BAD NEWS........

[weaglewagon 1]

i work at Western Kentucky.....word is through the AD that Auburn will host WKU in Sept. to replace USM. i HAVE NOT seen it in writing, but they say the AD reported it during the men's basketball game here last nite.

sorry to bring the bad news on a friday.

if this is found to be a big lie, i will kill my co-workers and may you permanently banish me from WEN.

WDE

[CarolinaTiger 0]

well, we had to play somebody...might as well be WKU.

i honestly cannot fathom a scenario where it'll matter this upcoming year, however.

if we're in the discussion for 'who goes to the BCS Bowl' again, i'm sure we'll get next year's sympathy vote just like USC did this year.

if we're not, then i don't think it'll matter that we've played USM or WKU.

$0.02.

ct

[AUesquire 1]

Oh my God. I'm sorry but you just can't respect a team that has the Cookie Monster for a mascot.

[AuNuma1 1]

Surprise, surprise...

But seriously guys, we're playing a first year starter at QB and 3 other starters are possibly going to be signed in the FIRST round of the NFL draft...surely you're not expecting us to do what we did last year, right?

[weaglewagon 1]

oh no. definitely not expecting 13-0 again......and it's cool for me WKU will play us. lord knows they need that money here. you'd think i'd like it. i just wanted a decent opponent. that's all.

[TexasTiger 14,606]

Surprise, surprise...

But seriously guys, we're playing a first year starter at QB and 3 other starters are possibly going to be signed in the FIRST round of the NFL draft...surely you're not expecting us to do what we did last year, right?

146013[/snapback]

Not expecting it, but conceding nothing until it happens on the field.

[Auburn85 438]

I heard something about Furman or Wofford replacing USM but oh well. In the BCS's eyes all the D 1AA schools are the same.

[clantontiger 0]

I had heard Elon or Davidson were really pushing for this game.

[AUBURNTIGERFAN 0]

Here is the Link

[ezeskeezy 0]

You guys get upset at the idea that the Citadel was the reason we didn't play in the NC game this year. It wasn't. Picking up Western Kentucky is a good move. Yeah YOU may not like it...YOU may have to watch it at 1:00 pm, but hey, it's another home game, and it's a win. Teams like this don't prevent us in playing in the NC, being ranked so low at the beginning of the season does. War Eagle

E

[passthebiscuits 7,021]

Agreed.

The "Strength of schedule" issue with the Citadel was just the media's way of backing up their love-fest with OK and USC. It wouldn't have mattered if we had beaten Miami--we still only "squeaked by LSU on a penalty" or "barely beat a devastated by injury UAT" or "played in a weakened SEC..." etc, etc.

[AUslug 1]

This is getting very old very fast IMO the next team to back out should pay a hefty fine for breaking a contract. Texas Tech, Ga. Tech, Ball State, Bowling Green and now Southern Miss have all backed out on AU under Tubby, what gives? I've already seen the Tigers and the Hilltoppers...I think I'm going to drink all day and skip the game.

[Auburn85 438]

oh well, when WK comes to town there will just be more tickets on ebay for bidding.

Starting bidding $.01

[rolltoomer 0]

USM didn't "break" the contract. There was an option to go out for a league game and they took the option.

I hope to heck we lock in the future games.

[WarDlowe 39]

I agree about the NCG thing. Playing the Citadel had nothing to do with us not being there. There's a page on the NCAA website that has our SOS tougher than USuCk's and Oklahomo's. WKU isn't a bad pickup I don't think.

[PChamp119 96]

well, we had to play somebody...might as well be WKU.

i honestly cannot fathom a scenario where it'll matter this upcoming year, however.

if we're in the discussion for 'who goes to the BCS Bowl' again, i'm sure we'll get next year's sympathy vote just like USC did this year.

if we're not, then i don't think it'll matter that we've played USM or WKU.

$0.02.

ct

146009[/snapback]

I couldn't disagree with you anymore. Everyone said that about Oklahoma should lose their vote for what they did to USC the year before and they didn't move down at all - did they?

People... get this through your heads... "If you are ranked #1 or #2 and don't ever lose, you will NOT fall to #3." If USC and Oklahoma/Texas go undefeated - Auburn could go 13-0 and it won't mean crap. The writers and the coaches and all the media for the most part agreed Auburn outplayed it's opponents better than Oklahoma did. The schedule, but mostly the fact that OU just didn't lose, is why Auburn couldn't jump Oklahoma. Writers will say "well I had OU #2, why should I drop them?"

If Auburn goes undefeated again (I don't think they will, but let's say they do) - it won't mean crap. No one in this world should ever expect Auburn to go to the Rose Bowl Next year. It's not going to happen. And say "wow, way to be optimistic" but the odds are USC and OU/Texas will go undefeated. I could be wrong, but thats my humble opinion.

If in fact that does indeed happen (because YOU said we would get the sympathy vote like USC did) WE WILL NOT JUMP OU/TEXAS or whoever is the other undefeated team simply because Auburn will not start in the top 2. USC didn't get a "sympathy" vote into the Orange Bowl. They got sympathy votes at the beginning of the season and stayed #1. You act as if Auburn would get a sympathy vote at the END of the season and that just would not happen because there would be a team that "started higher than Auburn and didn't lose, so why drop that team." It can be Oklahoma again and even though they screwed things up this year, the writers will once again be like "I started them #2 and I will not drop them." No way in hell would Auburn or any team for that fact get "sympathy" votes at the END of a season when it comes to jumping one undefeated team over another.

The only way it could possibly happen is if Oklahoma/Texas struggled throughout the season and Auburn blew everyone out - then the voters MIGHT change their vote based on that - but it would NOT be based on sympathy from the season before because this season is now in the past. The voters will look at who is playing now and won't care about what happened the year before. Had that been the case - Auburn would've played in the Orange Bowl this year.

[CarolinaTiger 0]

I couldn't disagree with you anymore. Everyone said that about Oklahoma should lose their vote for what they did to USC the year before and they didn't move down at all - did they?

People... get this through your heads... "If you are ranked #1 or #2 and don't ever lose, you will NOT fall to #3." If USC and Oklahoma/Texas go undefeated - Auburn could go 13-0 and it won't mean crap. The writers and the coaches and all the media for the most part agreed Auburn outplayed it's opponents better than Oklahoma did. The schedule, but mostly the fact that OU just didn't lose, is why Auburn couldn't jump Oklahoma. Writers will say "well I had OU #2, why should I drop them?"

If Auburn goes undefeated again (I don't think they will, but let's say they do) - it won't mean crap. No one in this world should ever expect Auburn to go to the Rose Bowl Next year. It's not going to happen. And say "wow, way to be optimistic" but the odds are USC and OU/Texas will go undefeated. I could be wrong, but thats my humble opinion.

If in fact that does indeed happen (because YOU said we would get the sympathy vote like USC did) WE WILL NOT JUMP OU/TEXAS or whoever is the other undefeated team simply because Auburn will not start in the top 2. USC didn't get a "sympathy" vote into the Orange Bowl. They got sympathy votes at the beginning of the season and stayed #1. You act as if Auburn would get a sympathy vote at the END of the season and that just would not happen because there would be a team that "started higher than Auburn and didn't lose, so why drop that team." It can be Oklahoma again and even though they screwed things up this year, the writers will once again be like "I started them #2 and I will not drop them." No way in hell would Auburn or any team for that fact get "sympathy" votes at the END of a season when it comes to jumping one undefeated team over another.

The only way it could possibly happen is if Oklahoma/Texas struggled throughout the season and Auburn blew everyone out - then the voters MIGHT change their vote based on that - but it would NOT be based on sympathy from the season before because this season is now in the past. The voters will look at who is playing now and won't care about what happened the year before. Had that been the case - Auburn would've played in the Orange Bowl this year.

146105[/snapback]

i beg to differ

so, PC, are you saying that having USM on the schedule (vs. WKU) will make a difference? i just can't see it.

and yes...i think that if the same scenario unfolds this upcoming year where auburn is in a 3-way mix for making the BCSCG, i think we get the nod.

for both our sakes, i hope we get a chance to see if i'm right!!!

ct

[tgr4lfe 220]

I couldn't disagree with you anymore. Everyone said that about Oklahoma should lose their vote for what they did to USC the year before and they didn't move down at all - did they?

People... get this through your heads... "If you are ranked #1 or #2 and don't ever lose, you will NOT fall to #3." If USC and Oklahoma/Texas go undefeated - Auburn could go 13-0 and it won't mean crap. The writers and the coaches and all the media for the most part agreed Auburn outplayed it's opponents better than Oklahoma did. The schedule, but mostly the fact that OU just didn't lose, is why Auburn couldn't jump Oklahoma. Writers will say "well I had OU #2, why should I drop them?"

If Auburn goes undefeated again (I don't think they will, but let's say they do) - it won't mean crap. No one in this world should ever expect Auburn to go to the Rose Bowl Next year. It's not going to happen. And say "wow, way to be optimistic" but the odds are USC and OU/Texas will go undefeated. I could be wrong, but thats my humble opinion.

If in fact that does indeed happen (because YOU said we would get the sympathy vote like USC did) WE WILL NOT JUMP OU/TEXAS or whoever is the other undefeated team simply because Auburn will not start in the top 2. USC didn't get a "sympathy" vote into the Orange Bowl. They got sympathy votes at the beginning of the season and stayed #1. You act as if Auburn would get a sympathy vote at the END of the season and that just would not happen because there would be a team that "started higher than Auburn and didn't lose, so why drop that team." It can be Oklahoma again and even though they screwed things up this year, the writers will once again be like "I started them #2 and I will not drop them." No way in hell would Auburn or any team for that fact get "sympathy" votes at the END of a season when it comes to jumping one undefeated team over another.

The only way it could possibly happen is if Oklahoma/Texas struggled throughout the season and Auburn blew everyone out - then the voters MIGHT change their vote based on that - but it would NOT be based on sympathy from the season before because this season is now in the past. The voters will look at who is playing now and won't care about what happened the year before. Had that been the case - Auburn would've played in the Orange Bowl this year.

146105[/snapback]

i beg to differ

so, PC, are you saying that having USM on the schedule (vs. WKU) will make a difference? i just can't see it.

and yes...i think that if the same scenario unfolds this upcoming year where auburn is in a 3-way mix for making the BCSCG, i think we get the nod.

for both our sakes, i hope we get a chance to see if i'm right!!!

ct

146115[/snapback]

I agree with you Carolina. Of course, it will depend on where we are ranked in the preseason polls. If we start off in the top 5, then yes we will get the sympathy vote next year as did USC. They will of course start off #1 next year. I think we will not be in the top 5, why? b/c everyone will only see us losing Caddy, Brown, and Campbell on Offense and Junior and Carlos in secondary. Not the number of starters returning on D, or the WR corp returning, or the 4 OL returning. I hope we get in a mix again just to see what happens. We'll see come December!!

[PChamp119 96]

Incase y'all didn't realize... they already have preseason rankings out by the media and the AP and the coaches pretty much base it off of that. The media feeds everything up. The coaches don't know who is gonna be good - they worry about their own team and maybe the teams in that conference. Auburn is like 18th and USC OU and Texas are in the top 3.

USM... WKU... it's not that big of a difference. USM is a respectable but not that great of a D-IA opponent.

I mean, why didn't Auburn get the nod this year? I mean the logic would all flow through. Everyone said Oklahoma would get jumped by Auburn because OU screwed things up the year before.

Auburn will start off low in the rankings and if by some miracle they go undefeated - why should Auburn jump the OU/Texas winner? The voters wouldn't be able to say anything about a D-IAA opponent if we got to stick with USM, but do you really think that one game would make the voters be like, "Wow, Auburn beat USM... they get to jump Oklahoma." Odds are yea - they'll be like "that's what you get for playin a D-IAA opponent." And that will be an excuse, but the voters - with or without USM would not "give Auburn the nod." Because Oklahoma would feel cheated and be like "that's last year, this is this year."

And what if Texas goes undefeated, why should they suffer for Oklahoma screwing up the year before? The fact is - the voters will be like "I started Texas #3 (or #2), they went undefeated and didn't play any D-IAA opponents, why should I move them?" Texas will have a stronger computer ranking because UT's biggest will be against a top 5 Oklahoma team (at the end of the year, because the UT-OU game is so early in the season - OU will be higher ranked than the 2nd best SEC team - say Florida - unless that SEC team is also undefeated . That's how the computer rankings pretty much work - USC had a better SOS than OU, but OU was #1 in most of the computer rankings because they beat Texas where USC only beat Cal). BECAUSE OF THIS, the voters will think "wow, well Texas had the tougher schedule and beat a better opponent then Auburn did - no reason to put Auburn ahead of Texas."

The only way Auburn could ever get into the Rose Bowl is if 2 of the big 3 (USC, OU, Texas) lose. The odds of that happening - not too good. Voters don't care about what happened the year before - like i said, had that been the case, Auburn would've played in the Orange Bowl this year. Voters don't give sympathy votes and give nods. It just doesn't happen. Can you ever think of an example when that has happened in the past? Why start with Auburn?

You can live in your fantasy world of thinking Auburn will get the respect it deserves, but that fact is your just an Auburn fan that doesn't see the reality. I am an Auburn fan who sees the reality. I called it throughout the entire season - everyone on this board except me and like 2 other ppl were like "Don't worry everything will work itself out" or "Don't worry Auburn will jump Oklahoma - the voters realize Auburn has played a tougher schedule" or "No SEC team has ever gone undefeated and not played in the NC." Finally as time came to and end, just about everyone realized Auburn wasn't going to Miami. It was because reality doesn't hit the people on this message board. Everyone wants to think everything will go Auburn's way - that's not the case. There are other teams in the nation besides Auburn. Get it through your heads.

[SLAG-91 1,631]

I don't see us in the top 10 to start the '05 season...matter of fact, I figure we'll start maybe a little better than we did in '04 (I think we were 17-18 at the beginning of last year).

If a 1-AA school is all that is available, then you bite the bullet and do it...but that should be an absolute last resort. I get the gnawing feeling that it's being done almost willingly and that bothers me.

[PChamp119 96]

And to add even more to my proof about Auburn fans not living in reality - EVERYONE on this board 6 weeks ago is like "man, Auburn is going to have a top 5 recruiting class." Thought Auburn would get all these top prospects. Apperently I was the only one on this board that was like "I think some of these prospects will look at other schools" and I didn't see us picking up any big name talent. I'm not putting down our recruiting class cuz CTT finds talent other schools don't (like Courtney Taylor). But everyone on this board just is like "ooo we are gonna get all this talent" forgetting there are other schools for kids to go to.

My friend the entire time is like, "Paul we have Antone Smith, he is coming to Auburn" and I never bought it.

[quietfan 233]

LIke it or not, there is no way the pollsters are going to start us any higher than 15th or worse because of the names we lost to graduation. Starting that low, there is no way we will jump all 15 or more teams ahead of us even if we miraculously went 13-0 with any schedule. The top five teams never drop if they don't lose, and they wouldn't drop below us unless they actually lost MORE than us. So there is no point in sweating the BCS or strength-of-schedule next year.

Furthermore, we have a lot of young talent that can use more experience before they head into the LSU-Georgia-Bama part of the season, so a little more seasoning against WKU will probably benefit them. If there is any year where a cupcake opponent can help us, it's probably next year for that reason. We just need to be sure that we do well enough next year to impress the pollsters for 2006, when we should have another legitimate shot at the top.

But there are two disturbing trends that bother me. 1) Why do teams keep jumping out of their deals with us? Why can't we get tight enough contracts that teams cannot skip out on us, leaving us with these last minutes holes to be filled by 1-AA teams? and 2) If we want to be perceived as a perennial national power and one of the top 6-8 teams always in the mix for the MNC (which is where I think CTT has us headed), we cannot get the reputation of always scheduling a 1-AA pushover. We don't want the nation to start thinking of us as a school that is always a little afraid of the big dogs. (I'm not saying that has happened yet, but such a trend could develop if the same 1-AA problems crop up much more.)

OH, and one other negative--I hate giving Bama fans something else to tease us about. They have had their share of cupcakes, also (and even had some embarrassing losses to a few "regional/directional" schools of late.) But that did stop them from constantly throwing the Citadel in my face all last year!

[PChamp119 96]

Well USM has a decent excuse because of their new conference schedule next year.

[tiger1432 0]

I hate to say it but some of yall sound line whinein bamma boobs

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

I hate to say it but some of yall sound line whinein bamma boobs

146387[/snapback]

Make that whiney and I agree