Unclaimed National Championships

[NewYrkTiger 68]

17 minutes ago, ScotsAU said:

1913 and 1914 I think are claimable. I don’t agree with 83. Consensus 3rd in both the coaches and AP. 
 

As for 93 and 04, I think we can logically claim one of the two but not both. USC won it in 04, and probably was a better team than us. Should we have played them instead of Oklahoma? Absolutely. But that team was also stacked, and had a more consistently effective offense. If we claim it, I think the argument we can make is that USC’s vacated wins for violations leave us as the only undefeated team. However, if we do that, we can’t claim 93. We were probably the best team that year. But we were being sanctioned for violations. It would be a contradiction to say we claim 04 because usc no longer can due to violations, but we can claim our own when we were penalized for violations. 
 

I’d add 1913, 1914, and 2004, and not claim the others.

The difference is that Auburn was not penalized for infractions during the 1993 season. Nor were any of our wins vacated. USC was penalized for violations during the 2004 season and did have wins vacated from that season. So I think there is a clear distinction. (Also, if you are going to hold probation for previous acts against the 1993 team, don't you also have to hold it against the 1957 team?) 

Moreover, cherry picking which NCs to "claim" is exactly why am against the idea that it is on us to claim anything. We are just reporting the facts, ma'am. 

It is a fact that Billingsley named Auburn the 1913 National Champion. It is a fact that Billingsley, the New York Times, Sagarin, FACTS, and Football Research named Auburn the 1983 National Champion. It is a fact that the National Championship Foundation named Auburn the 1993 National Champion. No opinions. No claims. Just facts. 

Of course, we also have 1957 and 2010. 

2004...ok, we have to go rouge with this one. Our best argument is that USC was cheating at the time and was stripped of the championship, so it naturally falls to us. It is a dubious argument, but it is either that or don't count it. 

That is my 2 cents worth, anyway. 

 

[Viper 3,142]

5 minutes ago, NewYrkTiger said:

2004...ok, we have to go rouge with this one.

There were a couple of entities that voted us #1 in 2004.

[Zeek 16,660]

21 hours ago, aubiefifty said:

Unclaimed National Championships

What is it going to take for Auburn to claim its National Championships? Given the systems in place prior to the playoff era, Auburn inarguably has claims to the '83, '93, and '04 titles at a minimum, and arguably some others as well. Why won't Auburn claim them, and what can fans do to encourage them to do so?

Auburn is in the process of rehabbing its image after a decade of mediocrity, and this sort of thing could really help boost its prestige to recruits. Sure, there would be a few years of ribbing from rival fans, but who honestly cares?

Those seasons deserve to be talked about by more than just die hard Auburn fans.

 

what say yee folks?

Claim every single one we can remotely try to claim. All it does to have a higher standard is make our program look less impressive nationally. 

Claim 1913, 1983, 1993, and 2004 at the very least.

[JuscAUse! 1,516]

26 minutes ago, LPTiger said:

 

 

6 hours ago, ScotsAU said:

1913 and 1914 I think are claimable. I don’t agree with 83. Consensus 3rd in both the coaches and AP. 
 

As for 93 and 04, I think we can logically claim one of the two but not both. USC won it in 04, and probably was a better team than us. Should we have played them instead of Oklahoma? Absolutely. But that team was also stacked, and had a more consistently effective offense. If we claim it, I think the argument we can make is that USC’s vacated wins for violations leave us as the only undefeated team. However, if we do that, we can’t claim 93. We were probably the best team that year. But we were being sanctioned for violations. It would be a contradiction to say we claim 04 because usc no longer can due to violations, but we can claim our own when we were penalized for violations. 
 

I’d add 1913, 1914, and 2004, and not claim the others.

Totally disagree. 2004 was better than Oklahoma by a mile and USCs receivers stretched there arms to the sky all year. So did the Sooners. Under the defensive rules at the time, any SEC team would have cracked a few rib cages and that would have stopped. Alligator arms were a necessity. USC would have been a tough out. OU would not have been. I still think we beat either that year. JMO . They also were cheating so bad ...... nevermind. It's pissing me off again.

 

Edited August 17, 2023 by JuscAUse!