Bear or Bama Tradititon?

[DKW 86 7,441]

From ITAT, Thanks JJforAU

With Bear

Bear Era - Bama 19-6

All games played in the Birmingham 19-6

Without the Bear...

Pre-Bear - Auburn 12-9-1

Games played in Tuscaloosa - Auburn 2-0

Games played in Montgomery - Bama 2-1

Games played in Birmingham - Auburn 9-7-1

Post Bear Era - Auburn 13-10

Games played in Birmingham - Bama 8-4

Games played in Auburn - Auburn 6-2

Games played in Tuscaloosa - Auburn 3-0

I know you can't take out those Bear years, but if you did, it's Auburn's advantage 25-19-1

[Tigermike 3,053]

The Bama nation is now living in fear of the "Thumb". The AUBURN Nation is living in anticipation of the thumb and beyond.

WAR EAGLE!

[AFTiger 282]

The current whine from Bammers (at least on finbaum) is the only reason Auburn is dominating is because Bammer was suffering under the effects of probation. How many games did Bear win while Auburn was suffering the effects of probation? Don't forget, when Auburn would begin to climb back on top, we would be hit by another NCAA probation which usually had some genesis with the Bammer nation.

[quietfan 233]

The current whine from Bammers (at least on finbaum) is the only reason Auburn is dominating is because Bammer was suffering under the effects of probation.  How many games did Bear win while Auburn was suffering the effects of probation?  Don't forget, when Auburn would begin to climb back on top, we would be hit by another NCAA probation which usually had some genesis with the Bammer nation.

206980[/snapback]

Slightly off subject, but something that bothers me:

I know traditionally Bama has reveled in our probations just as we have reveled in their's. I know that in some past instances Bama supporters have been instrumental in turning us in or furthering NCAA investigations. But after spending the last 2-3 years disgusted by Bama fans who wanted to blame everyone except themselves--the NCAA, Tennessee, Phil Fulmer, even the FBI according to some--for their latest NCAA troubles, I hope we will never again behave that way.

Forget conspiracy theories, accurate or not. If we committed violations, we were guilty, regardless of who may or may not have turned us in or "set us up". Rather than act like a whining Bama fan, from now on I say if we were found guilty in the "court of NCAA law" we were guilty and I will never again try to pass the buck to any other school. Keep our own nose clean and others can't hurt us. Cheat, and we have no one to blame but ourselves. [Wish a lot of Bama fans would accept this about their current woes.]

And if you don't like the NCAA laws & procedures, use your institutional vote and politic for others within the organization to change them.

But back to the subject: I have no problem conceding their dominance under Bear. I just hate that they act as if they always have and always will be "God's gift to football" when their record outside of him does not support that attitude. Yes, they've had some remarkable successes beyond Paul Bryant, but no more or less than many other programs.

[MDM4AU 336]

The current whine from Bammers (at least on finbaum) is the only reason Auburn is dominating is because Bammer was suffering under the effects of probation.  How many games did Bear win while Auburn was suffering the effects of probation?  Don't forget, when Auburn would begin to climb back on top, we would be hit by another NCAA probation which usually had some genesis with the Bammer nation.

206980[/snapback]

Here is an email I sent in to Fineslob recently regarding the bammers and probation:

Paul:

I just heard a clip on your show of some Bammer homer complaining about Auburn fans, and "four fingers," and what the NCAA did to UAT.  One thing these bama weenies have forgotten is this:  in 1993 Auburn got the same number of years on probation, lost more scholarships (33), lost the same number of bowl games, and lost one year of TV. Auburn still managed to beat them in '93, '95, '97.  So the whole "Auburn benefited" is a crock.  The Great Bama didn't seem to benefit.  And if it were true that AU's streak is because the whiners from West Vance were on probation, could it not also be said that the 9 straight in the 70's was aided by AU being on probation as well?

Auburn prior to sanctions went 5-5-1.  From '93-'96 the Tigers went 36-9-1 (.782).  During that time, Auburn and UAT split the series 2-2.  On the other hand, UAT had a record of 7-5 prior to sanctions.  They were a year removed from an SEC Championship.  From '02-'05 the Tide went 29-20 (.591). The Tide went 0-4 v. Auburn during that time.

Auburn proved winning after probation is possible.  And if UAT was as great as their fans believe, would they not have done better after sanctions than Auburn did?

Please tell the whiners from Tuscaloser to stop making excuses for their lousy existence as of late.  They are not and will never be what Paul Bryant created ever again.

As far as I know he never mentioned this on his show. I wonder why that is never brought up in the media. I understand this is Bamaham, but one would think at least the Fineboobs of the world would love to stir the pot with this. This type of news would send Phyllis and Shane over the edge.

[TrueBlue72 0]

Quietfan, it is one thing to be turned in; it is another to be set up. If you go back and research our probations, you will find that the 1957 probation, involving a player named Don Fuell, was a set up. Auburn did nothing wrong, but was caught in a situation where to clear their name would have imposed a hardship on the player and his family. It was orchestrated by two Bammer assistant coaches who posed as encyclopedia salesmen to gain access to the player's apartment. Our coaches became involved in bidding for the services of a couple of players in NE Alabama. Unfortunately, the other school who was also bidding for these players was Alabama, but they were given a pass, as the NCAA's favored one.

The late 50's probation was a legitimate bust.

The most recent episode, involving a box of steaks given to a sub DB, was a set up by a bunch of Bammers in B'ham. They actually had him wired, I believe, when he went to CPD to beg for food to feed his family!

When you've been around as long as we old Tigers, you'll develop a different attitude; one that is based on reality rather than idealism.

[SKCAUB 0]

The current whine from Bammers (at least on finbaum) is the only reason Auburn is dominating is because Bammer was suffering under the effects of probation.  How many games did Bear win while Auburn was suffering the effects of probation?  Don't forget, when Auburn would begin to climb back on top, we would be hit by another NCAA probation which usually had some genesis with the Bammer nation.

206980[/snapback]

Here is an email I sent in to Fineslob recently regarding the bammers and probation:

Paul:

I just heard a clip on your show of some Bammer homer complaining about Auburn fans, and "four fingers," and what the NCAA did to UAT.  One thing these bama weenies have forgotten is this:  in 1993 Auburn got the same number of years on probation, lost more scholarships (33), lost the same number of bowl games, and lost one year of TV. Auburn still managed to beat them in '93, '95, '97.  So the whole "Auburn benefited" is a crock.  The Great Bama didn't seem to benefit.  And if it were true that AU's streak is because the whiners from West Vance were on probation, could it not also be said that the 9 straight in the 70's was aided by AU being on probation as well?

Auburn prior to sanctions went 5-5-1.  From '93-'96 the Tigers went 36-9-1 (.782).  During that time, Auburn and UAT split the series 2-2.  On the other hand, UAT had a record of 7-5 prior to sanctions.  They were a year removed from an SEC Championship.  From '02-'05 the Tide went 29-20 (.591). The Tide went 0-4 v. Auburn during that time.

Auburn proved winning after probation is possible.  And if UAT was as great as their fans believe, would they not have done better after sanctions than Auburn did?

Please tell the whiners from Tuscaloser to stop making excuses for their lousy existence as of late.  They are not and will never be what Paul Bryant created ever again.

As far as I know he never mentioned this on his show. I wonder why that is never brought up in the media. I understand this is Bamaham, but one would think at least the Fineboobs of the world would love to stir the pot with this. This type of news would send Phyllis and Shane over the edge.

207000[/snapback]

AUsome POST! But don't confuse them with facts...instead, do what they do...baffle them with BS!!!

[WarTim 3,457]

Quietfan, it is one thing to be turned in; it is another to be set up.  If you go back and research our probations, you will find that the 1957 probation, involving a player named Don Fuell, was a set up.  Auburn did nothing wrong, but was caught in a situation where to clear their name would have imposed a hardship on the player and his family.  It was orchestrated by two Bammer assistant coaches who posed as encyclopedia salesmen to gain access to the player's apartment.  Our coaches became involved in bidding for the services of a couple of players in NE Alabama.  Unfortunately, the other school who was also bidding for these players was Alabama, but they were given a pass, as the NCAA's favored one. 

The late 50's probation was a legitimate bust. 

The most recent episode, involving a box of steaks given to a sub DB, was a set up by a bunch of Bammers in B'ham.  They actually had him wired, I believe, when he went to CPD to beg for food to feed his family! 

When you've been around as long as we old Tigers, you'll develop a different attitude; one that is based on reality rather than idealism.

207002[/snapback]

Bingo! The past should be remembered so that we can NEVER repeat or forget WHO "they" are and WHAT they do.

[quietfan 233]

Quietfan, it is one thing to be turned in; it is another to be set up.

...

When you've been around as long as we old Tigers, you'll develop a different attitude; one that is based on reality rather than idealism.

207002[/snapback]

I was a freshman at Auburn in 1972 and although I was an Auburn fan from the earliest I can remember knowing what college football was, I did not really keep up with the news until the Sullivan years while in high school. So I concede there are better, older memories than mine. I certainly know nothing of the details of the Don Fuell situation so will not give an opinion on it.

But some of what you say sounds exactly like the Bama reactions that have bothered me lately:

Our coaches became involved in bidding for the services of a couple of players in NE Alabama.  Unfortunately, the other school who was also bidding for these players was Alabama, but they were given a pass, as the NCAA's favored one.

So we WERE guilty of bidding? Bama is constantly complaining that Tennessee & others were also bidding on Albert Means--that doesn't reduce Bama's (and/or Logan Young's) guilt in the situation, as determined by both the NCAA and a federal court, IMO.

The most recent episode, involving a box of steaks given to a sub DB, was a set up by a bunch of Bammers in B'ham.  They actually had him wired, I believe, when he went to CPD to beg for food to feed his family!

But we DID give him the steaks, so we were guilty, whether he was wired or not. And maybe it is hard to turn down someone begging for his family, but when did "to feed a family" become an excuse for breaking the law/rules?

In these two circumstances, all we had to do was refuse to bid, or refuse the steaks. All Bama/Logan Young had to do was obey the rules, regardless of what others were or were not doing. Also, as many Bama fans are screaming, perhaps the penalties were unfair or too harsh in all these cases, but I subscribe to the old cliche "don't do the crime if you can't do the time".

I respect your right to your opinion, TrueBlue, and am not being critical of you personally. And maybe I am a "cocked-eyed idealist". But I do not see how these sort of "extenuating circumstances" diminish our or Bama's guilt in the situations. If we are less guilty because of Bama's involvement in our cases, then perhaps Bama fans are justified in saying Tennessee's or the NCAA's involvement or prior knowledge reduces their guilty. It just seems like a double standard to criticize Bama for making these sort of excuses while claiming similar excuses for ourselves.

[rolltoomer 0]

Man, I hate the off-season!--even as well thought-out and as well-phrased as these posts are.

[WarEagle_57 0]

If "if brodie" can take out the first quarter of our game, I say we can take out the bahr era.

[AUloggerhead 2,253]

Slight correction to the data (courtesty of CFB Data Warehouse)

I counted AU's record over uat as 14-8-1, pre-Bear (before 1959.) AU & uat first played in 1892 and then every year except for 1896-1899 and a forty-year stretch from 1908-1947. Before the 40-year hiatus, AU has a 8-3-1 record against uat. From 1948-1958, AU compliled a 6-5 record. Just trying to be accurate.

[Argo 8]

Hmm. I've noticed this to be a favorite topic of the AUnation during every off-season. I'll just give my take on the matter. When I hear the words "Bama tradition", I don't think of victories over any certain team. These are the things that would come to mind.

1. 6th in all-time victories 773-301-43

2. 4th in all-time winning percentage .711

3. 53 bowl invitations including this year

4. 29 bowl victories.

Those are the numbers I would put with tradition. I realize the Iron Bowl is a huge game, but I wouldn't base any teams tradition or history on one game a year. JMO.

[WarEagle_57 0]

1.  6th in all-time victories  773-301-43

2.  4th in all-time winning percentage  .711

3.  53 bowl invitations including this year

4.  29 bowl victories. 

Those are the numbers I would put with tradition.  JMO.

207050[/snapback]

Tiger Walk, Rolling Toomers, Eagle Flying before the game

Those are things I would put with tradition. Your list are things I would consider "history". JMO...

[DKW 86 7,441]

1.  6th in all-time victories   773-301-43

2.  4th in all-time winning percentage   .711

3.  53 bowl invitations including this year

4.  29 bowl victories. 

Those are the numbers I would put with tradition.  JMO.

207050[/snapback]

Tiger Walk, Rolling Toomers, Eagle Flying before the game

Those are things I would put with tradition. Your list are things I would consider "history". JMO...

207052[/snapback]

WTG Lil Bro...

I will forever never again confuse Tradition and History. Tradition is something that is living and growing and is present day. History is just something that happened in the past.

[Argo 8]

All time wins, winning percentage, bowl appearances and bowl victories are still growing today, but I see the point that stats should be considered history.

Someone needs to tell ABC/ESPN. Everytime I watch Michigan play a game, they talk about Michigan's winning tradition and show their all-time record and win percentage.

[quietfan 233]

Hmm.  I've noticed this to be a favorite topic of the AUnation during every off-season.  I'll just give my take on the matter.  When I hear the words "Bama tradition", I don't think of victories over any certain team.  These are the things that would come to mind. 

1.  6th in all-time victories  773-301-43

2.  4th in all-time winning percentage  .711

3.  53 bowl invitations including this year

4.  29 bowl victories. 

Those are the numbers I would put with tradition.  I realize the Iron Bowl is a huge game, but I wouldn't base any teams tradition or history on one game a year.  JMO.

207050[/snapback]

I totally respect that Alabama has a very storied history of success, even beyond Bear. And they have every right to be proud of it.

I just get irritated by those Bama fans (not you, TD 24) that seem to think their history is unique and so far beyond any other school's that they are the greatest football program that ever existed. Even the stats quoted here show them as only 4th in winning percentage and 6th in total victories. I accept that Bama is ONE of the top programs in NCAA football history, but they are not, as the rabid koolaid drinkers believe, THE ALL-TIME, UNDISPUTED, GREATEST thing that ever happened to college football. ...and over the last twenty years, they're probably not even in the top ten.

[incidentally, The Iron Bowl is such a legendary rivalry that I believe both schools should be proud to include their finer moments in that game as part of their storied traditions. JMHO]

[tgr4lfe 220]

hey TF24, I understand and somewhat respect bama's tradition/history/whatever the crap it wants to be called. I have a question, why is it that bama fans stand so firm on the "capstone" known as the "bear bryant" years that everyone knows was years and years of lying , cheating, paying off players, coaches, the NCAA, etc. Everyone knows this is why the bear was so successful. It is well known...in my mind those days are BS, I don't care who it is!!

I don't think any school in the country has as bad a legacy in my mind as bama and the years pbb was coaching. Not hard to coach when you are doing everything legal and illegal to get the best players and even to keep the second best players from going to the rival school, even if it meant lying to the kids about playing, only for them to sit the bench for years.

I can understand the love for the school....I love Auburn, so much I am going to raise my kids here...but to have such a long sad chapter in the history, I would turn my back on that time.

[DKW 86 7,441]

TF24, Auburn is the best in the since 2000. BEST TODAY...

Traditions are like Trey described, timeless. History, and you are adding to history even now also shows many things.

Bear lost 8 Bowl Games in a row.

Bear never beat ND, 0-3

Bama has never beaten Texas.

etc, etc, etc. Is that part of your TRADITION too? No way, it is history.

Bear was a great Coach. Bama without him though is very mortal. Like the Iron Bowl records show, and like the current series with show, Bama does not equal Bear.

[tigernt'town 4]

12 national titles, what bs!

1925 shared with dartmouth, 1926 shared with stanford after tie in rose bowl, next mention of al. was in 1961 alabama won sugar, 1964 alabama lost orange, 1965 alabama won orange but shared title with michigan st., 1973 alabama shared title with notre dame but lost the sugar bowl. 1978 alabama shared with usc, 1979 alabama. 1992 alabama. 3 undisputed titles, 1 after loss in bowl. 5 shared titles-1 after loss in bowl & 1 after tie in bowl. according to this list i count only 9 NC's. by modern standards the list could be whittled down some. they claim some during 30's and 40's. let's see...don't see any on this list, 1941 was minnesota, all i see is a steady diet of michigan, army, minnesota, NOTRE DAME, usc, AUBURN, and ohio st. how can you win a title after losing a bowl game? how whacked is that?

also georgia tech won the first title by a southern team in 1917. and notre dame and yale have 11 titles each, usc and alabama have 9. 6 of which were under bear with bowl losses in 64 and 73, HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE?

found this NC list online.

[Argo 8]

TF24, Auburn is the best in the since 2000. BEST TODAY...

Traditions are like Trey described, timeless. History, and you are adding to history even now also shows many things.

Bear lost 8 Bowl Games in a row.

Bear never beat ND, 0-3

Bama has never beaten Texas.

etc, etc, etc. Is that part of your TRADITION too? No way, it is history.

Bear was a great Coach. Bama without him though is very mortal. Like the Iron Bowl records show, and like the current series with show, Bama does not equal Bear.

207131[/snapback]

In all due respect, I agreed with the fact that stats should be considered history. That will not stop media heads from using the term "winning tradition" that will always be used to describe the Michigan type teams.

Now, I do not intend to argue Bama's stats, nor do I intend to get in another drawn out MNC debate....I wasn't even born until '81, so I'm not going to defend the Bear years either. BUT, you could take out the best years with ANY team and show them to be mortal. Where would Penn St. be if you took out the Paterno years? How about UF before Spurrier? Would they have been as good in the 90's without him? Take CBB away from Florida State, where would they be? I don't know the stats of all these teams pre-Paterno/Spurrier/Bowden, but I'm guessing they probably wouldn't be where they are now.

[autigeremt 6,711]

This is all entertaining and all...........but the bottom line is this.

Alabama has been listing in the seas of SEC mediocrity for years and years. Excluding the 1992 National Title (which was basically stripped due to NCAA infractions), the Bama nation has found itself in a circle jerk with coaching spins and losing football seasons. And what really has them in a knot of stomach pain..................

THEY ARE NOT AUBURNS BULLY ANYMORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Auburn has risen over the legacy of Bear and the mighty Tide. The Tigers roar is louder than that "Million Dollar Band" on steroids.

It's our turn to bask in the hard work and dedication of our football team. I only hope we can make the basketball team a winner at the same time.

It's great, to be, an Auburn Tiger!

[tgr4lfe 220]

TF24, Auburn is the best in the since 2000. BEST TODAY...

Traditions are like Trey described, timeless. History, and you are adding to history even now also shows many things.

Bear lost 8 Bowl Games in a row.

Bear never beat ND, 0-3

Bama has never beaten Texas.

etc, etc, etc. Is that part of your TRADITION too? No way, it is history.

Bear was a great Coach. Bama without him though is very mortal. Like the Iron Bowl records show, and like the current series with show, Bama does not equal Bear.

207131[/snapback]

In all due respect, I agreed with the fact that stats should be considered history. That will not stop media heads from using the term "winning tradition" that will always be used to describe the Michigan type teams.

Now, I do not intend to argue Bama's stats, nor do I intend to get in another drawn out MNC debate....I wasn't even born until '81, so I'm not going to defend the Bear years either. BUT, you could take out the best years with ANY team and show them to be mortal. Where would Penn St. be if you took out the Paterno years? How about UF before Spurrier? Would they have been as good in the 90's without him? Take CBB away from Florida State, where would they be? I don't know the stats of all these teams pre-Paterno/Spurrier/Bowden, but I'm guessing they probably wouldn't be where they are now.

207144[/snapback]

If you take out the Paterno years....PSU would be left with nothing!!

[DKW 86 7,441]

TF24, Auburn is the best in the since 2000. BEST TODAY...

Traditions are like Trey described, timeless. History, and you are adding to history even now also shows many things.

Bear lost 8 Bowl Games in a row.

Bear never beat ND, 0-3

Bama has never beaten Texas.

etc, etc, etc. Is that part of your TRADITION too? No way, it is history.

Bear was a great Coach. Bama without him though is very mortal. Like the Iron Bowl records show, and like the current series with show, Bama does not equal Bear.

207131[/snapback]

In all due respect, I agreed with the fact that stats should be considered history. That will not stop media heads from using the term "winning tradition" that will always be used to describe the Michigan type teams.

Now, I do not intend to argue Bama's stats, nor do I intend to get in another drawn out MNC debate....I wasn't even born until '81, so I'm not going to defend the Bear years either. BUT, you could take out the best years with ANY team and show them to be mortal. Where would Penn St. be if you took out the Paterno years? How about UF before Spurrier? Would they have been as good in the 90's without him? Take CBB away from Florida State, where would they be? I don't know the stats of all these teams pre-Paterno/Spurrier/Bowden, but I'm guessing they probably wouldn't be where they are now.

207144[/snapback]

TF, again, I am not taking "the best years," I am taking out one coach.

The being mortal part was the true direction I was going in BTW. All temas are mortal. But the fans and their delusions are what make the rest of us so sick. The fans can take a great run and mythologize? it till you cant recognize anything anymore.

[AFTiger 282]

In trying to define tradition one must apply some logical tests. To some tradition is history and history is tradition. Notre Dame, Michigan, So Cal and Alabama all have a history and have tradition.

Do Florida State and Miami now have tradition or does their lack of history detract?

Auburn has both tradition and history so if you don't mind too terribly, may I just enjoy the current run and future history which will all be Auburn Tradition?