15 pm to saintsfan92612
quote:
in 1958, Auburn was 4th in the final AP poll with 5 teams having more first place votes than them and they didn't even play in a bowl game
Also they tied against the worst Georgia Tech team of the decade.
Insanity.
Did the Auburn school newspaper vote them champions and they're counting that?
Posted on 8/19/25 at 3:19 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
Their 04 claim is more legit than USCs 03 claim. neither of those claims is legit in any way
2003 USC didn’t “claim” anything. They were ranked #1 by the AP. That is officially recognized as a NC by the NCAA whether people like it or not. After all this time I do not understand why LSU fans are so insecure about this, there have been several split titles 3 in the 90s, it does not in any way invalidate what LSU accomplished winning the more prestigious title.
2004 Auburn like 1994 PSU had great teams and i would be pissed off if I were them too.
Posted on 8/19/25 at 3:19 pm to WG_Dawg
Oh no Internet user WG_Dawg said it doesn't count, whatever will we do? But he'll fap to a "title" his team just won when it couldn't even win its own conference.
Posted on 8/19/25 at 3:21 pm to StansberryRules
quote:
Hell at this rate Oregon would have been better off last year refusing to play in the playoff and just declaring themselves champions anyway.
oddly enough, they were national champs according to Anderson & Hester and Williamson System.
But Auburn is just making shite up with some of these new claims. They're using polls that I don't see on any site with obscure computer polls
James Howell’s Power Ratings System, Montgomery Full Season Championship, Darryl Perry and GBE College Football Ratings. WTF
Posted on 8/19/25 at 3:22 pm to RandySavage
quote:
The team UCF beat in the post season beat both teams that played in the championship that UCF was denied a shot at.
There's absolutely nothing more useless in sports analysis than the transitive property argument. It's easily proven ridiculous and yet people continue to use it like it's some sort of meaningful thing.
Posted on 8/19/25 at 3:25 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
2003 USC didn’t “claim” anything. They were ranked #1 by the AP
which meant as much at the time as the WG_Dawg personal poll. Which is to say..meaningless.
quote:
That is officially recognized as a NC by the NCAA
Every conference signed a contract designated the winner of the BCS title game as the national champion. The AP doing their own thing is no different than the colley matrix or jeff sagarin poll doing their own thing. The only thing that mattered, in this designated time period, was the BCS title game.
quote:
there have been several split titles 3 in the 90s
yeah...before the BCS existed....
Posted on 8/19/25 at 3:26 pm to RandySavage
quote:
Oh no Internet user WG_Dawg said it doesn't count,
well the league in which auburn plays also signed a contract saying it doesn't count. Millions of others acknowledge reality as well.
Look around the internet today at the response; everyone outside of Lee county is basically laughing but yeah, it's just me that's the oddball..
quote:
But he'll fap to a "title" his team just won when it couldn't even win its own conference.
Posted on 8/19/25 at 3:29 pm to RandySavage
quote:
The team UCF beat in the post season beat both teams that played in the championship that UCF was denied a shot at.
The team UCF beat finished the season with 4 losses. UCF, entering the postseason, had 3 ranked wins. 1 against South Florida and 2 against Memphis. 2 of those ranked wins went to OT. They played 1 power conference team, 4-8 Maryland. Beating an Auburn team who had just lost out on a playoff bid by losing the SECCG to a team they beat weeks earlier isn't really a big feather in their cap. Auburn was completed deflated after that SECCG loss. Those two teams in the national title game each only had 1 loss and would have completely mauled UCF.
This post was edited on 8/19/25 at 3:30 pm
Posted on 8/19/25 at 3:36 pm to StansberryRules
quote:
There's absolutely nothing more useless in sports analysis than the transitive property argument. It's easily proven ridiculous and yet people continue to use it like it's some sort of meaningful thing.
Except when someone tries to use the argument that the team making a "bogus" claim dodged all the big dogs in the post season.
Posted on 8/19/25 at 3:39 pm to lsufball19
quote:
UCF, entering the postseason, had 3 ranked wins.
So more than UGA and same number as Bama, got it.
This post was edited on 8/19/25 at 3:42 pm
Posted on 8/19/25 at 3:46 pm to RandySavage
quote:
So more than UGA and same number as Bama, got it.
Ok, yeah, let's just ignore the rest of UCF's schedule. Why are you even defending UCF's 2017 claim? I don't recall Auburn fans defending their claim 9 years ago? What changed? Wait, nevermind.
I know if you're being honest with yourself, you don't actually think UCF has a claim to the 2017 national title. They're not the first G5 team to go undefeated, but they're the only one I see trying to claim a national title for going undefeated.
This post was edited on 8/19/25 at 3:49 pm
Posted on 8/19/25 at 3:57 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Ok, yeah, let's just ignore the rest of UCF's schedule.
Ok, but I'll have to catch those moving goal posts first.
Look at the SOS of AU in 1983 vs. Miami in 1983. Miami beat one team that finished ranked going into bowl season, Auburn beat 5 including 4 straight (3 in the top 7) to end the season going into the bowls. A far larger discrepancy than the one separating UCF and UGA/UA in 2017.
Here's the bottom line, if you have a system where teams can go undefeated and not win, or even play for, a title or where two teams can have a claim without playing each other you don't have a real title. The criteria is subjective and changes year to year based on laughable media narratives rarely having to do with merit. Bowl Coalition, BCS, 4 team playoff, 12 team playoff it doesn't matter none of them are real titles. Some years we can all agree who the best team is others it is up for debate. It's seldom decided on the field thus all these split titles and teams claiming them years later (it's far from just an Auburn thing).
This post was edited on 8/19/25 at 4:01 pm
Posted on 8/19/25 at 3:59 pm to WG_Dawg
I agree, the only caveat is Auburn went undefeated in 04, USC lost in 03 so it was just a case of having 3 teams who all did what they were supposed to in 04 and one was left out.
Posted on 8/19/25 at 4:09 pm to RandySavage
quote:
Ok, but I'll have to catch those moving goal posts first.
they're not moving goalposts. I literally addressed their entire schedule in my post. You, then, ignored it. If anyone is moving the goalposts, it's you. Let me refresh your memory
quote:
UCF, entering the postseason, had 3 ranked wins. 1 against South Florida and 2 against Memphis. 2 of those ranked wins went to OT. They played 1 power conference team, 4-8 Maryland.
See the second part of that post? Where it talks about them only playing one power conference team all season? Now do the same for UGA and Alabama
This post was edited on 8/19/25 at 4:14 pm
Posted on 8/19/25 at 4:19 pm to lsufball19
Bad teams are bad teams whether they are P5 or G4. Now tell me why schedule even matters at all when it didn't in 1983?
You, like every media donkey for the last 100 years and sheep who are too dumb/lazy to critical think, are doing the very definition of moving the goal posts.
You, like every media donkey for the last 100 years and sheep who are too dumb/lazy to critical think, are doing the very definition of moving the goal posts.
This post was edited on 8/19/25 at 4:21 pm
Posted on 8/19/25 at 4:43 pm to PJinAtl
quote:
And I am pretty sure SOS was still a factor in 2004. Auburn was supposed to play Bowling Green that year, but BGU asked to get out of the game in either 2002 or 2003, because they had an opportunity to play Oklahoma
This is true.
quote:
Auburn had to scramble to find a replacement and picked up The Citadel as the replacement. BGU won 9 games that year, Citadel only won 3. I think that one difference in an opponent's record kept AU out of the title game.
This is completely false and probably the most laughable justification, even worse than the "eye test", in CFB history. To be honest the fact that they had to stoop to that level of absurdity to justify their selection is the best proof of how terrible their argument to leave Auburn out was.
Trading out a game with a 99.8% probability of winning for a game with a 99.9% probability of winning was the difference in getting to play for a national title? No one is that stupid.
This post was edited on 8/19/25 at 4:48 pm
Posted on 8/19/25 at 6:37 pm to RLDSC FAN
Don't recall Tuberville raising the crystal ball trophy. Auburn can live in whatever fantasy world they want. Fact of the matter, is USC and Oklahoma played for the NC games and Auburn didn't. Usc having an ineligible player is a weak argument. Cam Newton was just as guilty in 2010. Everyone knows that. This claim is as bad as lame arse Ole Miss declaring SEC champs in 2003.
This post was edited on 8/20/25 at 4:50 am
Posted on 8/19/25 at 7:03 pm to RandySavage
quote:
Look at the SOS of AU in 1983 vs. Miami in 1983. Miami beat one team that finished ranked going into bowl season
Miami won 83 for the sole reason that everyone had already mentally crowned Nebraska. Miami jumping Auburn had way more to do with Nebraska than it did Auburn or Miami
quote:
Here's the bottom line, if you have a system where teams can go undefeated and not win, or even play for, a title or where two teams can have a claim without playing each other you don't have a real title.
I mean, theoretically, a college basketball team can lose every regular season game and win the championship. That's an irrelevant point, really.
This post was edited on 8/19/25 at 7:05 pm
Posted on 8/19/25 at 7:15 pm to RandySavage
quote:
You, like every media donkey for the last 100 years and sheep who are too dumb/lazy to critical think, are doing the very definition of moving the goal posts.
Moving the goal post is crowning yourself national champs decades, or a century+, after the fact using a different criteria than what was accepted by everyone playing football during those seasons. Strength of schedule/recotr has always been a criteria the committee of every college sport has looked at when seeding teams for postseason play or dejecting them for the field. It’s not moving the goalpost to talk about UCF in the same capacity when we had a 4 team playoff. Their resume was not as good as the teams who made it. Period
quote:
Bad teams are bad teams
If you can’t see the nuance between an 8-4 unranked SEC team and a 3-9 G5 team it’s pointless to talk to you
This post was edited on 8/19/25 at 7:18 pm
Page 5 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News