TigerDevil 3 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Congratulations to the 2005 National Champion Auburn Tigers. 2005 Sugar Bowl Champions. 2004 SEC Champions. 13-0 . Great season. Oh, how I love Auburn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jared52 4,354 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Perfection... WAR EAGLE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raven_tiger 5 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSUfan91 0 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Congratulations to the 2005 National Champion Auburn Tigers I'm afraid that is the only thing that is incorrect! AU is Sugar and SEC but not National Champions but in my opinion you guys are co-champs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan4Auburn 1,626 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Congratulations to the 2005 National Champion Auburn Tigers I'm afraid that is the only thing that is incorrect! AU is Sugar and SEC but not National Champions but in my opinion you guys are co-champs! 135842[/snapback] Fair enough with me. If you can't put em together on the field at the end then give it to Auburn, Utah, and tommorow nights winner. Same thing I said last year, if you can't put LSU/USC on the same field then give it to them both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSUfan91 0 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 OU shouldn't have been in the Championship game last year because they lost their Big XII Championship game but they still managed to get in! If OU couldn't get it done with LSU last year, why does the BCS think that OU is going to get it done with USC, or even have shot? I guess AU's 2003 regular season loss to USC forced the BCS's hand to put OU in there! I still hope USC proves that OU didn't deserve to be in the game in the first place and dominates the game! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tigrinum Major Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Congratulations to the 2005 National Champion Auburn Tigers I'm afraid that is the only thing that is incorrect! AU is Sugar and SEC but not National Champions but in my opinion you guys are co-champs! 135842[/snapback] That endorsement is just as valid as the ESPN or AP poll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUesquire 1 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 What I find really disturbing about this system, among other things, is that AU had to get "Style points" or win really big to have a chance for voters to have a chance at the MNC. No matter how good or bad these teams look tonite, the team with the most points at the end is the national champion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theMan 0 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Congratulations to Utah also then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECEstudentUA 9 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 A tie is like kissing your sister. Congrats Auburn on the three way tie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passthebiscuits 6,872 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Jealous? Oh that's right, you have lost 3 iron bowls in a row...hmmm. Oh and congrats on that Music City bowl showing vs the Beavers. And if there's anybody who knows what kissing their sister feels like... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,054 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 BCS logic? In 2003 Oklahoma couldn't win the Big12 and still made it to the National Championship game. Oklahoma got their asssses beat like a drum by LSU. In effect LSU showed the world that Oklahoma should never have been in that game. In 2003 USC beat AUBURN but was shunned from the BCS Championship game. In 2004 USC must be allowed in the BCS game and since USC beat AUBURN in 2003 then AUBURN must be kept out this year. Since Oklahoma had their shot at an SEC team and came up woefully short, the BCS voters must keep the UNDEFEATED SEC CHAMPION out of the BCS Championship game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argo 8 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 If any of you question how and why Bama claims 12 MNC's, this is how it works. and passthebiscuit, just because we played like beavers didn't mean the beavers were in the MCB. It's the Tide and the Gophers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raven_tiger 5 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 If we were the ONLY undefeated team then and win is a win. Unfortunately, we were ranked behind 2 other undefeated teams who had been ranked #1 and #2 ALL year, hence in this case, style points do/did matter. Tubby should have figured that out after our big victory over UGA. Nope. Maybe next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 If any of you question how and why Bama claims 12 MNC's, this is how it works.and passthebiscuit, just because we played like beavers didn't mean the beavers were in the MCB. It's the Tide and the Gophers. 136061[/snapback] You mean beavers and gofurs aren't the same thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raven_tiger 5 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 If any of you question how and why Bama claims 12 MNC's, this is how it works.and passthebiscuit, just because we played like beavers didn't mean the beavers were in the MCB. It's the Tide and the Gophers. 136061[/snapback] You mean beavers and gofurs aren't the same thing? 136085[/snapback] They're both rats, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argo 8 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 If any of you question how and why Bama claims 12 MNC's, this is how it works.and passthebiscuit, just because we played like beavers didn't mean the beavers were in the MCB. It's the Tide and the Gophers. 136061[/snapback] You mean beavers and gofurs aren't the same thing? 136085[/snapback] There's two ways to answer this question. Both the beavers and gophers beat teams that mirror each other from past to present, in their bowl games. I took the football route on that one PT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argo 8 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 If any of you question how and why Bama claims 12 MNC's, this is how it works.and passthebiscuit, just because we played like beavers didn't mean the beavers were in the MCB. It's the Tide and the Gophers. 136061[/snapback] You mean beavers and gofurs aren't the same thing? 136085[/snapback] They're both rats, correct? 136089[/snapback] Make that three ways to answer that question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,511 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I think now is a good time for the following quote, which will now be part of my signature: "If a Laundromat in Tuscaloosa wants to pick Alabama No. 1, we'll claim it." -- Paul W. Bryant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 If any of you question how and why Bama claims 12 MNC's, this is how it works.and passthebiscuit, just because we played like beavers didn't mean the beavers were in the MCB. It's the Tide and the Gophers. 136061[/snapback] You mean beavers and gofurs aren't the same thing? 136085[/snapback] There's two ways to answer this question. Both the beavers and gophers beat teams that mirror each other from past to present, in their bowl games. I took the football route on that one PT. 136094[/snapback] ah tidefan24 I can agree with that. Both bama and ND are former good programs that have gone to the dogs, er I mean the gofurs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TigerinBham 1 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Any negative post by a Bama fan is just a sign of jealousy. Nothing that you can say is going to take away from us being 13-0. So who cares what you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argo 8 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I think now is a good time for the following quote, which will now be part of my signature:"If a Laundromat in Tuscaloosa wants to pick Alabama No. 1, we'll claim it." -- Paul W. Bryant 136099[/snapback] So are you using that to make AU fans claim at a 2004 MNC claim legit? If so, how ironic that after all these years of trashing bama over false MNC claims, some AU fans jump at the first chance to do the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,511 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 No, I'm using it to shut up bammers who try to make fun of us for lobbying for a national title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argo 8 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 While it most certainly should work with 90% of bama fans who boast false mncs, I'm not one of those. The 2004 Auburn Tigers did everything they could to have a fair share at the NC claim. No bama or any other fan can take that away. BUT, I've seen the same arguments used by bama fans on Tidefans.com talking about some of the bama NC claims years and years ago. The only difference I see is AU fans saying bama was delusional for the same arguments you guys are making now. Let me take the role of an AU fan and say......... Dumb Bammers, only the AP or coaches poll counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,457 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 A tie is like kissing your sister. Congrats Auburn on the three way tie. 136040[/snapback] Poor uaters...Congrats on that second consecutive NON-winning season. You folks MUST be proud! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.