PDA

View Full Version : Auburn has "National Championship" Parade, celebration



jmcclain19
01-16-2005, 08:02 PM
I think coach Tuberville has been sipping too much of the kool-aid, in my opinion

http://www.al.com/sports/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/sports/1105888643278810.xml


Tuberville used the celebration to proclaim Auburn a national champion.

"Six years ago, in one of the last things I said at the press conference is that we will win a national championship here at Auburn, and we danged did it," he said.

RBA
01-16-2005, 08:48 PM
They are the Red State national champions, just like Kerry is President of the Blue States. ;)

jmcclain19
01-16-2005, 08:53 PM
hehe that's a great point RBA.

Can we declare our own "moderators" of Redszone in that same spirit? ;)

Chip R
01-16-2005, 09:02 PM
More power to Auburn if they want to declare themselves national champs. As long as there isn't a playoff all it is is just someone's opinion. Back in the day if one poll claimed you were the champs, you counted it. For example: The University of Alabama's web site claims they have won 12 national championships in football. However, even counting the ones Bama shared with other schools, the NCAA only has them as winning 10 championships.

CbusRed
01-16-2005, 09:03 PM
The University of Alabama's web site claims they have won 12 national championships in football. However, even counting the ones Bama shared with other schools, the NCAA only has them as winning 10 championships.


The NCAA does not actually declare a national champion, or give a trophy, for Division 1A football. This is the only sport that is like this.

jmcclain19
01-16-2005, 09:06 PM
More power to Auburn if they want to declare themselves national champs. As long as there isn't a playoff all it is is just someone's opinion. Back in the day if one poll claimed you were the champs, you counted it. For example: The University of Alabama's web site claims they have won 12 national championships in football. However, even counting the ones Bama shared with other schools, the NCAA only has them as winning 10 championships.

Heh, thanks to the BCS, who needs truth in football?

I didn't know Alabama has done that, which is priceless. You mean to tell me that Alabama isn't being truthful? :mhcky21:

Chip R
01-16-2005, 09:08 PM
The NCAA does not actually declare a national champion, or give a trophy, for Division 1A football. This is the only sport that is like this.
I didn't say they have 10 NCAA championships. What I said was that the NCAA has them winning only 10.

http://www.ncaafootball.net/local/d1pastchamps.html

jmcclain19
01-16-2005, 09:11 PM
Reading the Tide's website, only two of those "12" are unanimous.

And, to add even more, they claim that five more should have been awarded in this file

http://www.rolltide.com/files/14260.pdf

CbusRed
01-16-2005, 09:18 PM
I didn't say they have 10 NCAA championships. What I said was that the NCAA has them winning only 10.

http://www.ncaafootball.net/local/d1pastchamps.html


Yeah I know, The point of my post was not to call you out, but to bring up the point that none of this would even be an issue if there was a system in place, created by the NCAA to define a champion of THEIR football league, every year.

Guess my wording was a little off :MandJ:
Sorry Chip!

Chip R
01-16-2005, 09:23 PM
Reading the Tide's website, only two of those "12" are unanimous.

And, to add even more, they claim that five more should have been awarded in this file

http://www.rolltide.com/files/14260.pdf
Yep. Bammers like to live in denial. :lol: But they aren't the only ones to count specious national championships. In 1947 ND won the AP national championship. Michigan won the vast majority of the polls and computer rankings (retroactively, of course) and actually was #1 in the AP poll - which didn't count for the national championship.

In 1964 none of the long-standing polls picked ND that year. The AP and UPI went to Alabama, the NCF and Billingsley went to Arkansas, Michigan and Notre Dame each got computers (Dunkel and Sagarin,
respectively)

In 1973 Alabama, ND, OSU and Oklahoma all winning polls or computers that are relevant (as measured by the fact that these polls/computers are used in the BCS).

But ND claims all these as "consensus" national championships.

So Auburn claiming a national championship is nothing new - even in their own home state. ;)

Chip R
01-16-2005, 09:28 PM
Yeah I know, The point of my post was not to call you out, but to bring up the point that none of this would even be an issue if there was a system in place, created by the NCAA to define a champion of THEIR football league, every year.

Guess my wording was a little off :MandJ:
Sorry Chip!
Don't worry about it. I didn't think you were trying to call me out. :)

RedsBaron
01-17-2005, 07:54 AM
I don't blame Auburn one bit. They had a perfect record despite playing in perhaps the toughest conference in the nation.
Had Auburn played Southern Cal, I would have picked USC to win, but so long as the NCAA refuses to have a proper championship tournament to decide a football champion, I believe that any major school that goes undefeated has a right to proclaim itself national champion.

remdog
01-17-2005, 09:45 AM
I believe I heard on one of the bowl games that Bowling Green was originally supposed to play Auburn this year but asked out of that game in order to open the season with Oklahoma. BG finished in the top 25 in some polls and went to a bowl game themselves. Meanwhile, Auburn was left to pickup a game with a division 1-AA school (forget exactly who it was). According to the announcer, this change was the major factor in Auburn having a weaker schedule and, therefore, costing them the #2 ranking ahead of Oklahoma.

Even if all that were true, the way SC played that night, I don't think that Auburn would have done much better.

Michael Franks had an album out many years ago entitled 'A Ledgend In His Own Room, A Rumor In His Own Time'. IMO, that's a good summation of Auburn's 'National Championship'.

Rem

RedFanAlways1966
01-17-2005, 10:30 AM
... this change was the major factor in Auburn having a weaker schedule and, therefore, costing them the #2 ranking ahead of Oklahoma.

Even if all that were true, the way SC played that night, I don't think that Auburn would have done much better.

Michael Franks had an album out many years ago entitled 'A Ledgend In His Own Room, A Rumor In His Own Time'. IMO, that's a good summation of Auburn's 'National Championship'.

And the funny/ironic things in the shotty setup called the BCS which all Auburn fans hate...

* Even USC fans hate the BCS. To have fans question their championship sucks for them. Their team was GREAT(!!). But the BCS allows other people to call their team the real champ. Hard to argue w/ Auburn fans in a sense. I think USC would have sent Auburn back to AL with both their War Eagle and Tiger tails between their legs if they had played. But the BCS leaves that uncertainty in some fans. Too bad... money talks, a REAL system walks.

* Auburn probably finishes the season higher (#2) than if they had played (and probably lost to) USC. Just ask Oklahoma fans. We all know that Auburn would not have been #2 if they lost in the Bowl regardless of who they played that night. Even if OKlahoma had lost their non-championship bowl game. So, as the BCS leaves it, Auburn gets to have an undefeated season in check. Not playing USC might be the complaint... but it might also have been a blessing!

* Back to Oklahoma fans. They were thrilled to get a shot at the title, but fell in the final rankings for it. Sure... only #1 really matters. However, in a few years most will only remember that they finished #-something rather than they had a chance to win it all in one night. Bitter-sweet as they say. Perhaps Oklahoma, in the world of 20-20 hindsight, would rather be sitting in Auburn's turfshoes today with an undefeated record and a parade thru Norman, OK declaring themselves champs? Better than still changing the bandages on those USC-inflicted wounds and a lower final rating? Gotta wonder... in the 20-20 hindsight world!

MWM
01-17-2005, 11:06 AM
I don't blame Auburn one bit. They had a perfect record despite playing in perhaps the toughest conference in the nation.
Had Auburn played Southern Cal, I would have picked USC to win, but so long as the NCAA refuses to have a proper championship tournament to decide a football champion, I believe that any major school that goes undefeated has a right to proclaim itself national champion.

That's pretty much how I felt. I also believe USC was the best team, but it's nothing more than opinion, no matter how strong we fell in that opinion. Auburn accomplished everything that USC did this year. They hav every right to consider themselves National Champions.