Jump to content

Auburn & Alabama


TitanTiger
 Share

Recommended Posts

Much gets said by a certain, rather large percentage of bammers about their tradition. It usually comes up in conversations with Auburn people as to how the current 3 game losing streak to us in the Iron Bowl and us winning the SEC title is just an "aberration" and how things will "return to normal" once they get over the effects of probation, blah, blah, blah.

The truth is, this is the new normal. Not Bama being on probation...just Bama being average with a few spots of "really good". See, for all the talk of Bama at the top being "normal", it really was only the norm for the tenure of Paul Bear Bryant. Yes, Bama had some glory days in the 20s and they had a couple of good years in the 40s. But Bama's "tradition" of being at the top is pretty much attributed to an era that ended 22 years and 6 Bama head coaches ago. This era accounts for over half of their SEC titles and national championships. It also accounts for their lead in the Iron Bowl series (38-30-1) since Bryant went 19-6 against Auburn in his tenure. That's not to say it isn't something to be proud of. It absolutely is. But it has to be placed in its proper perspective. The Bryant era is the aberration, not the norm.

Now look at the years since Bryant, the new "normal", and compare Auburn and Alabama.

AU-UAT.jpg

See, the truth is, Alabama just isn't the "big dog" of the SEC anymore. They had their time and I'm sure it was fun for them. But don't let any smart mouthed bammer try to tell you that it's "just a matter of time" before they return to their "rightful place" at the top of the SEC. And don't let them blame probation either. They've had 22 years to assert their dominance and it hasn't happened. Auburn leads in virtually every category against Alabama that you can come up with.

In summary, the Bryant era was a great time for Alabama football, especially in the modern era. But Bama has not been anything remotely dominant since he left. They've had some good seasons and some bad ones. Alabama is an above average team, but they are second best in the state and not just because of probation.

Just keep these facts and figures handy the next time some mouthy bammer who is ignorant of history tries to feed you that load of Bama tradition and "rightful place" bullcrap. There is certainly nothing wrong with them pulling for their team or even being optimistic. Real fans of all stripes are "guilty" of such things. But you know as well as I do when it crosses the line from rosy optimism into blind, ignorant, unfounded arrogance. These facts and figures should enlighten them to the way things really are. (But don't expect them to admit it to your face!). ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Does anyone recall what our record is against UA before bear and after bear?  I think we have winning records before and after.

131643[/snapback]

Well, from TitanTiger's figures, a little subtraction gives:

(Listing as Bama-Auburn-Tie)

Overall: 38-30-1

Bryant Years: 19-6-0

Post-Bryant: 10-13-0

Pre-Bryant: 9-11-1

So we lead 11 wins to 9 with one tie before Bear and 13 to 10 since Bear

EDIT- Sorry for the redundancy, TT-you posted just before I did

Edited by quietfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some CORRECTIONS:

Pre-Bryant: AU 12, UA 9, Tied 1

Bryant: UA 19, AU 6

Post-Bryant: AU 12, UA 10

Series: UA 38, AU 30, Tied 1

Looking at it another way, the series is even over the last 26 (TWENTY-SIX) years. This reaches back 4 years into the Bryant era. Maybe we can continue to "erase" some of that lead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From 1869 thru 1957 Alabama was 8-7-1 vs. Auburn

Football.stassen.com

From 1958 thru 1982 Alabama was 19-6 vs. Auburn

Football.stassen.com

From 1983 thru 2004 Alabama is 10-12 vs. Auburn

Football.stassen.com (I added this year)

Overall, Alabama is 37-25-1 vs. Auburn

Football.stassen.com (with this year added)

You can search the head-to-head results of any two teams HERE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darn it. Now you are using FACTS. That makes it impossible for the uaters to contribute to the thread. :lol::lol::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question about your graphic, Titan: Do the numbers shown DELETE the forfeited games? The * footnote can be interpreted both ways.

In other words, as played, would the numbers won be 177 (vs 168 shown), 108 (vs 99) ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question about your graphic, Titan:  Do the numbers shown DELETE the forfeited games? The * footnote can be interpreted both ways. 

In  other words, as played, would the numbers won be 177 (vs 168 shown), 108 (vs 99) ?

131681[/snapback]

If I am not mistaken, the year that Bama had to forfeit games, AUBURN won! Didn't they? :big:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tigrinum Major
Question about your graphic, Titan:  Do the numbers shown DELETE the forfeited games? The * footnote can be interpreted both ways. 

In  other words, as played, would the numbers won be 177 (vs 168 shown), 108 (vs 99) ?

131681[/snapback]

Yes, that was 1993. 11-0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From 1869 thru 1957 Alabama was 8-7-1 vs. Auburn

Football.stassen.com

From 1958 thru 1982 Alabama was 19-6 vs. Auburn

Football.stassen.com

From 1983 thru 2004 Alabama is 10-12 vs. Auburn

Football.stassen.com (I added this year)

Overall, Alabama is 37-25-1 vs. Auburn

start=1869&end=2004&team1=Alabama&team2=Auburn'>Football.stassen.com (with this year added)

You can search the head-to-head results of any two teams HERE

131677[/snapback]

The source posted above is in error:

Pre-Bryant:

Auburn won in 1893 (twice), '95, 1900, '01,'02, '04, '49, '54, '55, '56, '57 (12 wins)

Alabama won in 1894, 1903, '05, '07, '48, '50, '51, '52, '53 (9 wins)

The tie was in 1906.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The source posted above is in error:

Pre-Bryant:

Auburn won in 1893 (twice), '95, 1900, '01,'02, '04, '49, '54, '55, '56, '57 (12 wins)

Alabama won in 1894, 1903, '05, '07, '48, '50, '51, '52, '53 (9 wins)

The tie was in 1906.

131684[/snapback]

Yeah, I just noticed it leaves off the 1893, '94, '95, & 1901 games. It shows the first meating being 1902. Is 1902 the year Auburn changed it's name to Auburn?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The source posted above is in error:

Pre-Bryant:

Auburn won in 1893 (twice), '95, 1900, '01,'02, '04, '49, '54, '55, '56, '57 (12 wins)

Alabama won in 1894, 1903, '05, '07, '48, '50, '51, '52, '53 (9 wins)

The tie was in 1906.

131684[/snapback]

Yeah, I just noticed it leaves off the 1893, '94, '95, & 1901 games. It shows the first meating being 1902. Is 1902 the year Auburn changed it's name to Auburn?

131691[/snapback]

Name was changed in January 1960.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that in 100 years of football, you pick the last 20 years...which were AU's best in school history...yet the numbers are almost the same.

Thanks for sharing.

I think this is yet ANOTHER Titan contributed thread ABOUT Alabama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good topic Titan. Hate to throw a negative in it but I sure wish we could find a way to blow these guys out...just once. I wish there was some way this game could be played where I could just relax by half time knowing Auburn had the game well in hand. Instead, I owe my in-laws for new carpet this year after wearing out a new track down to the slab. :D

Bryant's teams absolutely dominated and it's something to be proud of. Just look at the long lasting effects his tenure still has on the fans in this state. It's good to see how competitive the series really is when you exclude that dark period in history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For my money, I just don't see how the numbers from the Pat Dye era, or even the Gene Stallings era have much bearing on anything. For me, to get an accurate assessment of where a program's at, I only look at (a) What their current coach has done since he's been there, and (b.) if the coach hasn't been there 4 years, how have the last 4 years gone?

So from that standpoint we're looking pretty good:

:au: under Tubby

50-24 (32-18 SEC)

5 bowls in 6 years, 3 New Year's, 1 BCS

2 trips to ATL (if you want to count co-championships, we've won or tied for the West 4 times)

1 SEC Title

Last 4 Years:

36-14 (24-9 SEC)

4 bowls, 2 New Year's, 1 BCS

Won/Tied West 3 times

1 trip to ATL

1 SEC Title

:ua: under Shula

10-14 (5-11 SEC)

1 Bowl

Last 4 Years:

27-22 (15-17 SEC)

2 Bowls, would've been 3 if not on probation

Best record in West once, no trip to ATL

4 coaches

I think these are all correct. Anyway, there's really not much of a comparison of late. Once Bama gets back on its feet and has a full complement of scholarships again, I'm sure they'll be better, but we're not going anywhere anytime soon. Sadly though, the mere fact that this thread was even started makes me think that some of us feel we still have something to prove, which is simply not true.

P.S. - about the whole "last 4 years" thing... I was going to go back 5 years, which would have made it look even better for us and much worse for Bama, but I thought just to make it seem unbiased, I'd go 4. The point was still made, but bear in mind it could be an even bigger disparity.

Edited by Longtrainn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that in 100 years of football, you pick the last 20 years...which were AU's best in school history...yet the numbers are almost the same.

Thanks for sharing.

I think this is yet ANOTHER Titan contributed thread ABOUT Alabama.

131703[/snapback]

it says more than that bamagrad.

It says :au: is heading UP

Whereas, it says UA is heading........ well you get the picture (psst give you a hint :thumbsdown: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great Post! There's no question that Bear was the difference in the series with us. Since his demise, we have moved into position to dominate the series as we did prior to 1958. In fact, as I recall the 40-0 thumping we gave them the previous year was the catalyst that brought Bryant back home to "Mama." The turders couldn't stand it any longer. Hey, they are still trying to bring somebody back or find somebody, anybody, who can reverse their decline in fortunes. :D They don't have enough sense or patience to realize that nobody could win like Bryant did now nor do they realize that stability is the key to rebuilding a program. I can remember w hen Alabama football was a complete "Joke" and Auburn dominated the SEC. May their lack of patience and arrongant attitude always remain so :P:au:

Edited by Shug2003
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that in 100 years of football, you pick the last 20 years...which were AU's best in school history...yet the numbers are almost the same.

At 24 years old, the past 20 years represent pretty much all I know of Auburn or Alabama football. So thats all that really matters to me. The point is, there is a trend here and the numbers clearly show it. Alabama's reign of dominanace is over, while Auburn's is just getting started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that in 100 years of football, you pick the last 20 years...which were AU's best in school history...yet the numbers are almost the same.

At 24 years old, the past 20 years represent pretty much all I know of Auburn or Alabama football. So thats all that really matters to me. The point is, there is a trend here and the numbers clearly show it. Alabama's reign of dominanace is over, while Auburn's is just getting started.

131710[/snapback]

Good point, though actually I doubt anyone will have another "reign of dominance." I think Spurrier was the last to have one of those, and there's so much parity in the conference these days, I don't see anything like that happening again for a while, maybe ever. Remember what people were saying after last year? Everyone said Georgia and LSU had begun to pull away from the rest of the conference, and we'd be seeing those two square off in ATL for years to come. Well, that all kind of looks foolish right now, doesn't it? So I don't think there's going to be just one or two powerhouses taking over the conference anymore.

Edited by Longtrainn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share




×
×
  • Create New...