Started By
Message

re: Auburn football now claims nine national championships, including 1993 & 2004

Posted on 8/19/25 at 7:19 pm to
Posted by The Boat
Member since Oct 2008
175897 posts
Posted on 8/19/25 at 7:19 pm to
I swear Auburn said this years ago and apparently never went through with. I remember a story about Auburn saying they were going to claim a bunch of years.
Posted by KosmoCramer
Member since Dec 2007
80063 posts
Posted on 8/19/25 at 8:07 pm to
Based on recent NCAA rulings, Ohio State now claims 2012 National Champions. Undefeated.
Posted by SPEEDY
2005 Tiger Smack Poster of the Year
Member since Dec 2003
87162 posts
Posted on 8/19/25 at 8:10 pm to
quote:

2004 is their most legit one of them all though.


Does Tubberville and his staff gets their NC bonus now?
Posted by TexasTiger08
Member since Oct 2006
29204 posts
Posted on 8/19/25 at 8:20 pm to
quote:

This may be an unpopular take with other Bama fans, but we were cheated out of what would have been a great National Title game matchup between Auburn and Florida State in 1993.


Cheated out of it how? There was no BCS then. FSU went to the Orange Bowl, so did Nebraska. Auburn would have had to win in Birmingham against UF (a second time), then face West Virginia.

The SEC in 1993 wasn’t the SEC as we know it. Hell, 4/6 in the West weren't over .500.
Posted by RandySavage
9 Time Natty Winner
Member since May 2012
34874 posts
Posted on 8/19/25 at 8:49 pm to
Again, their resume was closer to bama and ugas than Miami's was to auburn in 1983. No one will address this because it blows up every terrible argument you're trying to make.
Posted by RandySavage
9 Time Natty Winner
Member since May 2012
34874 posts
Posted on 8/19/25 at 8:51 pm to
Yeah, i love that 93 team for obvious reasons but don't think they are beating Florida again on a neutral field. Wish we had the opportunity to find out though. That is the game we were robbed of.
Posted by olemc999
At a blackjack table
Member since Oct 2010
15091 posts
Posted on 8/19/25 at 9:08 pm to
UF should claim 84
This post was edited on 8/19/25 at 9:09 pm
Posted by GoGators1995
Member since Jan 2023
6699 posts
Posted on 8/19/25 at 10:48 pm to
1910, 1914, 1958, and 2004 don't even have Auburn listed in the records book. That's certainly an interesting choice.
Posted by TexasTiger08
Member since Oct 2006
29204 posts
Posted on 8/19/25 at 10:51 pm to
quote:

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.


As an LSU guy, I’m not insecure. The title game should have been LSU/USC.

Conferences agree to dumb shite all the time, just like they’re trying to rig the current playoff system. Hell, the NCAA never awarded the titles anyway.
Posted by LooseCannon22282
Mobile
Member since May 2008
35470 posts
Posted on 8/19/25 at 10:52 pm to
it's funny that they now claim these titles when present day coach Freeze sounds like he wants to play all 3 QB's on the roster.

Bold fricking strategy Hugh.

Way to identify and endear yourself to your team in Year 3.

Auburn is in the toilet so why not make up shite like winning championships from years no one cares about anymore?

Posted by Drank
Member since Jun 1864
Member since Dec 2012
12164 posts
Posted on 8/19/25 at 11:12 pm to
2004 is legit. That’s all I’ve got
Posted by TexasTiger08
Member since Oct 2006
29204 posts
Posted on 8/19/25 at 11:29 pm to
Are you suggesting Hugh Freeze is behind this decision?
Posted by TexasTiger08
Member since Oct 2006
29204 posts
Posted on 8/19/25 at 11:39 pm to
quote:

well the league in which auburn plays also signed a contract saying it doesn't count.


What contract said “it didn’t count”. The AP awarded titles for decades, and still does to this day. There’s a reason “MNC” exists. You can argue it’s still “mythical” considering a committee selects teams that don’t play anything close to balanced schedules, especially with mega conferences. They can’t even figure out a fair way to determine who plays in a conference title game.

That said, I think that’s what always made CFB unique. The obsession to crown a singular and undisputed champion fricked things up. Sure, most years it works itself out, especially with the 4-team playoff (IMO). Last year was fun, but Boise and Arizona State getting byes?

Sorry to say, but it will always have major flaws. Expanding again is a joke. I’ll still love the sport to an extent, but it’s comedic what the decision makers have done.

So yeah…sorry, it’s hard for me to really care whether a school claims a title in 2004, or even 1993. I think it’s good discussion, though.
Posted by Dr Rosenrosen
Member since May 2006
4092 posts
Posted on 8/19/25 at 11:47 pm to
Auburn has no legitimate claim for 1993 or 2004. Post-1936, there are four recognized titles:

AP
Coaches
BCS
CFP
Posted by TexasTiger08
Member since Oct 2006
29204 posts
Posted on 8/19/25 at 11:58 pm to
‘83 was so wild.

4 schools received 1st placed votes in the final coaches poll, and 3 schools received the nod in the AP poll, with one voter even splitting that vote.

The final top 5 all had a loss, UGa also had a tie. Even BYU at 7 only had a loss. They lost the opener, then won 11 straight, but didn’t beat a ranked opponent. For the sake of the discussion, that leaves this…

Miami 11-1
Nebraska 12-1
Auburn 11-1
Georgia 10-1-1
Texas 11-1

Common opponents:
Miami beats Nebraska (sort of a home game for the Canes)
Texas wins @Auburn
Auburn wins @UGa
Georgia beats Texas (Cotton Bowl)

You have this weird situation where Texas beats Auburn, Auburn beats Georgia, Georgia beats Texas.

Versus ranked opponents:
Miami 2-1
Nebraska 1-1
Auburn 5-1
Georgia 3-1
Texas 3-1

Going into the bowls, the pecking order was Nebraska, then Texas, then Auburn. Nebraska and Texas each lost by a single point in some gut-wrenching fashion.

I feel like naturally, Georgia is out with the tie to Clemson. I’m inclined to say the two best resumés are Auburn and Texas, and if you JUST look at the two, wouldn’t you take the team that won H2H.

Obviously, it doesn’t work like that. Auburn was the best team down the stretch. Any “normal” season and they get the nod, but the voters loved the Canes win. You can make a compelling argument for Miami, Auburn, and Texas.
Posted by dukke v
PLUTO
Member since Jul 2006
216143 posts
Posted on 8/20/25 at 12:11 am to
But still would have got creamed by that USC.
Posted by mizzoubuckeyeiowa
Member since Nov 2015
39024 posts
Posted on 8/20/25 at 2:30 am to
quote:

1993


Well 1993 Auburn did beat (1-7 SEC) Vandy 14-10.

And they beat Alabama lwho later forfeited all regular-season wins and one tie due to NCAA violations, giving an official record of 1–12 overall and 0–8 SEC. Joining 1993 on Probation Auburn in the dirtiest Iron Bowl ever.

What a year for Auburn to hang a banner from NCF (whatever that is) who named four National Champions in 1993 (Florida State, Nebraska ( who lost to FSU in the National Title game/Orange Bowl) Notre Dame (who beat FSU in the regular season) and Auburn who played no Bowl game.)
This post was edited on 8/20/25 at 2:31 am
Posted by tigerbait2010
PNW
Member since May 2006
32889 posts
Posted on 8/20/25 at 5:02 am to
Auburn fans will stick their heads in the sand but they look retarded claiming every single time anyone has voted them #1.

It seems like 1983 and 2004 are very legitimate with the rest being a laugh riot. 4 legitimate national titles and the additional conference titles makes for a nice brand improvement. The inflated number doesn’t really move the needle
Posted by RandySavage
9 Time Natty Winner
Member since May 2012
34874 posts
Posted on 8/20/25 at 5:43 am to
I do agree claiming things like 58 cheapens the legit claims on 83 and 04. 1913 i don't have a problem with claiming though it's so long ago i don't really care
Posted by Dr Rosenrosen
Member since May 2006
4092 posts
Posted on 8/20/25 at 8:54 am to
Nothing against Auburn, but 1983 and 2004 are not valid. Only the AP or Coaches/BCS titles were valid during those years.
first pageprev pagePage 6 of 8Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram