AU will not claim any more national titles

[Eagle Flight 0]

In 04, Auburn wasn't ever going to leapfrog OU or USC as long as they remained undefeated. The SEC didn't have the respect nationally that it does now. The out of conference schedule was a hindrance as well.

Auburn's schedule strength in 04 was much tougher than OU or USC. It was not even close.

It wasn't thought so at the time not nationally. Nobody thought the SEC was as good as it actually was and the non conference schedule was lacking.

The NCAA ranked Auburn's strength of schedule tougher than USC's or Oklahoma's in 2004. Auburn's SOS was #5. Oklahoma's SOS was ranked #11. USC's SOS was ranked #18.

Here's the link: http://web1.ncaa.org...9games_cumm.pdf

I'm not talking about what the NCAA ranked the schedules. I'm talking about perception by the voters. At that time the national sports media and the voters in the polls did not believe in the schedule strength for Auburn. Yes they were wrong but that was the perception and it was one reason why we got the shaft. Perception is reality when it comes to ranking teams in the polls.

The BCS system itself also ranked AU's schedule strength much tougher than the other two.

That is/was part of the whole injustice. Three undefeated teams but the one with the toughest BCS schedule strength is ranked #3 by that same BCS system?

OU and USC started out the season ranked above Auburn and didn't lose. The pollsters had an unofficial policy of not dropping teams if they don't lose. Since neither one of those two teams lost, Auburn was never going to jump them in the rankings. The whole thing stunk to high heaven but that's water under the bridge now.

If that had been the policy all the time, that would be understandable, but it went out the window pretty much after that. Not saying that was just against us, though it might be. We were the best team that year, but that was always the problem with the BCS(Beyond Common Sense.) If it came down to a clear 1 versus 2, like 2005, the BCS worked. The problem was more times than not, there was a 3rd legit contender. My opinion as far as claiming the titles is, we won them, were awarded them, and should claim them. But I understand those who don't share that view. NCAA rules state all intercollegiate championships are to be determined by a playoff or tournament. So using that logic, only Ohio State has a football title.

[auburn4ever 1,266]

Don't Just Say It. Claim It. Auburn National Championships.

1900, 1904, 1910, 1913, 1914, 1919, 1932, 1957, 1958, 1983, 1993, 2004, 2010.

[Auburnfan91 1,407]

It's disgusting to think that some of the best teams in our history were snubbed and didn't win the NC.

At least now with the 4 team playoff, winning a NC will be less of a popularity contest but more of an award that's won on the field and not won mostly by opinion.

[alexava 6,973]

Don't Just Say It. Claim It. Auburn National Championships.

1900, 1904, 1910, 1913, 1914, 1919, 1932, 1957, 1958, 1983, 1993, 2004, 2010.

surely you can find 3 or four more?

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,678]

Guy really claimed 13 national championships

Cmon

[AU-24 3,104]

In 04, Auburn wasn't ever going to leapfrog OU or USC as long as they remained undefeated. The SEC didn't have the respect nationally that it does now. The out of conference schedule was a hindrance as well.

Auburn's schedule strength in 04 was much tougher than OU or USC. It was not even close.

It wasn't thought so at the time not nationally. Nobody thought the SEC was as good as it actually was and the non conference schedule was lacking.

The NCAA ranked Auburn's strength of schedule tougher than USC's or Oklahoma's in 2004. Auburn's SOS was #5. Oklahoma's SOS was ranked #11. USC's SOS was ranked #18.

Here's the link: http://web1.ncaa.org...9games_cumm.pdf

I'm not talking about what the NCAA ranked the schedules. I'm talking about perception by the voters. At that time the national sports media and the voters in the polls did not believe in the schedule strength for Auburn. Yes they were wrong but that was the perception and it was one reason why we got the shaft. Perception is reality when it comes to ranking teams in the polls.

The BCS system itself also ranked AU's schedule strength much tougher than the other two.

That is/was part of the whole injustice. Three undefeated teams but the one with the toughest BCS schedule strength is ranked #3 by that same BCS system?

OU and USC started out the season ranked above Auburn and didn't lose. The pollsters had an unofficial policy of not dropping teams if they don't lose. Since neither one of those two teams lost, Auburn was never going to jump them in the rankings. The whole thing stunk to high heaven but that's water under the bridge now.

If that had been the policy all the time, that would be understandable, but it went out the window pretty much after that. Not saying that was just against us, though it might be. We were the best team that year, but that was always the problem with the BCS(Beyond Common Sense.) If it came down to a clear 1 versus 2, like 2005, the BCS worked. The problem was more times than not, there was a 3rd legit contender. My opinion as far as claiming the titles is, we won them, were awarded them, and should claim them. But I understand those who don't share that view. NCAA rules state all intercollegiate championships are to be determined by a playoff or tournament. So using that logic, only Ohio State has a football title.

Well said!!

[toddc 13,194]

I like it!!! I want to win the NC outright with no *'s beside the year. I am so tired of the "everybody gets a trophy" mentality today. If we did not win it on the field with no doubts I don't want to claim it. I think it is a class move, and it puts Auburn in a class of it's own with integrity. It takes guts in this day and age to stand out from the pack by not claiming something that we may have some doubts about. How many people have made fun of UA for it's claims of some of the NCs that were dubious at best?

[cooltigger21 0]

I like it!!! I want to win the NC outright with no *'s beside the year. I am so tired of the "everybody gets a trophy" mentality today. If we did not win it on the field with no doubts I don't want to claim it. I think it is a class move, and it puts Auburn in a class of it's own with integrity. It takes guts in this day and age to stand out from the pack by not claiming something that we may have some doubts about. How many people have made fun of UA for it's claims of some of the NCs that were dubious at best?

^^^This

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,678]

Just win a title this year and I don't care bout titles from 1983

[WarTiger 3,910]

I like it!!! I want to win the NC outright with no *'s beside the year. I am so tired of the "everybody gets a trophy" mentality today. If we did not win it on the field with no doubts I don't want to claim it. I think it is a class move, and it puts Auburn in a class of it's own with integrity. It takes guts in this day and age to stand out from the pack by not claiming something that we may have some doubts about. How many people have made fun of UA for it's claims of some of the NCs that were dubious at best?

SPOT ON... great perspective.

NOBODY gains anything from Auburn claiming previous titles.

[Randman5000 4,229]

Best Hot topic in a while.

[auburn4ever 1,266]

We have won more then just 2 national championships.

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,678]

We've "won" one - in 2010

Just like Alabama essentially "won" 3

I feel like BCS Era should be the beginning of counting titles since that's when you started having these official championship games (I know before hand you had a certain bowl game just be dubbed the championship, but still)

[doc4aday 1,887]

My opinion is to try telling this to those players on those teams that gave it their all and deserve this recognition? This is a bad decision that I am 110% against.

[cooltigger21 0]

My opinion is to try telling this to those players on those teams that gave it their all and deserve this recognition? This is a bad decision that I am 110% against.

i think they are a lot less worried about this than some of the fans are. Most of this smacks of feeling left out so to speak. We see others doing so we say why not us too. They know what they accomplished on the field.

[JamesG 0]

Good decision. Claiming disputed titles from years and years ago is so hokey. I was embarrassed Jacobs even considered doing this. We have a great football program with tons of tradition and everyone knows it. Leave it to Bama to do this stuff.

[BeatBama1972 11]

My opinion is to try telling this to those players on those teams that gave it their all and deserve this recognition? This is a bad decision that I am 110% against.

Agree. Shame on Jacobs

[Grumps 3,704]

It is my opinion that there is not a single living Auburn football player who thinks he actually won a national championship but did not get credit for it. Does anyone have any info from a player who thinks he won one?

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,678]

It is my opinion that there is not a single living Auburn football player who thinks he actually won a national championship but did not get credit for it. Does anyone have any info from a player who thinks he won one?

There is one

And probably only one

Jacobs

And he doesn't even want to claim them anymore

[auburn4ever 1,266]

I know JJ won't lose sleep over this, but he should. It's an awful stand he's taking. Any other AD would claim those championships and rightfully so.

Don't Just Say It. Claim It.

1900, 1904, 1910, 1913, 1914, 1919, 1932, 1957, 1958, 1983, 1993, 2004, 2010

[AUIH1 1,515]

Good decision. Claiming disputed titles from years and years ago is so hokey. I was embarrassed Jacobs even considered doing this. We have a great football program with tons of tradition and everyone knows it. Leave it to Bama to do this stuff.

I agree. The players who left it all on the field in those disputed years understand and know what they accomplished. They don't need some artificial claim to a title to acknowledge their achievement. I am not fan of Jay Jacobs at all, but I agree with him on this. Let's leave the manufactured MNC claims to spuat.

wde

[CJBas 4]

Jacobs is such an idiot! In the article he states: "We earned, what we earned" that's all we want to claim, what is rightfully ours!! What we earned!!

Yes Jay, we earned National Titles in several years, (championship teams in 1910, 1913, 1914, 1983, 1993 and 2004) why are we not claiming them?

Exactly! Auburn earned them. Auburn should claim them. There's something about a lot of Auburn people who seem to believe that it's not proper to stand up and claim what we've earned unless virtually forced to by the rest of the world. It's time for Auburn people to stand up for ourselves and claim what our guys have earned over the years. the catch is that when WE claim those titles, then the rest of the world will accept our claim. but so long as we don't claim them then they won't either.

[juscAUse 1]

My son drank an adult beverage in Fla. several years ago with Ronnie Brown and Cadillac. Ask THEM what they think.

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,678]

Auburn National Championships. Claim Them NOW!!!

1900, 1904, 1910, 1913, 1914, 1919, 1932, 1957, 1958, 1983, 1993, 2004, 2010.

Jay, you owe it to all the players, coaches who gave it their all and the fans who watched us win these "real" national chamionships.

What's wrong with you man? Every day you lose your mind about a topic that won't be reversed to a man that will never hear your opinion. I could see if you had ANY backing at all on this forum, but you don't.

[cooltigger21 0]

Auburn National Championships. Claim Them NOW!!!

1900, 1904, 1910, 1913, 1914, 1919, 1932, 1957, 1958, 1983, 1993, 2004, 2010.

Jay, you owe it to all the players, coaches who gave it their all and the fans who watched us win these "real" national chamionships.

What's wrong with you man? Every day you lose your mind about a topic that won't be reversed to a man that will never hear your opinion. I could see if you had ANY backing at all on this forum, but you don't.

Between this and expanding JH to over 100,00 he doesn't have anything else. Neither is happening but he just can't let it go.