Are We Claiming This?

[crankers 0]

Is there an official stance on our NC season?

I've seen the "2004 Championship Season" stuff, but just wondering if we are going to claim this as a National Championship - haven't really seen anything official saying we would.

[TigerGlide 1]

Tuberville said if someone would give it to them, they'd claim it. I heard Lindy on Southern Sports tonight say that two computer polls have rated Auburn #1, but I could not find the results he was referring to. Did anyone else hear that and catch the name of the polls?

It wasn't any of the BCS computers: Link to the Individual BCS Computer Rankings

[TexasTiger 13,017]

Tuberville said if someone would give it to them, they'd claim it.  I heard Lindy on Southern Sports tonight say that two computer polls have rated Auburn #1, but I could not find the results he was referring to.  Did anyone else hear that and catch the name of the polls?

It wasn't any of the BCS computers: Link to the Individual BCS Computer Rankings

136828[/snapback]

These polls have a stake in tweaking their final results to match the BCS. All haven't updated yet, but read Anderson's BS spin:

The Only Original and Unaltered 

BCS Computer Rankings...

Showing Which Teams Have Accomplished the Most to Date

OU & USC Are Deservedly Orange Bowl-Bound

* In the Anderson & Hester Rankings over the BCS's 7-year history, this season's Oklahoma and USC teams have achieved the highest pre-bowl ratings (.838 and .837) that any teams have achieved, breaking the mark of .836 set by Oklahoma in 2000.  In other words, no #1-ranked team in the BCS's previous 6 years has posted as high of a rating as either of these two teams.  The Orange Bowl is truly featuring a battle of the titans.

* Auburn has been outstanding, and the Tigers' .833 rating would have earned them the #1 or #2 ranking in any of the BCS's previous 6 seasons, but the Tigers did not play as tough of a schedule as either of the top two teams.

* Auburn has not played a team in the current top-7 (Oklahoma and USC each have), and the Tigers have played more below-average teams than either the Sooners or Trojans have played.

* Auburn has posted a perfect record versus teams ranked outside of the current top-7, but so has every other top-7 team:  the top 7 teams (after which there is a large drop) have not lost except to each other, going a combined 76-0 versus all other competition.

http://andersonsports.com/football/ACF_frnk.html

[aumoore 0]

Guess we should lose to some of these teams so they can stay in the top 7. Give me a break.

Oklahoma did not deserve it last year and this year they really did not. I bet next year the media who looks to be in love with Stoops will find a way to promote OU as a top team.

[AuNuma1 1]

If we claimed it, Utah could claim it to.

If you don't have the crystal egg, I don't see how you could "officially" claim it. The players better get rings though.

[wesfau 0]

This question was posed on ITAT yesterday and I'll paraphrase my response from that thread:

No, we should not claim an NC. We have continually given the bammers grief for claiming dubious championships and to begin to do the same thing reeks of hypocrisy. If the AP and/or the BCS do not "crown" your team champs, then I don't think there is any legitimacy to claiming a championship. I could not be any prouder (is that a word?) of our 2004 Auburn Tigers and their 13-0 record, but they are not, unfortunately, national champs under the current system.

[mcgufcm 4,107]

i don't think there is any legitimacy to claiming (hell, that word alone should semantically tell you that "national titles" are total crap... you think the super bowl champion has to go around claiming their championship?) ANY TITLE. the ap has a region-based and tradition-based bias. the coaches obviously have a problem with screwing one another in that little dishonest system (i mean mack brown campaigned for votes, bob stoops voted us like 5th, and everyone called on sec coaches to block vote for auburn... that's no way to crown a champion). so i give no added validity to the ap or the bcs over cfn or any other news/computer source that wants to come up with their own ranking system. all those two have are more money and more years of screwing things up.

[quietfan 233]

No, we should not claim an NC.  We have continually given the bammers grief for claiming dubious championships and to begin to do the same thing reeks of hypocrisy.  If the AP and/or the BCS do not "crown" your team champs, then I don't think there is any legitimacy to claiming a championship.  I could not be any prouder (is that a word?) of our 2004 Auburn Tigers and their 13-0 record, but they are not, unfortunately, national champs under the current system.

136882[/snapback]

My feelings exactly. I don't want to be a Bammer, or give a Bammer a reason to criticize.

I don't mind just using the words "Championship Season" on memorabilia, but I'd avoid a specific claim to "National Champions"

I'm satisfied with:

1) undisputable SEC Champions,

2) Perfect Season--which is therefore of "championship" quality and hense a "championship season" in a more esoteric sense, and

3) As good as the current BCS/AP champions (as well as all perfect teams in history, including Bama's) until proven otherwise on the field.

Imagine if roles were reversed and Bama was in our position. How much grief would we give them for chalking up another MNC on their "brag list"? How many times did we criticise them for claiming a "mythical" SEC West title for Franchione's 10-3 season? How much criticism have we already lived with for claiming all our SEC West "Co-championships".

Our guys accomplished as much as any other team in the country this year, more than all but two others, and matched every other perfect team of the past. The two extra words "National Champions" are mere words, and pale by comparison to the deeds.

[AUTaxMan 0]

Unless you can put that crystal football in your trophy case, you can't claim a national championship.

[mcgufcm 4,107]

that crystal ball is as meaningless as any piece of crystal i can buy at ware's jewelers.

[aubgrad66 0]

Why not, PCH and Eufaula news have declared us number one.

1. AUBURN TIGERS (13-0) -- Again, yes, we do have televisions in Pickens County. We even have cable and satellite. We were all witness to USC's annihilation of Oklahoma. But it was just one game. It was one game against an opponent that was vastly overrated for the past two seasons. That one game carries no more weight than any other if you look at an entire season objectively. Beating Oklahoma has no more significance than beating Georgia or Tennessee. In fact, both Georgia and Tennessee are better teams than OU, so those Tiger wins may be more significant. Why is Auburn number one? The answers are myriad. Auburn played more teams with winning records than USC. They played more teams in the top 10 at the time they played them than USC. They beat more 10-win teams than any other undefeated team in college football history. USC played one team all year with 10 wins, California. Bear stock dropped significantly when Texas Tech shredded them in the Holiday. Auburn played four 10-win teams and one nine-win squad. The Tiger's bowl opponent was superior to USC's. Sorry, OU fans, but Virginia Tech had much better speed. Auburn played statistically better defense than USC. They played statistically better offense than USC. No team in college football was more dominant week in and week out than Auburn. The Tigers trailed in a game just twice. They surrendered no more than 20 points in any game. The Tigers gave up rushing touchdowns to a mere two teams. Only one team had a fourth quarter lead on the Tigers. And Auburn did this while playing a schedule that is easily superior to USCs. Here's the litmus test: How would each do in the other's place? If you swapped schedules and USC played Tennessee (twice) Georgia, Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, MSU, Kentucky, Louisiana Monroe, Louisiana Tech and Citadel, you're not looking at an undefeated Trojan team right now. On the other hand, if you fed this Auburn team Colorado State, BYU, Stanford, Cal, Arizona State, Washington, Washington State, Arizona, Notre Dame and UCLA, their final record would remain unspoiled. That alone is enough to rank Auburn at the top.

[Erik81 0]

I am claiming it

[AURainman 6]

Auburn is the best team in the country this year. Whether you call it National Champs or not is up to you. I prefer to call them the best team in the country. No polls can ever take that away.

Does anyone have any proof otherwise?

If you do, speak up, and I'll stop referring to Auburn as the best team in the country.

(P.S. Associative score comparisons are and have always been horsesh** so don't give me that as a reason)

[Gorilla 0]

For what its worth, I think you shouldn't claim a national championship. The reason is b/c If you say, "we won a NC," it cheapens the meaning of that phrase and undercuts how the BCS devalued Auburn's accomplishments this season. The fact is you guys had a perfect season and got screwed. This is the indisputable truth, and that's what you should stand on as Auburn fans. Its not that you don't deserve one b/c you absolutely do - rather, its because, by not just claiming one anyway, you emphasize the strongest point of your argument. That is, the BCS utterly failed, as exhibited by your season.

The whole debate has to start with the definition of "National Championship." Do you define that term as winner of the BCS trophy, or in some other fashion? I know this sounds like LSU fan ranting from last year, but its only b/c we're talking about the same issue. Last season, USC claimed a National Championship after being voted No. 1 in the AP poll. This year, they're claiming to be National Champions after winning the BCS game, AND being voted No. 1 in the AP poll. The inconsistency, or at least uncertainty, of that position is obvious - USC is making the same claim in consecutive years as a result of two different scenarios. In my opinion, Auburn fans should avoid this kind of compromised, half-ass claim, and simply stand firm in their indignation.

Again, to say you didn't win a NC says nothing about the quality of your team, or its deservedness. And the impulse to make that claim is, of course, completely understandable. Ironically enough though, I think making the claim would undermine what you accomplished this season and that should never be done.

[BiggestAUfan 0]

Hell of a post gorilla. I never thought I'd say that about an LSU fan, but damn if you didn't prove me wrong.

Good to have you on the board, and as much as I hate to admit it I think you've hit it right on the head.

[Gorilla 0]

Hell of a post gorilla. I never thought I'd say that about an LSU fan, but damn if you didn't prove me wrong.

Good to have you on the board, and as much as I hate to admit it I think you've hit it right on the head.

136961[/snapback]

Thanks. Although we're usually at each other's throats, LSU and Auburn fans can definitely find some common ground when discussing National Championships and the BCS. Last year, we felt like we didn't get full credit, if you will, for a national championship season. Obviously you guys haven't been given anywhere close to full credit for this season. The situations aren't exactly alike, but in both cases fans felt some disatisfaction with the "system" (the BCS, polls, the media, etc.) and its results. I don't want to overstate the comparison b/c you guys got robbed entirely, but to a certain extent (believe it or not) LSU fans "feel your pain."

[AuNuma1 1]

Yeah I remember LSU fans whining because they had to share...how dumb does that look now? And LSU wasn't even undefeated in the SEC...I say take it anyway you can get it as long as you have the crystal egg to justify your claim. :hmm:

[mcgufcm 4,107]

i say anyone claiming to be "the true national champions" in a system that doesn't provide for a true championship is full of crap. it just so happens that some years there is less controversy, but even in those years we really don't have a true champ. who's to say that oregon wouldn't have beaten miami in 2001? in a system with one more game, we'd know the answer. it'd give validity to a title that's never had a shred of it. let the top four teams fight it out. if you're number five, tough, you should've done more b/c we know as a historical truth that number five has lost at least once. they have nothing to complain about.

[aucanucktiger 1,798]

First of all, it makes my hair hurt to even consider teams like Utah and Harvard...with schedules that are top to bottom jokes...claiming a share of the same championship an undefeated Auburn or Arizona State would claim. There's a reason Utah's conference in not in the BCS.

Second, our claiming the 2004 MNC isn't even on the same planet as some of the MNCs Bama claims. This rhetoric only goes so far, because no matter how you slice it, bammer has several MNCs...HOWEVER, just as an example, Bama claims the 1942 MNC. In 1942, Bama ended the season being shut out by Vandy and Miss. St. In 1942, they werem't even ranked in the top 10. Fast forward to 1980 when Sagarin RETROACTIVELY awards the 1942 MNC to Bama...which they promptly accept. Na, they don't deserve ANY grief for that...

[lsuj2006 0]

If you don't have the crystal egg, I don't see how you could "officially" claim it. 

136867[/snapback]

Tell that to Pete Carroll.

[aumoore 0]

Ok SC fans I give up you are the Mythical National Champions in a flawed system. Auburn is the best damn team in the best damn conference in the land therefore the best team in the nation.

I don't need some lame sports writers telling me who is #1 or a bunch of coaches who have agendas.

[jumbo 0]

I say you have to claim it! Here is why, Auburn went 13-0 in the toughest conference in the land. They were screwed out of the Orange Bowl because Bowling Green backed out of the game, So they were replaced by east Popcorn state, alabama fans are loving this talking trash like going 13-0 is something bad. The national media is laughing at Auburn being upset with being left out they are saying that auburn would have no chance verses usc. So if corso and slime like him are poking fun at auburn buying rings, why not claim the title its already a big huge joke, its not going to make anything worse, War Eagle Jason Campbell 4 president

[AUloggerhead 2,253]

Simple answer: no, don't claim a Mythical National Championship. Call the 13-0 2004 AU Tigers the Best in the Land because that's exactly what they are. There's not a single team "better" than them this year. SC ended the season with an identical won/loss record but no one can truthfully say they were "better" than AU unless and until they play on the field head-to-head. All this talk about computer rankings & voter polls, SOS, etc. ... ... it's all meaningless. Don't buy into this Bogus Charlatan Sham. The three components that make up the BCS are equally flawed. The human polls will never be objective. There's a reason no particular region of the country is assigned an abnormal number of voters -- they don't want to concentrate the bias in any region. Bias Spread around the country is still BS. There's a reason the coaches voted overwhemingly against revealing their weekly votes -- they want to hide behind all that objectivity & integrity. Right. While you're contemplating why this is so, remember this about the computer rankings -- they have been propping up OU as the consensus #1 all along. We all saw how reliable that component was long before halftime in the Orange Bowl.

2004 Tigers. 13-0 & Best in the Land.

[SouthLink02 8]

If we claimed it, Utah could claim it to.

If you don't have the crystal egg, I don't see how you could "officially" claim it.  The players better get rings though.

136867[/snapback]

Agree exactly.