AuCivilEng1 12,293 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 (edited) There is a lot of chatter online about Auburn officially claiming 3 more championships now (1913,1993,1983). Not sure if this is true or not. I haven’t seen us raise any banners, but it is on the athletic website. https://auburntigers.com/sports/2018/6/11/sports-m-footbl-history-and-tradition-html.aspx If so, I think that’s awesome! Going by Bama’s rules, 5 is the least we should claim. At the same time, this seems like the type of thing that Auburn will be uniquely roasted for. Edited October 27, 2023 by AuCivilEng1 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Shadow Tiger 1,549 Posted October 27, 2023 Popular Post Share Posted October 27, 2023 They can add 2004 also. 15 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwayne Pride 379 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 I have mixed feelings. I was around for ‘83 and ‘93 and felt at the time they deserved some recognition. However, they don’t seem any more legit than some of the one that Alabama claims, especially the ones they claimed after the fact. I will let other people decide what they want to concerning those teams. ‘83 was the strongest schedule possibly ever played in college football. I would have loved to have seen a 4 team playoff back then. Huskers vs. Illini Auburn Horns rematch Hurricanes are possibly not even in the conversation. That was a messed up way to do things back then. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eltigrerex 20 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 Yes! Long overdue. Five is the least that should be claimed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowebb11 9,945 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 This absolutely should happen. UCF claims one from their undefeated team and there are many other examples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuCivilEng1 12,293 Posted October 27, 2023 Author Share Posted October 27, 2023 Just now, Gowebb11 said: This absolutely should happen. UCF claims one from their undefeated team and there are many other examples. That’s a bullsh*t claim. I don’t mind Auburn claiming pre BCS championships, but if there was a national championship game played and you didn’t play in it, the waters get kind of muddied there. 2004 would possibly be an exception, because USC had to vacate. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TigerPAC 1,030 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 i love the 2004 team, hate we got shafted but hard to claim imo. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowebb11 9,945 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 10 minutes ago, AuCivilEng1 said: That’s a bullsh*t claim. I don’t mind Auburn claiming pre BCS championships, but if there was a national championship game played and you didn’t play in it, the waters get kind of muddied there. 2004 would possibly be an exception, because USC had to vacate. I didn’t say I agreed with it. They claim it and put it up on their stadium. We should claim the ones we feel are legit and hang the banners. 1983 was pre-BCS and that team should absolutely claim it as several media services awarded it to us, including The NY Times. I’m mixed on 1993 since we were on probation. We agree on your rationale for 2004 since USC vacated it. I also agree that we will get roasted for it and couldn’t care less. It’s the cost of entry in being an Auburn fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aucanucktiger 1,896 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 1 hour ago, AuCivilEng1 said: There is a lot of chatter online about Auburn officially claiming 3 more championships now (1913,1993,1983). Not sure if this is true or not. I haven’t seen us raise any banners, but it is on the athletic website. https://auburntigers.com/sports/2018/6/11/sports-m-footbl-history-and-tradition-html.aspx If so, I think that’s awesome! Going by Bama’s rules, 5 is the least we should claim. At the same time, this seems like the type of thing that Auburn will be uniquely roasted for. Going by Bama's rules, we'd claim 12 natl championships to go with our 12 undefeated seasons. Let's not go by their rules, please. Put "12 undefeated seasons" on the stadium and leave it at that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodford 3,751 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 Claiming titles is totally fair in CFB. Just goes to show there’s always been more to play for in this sport than just a championship. Networks are doing their best to erase that though. Let’s get real, If you went 11-1 with a Rose Bowl victory in 1972 or something and no one else was undefeated, you had a national championship level season. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU120289 542 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 9 minutes ago, Gowebb11 said: This absolutely should happen. UCF claims one from their undefeated team and there are many other examples. Good ole Gus. Memories, terrible memories. Signed the mega extension, lost in the SECCG, lost to UCF in the bowl game. I guess he can claim he won a Natty as a head coach. 🤣 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WillMunny 1,589 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 (edited) CFB championships are like "Billy the Kid" grave sites out west. Way more claimed than actually exist. Edited October 27, 2023 by WillMunny 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 21,341 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 There was a time, shortly after Bama poofed an extra 6 natties into existence in one year via their media guide that us holding to the more strict count was a badge of pride. But that ship has sailed. Every other program claims pre-BCS/CFP titles all over the place. We lost that PR battle. Embrace the way everyone else does it and claim at least these five. 6 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAG 34,939 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 2 hours ago, AuCivilEng1 said: That’s a bullsh*t claim. I don’t mind Auburn claiming pre BCS championships, but if there was a national championship game played and you didn’t play in it, the waters get kind of muddied there. 2004 would possibly be an exception, because USC had to vacate. No exceptions! J/k: That 2004 team was nice. Iono how we would’ve done against USC but certainly couldn’t have been any worse than OU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuCivilEng1 12,293 Posted October 27, 2023 Author Share Posted October 27, 2023 (edited) 3 minutes ago, DAG said: No exceptions! J/k: That 2004 team was nice. Iono how we would’ve done against USC but certainly couldn’t have been any worse than OU. I think USC would have beaten us pretty good, based off of how we almost lost to VT. But USC was paying players and we were literally only paying Stanley McClover…. Edited October 27, 2023 by AuCivilEng1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAG 34,939 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 Just now, AuCivilEng1 said: I think USC would have beaten us pretty good, based off of how we almost lost to VT. But USC was paying players and we were literally only paying Stanley McClover. Yeah it’s hard to say because maybe we we were “whatever” after not going to the NC game. Would like to think we would have a chip on our shoulder after 03, but like you mentioned I don’t know if we would’ve had enough to beat them truly, if I am being honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURex 2,262 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 These 5 are not simply "claimed" by Auburn. These 5 championships are listed in the NCAA Record Book, which recognizes championships selected by various sports/news sources at that time. So there is nothing to get "roasted" for. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuCivilEng1 12,293 Posted October 27, 2023 Author Share Posted October 27, 2023 (edited) 5 minutes ago, DAG said: Yeah it’s hard to say because maybe we we were “whatever” after not going to the NC game. Would like to think we would have a chip on our shoulder after 03, but like you mentioned I don’t know if we would’ve had enough to beat them truly, if I am being honest. They had also owned us the previous two seasons. Just a complete matchup nightmare for us. I’d like to think Tubs was playing 4D chess. and just letting it ride knowing USC was going to have to vacate. But turns out Tubs is a complete dumba** who couldn't even play candyland properly. Edited October 27, 2023 by AuCivilEng1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuCivilEng1 12,293 Posted October 27, 2023 Author Share Posted October 27, 2023 1 minute ago, AURex said: . So there is nothing to get "roasted" for. Oh, they’ll roast. We know it. They know it. Everyone knows it. We don’t get to use logic like Bama, UGA, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAG 34,939 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 4 minutes ago, AuCivilEng1 said: They had also owned us the previous two seasons. Just a complete matchup nightmare for us. I’d like to think Tubs was playing 4D chess. and just letting it ride knowing USC was going to have to vacate. But turns out Tubs is a complete dumba** who could even play Cartland properly. There is a lot I would love to say about tubs but most of it belongs on the political board so I will spare everyone haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuCivilEng1 12,293 Posted October 27, 2023 Author Share Posted October 27, 2023 1 minute ago, DAG said: There is a lot I would love to say about tubs but most of it belongs on the political board so I will spare everyone haha Oh we are being good? I was just going to light a match and throw it towards the gas tank and see what I could see. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PowerOfDixieland 3,236 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 2 hours ago, aucanucktiger said: Going by Bama's rules, we'd claim 12 natl championships to go with our 12 undefeated seasons. Let's not go by their rules, please. Put "12 undefeated seasons" on the stadium and leave it at that. Good idea.... 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuCivilEng1 12,293 Posted October 27, 2023 Author Share Posted October 27, 2023 1 minute ago, PowerOfDixieland said: Good idea.... I can smell the Marlboro reds, nacho cheese, and bourbon just looking at this picture. Gah I miss Auburn. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeamZero77 1,945 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 I can see 2004 both ways. We say we deserve that championship because we ended up 2nd in the polls to USC and they were stripped of the title. On the other hand, if we were in Oklahoma's position we would definitely be saying "Hey, we deserve that championship because we are the team that actually played USC in the National Title game. Auburn didn't." I can see both ways. I saw the 5 titles on the Auburn site so if we are about to start claiming 5 championships, I have to wonder why now and not earlier? I wonder if it's because we've been in a lull for the last 5 or 6 years and maybe this could generate some excitement and it could also be a positive in recruiting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUght2win 7,079 Posted October 27, 2023 Share Posted October 27, 2023 3 hours ago, AuCivilEng1 said: That’s a bullsh*t claim. I don’t mind Auburn claiming pre BCS championships, but if there was a national championship game played and you didn’t play in it, the waters get kind of muddied there. 2004 would possibly be an exception, because USC had to vacate. ALL MNC titles are BS claims. It’s the only sport on earth whose champion is determined by the opinion of fat sports writers who watch 1% of the action. Also the only sport where over half the field is ineligible regardless of results on the field. It’s all a joke, and there will never be a true national title until ALL teams control their own destinies, with all having a shot at the crown. The expansion to 12 will likely do that. So for the “pre-actual NC era” we should definitely claim 2004. If it’s challenged, the rebuttal should be “prove we weren’t the best team in CFB that year”. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now