Auburn's 3rd claimed title?

[IronMan70 3,321]

I'm totally against it. The players on that team have received plenty of recognition for their season but to claim a NC retro-actively is IMO just not something we should do especially if you read what other teams accomplished that year. It's hard for me, even as an Auburn fan, to believe Auburn won a legit NC in football that year.

Here is something to consider. Billingsley, James Howell and 1st and Goal just happen to be 3 respected selectors that made the choice on the 1913 team and for good reason. An 8-0 Auburn team that scored 224 points while holding their opponents to 13 was as valid a NC as any team in the country that year. That is their opinion. You can read in the long article posted the bias against the South back then, a bias which even continues in the author's comments as he attempts to rationalize his own opinion. Which is really all it is, opinion, with one being just as good as another.

If people want to discuss the overall topic of mythical titles, now that is another subject. Since there was no playoff, they are nothing but opinion titles and as I said one is no better than another. It's even a process that has continued to this day. If they were real titles, there would not be up to 5 champions in any one year or, even in modern times, arguments about who was the real champion in a given year. There would also not be articles like the one posted to argue one team over another as being the "real mythical national champion" (I love that one). So to think these opinion titles are more than what they are and/or that AU should shy away from making valid opinion claims is something that is not really necessary.

[TheBlueVue 177]

I'm totally against it. The players on that team have received plenty of recognition for their season but to claim a NC retro-actively is IMO just not something we should do especially if you read what other teams accomplished that year. It's hard for me, even as an Auburn fan, to believe Auburn won a legit NC in football that year.

Here is something to consider. Billingsley, James Howell and 1st and Goal just happen to be 3 respected selectors that made the choice on the 1913 team and for good reason. An 8-0 Auburn team that scored 224 points while holding their opponents to 13 was as valid a NC as any team in the country that year. That is their opinion. You can read in the long article posted the bias against the South back then, a bias which even continues in the author's comments as he attempts to rationalize his own opinion. Which is really all it is, opinion, with one being just as good as another.

If people want to discuss the overall topic of mythical titles, now that is another subject. Since there was no playoff, they are nothing but opinion titles and as I said one is no better than another. It's even a process that has continued to this day. If they were real titles, there would not be up to 5 champions in any one year or, even in modern times, arguments about who was the real champion in a given year. There would also not be articles like the one posted to argue one team over another as being the "real mythical national champion" (I love that one). So to think these opinion titles are more than what they are and/or that AU should shy away from making valid opinion claims is something that is not really necessary.

All your points are solid and undeniable. I guess the question it boils down to is this...Do I think we should resort to the tactics of those we've ridiculed so much for their retro-active mythical national titles? Personally, I don't want to. I'm fine with the 2 that were not retro-actively awarded.

[Dixie1860 27]

I can see both sides on this one, the only years I really care about when all is said and done are the last and the next! WDE!

EDIT: Although I doubt if recruits bother to check all the factual data so let's claim one more than bammer just to watch their mullet topped heads explode!!!

[IronMan70 3,321]

I can see both sides on this one, the only years I really care about when all is said and done are the last and the next! WDE!

EDIT: Although I doubt if recruits bother to check all the factual data so let's claim one more than bammer just to watch their mullet topped heads explode!!!

You want to get one of those bammer palookas wound up ? All you have to do is tell them that none of those titles are real, then watch the fun begin. It's like winding up a toy. Their very existence is only validated through the silly belief that opinion titles are real titles. Most fans from other teams treat them for what they really are, opinions and entertainment.

[homersapien 12,172]

Wow. This is a fascinating discussion.

I have to admit, I have always taken the position represented by "TheBlueVue". It's simply demeaning to claim championships simply because you can make a case for them, however flimsy or contrived. That is one of the things that distinguishes us from Bama.

It also devalues real (modern day) championships (to the extent they are legit in the first place).

But if we could draw attention to them in a way that is not really serious (official) and simply recognizes it as a publicity stunt, I'd say let's do it. Maybe it would serve to ridicule those programs that take them seriously. We could call it an accounting using the "Bama method".

Not sure how to do that, but I agree with others, we need to wait until our next MNC to do so. After all, it's about PR not actual history.

[vt_johnp 0]

TL:DR

[AUloggerhead 2,507]

I'd hope we don't claim things retroactively (unless somebody's stripped of their title like, oh, say, #1 USC in 2004 when we finished #2 and maybe a shared title by Okie & Auburn is fair) but we're wrong, wrong, wrong in not recognizing on our stadium for all the world to see all TWELVE undefeated seasons in Auburn football history. That can be done without claiming them as national titles. To ignore them belittles those teams, players and coaches.

http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/records/fetch-team.pl?team=Auburn

Look this is always a very depressing conversation if you're into credibility for the sport of college football. Not just Bama but dozens of schools claim (and have recognized by major media) total joke seasons while others have seasons where they beat strong opponents, lost no games and despite pre-BCS years virtually always having titles shared among multiple teams, those undefeated seasons are consider somehow less legit. Heck, BSPN and most major media still consider USC co-champions in 2003 because the final sports writers poll (only a PART of the exclusively recognized final BCS poll that year) voted USC #1. We all know Bama's more hilarious claims like 1942 where they lost their last 2 games of the year, shutouts to Vandy & Miss St and didn't even finish top 10...only to have a "publication" award it to them 30 years later.

I'm with you there, Canuck. The history of naming a 'National Champion' in football started with the AP in 1936. Since there was no playoff and no nationally televised games, the sports writers were influential in starting the whole Mythical NC. Of course the obvious flaw in this system is personal bias -- one man's opinion of a dominant team is just another's opinion of a good team. Regional favoritism exists today. Just imagine how strong it was in the early years. To compound the error of having sportswriter polls anointing a NC, the fools went and retroactively named NCs for every year prior to 1936(!) They even went back to 1869 and declared Princeton National Champs. There were only two teams playing that year, Princeton & Rutgers. They played each other twice and came away with identical 1-1 records. ... ... Objective? Legit? Only if you want to believe it.

I had bought into the whole AP Mythical NC crap up until the 1983 season when a #5 Miami team was leapfrogged over the #3 AU team after each had won their respective bowl game, and the #1 & #2 teams both lost. Ever since then I've been wary of any poll, sportswriter or otherwise. The 2004 season just further cemented my distrust of polls being objective or fair.

Anyways, I think your idea of honoring the undefeated teams in AU's history is a great idea. It's better than claiming a MNC and it exemplifies the tenets of the Auburn Creed of hard work and earning everything that you achieve. One minor correction, though: AU has 13 undefeated seasons in its storied football history, not 12. Perhaps you forgot AU's first season in '1891' where they went undefeated, untied and unscored upon? AU defeated UGA 10-0 on 20-Feb-1892 in Atlanta.

[Dixie1860 27]

AU defeated UGA 10-0 on 20-Feb-1892 in Atlanta.

I love seeing that stat. It is the longest running rivalry in the south and for good reason. AU Alumni have flooded the Metro Atlanta area in the last 20 years. Every day I see more and more AU stickers on cars. Where I live you see way more AU than thUGA logos on vehicles.

[jcm81 2]

AU defeated UGA 10-0 on 20-Feb-1892 in Atlanta.

I love seeing that stat. It is the longest running rivalry in the south and for good reason. AU Alumni have flooded the Metro Atlanta area in the last 20 years. Every day I see more and more AU stickers on cars. Where I live you see way more AU than thUGA logos on vehicles.

I see just as many AU as UGA here in Gwinnett, but I am not sure if it because I notice the AU tags and logos more.