Auburn losing recruiting war with in-state rival

[BAMMERPERRY 0]

at L-S-U...

and LSU was a loser program. Saban will win several at Bama.

[Legionfield 0]

Give him time.....

[MDM4AU 332]

While $aban was at LSU, he had better recruiting classes than AU. He won the recruiting battle in Louisiana (arguably a more talent rich state than Alabama) recruiting against the likes of Texas, Florida Schools and Oklahoma. He still went 2-3 v. Tuberville at Auburn. Their records during $abans stay at LSU were NS- 48-5 , TT - 47-8. He was a bit lucky the way the polls worked out to get into the BCS NCG (They won it because they were the best team). As we all know, Auburn wasn't so lucky with 4 undefeated teams in 2004 and the top 2 were preseason 1 & 2.

So tell me again how $aban is so much better?

[tgr4lfe 220]

Tuberville has 1 SEC Title in 13 years in the SEC. Glad you're happy with him.

Saban has 2 conference titles in 12 years of coaching. And that's with him coaching in a easier conference for half his career. He's 2-4 against CTT. Plus, no undefeated seasons and he left an NFL team in shambles. Congrats on that stunning achievement. Glad you love him.

I know it is hard to say. Say it with me now. Na-tion-al Champ-ion-ship! Saban has one, Tubby doesn't....

And you know good and well, that AU was the best team in 2004 and should have played USC or OU, but obviously OU was not that good. AU got screwed that year b/c of the stupid system that is beign played in right now.

You want to battle on recruiting...let's wait and see until signing day or after when non-qualifiers are settled. Then we will see who is ranked highest. Auburn has 16 commits. Looks like bama has all of their 25 committed, now assuming those 25 stay committed.

I don't, and probably a majority of the AU faithful, don't care about those rankings. Thank goodness that BG and argo aren't this arrogant, well at least Argo isn't, all the time. So, you think bama has some God given place to sit in the realm of college football? Get a clue, NOBODY is dominant year in year out, especially not in the SEC!! uat may very well get back to winning 8+ games a year, good for them, but it won't be real soon, and one of those wins will not be against AU w/in the forseeable future. Enjoy winning the recruiting, it has shown that that alone doesn't make a great football team or good.

[tgr4lfe 220]

at L-S-U...

and LSU was a loser program. Saban will win several at Bama.

what game is LSU playing in this year? I know, I know, I'll say what you will anyway... Les Miles is winning with NS's players, blah blah blah. LM is a lucky coach this year, a better coach possibly would be undefeated at LSU this year, possibly.

[AUdaREALsecTigers 2]

Give him time.....

I know... We hear it every year.... "Coach __(insert name of current coach)___ is gonna win us some more championships...just you wait! " We've heard it for six or seven coaches now. Whatever.

I know...you really mean it this time.

[auwallace 6]

can we move this to the rivals forum since it is mostly bammer propaganda

[WAR EAGLE!!! 0]

I know it is hard to say. Say it with me now. Na-tion-al Champ-ion-ship! Saban has one, Tubby doesn't....

Are you idiots counting that as Number 13? Might as well, I have heard more about the MNC that Saban won at LSU over just about anything that you guys have spewed out over the last year...

[jetermary 6]

If this were a football game, it would be like celebrating that you've won and it's not even midway through the 3rd quarter. I thought signing day was still in February.

Saban has put together an excellent class and yes, part of that is because they have more slots and can offer more immediate playing time. That's not saying it's the only reason, just that it is a major factor.

But comparing it to CTTs class right now when under him Auburn has always closed much better than it started, not to mention the boost that Franklin's hiring will give us on the offensive side of the ball in recruiting, is just stupid. Let's see what things look like on signing day. While Bama will still have one of the best classes they've had in a long time (since the Dubose era...fat lot of good it did them), Auburn's is going to look a lot better than it does right now.

Yes, and I don't respect his methods. Didn't he get in some hot water while at LSU and then again at Alabama?

[mowegl 4]

Tuberville has 1 SEC Title in 13 years in the SEC. Glad you're happy with him.

Saban has 2 conference titles in 12 years of coaching. And that's with him coaching in a easier conference for half his career. He's 2-4 against CTT. Plus, no undefeated seasons and he left an NFL team in shambles. Congrats on that stunning achievement. Glad you love him.

I know it is hard to say. Say it with me now. Na-tion-al Champ-ion-ship! Saban has one, Tubby doesn't....

Say it with me - undefeated seasons. Tubby has one, Sa6an doesnt. That and a 4-2 record against Sa6an.

SIX.

[IslandTiger 0]

I know it is hard to say. Say it with me now. Na-tion-al Champ-ion-ship! Six-in-a-row for-Au-burn, Saban has one, is over paid, Tubby doesn't owns our pathetic school....

Fixed that for ya...

[IslandTiger 0]

What about one title in 13 years is erroneous? Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth, nonetheless.

Here's a DECADE'S worth of truth for you...

AU vs AL '98 thru '07

AU UA

Record 82-41 69-54

Win % .667 .561

SEC Wins 49 42

SEC W % .613 .518

Bowl Rec 5-3 2-4

Bowl W % .625 .429

IRON BOWL 7-3 3-7

P.S. You're lucky the 98 & 99 seasons fall into these comparisons 'cause if they didn't it'd be REALLY ugly for your dark pink powerhouse of a football program.

Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth none the less...Enjoy

[Legionfield 0]

What about one title in 13 years is erroneous? Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth, nonetheless.

Here's a DECADE'S worth of truth for you...

AU vs AL '98 thru '07

AU UA

Record 82-41 69-54

Win % .667 .561

SEC Wins 49 42

SEC W % .613 .518

Bowl Rec 5-3 2-4

Bowl W % .625 .429

IRON BOWL 7-3 3-7

P.S. You're lucky the 98 & 99 seasons fall into these comparisons 'cause if they didn't it'd be REALLY ugly for your dark pink powerhouse of a football program.

Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth none the less...Enjoy

Why did you leave out SEC titles? Maybe because they were equal? how convenient. We might have gotten one in '02 had we been eligible. Then we would have had more than your glorious program in those years. You guys are hilarious... Have fun going 8-4, we know that is all you expect, along with an SEC west co-championship.

[TitanTiger 20,474]

If we'd been content with 8-4 seasons and whipping your a**, we'd have just kept Borges and not worried about whether or not the offense got back to 2004-2005 form or not. Pretty amazing that we managed to still beat you with such low ranked offenses the last two years (101st this year I believe). Even all Saban's defensive prowess couldn't help you stop our 101st ranked attack. God help you when Franklin makes the kind of improvements in output here that he did at Troy.

[weglchamp 0]

If UAT finishes #1 in recruiting rankings does that make 13? What are they gonna do with all those t-shirts?

[WarTiger 3,901]

What about one title in 13 years is erroneous? Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth, nonetheless.

Here's a DECADE'S worth of truth for you...

AU vs AL '98 thru '07

AU UA

Record 82-41 69-54

Win % .667 .561

SEC Wins 49 42

SEC W % .613 .518

Bowl Rec 5-3 2-4

Bowl W % .625 .429

IRON BOWL 7-3 3-7

P.S. You're lucky the 98 & 99 seasons fall into these comparisons 'cause if they didn't it'd be REALLY ugly for your dark pink powerhouse of a football program.

Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth none the less...Enjoy

Why did you leave out SEC titles? Maybe because they were equal? how convenient. We might have gotten one in '02 had we been eligible. Then we would have had more than your glorious program in those years. You guys are hilarious... Have fun going 8-4, we know that is all you expect, along with an SEC west co-championship.

The idiot speaks again. You really are stupid, aren't you? Why would you come here to run your mouth and smack talk us about going 8-4 when your own pathetic excuse for a program is sitting at a stellar 6-6? Why would you come here talking trash about this 8-4 season when its our worse record in 4 years? Why would you want to come here knowing our program is in total domination of yours to the tune of 6 straight. We had an offense that wasn't ranked in the top 100 and your defense still couldn't do enough to stop us. If we were content with 8-4 and our annual beatdown of your pathetic program, Al Borges would likely still be at Auburn and we'd just keep kicking your a**. We do have higher expectations, which is exactly why borges was shown the door. Now if you couldn't stop an offense not even ranked in the top 100, what will you do with our offense that is surely to improve in the years to come.

I love this though... "We might have gotten one is 2002 had we been eligible".... classic bammer talk. I'm surprise you haven't retroactively "claimed' one like you do everything else. The FACT is you didn't get squat in 2002, and you just need to accept it the way things are instead of playing the what if game. I do enjoy that though...cause even with the 10 wins that year, uat still couldn't beat Auburn. That must be tough to swallow.

Since you brought up the SEC title situation, let's examine it shall we. uat won theirs in 1999, right? Nice little blip on the radar for a program mired in mediocrity. Let's see how uat responded before and after that fleeting success:

1997 - 4-7

1998 - 7-5

1999 - 10 -3**

2000 - 3-8

2001 - 7-5

2002 - 10-3

Now take a look at how Auburn responded before and after their SEC title in 2004:

2002 - 9-4

2003 - 8-5

2004 - 13-0**

2005 - 9-3

2006 - 11-2

2007 - 8-4 one game pending

** denotes title year

So, when uat won the title it was coming off a losing season and an average 7 win season, then the years following the sec title, what's that?, another LOSING SEASON. In 2000 uat was ranked preseason #3 as well, and tanked it to 3-8.

Meanwhile, Auburn won the title in 2004 with a PERFECT 13-0 record after failing to meet the high expectations of 2003. However, even with the high expectations and low results we still went 8-5 and still beat uat ON THE FIELD. We also responded in a big was going 13-0 the next season. THen after that championship season we followed by winning 20 games combined the next two years.

So, uat had their lofty expectations AFTER winning the title in 1999, and responded by going 3-8. We had our lofty expectations BEFORE the title in 2003 but went 8-5, however we responded the following year with that 13-0 season. We have also followed it up by averaging 9 wins a season since, while uat followed it up with an average of 6 wins a season....

I know after all those facts layed before you, you will start spinning them in to something better suited for your losing argument. THose are the facts, whether you like it or not. Review them over and over again until it sinks in. uat is a program on life support and shows no signs of gaining consciousness anytime soon. Have fun laughing about an SEC co-championship if you will, but at least we are contending for something. You only wish uat could sniff at a co-championship, yet 2007 and $4 Million and uat is still an sec bottom feeder. Congrats, you made the sec west standings ahead of Ole Miss and....well, nobody. FIFTH place finish for your program while you trash ours. laughable indeed.

[Grider 1]

Wow thanks bammers for trashing up this thread. Please remove your tired smack talk from the cinder blocks before the end of the day.

On another note, the Alex City Outlook had to issue an apology about their idiot writers plagerism.

http://www.alexcityoutlook.com/articles/20...ts/sports02.txt

[Legionfield 0]

What about one title in 13 years is erroneous? Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth, nonetheless.

Here's a DECADE'S worth of truth for you...

AU vs AL '98 thru '07

AU UA

Record 82-41 69-54

Win % .667 .561

SEC Wins 49 42

SEC W % .613 .518

Bowl Rec 5-3 2-4

Bowl W % .625 .429

IRON BOWL 7-3 3-7

P.S. You're lucky the 98 & 99 seasons fall into these comparisons 'cause if they didn't it'd be REALLY ugly for your dark pink powerhouse of a football program.

Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth none the less...Enjoy

Why did you leave out SEC titles? Maybe because they were equal? how convenient. We might have gotten one in '02 had we been eligible. Then we would have had more than your glorious program in those years. You guys are hilarious... Have fun going 8-4, we know that is all you expect, along with an SEC west co-championship.

The idiot speaks again. You really are stupid, aren't you? Why would you come here to run your mouth and smack talk us about going 8-4 when your own pathetic excuse for a program is sitting at a stellar 6-6? Why would you come here talking trash about this 8-4 season when its our worse record in 4 years? Why would you want to come here knowing our program is in total domination of yours to the tune of 6 straight. We had an offense that wasn't ranked in the top 100 and your defense still couldn't do enough to stop us. If we were content with 8-4 and our annual beatdown of your pathetic program, Al Borges would likely still be at Auburn and we'd just keep kicking your a**. We do have higher expectations, which is exactly why borges was shown the door. Now if you couldn't stop an offense not even ranked in the top 100, what will you do with our offense that is surely to improve in the years to come.

I love this though... "We might have gotten one is 2002 had we been eligible".... classic bammer talk. I'm surprise you haven't retroactively "claimed' one like you do everything else. The FACT is you didn't get squat in 2002, and you just need to accept it the way things are instead of playing the what if game. I do enjoy that though...cause even with the 10 wins that year, uat still couldn't beat Auburn. That must be tough to swallow.

Since you brought up the SEC title situation, let's examine it shall we. uat won theirs in 1999, right? Nice little blip on the radar for a program mired in mediocrity. Let's see how uat responded before and after that fleeting success:

1997 - 4-7

1998 - 7-5

1999 - 10 -3**

2000 - 3-8

2001 - 7-5

2002 - 10-3

Now take a look at how Auburn responded before and after their SEC title in 2004:

2002 - 9-4

2003 - 8-5

2004 - 13-0**

2005 - 9-3

2006 - 11-2

2007 - 8-4 one game pending

** denotes title year

So, when uat won the title it was coming off a losing season and an average 7 win season, then the years following the sec title, what's that?, another LOSING SEASON. In 2000 uat was ranked preseason #3 as well, and tanked it to 3-8.

Meanwhile, Auburn won the title in 2004 with a PERFECT 13-0 record after failing to meet the high expectations of 2003. However, even with the high expectations and low results we still went 8-5 and still beat uat ON THE FIELD. We also responded in a big was going 13-0 the next season. THen after that championship season we followed by winning 20 games combined the next two years.

So, uat had their lofty expectations AFTER winning the title in 1999, and responded by going 3-8. We had our lofty expectations BEFORE the title in 2003 but went 8-5, however we responded the following year with that 13-0 season. We have also followed it up by averaging 9 wins a season since, while uat followed it up with an average of 6 wins a season....

I know after all those facts layed before you, you will start spinning them in to something better suited for your losing argument. THose are the facts, whether you like it or not. Review them over and over again until it sinks in. uat is a program on life support and shows no signs of gaining consciousness anytime soon. Have fun laughing about an SEC co-championship if you will, but at least we are contending for something. You only wish uat could sniff at a co-championship, yet 2007 and $4 Million and uat is still an sec bottom feeder. Congrats, you made the sec west standings ahead of Ole Miss and....well, nobody. FIFTH place finish for your program while you trash ours. laughable indeed.

You know what they say. Second place is the first loser!! We will also improve next year. Your so-called reign is coming to an end.......

[mowegl 4]

What about one title in 13 years is erroneous? Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth, nonetheless.

Here's a DECADE'S worth of truth for you...

AU vs AL '98 thru '07

AU UA

Record 82-41 69-54

Win % .667 .561

SEC Wins 49 42

SEC W % .613 .518

Bowl Rec 5-3 2-4

Bowl W % .625 .429

IRON BOWL 7-3 3-7

P.S. You're lucky the 98 & 99 seasons fall into these comparisons 'cause if they didn't it'd be REALLY ugly for your dark pink powerhouse of a football program.

Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth none the less...Enjoy

Why did you leave out SEC titles? Maybe because they were equal? how convenient. We might have gotten one in '02 had we been eligible. Then we would have had more than your glorious program in those years. You guys are hilarious... Have fun going 8-4, we know that is all you expect, along with an SEC west co-championship.

The idiot speaks again. You really are stupid, aren't you? Why would you come here to run your mouth and smack talk us about going 8-4 when your own pathetic excuse for a program is sitting at a stellar 6-6? Why would you come here talking trash about this 8-4 season when its our worse record in 4 years? Why would you want to come here knowing our program is in total domination of yours to the tune of 6 straight. We had an offense that wasn't ranked in the top 100 and your defense still couldn't do enough to stop us. If we were content with 8-4 and our annual beatdown of your pathetic program, Al Borges would likely still be at Auburn and we'd just keep kicking your a**. We do have higher expectations, which is exactly why borges was shown the door. Now if you couldn't stop an offense not even ranked in the top 100, what will you do with our offense that is surely to improve in the years to come.

I love this though... "We might have gotten one is 2002 had we been eligible".... classic bammer talk. I'm surprise you haven't retroactively "claimed' one like you do everything else. The FACT is you didn't get squat in 2002, and you just need to accept it the way things are instead of playing the what if game. I do enjoy that though...cause even with the 10 wins that year, uat still couldn't beat Auburn. That must be tough to swallow.

Since you brought up the SEC title situation, let's examine it shall we. uat won theirs in 1999, right? Nice little blip on the radar for a program mired in mediocrity. Let's see how uat responded before and after that fleeting success:

1997 - 4-7

1998 - 7-5

1999 - 10 -3**

2000 - 3-8

2001 - 7-5

2002 - 10-3

Now take a look at how Auburn responded before and after their SEC title in 2004:

2002 - 9-4

2003 - 8-5

2004 - 13-0**

2005 - 9-3

2006 - 11-2

2007 - 8-4 one game pending

** denotes title year

So, when uat won the title it was coming off a losing season and an average 7 win season, then the years following the sec title, what's that?, another LOSING SEASON. In 2000 uat was ranked preseason #3 as well, and tanked it to 3-8.

Meanwhile, Auburn won the title in 2004 with a PERFECT 13-0 record after failing to meet the high expectations of 2003. However, even with the high expectations and low results we still went 8-5 and still beat uat ON THE FIELD. We also responded in a big was going 13-0 the next season. THen after that championship season we followed by winning 20 games combined the next two years.

So, uat had their lofty expectations AFTER winning the title in 1999, and responded by going 3-8. We had our lofty expectations BEFORE the title in 2003 but went 8-5, however we responded the following year with that 13-0 season. We have also followed it up by averaging 9 wins a season since, while uat followed it up with an average of 6 wins a season....

I know after all those facts layed before you, you will start spinning them in to something better suited for your losing argument. THose are the facts, whether you like it or not. Review them over and over again until it sinks in. uat is a program on life support and shows no signs of gaining consciousness anytime soon. Have fun laughing about an SEC co-championship if you will, but at least we are contending for something. You only wish uat could sniff at a co-championship, yet 2007 and $4 Million and uat is still an sec bottom feeder. Congrats, you made the sec west standings ahead of Ole Miss and....well, nobody. FIFTH place finish for your program while you trash ours. laughable indeed.

You know what they say. Second place is the first loser!! We will also improve next year. Your so-called reign is coming to an end.......

Youve been second place in this state for the last six years.

[WarTiger 3,901]

What about one title in 13 years is erroneous? Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth, nonetheless.

Here's a DECADE'S worth of truth for you...

AU vs AL '98 thru '07

AU UA

Record 82-41 69-54

Win % .667 .561

SEC Wins 49 42

SEC W % .613 .518

Bowl Rec 5-3 2-4

Bowl W % .625 .429

IRON BOWL 7-3 3-7

P.S. You're lucky the 98 & 99 seasons fall into these comparisons 'cause if they didn't it'd be REALLY ugly for your dark pink powerhouse of a football program.

Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth none the less...Enjoy

Why did you leave out SEC titles? Maybe because they were equal? how convenient. We might have gotten one in '02 had we been eligible. Then we would have had more than your glorious program in those years. You guys are hilarious... Have fun going 8-4, we know that is all you expect, along with an SEC west co-championship.

The idiot speaks again. You really are stupid, aren't you? Why would you come here to run your mouth and smack talk us about going 8-4 when your own pathetic excuse for a program is sitting at a stellar 6-6? Why would you come here talking trash about this 8-4 season when its our worse record in 4 years? Why would you want to come here knowing our program is in total domination of yours to the tune of 6 straight. We had an offense that wasn't ranked in the top 100 and your defense still couldn't do enough to stop us. If we were content with 8-4 and our annual beatdown of your pathetic program, Al Borges would likely still be at Auburn and we'd just keep kicking your a**. We do have higher expectations, which is exactly why borges was shown the door. Now if you couldn't stop an offense not even ranked in the top 100, what will you do with our offense that is surely to improve in the years to come.

I love this though... "We might have gotten one is 2002 had we been eligible".... classic bammer talk. I'm surprise you haven't retroactively "claimed' one like you do everything else. The FACT is you didn't get squat in 2002, and you just need to accept it the way things are instead of playing the what if game. I do enjoy that though...cause even with the 10 wins that year, uat still couldn't beat Auburn. That must be tough to swallow.

Since you brought up the SEC title situation, let's examine it shall we. uat won theirs in 1999, right? Nice little blip on the radar for a program mired in mediocrity. Let's see how uat responded before and after that fleeting success:

1997 - 4-7

1998 - 7-5

1999 - 10 -3**

2000 - 3-8

2001 - 7-5

2002 - 10-3

Now take a look at how Auburn responded before and after their SEC title in 2004:

2002 - 9-4

2003 - 8-5

2004 - 13-0**

2005 - 9-3

2006 - 11-2

2007 - 8-4 one game pending

** denotes title year

So, when uat won the title it was coming off a losing season and an average 7 win season, then the years following the sec title, what's that?, another LOSING SEASON. In 2000 uat was ranked preseason #3 as well, and tanked it to 3-8.

Meanwhile, Auburn won the title in 2004 with a PERFECT 13-0 record after failing to meet the high expectations of 2003. However, even with the high expectations and low results we still went 8-5 and still beat uat ON THE FIELD. We also responded in a big was going 13-0 the next season. THen after that championship season we followed by winning 20 games combined the next two years.

So, uat had their lofty expectations AFTER winning the title in 1999, and responded by going 3-8. We had our lofty expectations BEFORE the title in 2003 but went 8-5, however we responded the following year with that 13-0 season. We have also followed it up by averaging 9 wins a season since, while uat followed it up with an average of 6 wins a season....

I know after all those facts layed before you, you will start spinning them in to something better suited for your losing argument. THose are the facts, whether you like it or not. Review them over and over again until it sinks in. uat is a program on life support and shows no signs of gaining consciousness anytime soon. Have fun laughing about an SEC co-championship if you will, but at least we are contending for something. You only wish uat could sniff at a co-championship, yet 2007 and $4 Million and uat is still an sec bottom feeder. Congrats, you made the sec west standings ahead of Ole Miss and....well, nobody. FIFTH place finish for your program while you trash ours. laughable indeed.

You know what they say. Second place is the first loser!! We will also improve next year. Your so-called reign is coming to an end.......

In what year? We've heard the same song and dance for 5 years.

[SouthLink02 8]

We might have gotten one in '02 had we been eligible.

You wouldn't have had a chance in the SECCG. Nobody was beating us that night.

[AU alum 2]

What about one title in 13 years is erroneous? Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth, nonetheless.

Here's a DECADE'S worth of truth for you...

AU vs AL '98 thru '07

AU UA

Record 82-41 69-54

Win % .667 .561

SEC Wins 49 42

SEC W % .613 .518

Bowl Rec 5-3 2-4

Bowl W % .625 .429

IRON BOWL 7-3 3-7

P.S. You're lucky the 98 & 99 seasons fall into these comparisons 'cause if they didn't it'd be REALLY ugly for your dark pink powerhouse of a football program.

Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth none the less...Enjoy

Why did you leave out SEC titles? Maybe because they were equal? how convenient. We might have gotten one in '02 had we been eligible. Then we would have had more than your glorious program in those years. You guys are hilarious... Have fun going 8-4, we know that is all you expect, along with an SEC west co-championship.

The idiot speaks again. You really are stupid, aren't you? Why would you come here to run your mouth and smack talk us about going 8-4 when your own pathetic excuse for a program is sitting at a stellar 6-6? Why would you come here talking trash about this 8-4 season when its our worse record in 4 years? Why would you want to come here knowing our program is in total domination of yours to the tune of 6 straight. We had an offense that wasn't ranked in the top 100 and your defense still couldn't do enough to stop us. If we were content with 8-4 and our annual beatdown of your pathetic program, Al Borges would likely still be at Auburn and we'd just keep kicking your a**. We do have higher expectations, which is exactly why borges was shown the door. Now if you couldn't stop an offense not even ranked in the top 100, what will you do with our offense that is surely to improve in the years to come.

I love this though... "We might have gotten one is 2002 had we been eligible".... classic bammer talk. I'm surprise you haven't retroactively "claimed' one like you do everything else. The FACT is you didn't get squat in 2002, and you just need to accept it the way things are instead of playing the what if game. I do enjoy that though...cause even with the 10 wins that year, uat still couldn't beat Auburn. That must be tough to swallow.

Since you brought up the SEC title situation, let's examine it shall we. uat won theirs in 1999, right? Nice little blip on the radar for a program mired in mediocrity. Let's see how uat responded before and after that fleeting success:

1997 - 4-7

1998 - 7-5

1999 - 10 -3**

2000 - 3-8

2001 - 7-5

2002 - 10-3

Now take a look at how Auburn responded before and after their SEC title in 2004:

2002 - 9-4

2003 - 8-5

2004 - 13-0**

2005 - 9-3

2006 - 11-2

2007 - 8-4 one game pending

** denotes title year

So, when uat won the title it was coming off a losing season and an average 7 win season, then the years following the sec title, what's that?, another LOSING SEASON. In 2000 uat was ranked preseason #3 as well, and tanked it to 3-8.

Meanwhile, Auburn won the title in 2004 with a PERFECT 13-0 record after failing to meet the high expectations of 2003. However, even with the high expectations and low results we still went 8-5 and still beat uat ON THE FIELD. We also responded in a big was going 13-0 the next season. THen after that championship season we followed by winning 20 games combined the next two years.

So, uat had their lofty expectations AFTER winning the title in 1999, and responded by going 3-8. We had our lofty expectations BEFORE the title in 2003 but went 8-5, however we responded the following year with that 13-0 season. We have also followed it up by averaging 9 wins a season since, while uat followed it up with an average of 6 wins a season....

I know after all those facts layed before you, you will start spinning them in to something better suited for your losing argument. THose are the facts, whether you like it or not. Review them over and over again until it sinks in. uat is a program on life support and shows no signs of gaining consciousness anytime soon. Have fun laughing about an SEC co-championship if you will, but at least we are contending for something. You only wish uat could sniff at a co-championship, yet 2007 and $4 Million and uat is still an sec bottom feeder. Congrats, you made the sec west standings ahead of Ole Miss and....well, nobody. FIFTH place finish for your program while you trash ours. laughable indeed.

You know what they say. Second place is the first loser!! We will also improve next year. Your so-called reign is coming to an end.......

Youve been second place in this state for the last six years.

Third place, actually.

[JB33 1]

http://www.alexcityoutlook.com/articles/20...ts/sports04.txt

Just take a look and read his article.

"Quote: Tommy Tuberville on Feb. 4, 1999 from the Columbus Ledger-Enquirer: "We don't recruit out of magazines, we don't recruit out of recruiting services, we go out and evaluate our players."

Question to Coach Tuberville: For the past five years, where and the heck have you been looking? As of this date, you are sitting in 31st with 53 days left until national signing day."

Its funny.. he never wants to mention that we had a huge recruiting class last year and actually HAVE recruited well. This guy is a nut bag actually.

I know this hasn't been the best recruiting year.. but we still have a while to go.

Also this from the article

"Alabama will be the top recruiting class in the country - they will land top prospect, No. 1 wide receiver Julio Jones. The Tide will ink no less than 10 more top 150 recruits, all in the top 15 at their respective positions."

Is he saying that Alabama will sign 10 more top 150 recruits from what they have already? Or in total?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ . . . . . . .

[IslandTiger 0]

What about one title in 13 years is erroneous? Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth, nonetheless.

Here's a DECADE'S worth of truth for you...

AU vs AL '98 thru '07

AU UA

Record 82-41 69-54

Win % .667 .561

SEC Wins 49 42

SEC W % .613 .518

Bowl Rec 5-3 2-4

Bowl W % .625 .429

IRON BOWL 7-3 3-7

P.S. You're lucky the 98 & 99 seasons fall into these comparisons 'cause if they didn't it'd be REALLY ugly for your dark pink powerhouse of a football program.

Now, you might not LIKE the truth, but it's the truth none the less...Enjoy

Why did you leave out SEC titles? Maybe because they were equal? how convenient. We might have gotten one in '02 had we been eligible. Then we would have had more than your glorious program in those years. You guys are hilarious... Have fun going 8-4, we know that is all you expect, along with an SEC west co-championship.

WOW-You got me!! Okay were tied in SEC Titles-can't believe I thought that'd slip by a member of the tahd. Should have known better as that's really the only possible straw you could grasp for and that's why I left it out cause it totally blows my point out of the water....P.S. My point is: Your Team Sucks and has sucked quite well for 10 years now. By bammer "moral victory" logic, I guess that 1 to 1 on SEC titles is the trump card you've got on us for the "Hanging on to .500" performance the mighty tahd has rolled up over the last DECADE compared to us?? I say again, that's 10 long and painful years with 5 "Superior Coaches" that were destined to take you to the promised land over, and over, AND OVER, AND OVER, AND OVER AGAIN WITH A .500 RESULT! ROE TAHD BABY...ROE TAHD!! I'm thinking Bon Jovi's "Living on a Prayer" should be the song the might tahd roe's out too..."oh-oh, we're half way there..."

WOW-talk about delusional...I bet you've probably got a football that you've named "Spalding" that you enjoy talking to about all the "Next Year's-the-Year back to Glory" talk too huh? Don't do what Hanks did and try and get off insanity island-hang yourself instead, the pain will be easier to bear...Speaking of "bear" Take off the dark pink glasses for a moment and accept the fact that the state of your program is, has been, and will continue to be one of the mid-to low enders in the SEC for a while to come. Which one of your rivals is afraid to play you? Florida? TN? LSU? UGA? AU?...nope-not with the way you've been handing out the W's for the last dime. Oh wait, VANDY-THAT'S WHO BAMA OWNS NOW! Are you starting to get it yet? Your trend is going the wrong way homer-even with the "far superior" head coach, excuse me, "coaches" that you've had over the recent years. Face it, short of being Ole Miss(by the way-you scare them too, I think..), nothing sucks more right now in the SEC than being a member of the bama faithful-Rome was great while it lasted too; sorry Caesar-your glory days are over. Merry Christmas and Here's to your's and Spalding's Happy New Year in the "Yeah-We're .500 bowl!

Let me know if I've left any vital stats out of this post too please...

[CircleDrill 178]

Well, I have pretty much read this whole thread, and not seen a simple point brought up.

If you are a prestigious coach from a prestigious program with a roster that is already loaded with freshman and sophomore talent....versus a controversial coach from a nostalgic program with a roster that is crap.....

Who is going to get "more" (numbers) quality recruits? Why would Coach A (above) need to recruit everything he can get? Doesn't he just need to fill in the weak spots in the roster? Or should he go after 5-star running backs even though he already has several of them, meaning the recruit probably will never get to play?

Come on guys. Don't let the Bammers try to convince you that you have saban envy.

Julio Jones still has to catch passes from JPW with no O-line protecting him.

THERE WILL BE NO EXCUSES NEXT YEAR, WHEN #7 HAPPENS!