Would you be content as an Auburn fan...

[aujeff11 6,243]

Jack Nicklaus has won more majors than anyone else. He also finished in 2nd place more than anyone else. The last few years notwithstanding, if you want to consistently win championships, you have to consistently put yourself in position to win championships. Being the "comeback kid" every several years makes for a nice story but is not the way to bring home the trophy very often.

^This is a good post. ^

Doesn't really have anything to do with the OP.

Talking about consistency and not being on the 5 year rollercoaster has everything to do with the OP.

The OP laid it out as "would you be willing to have some really down years if we got a championship out of it every 5 years?" He said he'd rather be consistently good year in and year out and win championships (paraphrasing). OBVIOUSLY every poster here would take consistent 10 win seasons with championships but that defeats the whole purpose of the thread.

Eta- Now that I read his post again it's all so clear. What he's saying (and you're cosigning) is that you have a better chance to win championships if you're good every year. Your chances to win a championship are greatly reduced if you're only good every now and then and rely on miraculous comebacks. Someone alert the coaching staff to this immediately.

I had already spelled it out but ^^here^^ it is again, Jeff (from page 4 of this thread).

The fact that so many of y'all are saying "We'd have a much better shot at championships if we're a consistent powerhouse year in and year out" is OBVIOUS. No s**t guys. And OBVIOUSLY everyone here would rather be good to great every single year while winning championships. It's not like y'all have cracked the enigma code to winning national titles.

The OP was asking if you'd rather ride the rollercoaster- like we've been doing- or be consistently good but never reach the top of the mountain.

Right, but everyone who's wanting consistency with championships is answering 'no' to the OP's question of would you be content with the 5-year-championship-inconsistency question.

I get what Chimes is saying. If the waitress says, "you can either have apple pie or banana pudding," the customer technically can't say both. But I also think the OP is being answered also because only a few wants to outright suck 4 out of five years.

[chimesAU 89]

Jack Nicklaus has won more majors than anyone else. He also finished in 2nd place more than anyone else. The last few years notwithstanding, if you want to consistently win championships, you have to consistently put yourself in position to win championships. Being the "comeback kid" every several years makes for a nice story but is not the way to bring home the trophy very often.

^This is a good post. ^

Doesn't really have anything to do with the OP.

Talking about consistency and not being on the 5 year rollercoaster has everything to do with the OP.

The OP laid it out as "would you be willing to have some really down years if we got a championship out of it every 5 years?" He said he'd rather be consistently good year in and year out and win championships (paraphrasing). OBVIOUSLY every poster here would take consistent 10 win seasons with championships but that defeats the whole purpose of the thread.

Eta- Now that I read his post again it's all so clear. What he's saying (and you're cosigning) is that you have a better chance to win championships if you're good every year. Your chances to win a championship are greatly reduced if you're only good every now and then and rely on miraculous comebacks. Someone alert the coaching staff to this immediately.

I had already spelled it out but ^^here^^ it is again, Jeff (from page 4 of this thread).

The fact that so many of y'all are saying "We'd have a much better shot at championships if we're a consistent powerhouse year in and year out" is OBVIOUS. No s**t guys. And OBVIOUSLY everyone here would rather be good to great every single year while winning championships. It's not like y'all have cracked the enigma code to winning national titles.

The OP was asking if you'd rather ride the rollercoaster- like we've been doing- or be consistently good but never reach the top of the mountain.

Right, but everyone who's wanting consistency with championships is answering 'no' to the OP's question of would you be content with the 5-year-championship-inconsistency question.

I get what Chimes is saying. If the waitress says, "you can either have apple pie or banana pudding," the customer technically can't say both. But I also think the OP is being answered also because only a few wants to outright suck 4 out of five years.

I can agree with this. Thank you.

[LKEEL75 2,566]

Maybe I am the dummy here, but I don't see the original post as apples vs banana. Maybe I am reading way too much into this, but to me if you are consistent year in and year out then you are always going to be in the talks of NC. Take a look at UGA. Every year people are talking about them and yet how long has it been for them? The reason people are always talking about them each year is because they are consistently winning 10 games. You can only do that so long and eventually you are going to get the right breaks in the right game and get into a NC.

So to answer the OP, NO I do not want 1 NC for 4 years of sucking. I want 5 years of 10+ wins and see if we can't maintain the consistency into a NC.

[IronMan70 3,277]

.....................

So to answer the OP, NO I do not want 1 NC for 4 years of sucking. I want 5 years of 10+ wins and see if we can't maintain the consistency into a NC.

Yep, most people are saying they don't want these roller coaster seasons, with or without championships and that answers the OP's question. They want 10 win seasons.

But they are also intelligent enough to understand that, if you can do that consistently, one of the benefits will be a better chance to win a championship anyway.

[AUIH1 1,515]

No.

wde

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,641]

It's becoming increasingly clear that many (most) of y'all are struggling mightily with the premise of the OP. Carry on.

Lol

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,641]

To address the "premise police":

To ask if we're okay with winning a natty periodically and stinking it up in between, you have to ask "as opposed to what?" Stinking it up and then NOT winning championships? That's a clear answer. What I think most people understand is that high-level consistency is key to winning championships over the long haul. And, IMO, makes the off-season of anticipation a LOT more fun.

Sorry if some of us deviated from yes/no answers. THAT would have been a thrilling thread.

The scenario in OP vs becoming Georgia basically.

[WarTiger 3,896]

To address the "premise police":

To ask if we're okay with winning a natty periodically and stinking it up in between, you have to ask "as opposed to what?" Stinking it up and then NOT winning championships? That's a clear answer. What I think most people understand is that high-level consistency is key to winning championships over the long haul. And, IMO, makes the off-season of anticipation a LOT more fun.

Sorry if some of us deviated from yes/no answers. THAT would have been a thrilling thread.

The scenario in OP vs becoming Georgia basically.

Yeah, who in their right mind would want to win 10 games or more 9 out of 14 years. It's a troll thread to begin with.

[aujeff11 6,243]

To address the "premise police":

To ask if we're okay with winning a natty periodically and stinking it up in between, you have to ask "as opposed to what?" Stinking it up and then NOT winning championships? That's a clear answer. What I think most people understand is that high-level consistency is key to winning championships over the long haul. And, IMO, makes the off-season of anticipation a LOT more fun.

Sorry if some of us deviated from yes/no answers. THAT would have been a thrilling thread.

The scenario in OP vs becoming Georgia basically.

Yeah, who in their right mind would want to win 10 games or more 9 out of 14 years. It's a troll thread to begin with.

Count him as a consistency fan.

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,641]

To address the "premise police":

To ask if we're okay with winning a natty periodically and stinking it up in between, you have to ask "as opposed to what?" Stinking it up and then NOT winning championships? That's a clear answer. What I think most people understand is that high-level consistency is key to winning championships over the long haul. And, IMO, makes the off-season of anticipation a LOT more fun.

Sorry if some of us deviated from yes/no answers. THAT would have been a thrilling thread.

The scenario in OP vs becoming Georgia basically.

Yeah, who in their right mind would want to win 10 games or more 9 out of 14 years. It's a troll thread to begin with.

then why come in the thread at all? it's as if

1. I make a thread

2. the op is very clear on the general direction of the thread and of course it says who made it (me)

3. Even taking this into account, you still go into the process of unnecessarily ridiculing the thread, and then the cycle repeats

As we both know, you do at least SEEM to have a problem with all my threads, in this case being the only one having a problem, so why not just post in them? Wouldn't that be substantially easier?

[chimesAU 89]

To address the "premise police":

To ask if we're okay with winning a natty periodically and stinking it up in between, you have to ask "as opposed to what?" Stinking it up and then NOT winning championships? That's a clear answer. What I think most people understand is that high-level consistency is key to winning championships over the long haul. And, IMO, makes the off-season of anticipation a LOT more fun.

Sorry if some of us deviated from yes/no answers. THAT would have been a thrilling thread.

The scenario in OP vs becoming Georgia basically.

Yeah, who in their right mind would want to win 10 games or more 9 out of 14 years. It's a troll thread to begin with.

As we both know, you do at least SEEM to have a problem with everything

FIFY

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,641]

To address the "premise police":

To ask if we're okay with winning a natty periodically and stinking it up in between, you have to ask "as opposed to what?" Stinking it up and then NOT winning championships? That's a clear answer. What I think most people understand is that high-level consistency is key to winning championships over the long haul. And, IMO, makes the off-season of anticipation a LOT more fun.

Sorry if some of us deviated from yes/no answers. THAT would have been a thrilling thread.

The scenario in OP vs becoming Georgia basically.

Yeah, who in their right mind would want to win 10 games or more 9 out of 14 years. It's a troll thread to begin with.

As we both know, you do at least SEEM to have a problem with everything

FIFY

One problem at a time man LOL