Anyone else hearing we are talking to

[Ronald McDonald 0]

AU64, I agree 100%. No need to make the schedule any tougher than it already is. And you're definitely right about the 1 loss and out of BCS Championship conversation

[JamesG 0]

AU64, I agree 100%. No need to make the schedule any tougher than it already is. And you're definitely right about the 1 loss and out of BCS Championship conversation

This simply isn't true. There have been 5 BCS National Champions. 3 of them have had atleast 1 loss. With the kind of clout the SEC has these days, the SEC Champion has the inside track to the Title game, even if they have a loss.

[bloody tiger 0]

AU64, I agree 100%. No need to make the schedule any tougher than it already is. And you're definitely right about the 1 loss and out of BCS Championship conversation

This simply isn't true. There have been 5 BCS National Champions. 3 of them have had atleast 1 loss. With the kind of clout the SEC has these days, the SEC Champion has the inside track to the Title game, even if they have a loss.

lsu has won it twice, so has florida neither of them were undefeated

[Btiger1982 6]

North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Notre Dame, Oregon, Wisconsin and Boise State

[tallgraycat 33]

I would not change our schedule to all stronger team for several reasons.  First, I am sure the athletic department makes more money when paying teams $750,000 per year to play two home games that when we play a home and home game.  Second, the younger players need and want an opportunity play and that makes them better starter in the future.  If all the games are highly completive, which I like to watch when we win, younger players would not get to play.  Also, starting players need a break to recover mentally and physically.  Another point, there are more young fans when we play weaker teams.  My grandkids enjoy going to watch a game against a 2-3 tier team as well as many other youth.  To them a win is a win and they can tell them friends that they watched Auburn WIN.  My vote is don’t change our schedule unless all top tier team do the same and start play 12 highly completive games. 

[jjustjoe 0]

I have not done so, but I will leave that to someone else. Check the schedule strength of the teams that have played in the title game over the last 10 or so years. Teams with the most difficult schedule usually do not make it. Teams that do make it in usually make it because of no losses. Boise State is an extreme example, but they got more respect going undefeated than they would have received playing a difficult schedule and having three losses.

Tubberville realized this and changed our schedule so that it was more like the schedule of UAT and UGA.

[Barney 10]

I was talking to someone who dislikes the SEC. I told him about this, and he just looked and me and said, "Why would they want to do that?" SEC is a tough enough to get through. You don't need to add one of the best out of conference teams in the nation to the schedule.

[walker77 0]

^^^ There is a reason the scheduling is the way it is right now... ^^^

[3rdgen 2]

AU64, I agree 100%. No need to make the schedule any tougher than it already is. And you're definitely right about the 1 loss and out of BCS Championship conversation

This simply isn't true. There have been 5 BCS National Champions. 3 of them have had atleast 1 loss. With the kind of clout the SEC has these days, the SEC Champion has the inside track to the Title game, even if they have a loss.

lsu has won it twice, so has florida neither of them were undefeated

That is true but none of those programs were auburn.  So until proven otherwise I think we will be held to a different standard in which a loss removes us from contention.

[AU64 10,122]

Getting to the BCS championship with a loss is not the norm.  Over my many years of following AU football, I've seen some of our highly rated teams get shot down at the beginning of a season by Miami, USC and Texas to mention a few..or maybe it was Va Tech....I can't remember....but the point is, before the seasons had gotten underway we had lost to major teams and from that point it almost did not matter what happened.   

If we could schedule a game with some knowledge about what the AU team would look like on opening day, picking an Oklahoma or UCLA might work but there is absolutely nothing to gain by scheduling that level of competition without having a pretty set team.  AU got a lot of heat for dropping FSU a few years ago but other than Bama fans, who really cares now?  It was the right decison at the time and that's what counted. 

I will admit, it's more fun to see Utah State on the schedule than Chatt or Samford and we have had other "name" teams like Kansas  and Washington State visit... both of which sound better than Ga State or LaMonroe though they were two of the worst BCS teams I have ever seen.    Maybe we could try for Idaho which most people in our part of the country might confuse with Bosie State.

[AU lb's are beasts 2]

Boy I see this as a no win situation for AU....Last season we beat more top 25 teams than any other BCS team.  While it might be fun for the fans to see some of the schedules suggested in this post, give some thought to the players and the physical wear and tear these games pile up over a season. 

I'm fine with swapping Clemson for someone of similar difficulty but stacking up a schedule with 10 teams that have an even chance of beating AU is about the best way I know for us to wait another 50 years for a championship.   The SEC is a meatgrinder schedule and somewhere through the season we need a chance to bring along the younger players and let the starters take a bit of a break.....especially if the opposition is going to be playing Ga State the week before our game.  

Also, IMO, if we have a schdule like that and lose even one game, that's it for the BCS unless every other major program does the same thing.    Year in and year out Auburn's schedule is at least as challenging as any other team in the conference (or nation for that matter) and we gain nothing by dropping some of the mid-level teams and adding a bunch of top 25 teams who will demand home-away deals.   AU plays 7 home games most years and it takes that for the program to be financially sound.    By scheduling more road games  the AU program would lose at least one home game and thus bring in less money...plus, fewer Auburn fans would be able to see the team play. 

That said, I'm tired of the Clemson series too...would like to see someone like UNC or one of the Texas schools each year in a stadium with tickets split evenly...UNC at Charlotte for example.  But loading up on major BCS teams is a no win for Auburn IMO.

Nice Post, i agree 100%.

[BUTTACOW 0]

I'd like to see a h/h with Iowa ST. 

[WarEagle10 77]

Let's be honest here. We are not talking about a 10 year series. We are talking about a two year, home and home, series. I don't care what weekend that game would be played on, it would be HUGE television. It can't hurt recruiting one bit either. That would still leave us with three "cupcakes", and would bring a lot more national exposure to our program. That's one of the reasons FSU built their program into what it was. Bobby, in the 80's, would go play anybody anywhere. I believe these kids we are recruiting would love to play in a game like this also. I would definitely be against a prolonged series against any OOC top tier program, but I think the positives far outweigh the negatives by playing a home and home series against a perceived national powerhouse every eight to ten years.

[BirdofPrey76 0]

Home & Home/Texas Tech.

[bloody tiger 0]

Well by 2015 Oklahoma will probably be another conference so, why schedule someone that you will have to replace anyway?

maybe he means oklahoma could be in the same conference as auburn, or try to back out

[AuburnNTexas 7,127]

This is my thoughts and i'm old school....I would love to see the AU vs. Tech rivalry again

Sept. 3  UTAH STATE-----Drop and add cincy

Sept. 10  MISSISSIPPI STATE

Sept. 17  at Clemson ----------Drop Clem and add Ga. Tech

Sept. 24  FLORIDA ATLANTIC -----Drop and add FSU

Oct. 1  at South Carolina

Oct. 8  at Arkansas ------Drop Ark and add Tn. vols

Oct. 15  FLORIDA

Oct. 22  at LSU

Oct. 29  OLE MISS

Nov. 12  at Georgia

Nov. 19  SAMFORD [HC] Drop and add Boise State, UAB, Tar Heels or any media darling

Nov. 26  ALABAMA

Living in Texas if your kids have good grades they can pay in state tuition in Oklahoma and Arkansas and vice versa. For that reason my oldest son is transferring to Arkansas as a sophmore this year. So please do not drop the Arkansas game.  It is a five hour drive that I can make. I will be at my son's school but I will be wearing orange and blue.  I will support his team when not playing Auburn and especially when they play that other team from the state of Alabama.

I do like one more tough game against a known team. Ideally a team with a big name tghat is a little down.

[Tiger n Miami AU83 25]

I already mentioned I prefer us playing a good mid-level OOC team like Clemson (lower end of the top 25 usually which we should have more talent than) as opposed to an elite top 5 team which should have equal talent. I too want to switch someone else with Clemson and mentioned Miami as one I would like.

I am not sure playing 1 elite team per year really makes any real difference in recruiting. I mentioned earlier playing Texas cost us the NC in 1983. I forgot about 1987. Playing FSU in 1987 probably cost us another national championship. It was the only loss of the year and came at an aweful time. Right after playing a very emotional game against FL, we turned around and played a great FSU team and got crushed the next week. Pat Dye likely would have won 2 national championships in just 4 years if we do play a top 5 team each of those years (an 11-1 top 5 team no less).

Also, the only reason B. Bowden did not win a NC until 1993 and did not win more was due to playing so many big time OCC games. IF Bowden does not play AU and Miami, Bowden and FSU have 7 national championships in 13 years. They won two and 5 times the ONLY loss of those Bowden teams was to an OCC Miami or AU.

[WarEagle10 77]

I already mentioned I prefer us playing a good mid-level OOC team like Clemson (lower end of the top 25 usually which we should have more talent than) as opposed to an elite top 5 team which should have equal talent. I too want to switch someone else with Clemson and mentioned Miami as one I would like.

I am not sure playing 1 elite team per year really makes any real difference in recruiting. I mentioned earlier playing Texas cost us the NC in 1983. I forgot about 1987. Playing FSU in 1987 probably cost us another national championship. It was the only loss of the year and came at an aweful time. Right after playing a very emotional game against FL, we turned around and played a great FSU team and got crushed the next week. Pat Dye likely would have won 2 national championships in just 4 years if we do play a top 5 team each of those years (an 11-1 top 5 team no less).

Also, the only reason B. Bowden did not win a NC until 1993 and did not win more was due to playing so many big time OCC games. IF Bowden does not play AU and Miami, Bowden and FSU have 7 national championships in 13 years. They won two and 5 times the ONLY loss of those Bowden teams was to an OCC Miami or AU.

FSU was an Independent up until 1991, when they joined the ACC. As for FSU/The U, that is a State rivalry that must be played for the recruiting aspect of each schol. I grew up in the heart of 'Nole country, and had more than a handful of friends growing up play there in the mid to late 80's. Like I said before, FSU built up their program by "playing anybody anywhere". Oh, and Burt Reynolds money. The U was the same way. With Jimmy Johnson as coach, and using basically pro players because very few even went to class, they played the "big boys" all over the country. We play a very demanding schedule year in and year out, but it does not need to sound like we are scared to play anybody. We are Auburn and we can compete with anybody, anywhere, anytime.

[SCruzTiger 0]

Well, here is my 2 cents (and it is probably priced right).  In years when our SEC east opponents are Vandy or Kentucky, we should play 2 creampuffs (but not D2, not ever), one lower tier BCS team (think WSU or KSU) and one marquee match-up (the likes of Oklahoma, Texas, USCw, but nobody from the Big 10 because the bowls match up so many SEC and Big 10 teams).  But in years when we have to face UT, USCe, or UF, we should stick to a middle of the road BCS team like Clemson or Texas A&M.  And for purely selfish reasons, I would love to see a home and home with Stanford or Cal, since I live about an hour away.

[Tiger n Miami AU83 25]

I already mentioned I prefer us playing a good mid-level OOC team like Clemson (lower end of the top 25 usually which we should have more talent than) as opposed to an elite top 5 team which should have equal talent. I too want to switch someone else with Clemson and mentioned Miami as one I would like.

I am not sure playing 1 elite team per year really makes any real difference in recruiting. I mentioned earlier playing Texas cost us the NC in 1983. I forgot about 1987. Playing FSU in 1987 probably cost us another national championship. It was the only loss of the year and came at an aweful time. Right after playing a very emotional game against FL, we turned around and played a great FSU team and got crushed the next week. Pat Dye likely would have won 2 national championships in just 4 years if we do play a top 5 team each of those years (an 11-1 top 5 team no less).

Also, the only reason B. Bowden did not win a NC until 1993 and did not win more was due to playing so many big time OCC games. IF Bowden does not play AU and Miami, Bowden and FSU have 7 national championships in 13 years. They won two and 5 times the ONLY loss of those Bowden teams was to an OCC Miami or AU.

FSU was an Independent up until 1991, when they joined the ACC. As for FSU/The U, that is a State rivalry that must be played for the recruiting aspect of each schol. I grew up in the heart of 'Nole country, and had more than a handful of friends growing up play there in the mid to late 80's. Like I said before, FSU built up their program by "playing anybody anywhere". Oh, and Burt Reynolds money. The U was the same way. With Jimmy Johnson as coach, and using basically pro players because very few even went to class, they played the "big boys" all over the country. We play a very demanding schedule year in and year out, but it does not need to sound like we are scared to play anybody. We are Auburn and we can compete with anybody, anywhere, anytime.

Yeah, I knew FSU was an independent until joining the ACC and I understand them playing Miami as well as Florida. They also played Notre Dame with Holtz as well as us with Pat Dye many times. That is 4 games against arguably 4 of the top 5 teams of the 80's every year in addition to whoever else they scheduled each year. You play 4 teams per year that are elite and your equal each year, you have a 6.25% chance of winning those 4 games (not to mention the rest of the schedule).

Now, I am not saying we are or should be scared of playing anyone as we are good enough to beat anyone, especially in the upcoming years. However, I also remember under Dye in the 80's we were getting tired of playing the toughest schedule in the nation (or close to it) year in and year out. I even remember many AU fans were not unhappy to see FSU fall off the schedule even though it was a GREAT rivalry. I used FSU as an example because even though they were as good as any team in the country for almost 10 years (with a GREAT coaching staff), they never won a NC until AU was off their schedule in 1993. Even that year, they lost by 1 point to Holtz and Notre Dame.

Any team in the current SEC West will play a top 10 schedule every year right now. I am all for playing at least 1 quality OC opponent every year for sure. But when you start talking about 1 elite top 5 OC opponent AND a mid-tier OC opponent, that is not where I want to go. 1-2 mid tier lower top 20 opponent per year OC is about right to me OR 1 elite team for a home/home every now and then (like 50% of the time).

[Rednilla 5,383]

I already mentioned I prefer us playing a good mid-level OOC team like Clemson (lower end of the top 25 usually which we should have more talent than) as opposed to an elite top 5 team which should have equal talent. I too want to switch someone else with Clemson and mentioned Miami as one I would like.

I am not sure playing 1 elite team per year really makes any real difference in recruiting. I mentioned earlier playing Texas cost us the NC in 1983. I forgot about 1987. Playing FSU in 1987 probably cost us another national championship. It was the only loss of the year and came at an aweful time. Right after playing a very emotional game against FL, we turned around and played a great FSU team and got crushed the next week. Pat Dye likely would have won 2 national championships in just 4 years if we do play a top 5 team each of those years (an 11-1 top 5 team no less).

Also, the only reason B. Bowden did not win a NC until 1993 and did not win more was due to playing so many big time OCC games. IF Bowden does not play AU and Miami, Bowden and FSU have 7 national championships in 13 years. They won two and 5 times the ONLY loss of those Bowden teams was to an OCC Miami or AU.

FSU was an Independent up until 1991, when they joined the ACC. As for FSU/The U, that is a State rivalry that must be played for the recruiting aspect of each schol. I grew up in the heart of 'Nole country, and had more than a handful of friends growing up play there in the mid to late 80's. Like I said before, FSU built up their program by "playing anybody anywhere". Oh, and Burt Reynolds money. The U was the same way. With Jimmy Johnson as coach, and using basically pro players because very few even went to class, they played the "big boys" all over the country. We play a very demanding schedule year in and year out, but it does not need to sound like we are scared to play anybody. We are Auburn and we can compete with anybody, anywhere, anytime.

Yeah, I knew FSU was an independent until joining the ACC and I understand them playing Miami as well as Florida. They also played Notre Dame with Holtz as well as us with Pat Dye many times. That is 4 games against arguably 4 of the top 5 teams of the 80's every year in addition to whoever else they scheduled each year. You play 4 teams per year that are elite and your equal each year, you have a 6.25% chance of winning those 4 games (not to mention the rest of the schedule).

Now, I am not saying we are or should be scared of playing anyone as we are good enough to beat anyone, especially in the upcoming years. However, I also remember under Dye in the 80's we were getting tired of playing the toughest schedule in the nation (or close to it) year in and year out. I even remember many AU fans were not unhappy to see FSU fall off the schedule even though it was a GREAT rivalry. I used FSU as an example because even though they were as good as any team in the country for almost 10 years (with a GREAT coaching staff), they never won a NC until AU was off their schedule in 1993. Even that year, they lost by 1 point to Holtz and Notre Dame.

Any team in the current SEC West will play a top 10 schedule every year right now. I am all for playing at least 1 quality OC opponent every year for sure. But when you start talking about 1 elite top 5 OC opponent AND a mid-tier OC opponent, that is not where I want to go. 1-2 mid tier lower top 20 opponent per year OC is about right to me OR 1 elite team for a home/home every now and then (like 50% of the time).

His point about FSU is that without that brutal schedule they played, they never would have gotten the chance to win it all in 93. Bowden seriously built that program from the ground up, and they made their name, as he said, playing anybody, anywhere. If they had stuck to easier schedules, sure they would have been undefeated a time or two, but they wouldn't have gotten any respect and thus would be Boise minus the media attention (because it was a different atmosphere then).

[Tiger n Miami AU83 25]

I already mentioned I prefer us playing a good mid-level OOC team like Clemson (lower end of the top 25 usually which we should have more talent than) as opposed to an elite top 5 team which should have equal talent. I too want to switch someone else with Clemson and mentioned Miami as one I would like.

I am not sure playing 1 elite team per year really makes any real difference in recruiting. I mentioned earlier playing Texas cost us the NC in 1983. I forgot about 1987. Playing FSU in 1987 probably cost us another national championship. It was the only loss of the year and came at an aweful time. Right after playing a very emotional game against FL, we turned around and played a great FSU team and got crushed the next week. Pat Dye likely would have won 2 national championships in just 4 years if we do play a top 5 team each of those years (an 11-1 top 5 team no less).

Also, the only reason B. Bowden did not win a NC until 1993 and did not win more was due to playing so many big time OCC games. IF Bowden does not play AU and Miami, Bowden and FSU have 7 national championships in 13 years. They won two and 5 times the ONLY loss of those Bowden teams was to an OCC Miami or AU.

FSU was an Independent up until 1991, when they joined the ACC. As for FSU/The U, that is a State rivalry that must be played for the recruiting aspect of each schol. I grew up in the heart of 'Nole country, and had more than a handful of friends growing up play there in the mid to late 80's. Like I said before, FSU built up their program by "playing anybody anywhere". Oh, and Burt Reynolds money. The U was the same way. With Jimmy Johnson as coach, and using basically pro players because very few even went to class, they played the "big boys" all over the country. We play a very demanding schedule year in and year out, but it does not need to sound like we are scared to play anybody. We are Auburn and we can compete with anybody, anywhere, anytime.

Yeah, I knew FSU was an independent until joining the ACC and I understand them playing Miami as well as Florida. They also played Notre Dame with Holtz as well as us with Pat Dye many times. That is 4 games against arguably 4 of the top 5 teams of the 80's every year in addition to whoever else they scheduled each year. You play 4 teams per year that are elite and your equal each year, you have a 6.25% chance of winning those 4 games (not to mention the rest of the schedule).

Now, I am not saying we are or should be scared of playing anyone as we are good enough to beat anyone, especially in the upcoming years. However, I also remember under Dye in the 80's we were getting tired of playing the toughest schedule in the nation (or close to it) year in and year out. I even remember many AU fans were not unhappy to see FSU fall off the schedule even though it was a GREAT rivalry. I used FSU as an example because even though they were as good as any team in the country for almost 10 years (with a GREAT coaching staff), they never won a NC until AU was off their schedule in 1993. Even that year, they lost by 1 point to Holtz and Notre Dame.

Any team in the current SEC West will play a top 10 schedule every year right now. I am all for playing at least 1 quality OC opponent every year for sure. But when you start talking about 1 elite top 5 OC opponent AND a mid-tier OC opponent, that is not where I want to go. 1-2 mid tier lower top 20 opponent per year OC is about right to me OR 1 elite team for a home/home every now and then (like 50% of the time).

His point about FSU is that without that brutal schedule they played, they never would have gotten the chance to win it all in 93. Bowden seriously built that program from the ground up, and they made their name, as he said, playing anybody, anywhere. If they had stuck to easier schedules, sure they would have been undefeated a time or two, but they wouldn't have gotten any respect and thus would be Boise minus the media attention (because it was a different atmosphere then).

I understand, but by 1987, FSU was considered an elite top 5 type teams. They could have done without going and scheduling Notre Dame at that point as they were established and realing in blue chip recruits and Bowden was at the top of his game. Notre Dame was at its peak under Holtz and beat FSU in 1988 in route to the NC. Just saying some moderation at that point was appropriate as Bowden had the program where it needed to be. Kinda what I am saying about AU. We do not need to be like LSU the past few years playing no one OC, but we also do not need to be FSU of the late 80's or even AU at times in the 80's playing the toughest schedule in the nation year in and year out. Just a middle ground...

[auburn4ever 1,266]

FSU would not be who they are now if they were in the SEC. The same is true for Miami, Fla.

[Tiger Growlin 0]

If you want to be the best, play the best and beat the best. A lot of AU fans are quick to bring up a lack of respect that is shown towards AU. This "I don't want to play the elite schools because we might lose" attitude is not gonna get that respect. I can understand the media's stance on AU. We never play anybody OOC worthwhile. The one time we did recently(USC) we got our buts handed to us twice in a row. We got whipped by Ga Tech. We beat Clemson, Kansas State and W. Virginia. Not impressive at all. If we're gonna be viewed as a top program, we have to start taking on other top programs(Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio State, Va Tech, Oregon.)

[WarEagle10 77]

If you want to be the best, play the best and beat the best. A lot of AU fans are quick to bring up a lack of respect that is shown towards AU. This "I don't want to play the elite schools because we might lose" attitude is not gonna get that respect. I can understand the media's stance on AU. We never play anybody OOC worthwhile. The one time we did recently(USC) we got our buts handed to us twice in a row. We got whipped by Ga Tech. We beat Clemson, Kansas State and W. Virginia. Not impressive at all. If we're gonna be viewed as a top program, we have to start taking on other top programs(Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio State, Va Tech, Oregon.)

I could not agree with you more!  However on the USCw thing. My memory isn't what it used to be, but if I remember correctly the first year we played them we lost by 8. We were driving to try and tie the game when the clock ran out. The second year, with "Nallsminger" as our OC's, we got our fannies handed to us.  I do think that for us to be recognized as a national power we have to play the perceived top programs in the country. I don't think we need to do it on a yearly basis, but we do need to step up to the plate every now and then with a home-and-home series with one of the "giants" of college football. We want respect? Well we have to earn it.