Good ariticle

[JBryant12]

Auburn takes a wrong turn with directionals
Matt Hayes /
Posted: 11 hours ago

The e-mails came pouring in from the Plains the day after Southern California disposed of Oklahoma and secured the national title. Auburn was robbed. Auburn would've given the Trojans a better game. Auburn this, Auburn that. Auburn, Auburn, Auburn.

At this point, I'll introduce Pat Hill. You know him as Fresno State's brash and bold coach, a guy who has built a program from the scrap heap and will play anyone, any time, any place to gain respect.



So I placed a call to Hill last week and told him Auburn just added a home game against Division I-AA Western Kentucky to complete its 2005 schedule. And before I could ask the question, he gave the answer.


"We called them," Hill interrupted. "We wanted to play them. I guess their schedule was already filled."


No, it wasn't. Fresno officials called before Auburn added Western Kentucky, and Hill is speaking with a politically correct tone because, well, he'd love a shot at Auburn somewhere down the road. Yeah, good luck with that. Auburn has bigger fish to flop.


Like The Citadel. Or Western Kentucky. Or big, bad Ball State.


This is why Auburn wasn't one of two teams playing in the Orange Bowl national title game last season, why the Tigers were stuck in the Sugar Bowl politicking for respect. Respect? Play someone with a pulse outside your conference, then we'll talk.


Wait, I take that back. Aubie played USC in the 2002 and '03 seasons and lost by a combined 47-17. The Tigers also played Georgia Tech in 2003 and lost 17-3. Hence, the reason for last year's brutal nonconference slate of Louisiana-Monroe, The Citadel and Louisiana Tech. And the reason the Tigers weren't playing USC in the Orange Bowl.


Look, Auburn shouldn't have to apologize for its schedule; it plays in the SEC, the toughest conference in college football. But like it or not, teams must prove themselves outside of their conferences to earn style points. It's as much a beauty pageant as it is a demolition derby.


Auburn was put in this predicament after Southern Miss bailed out of a game because of conflicts with the new Conference USA schedule. But here's the hitch: Southern Miss informed Auburn last September. University officials knew for five months -- through a magical unbeaten season, through the controversy of not being able to play for the national title because of a pathetic nonconference schedule -- that they needed a nonconference game for 2005, yet they chose to continue down the same path.


A university spokeswoman says Auburn needs seven home games per season to make budget. Fresno State didn't want a game in return -- "We usually play on the road; we know that," Hill says -- but Auburn steered clear of a team that is 10-8 against BCS teams since 2000.


Fresno State eventually signed up to play at two-time defending national champ USC -- which also will play nonconference games at Hawaii, against Arkansas and at Notre Dame. Notice the lack of cupcake directional schools.


Albert Einstein once defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Change was staring Auburn in the face not so long ago. And the choice was Western Kentucky.


Senior writer Matt Hayes covers college football for Sporting News. Email him at mhayes@sportingnews.com.

[Neo]

To an extent, I agree with the writer of this article. Didn't Auburn learn anything from this past year? Granted, this past year was beyond their control giving the "Bowling Green" situation, but why go out and schedule another cupcake? :confused:

This year if Auburn goes undefeated which I highly doubt, I will be the first one to say that they do NOT deserve a shot at the MNC. Going out and scheduling a cupcake as a last minute space filler is one thing. Going out and purposely scheduling one is another. :rolleyes:

[supergenius]

In an article on Rivals, wingnut is griping about the 12th game without an extra week in which to play it in. He is quoted as saying that the barn will not schedule a home and home series with a national power.http://auburn.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=391650.
"I'm not going to put our guys in a situation where they have to play a very tough conference game and go out and play a very tough road non-conference game," Tuberville explained. "I'm not going to do it. It's not fair to them. It's too hard. Our conference is hard enough". Hears to you tubbs, give NE Monroe St. Tech hell!!

[WayzUp]

Let's face it, the SEC has the same problem the Big Ten (11?) has....we beat the crap out of eachother every year. Even the lowest team can stun the top teams of these conferences. So Cal has been a great team as has OU but let's be realistic here; if either of those two were to play in the SEC or Big Ten, there would be a lot less of the "dynasty" talk.

The patsies of the Big Ten (Illinois, Indiana, Northwestern) compare to the SEC's (UK, Vandy, MSU) but look at those of the Big 12 and Pac 10. Last year's Big 12 included the scary-goodness of Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas State, Iowa State, Kansas, and Missouri among other just-above-mediocre teams like Texas A&M. How would Colorado (Big 12 North champion) have fared in the SEC last season? Would they have finished .500??

And the Pac 10...Arizona, UCLA, WSU, Stanford, Washington....who's scared of these teams on a weekly basis? Southern Cal can look at their schedule and circle the gimme W's....you can't do that in the SEC. Ask the Florida fans who had the Mississippi State game in the bag before that game started...the Big 12 and Pac 10 patsies roll over while the Vandy's, MSU Bulldogs and UK's of the SEC will at least put up a fight and have a chance of stunning a team that makes the mistake of overlooking them.

Can Baylor do that to OU? Or Kansas? How 'bout Arizona's chances of sneaking up on USC one weekend of the year? Or Washington?

I don't blame SEC teams or Tuberville for putting a patsy on their schedule...these other "dynasty" tier teams have them built into their schedule every single year.

[Neo]

I don't blame SEC teams or Tuberville for putting a patsy on their schedule...these other "dynasty" tier teams have them built into their schedule every single year.

You do have a point there, but I don't think the "patsy" is the argument. I think the argument lies in the Div. IAA team that they scheduled. C'mon, there are a lot of Div. I patsies that they could have scheduled. Why step down and schedule a Div. IAA loser like that?

That's my beef. :cool:

[WayzUp]

True dat.

Oh well, they're the ones who have to live with the "what if" questions if it comes down to that again.

And not to change sports but look at USC's basketball schedule last year....we played our first half of our schedule against schools that are smaller than a lot of high schools we recruit from. Of course, we may not have won a game if we'd have played the non-conference schedule Michigan State played last year (in basketball) but then, that's probably why we scheduled those teams.

[ColonelKurtz]

Much ado about a program having to scramble around at the 11th hour to fill a hole in their schedule. Why didn't AU holler at SoCal about another home & home as they had that week open too?

This nonsense about AU's "weak" schedule costing them the OB last year comes from the same neaderthals who set the SOS parameters in both their heads & algorithms last August. But we can now see via the head to head Bowl matchups that the B12's elevated strength perception was held up by silly string.

Only if you swallow the pablum puked up by the so-called 'experts' can you not see the sham for what it is. The USC-OU matchup was ordained by the EgomaniacallySuperiorPurchasersNetwork last Spring and was sold ad nauseum afterwards. I hope the sponsors get every penny they're due from the ratings crash with the game decided before halftime.

[GatorNation]

Much ado about a program having to scramble around at the 11th hour to fill a hole in their schedule. Why didn't AU holler at SoCal about another home & home as they had that week open too?

This nonsense about AU's "weak" schedule costing them the OB last year comes from the same neaderthals who set the SOS parameters in both their heads & algorithms last August. But we can now see via the head to head Bowl matchups that the B12's elevated strength perception was held up by silly string.

Only if you swallow the pablum puked up by the so-called 'experts' can you not see the sham for what it is. The USC-OU matchup was ordained by the EgomaniacallySuperiorPurchasersNetwork last Spring and was sold ad nauseum afterwards. I hope the sponsors get every penny they're due from the ratings crash with the game decided before halftime.

Agreed. The title game was orchestrated. But as for the "cupcake" accusation, I'm going to defend Auburn here.

As a general claim, the whole SOS for non-conference games is a bit out of hand, imo. When you play in a very difficult conference like the SEC, you're not going to schedule great teams outside of conference play. As we all know, if you lose in cfb, you're basically out of the picture. Who wants to risk being moved to the back of the BCS bus with an early loss that didn't need to happen? You want to have a cushion going into conference play. No one is going to schedule an up-and-coming team that could end up biting them on the butt. Plenty of examples abound from JUST the big xii: Troy/Mizzu, Marshall/K-State, Southern Miss./Nebrasska. Or we could ask Tennessee (ND). What you want is a tune-up game that gets the blood flowing....you don't want to be putting the season's BCS run on the line. Of course, that would be more fun for the fans but less good for the coaches who are, it seems, always a few poor losses short of the unemployment line. If there was a playoff, I think you'd see better non-conference matchups, because the constant pressure of having to win every week would be eliminated.

That said, yeah....1-AA W. Kentucky ended up hurting them in the long run with the BCS numbers, but I don't blame them at all for the thought process. The SEC is tough enough....you don't really need to beef up your non-conference load. If Auburn had scheduled probably any 1-A team, they might have gotten the nod. Although as the Colonel so eloquently stated, I think the powers-that-be were looking for an OU-USC title game the entire time.

[WDavE]

Never let facts get in the way of a good story.

Auburn did talk to Fresno State about playing a game this season at Jordan-Hare Stadium. AU stated that Fresno State could only play Auburn on Oct. 8. That would mean that Auburn would have had to play eight straight games at the end of the season. Remember we always end the regular season with Georgia and Alabama.

Auburn even went to the SEC office to see if we could move our conference schedule around. The answer was no.

USM officially pulled out Jan. 14th. They didn't even know they're new conference schedule as early as that article suggests.

Then there are some who say we are ducking Fresno St. That made me snicker to myself. One of the teams that beat Fresno last yeat was La. Tech. 28-21 was the score I believe. We beat La. Tech 52-7 that same year. The last time we played Frenso St. we won the game by +60.

Let's eliminate the fear factor.

To those who think that one OCC conference game would have made a difference last year for us. I live in Florida and I know some very good land investments for you.

Think back for a moment.

Auburn beats Georgia and we then end up tied with Okla. in one poll the next week. We then go beat our biggest rival the next week and Okla. beats a 3-8 Baylor team. Yet, we then lost ground? Another point of contention in this conversation. Everybody points out that playing I-AA team hurt our rankings. Just food for thought on that subject. Sagarin had Harvard which is a I-AA ranked higher then Alabama in his polls and he is used as part of the BCS formula.

It's all about perception. What conference besides the Big 12 could have a team not even qualify to play in it's conference championship game and still play for the NC? (Nebraska)
Which conference could have a team lose it's championship game and still be invited? (Oklahoma)

The answer is none....

Another factoid:
LSU played a I-AA team in 2003 and still won the NC and had a loss to boot.

So, I'm not buying.

As an older Auburn fan, let me remind you that in 1983 Auburn played the toughest schedule in the nation in 1983, playing Texas, Tennessee, Florida State, Maryland (With Boomer Esiason), Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and Michigan. Guess what? We entered the bowl game ranked # 3. # 1 Nebraska lost to # 5 Miami (they're only loss was to Florida who we beat). # 2 Texas (the only team that we lost to), lost to # 6 Georgia ( team that we beat), and Auburn beat # 8 Michigan in the Sugar Bowl. Despite playing 8 ranked teams and the toughest schedule in the nation, we also got the shaft then!. Miami vaulted to # 1 and we were left at # 3.

If you look at that seasons SOS. No other team has ever played a tougher rated schedule. To what benefit?

So again, I'm not buying.

Miami while making big time runs for NC's and playing in the Big Least has played 10 I-AA teams in 15 years.

Sure has hurt them hasn't it.

[GatorNation]

Never let facts get in the way of a good story.

Auburn did talk to Fresno State about playing a game this season at Jordan-Hare Stadium. AU stated that Fresno State could only play Auburn on Oct. 8. That would mean that Auburn would have had to play eight straight games at the end of the season. Remember we always end the regular season with Georgia and Alabama.

Auburn even went to the SEC office to see if we could move our conference schedule around. The answer was no.

USM officially pulled out Jan. 14th. They didn't even know they're new conference schedule as early as that article suggests.

Then there are some who say we are ducking Fresno St. That made me snicker to myself. One of the teams that beat Fresno last yeat was La. Tech. 28-21 was the score I believe. We beat La. Tech 52-7 that same year. The last time we played Frenso St. we won the game by +60.

Let's eliminate the fear factor.

To those who think that one OCC conference game would have made a difference last year for us. I live in Florida and I know some very good land investments for you.

Think back for a moment.

Auburn beats Georgia and we then end up tied with Okla. in one poll the next week. We then go beat our biggest rival the next week and Okla. beats a 3-8 Baylor team. Yet, we then lost ground? Another point of contention in this conversation. Everybody points out that playing I-AA team hurt our rankings. Just food for thought on that subject. Sagarin had Harvard which is a I-AA ranked higher then Alabama in his polls and he is used as part of the BCS formula.

It's all about perception. What conference besides the Big 12 could have a team not even qualify to play in it's conference championship game and still play for the NC? (Nebraska)
Which conference could have a team lose it's championship game and still be invited? (Oklahoma)

The answer is none....

Another factoid:
LSU played a I-AA team in 2003 and still won the NC and had a loss to boot.

So, I'm not buying.

As an older Auburn fan, let me remind you that in 1983 Auburn played the toughest schedule in the nation in 1983, playing Texas, Tennessee, Florida State, Maryland (With Boomer Esiason), Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and Michigan. Guess what? We entered the bowl game ranked # 3. # 1 Nebraska lost to # 5 Miami (they're only loss was to Florida who we beat). # 2 Texas (the only team that we lost to), lost to # 6 Georgia ( team that we beat), and Auburn beat # 8 Michigan in the Sugar Bowl. Despite playing 8 ranked teams and the toughest schedule in the nation, we also got the shaft then!. Miami vaulted to # 1 and we were left at # 3.

If you look at that seasons SOS. No other team has ever played a tougher rated schedule. To what benefit?

So again, I'm not buying.

Miami while making big time runs for NC's and playing in the Big Least has played 10 I-AA teams in 15 years.

Sure has hurt them hasn't it.


Yeah, that's tough to argue against. That was a brutal year for the Tigers. Well reasoned argument all around.....further supports Kurtz's claim that the BCS had it out for AUB from the start. The big xii is a joke.

[WDavE]

Gator,

I fully expect to see nothing mentioned if FSU has a good season to be in contention for the NC game. Even though they picked up the Citadel as an out of conference game this year.

Neo,

Go back and look at several years where some of the SEC teams played I-AA teams and those same teams went on to beat some of the I-A opponents that everybody else plays. Yet, nobody has a problem?

By the way, the NCAA site itself does an SOS ranking. Look at where they have Auburn's versus USC and Okla. ranked.

[Neo]

Never let facts get in the way of a good story.
Auburn did talk to Fresno State about playing a game this season at Jordan-Hare Stadium. AU stated that Fresno State could only play Auburn on Oct. 8. That would mean that Auburn would have had to play eight straight games at the end of the season. Remember we always end the regular season with Georgia and Alabama.


From what I heard, Auburn wanted a "home and home" deal and football doesn't work that way. The deal works like this: "You play one at Jordan-Hare, then you go and play one at Fresno".



Auburn beats Georgia and we then end up tied with Okla. in one poll the next week. We then go beat our biggest rival the next week and Okla. beats a 3-8 Baylor team. Yet, we then lost ground? Another point of contention in this conversation. Everybody points out that playing I-AA team hurt our rankings. Just food for thought on that subject. Sagarin had Harvard which is a I-AA ranked higher then Alabama in his polls and he is used as part of the BCS formula.


Jeff Sagarin is only one piece to the BCS puzzle. What you failed to mention was that the rest of the BCS dudes still had Auburn at #3 because of the Div. IAA game against The Citadel. Baylor may be bad, but overall Oklahoma decimated their rival 35-0 at Baylor. Auburn played a mediocre at best Alabama team and won by 8. Looking at how Bama got man-handled in their bowl game, If I were you, I would not try to use that angle to serve my purpose.



It's all about perception. What conference besides the Big 12 could have a team not even qualify to play in it's conference championship game and still play for the NC? (Nebraska)
Which conference could have a team lose it's championship game and still be invited? (Oklahoma) The answer is none....

The reason Nebraska went and not Oregon is because Nebraska was 11-1-0 and Oregon finished 10-1-0 for the season. Not to mention, we all know the Big XII is a lot more competitive than the PAC-10 9 out of 10 times.



Another factoid:
LSU played a I-AA team in 2003 and still won the NC and had a loss to boot.

So, I'm not buying.


You are not helping your case. These are two (2) totally different seasons and teams, but since you brought it up and want to compare two (2) totally different seasons, here are some factoids for LSU's 2003 squad compared to Auburn's 2004 squad;

LSU averaged 34.9 ppg during the regular season and LSU defeated 10 of their opponents convincingly by an average of 20+ points per game. In that year, they SMACKED Auburn 31-7.

Auburn averaged 33.41 ppg during the regular season. They beat 7 of their opponents by 20+ points per game. They scraped by LSU this year on a poor officiating call and won 10-9.

BTW: LSU had a last minute cancellation at the hands of Marshall. So they had to schedule a Div. IAA team also.

I could go into the MOV's and such, but I'll let you do that. I will warn you, it doesn't go in Auburn's favor.



As an older Auburn fan, let me remind you that in 1983 Auburn played the toughest schedule in the nation in 1983, playing Texas, Tennessee, Florida State, Maryland (With Boomer Esiason), Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and Michigan. Guess what? We entered the bowl game ranked # 3. # 1 Nebraska lost to # 5 Miami (they're only loss was to Florida who we beat). # 2 Texas (the only team that we lost to), lost to # 6 Georgia ( team that we beat), and Auburn beat # 8 Michigan in the Sugar Bowl. Despite playing 8 ranked teams and the toughest schedule in the nation, we also got the shaft then!. Miami vaulted to # 1 and we were left at # 3.

If you look at that seasons SOS. No other team has ever played a tougher rated schedule. To what benefit?

So again, I'm not buying.

Miami while making big time runs for NC's and playing in the Big Least has played 10 I-AA teams in 15 years.

Sure has hurt them hasn't it.


To an outsider, you are appearing to show signs of sour grapes. Do I think Auburn should have had a shot this year? Yes...I do. The scheduling matter this year was uncontrollable on Auburn's part due to Bowling Green pulling out at the last minute. That doesn't excuse Auburn scheduling the "Weakling of the Month" Western Kentucky for 2005 though. There are a lot of Div. I cupcakes out there and you cannot convince me that there was no way Auburn couldn't schedule one of em. Stooping down to Div-IAA because of no other options is one thing, going there just to chalk up a win and then cry about no respect is another.

[JBryant12]

Ding ding ding and the winner by knockout is NEO!!!

[GATA_Rob01]

I agree with most of whats been said except for what Neo has said...another point to bring up are rivalry games. I believe SEC teams play more rivalries than any other conference period. In a rivalry game...ANYTHING can happen and this should be factored into the SOS rankings....

Just off the top of my head:

UGA vs. Florida
UGA vs. Auburn
UGA vs. Tennessee (Growing Rivalry)
UGA vs. USC (Will be a rivalry with Spurrier soon enough)
UF vs. UT
UF vs. LSU (Great Series; Rivalry? I dunno)
OM vs. MSU
LSU vs. Arkansas
Auburn vs. Alabama
Alabama vs. Tennessee
Tennessee vs. Vandy (Not much of a rivalry now)
LSU vs. Auburn

I mean, what other conference has anything like that....???? Hell, the SEC NEEDS to schedule patsies to just keep up with the rest of the country.

[Neo]

I mean, what other conference has anything like that....???? Hell, the SEC NEEDS to schedule patsies to just keep up with the rest of the country.

That's fine and dandy. Schedule Division-I pansies. PERIOD!

[WDavE]

Point#1. There was no conversation about Auburn wanting a home and home. Wrong! It was offered by the Fresno St. coach as a one game series.

Point #2. UAB beat Baylor by a wider margin the Okla. did. Is it now your contention that UAB was better then Bama? Most fans don't care when your playing you hated in-state rival what the score is. Just the win and that how we played it. How about when USC struggled against UCLA? You can't have it both ways. We beat Tenn. twice and do you remember the score between them and Texas A&M? Thats right Baylor beat them. Okla. beat Texas A&M by less then 8.

One more quick stat. As bad as you perceive Bama to be last year. They finished 7th in the country in scoring defense. They gave up 15.8 points a game with no little or no offense. Baylor finished 110th.


Point #3 That same year LSU played UL-Monroe, Arizona and the I-AA team. UL-Monroe got beat that same year by Auburn by 60 and they also lost two games to I-AA teams. Going by everyones logic, playing a terrible I-A team is more important then playing a good I-AA team. Maybe is my answer.

If we're going to point to stats as all knowing. The 2004 Auburn lead the SEC in scoring at 32.1 points per game and lead the nation in scoring defense at 11.3 a game. Over half of those points came after we had pulled our starters. I'll let you do the margins.

I think the Big 12 is overated every year and gets to much consideration at the end of the season.


I have no sour grapes other then you guys pointing to something that wouldn't have made a difference to what happened. The media perception was that Okla. and USC started the year higher ranked and unless they lost. We could have played the Dallas Cowboys and beat them and still been left out.

I also notice you didn't take a look nor mention the NCAA SOS rankings of all three teams listed above.

[JBryant12]

Beatin the cowboys wouldnt be much of an accomplishent.....

[GatorNation]

Jeff Sagarin is only one piece to the BCS puzzle. What you failed to mention was that the rest of the BCS dudes still had Auburn at #3 because of the Div. IAA game against The Citadel. Baylor may be bad, but overall Oklahoma decimated their rival 35-0 at Baylor. Auburn played a mediocre at best Alabama team and won by 8. Looking at how Bama got man-handled in their bowl game, If I were you, I would not try to use that angle to serve my purpose.


True.....but I'd prefer a win over Bama compared to a win over Baylor.


The reason Nebraska went and not Oregon is because Nebraska was 11-1-0 and Oregon finished 10-1-0 for the season. Not to mention, we all know the Big XII is a lot more competitive than the PAC-10 9 out of 10 times.


True again...but Oregon won their conference. Seems like it should at least be a pre-requisite to get to the title game, because if not, that means you're--at best--only the third best team in your conference.


You are not helping your case. These are two (2) totally different seasons and teams, but since you brought it up and want to compare two (2) totally different seasons, here are some factoids for LSU's 2003 squad compared to Auburn's 2004 squad;

LSU averaged 34.9 ppg during the regular season and LSU defeated 10 of their opponents convincingly by an average of 20+ points per game. In that year, they SMACKED Auburn 31-7.


Just like it to be noted that UF beat LSU that year. :D

[WDavE]

By the way, on the bad officiating call you mentioned above. Even with the missed extra point the game would have been only tied. Not a LSU win at that point. Auburn was at home with the big MO.

The biggest blown call all year was the non-intereference call that cost Bama the win over LSU.

[ColonelKurtz]

Agreed. The title game was orchestrated. But as for the "cupcake" accusation, I'm going to defend Auburn here.

As a general claim, the whole SOS for non-conference games is a bit out of hand, imo. When you play in a very difficult conference like the SEC, you're not going to schedule great teams outside of conference play. As we all know, if you lose in cfb, you're basically out of the picture. Who wants to risk being moved to the back of the BCS bus with an early loss that didn't need to happen? You want to have a cushion going into conference play. No one is going to schedule an up-and-coming team that could end up biting them on the butt. Plenty of examples abound from JUST the big xii: Troy/Mizzu, Marshall/K-State, Southern Miss./Nebrasska. Or we could ask Tennessee (ND). What you want is a tune-up game that gets the blood flowing....you don't want to be putting the season's BCS run on the line. Of course, that would be more fun for the fans but less good for the coaches who are, it seems, always a few poor losses short of the unemployment line. If there was a playoff, I think you'd see better non-conference matchups, because the constant pressure of having to win every week would be eliminated.

That said, yeah....1-AA W. Kentucky ended up hurting them in the long run with the BCS numbers, but I don't blame them at all for the thought process. The SEC is tough enough....you don't really need to beef up your non-conference load. If Auburn had scheduled probably any 1-A team, they might have gotten the nod. Although as the Colonel so eloquently stated, I think the powers-that-be were looking for an OU-USC title game the entire time.

Well stated, but I simply can't fault AU for acting quickly as UGA went through a similar situation when Tulane violated a home & home deal for 2002-2003 in late Spring, causing the Dawgs to schedule 1-AA foes. Hopefully with our new AD, the politically pressured games with Georgia Southern will end.

Southern Miss got caught in a real bind with the CUSA reorganization deal and their hands were pretty much tied and that then screwed AU over. Though WKU is now a member of the Sun Belt Conference, the hit to AU's SOS will be big indeed.

Now IF I was the guy having to make the decision for AU in this deal, knowing that 2005 is for all intent & purpose a transition year, I might have rolled the dice anyway, for having a 500lb. gorilla game vs. say SoCal or another available quality team would have paid two dividends: Early season experience for a lot of newbies on the O which would benefit them later in the season AND the real possibility of a primetime TV airing which would bring in additional bucks. Jmvho....

[Neo]

Point#1. There was no conversation about Auburn wanting a home and home. Wrong! It was offered by the Fresno St. coach as a one game series.


Okay.... :rolleyes:



Point #2. UAB beat Baylor by a wider margin the Okla. did. Is it now your contention that UAB was better then Bama? Most fans don't care when your playing you hated in-state rival what the score is. Just the win and that how we played it. How about when USC struggled against UCLA? You can't have it both ways. We beat Tenn. twice and do you remember the score between them and Texas A&M? Thats right Baylor beat them. Okla. beat Texas A&M by less then 8.


Okay...but hands down UCLA was a better team than Alabama this past year. Bama got shellshocked in their bowl game at the hands of Minnesota. A lower-tier BIG TEN team that had it's own problems. As for the UAB/Baylor game, the difference was a mere 7 points so that argument is about as watertight as the Titanic. Oklahoma stomped them (Baylor) in their own house.

Baylor 14
UAB 56

Oklahoma 35
Baylor 0



Point #3 That same year LSU played UL-Monroe, Arizona and the I-AA team. UL-Monroe got beat that same year by Auburn by 60 and they also lost two games to I-AA teams. Going by everyones logic, playing a terrible I-A team is more important then playing a good I-AA team. Maybe is my answer.

If we're going to point to stats as all knowing. Auburn didn't give up 55 points this whole year. Okla. did in one game.

I think the Big 12 is overated every year and gets to much consideration at the end of the season.


For starters, if you are a Division I team, you have no business beating up on a little Div. IAA or lower team. Division IAA doesn't have the talent or the depth to keep up with most Div. I teams and that's a fact. If Auburn is so good and so great, quit scheduling these "space fillers" and play some real Division I patsies.

Who did Oklahoma give up 55 points to? The best team in the country that's who and don't even try to compare Auburn's regular season to Oklahoma's bowl game. Auburn would have gotten pimp-slapped up and down that field also. For crying out loud, Auburn had problems with Virginia Tech. They never could deliver the knock-out blow. Just imagine what would have happened to Auburn if they played Southern Cal? Keep in mind, Southern Cal has already flexed their muscles against you before. That game would have been worse. Southern Cal totally shutdown one of if not the best TB in the country. If you take Caddy or Ronnie Brown out of a game, Auburn's a dead duck. VT did it and you saw how Auburn performed.......



I have no sour grapes other then you guys pointing to something that wouldn't have made a difference to what happened. The media perception was that Okla. and USC started the year higher ranked and unless they lost. We could have played the Dallas Cowboys and beat them and still been left out.

I also notice you didn't take a look nor mention the NCAA SOS rankings of all three teams listed above.


Yes it is sour grapes. Your angry because the Tigers got left out. Would they have made a difference in the Orange Bowl? No way in hell! As for them (Ok and SC) being ranked #1 & #2. That's life. That's the system we use. Maybe if Auburn didn't get their azzes handed to them in Auburn by Southern Cal 23-0 in 2003 they may have been ranked higher. I mean, why should Southern Cal and Oklahoma drop in their respective rankings just because Auburn wins? As long as Oklahoma and Southern Cal were winning and winning by decent margins, then there is no argument. The top teams faced eack other. Then there's the fact of Auburn starting the season kinda shady.

The fact is that Southern Cal & Oklahoma didn't have ANY Div.IAA teams on their schedule and Auburn did. Wanna change the media's opinion? How about call Auburn's AD and get him to schedule some teams more on their level of play. Namely Division I opponents.

If you go back the last several years, Auburn has scheduled at least one (1) Div. IAA team a year. What does that tell you? It's a classic case of "School Yard Bully Syndrome".

As for SOS ratings, those can be debated. They are clearly OPINIONS and should be treated as such.

[Neo]

Well stated, but I simply can't fault AU for acting quickly as UGA went through a similar situation when Tulane violated a home & home deal for 2002-2003 in late Spring, causing the Dawgs to schedule 1-AA foes. Hopefully with our new AD, the politically pressured games with Georgia Southern will end.

No one is challenging that Colonel. As a last minute thing, they had to do what they had to do. What we have a problem with is Auburn screaming for respect while scheduling another Div. IAA cupcake for 2005. There are plenty of Div. I cupcakes around, they could have scheduled one of them.

[GeauxTo]

By the way, on the bad officiating call you mentioned above. Even with the missed extra point the game would have been only tied. Not a LSU win at that point. Auburn was at home with the big MO.

The biggest blown call all year was the non-intereference call that cost Bama the win over LSU.


What do you mean Auburn was home with the big MO? LSU led the whole game. I'm not spouting sour grapes, and never have, but I was there and Auburn knows how lucky they were to pull out that 10-9 win. Overtime could have easily gone LSU's way.
;)

[GeauxTo]

LSU recently added Appalachian State to fill a hole in the schedule and everyone here on the Bayou is pretty upset with that development. The AD says he tried really hard to schedule a higher quality opponent, but was unable to at this late date. This isn't Nebraska. We don't like clobbering patsys.
;)

[Neo]

What it boils down to is quit scheduling Division IAA patsies. Problem solved.

Also,

Comparing the 2003 LSU squad to the 2004 Auburn squad is laughable at best. The 2003 LSU squad I believe could have taken out anyone at anytime or anyplace. Coach Saban had that team firing on all cyllinders and it showed.

As for the famous LSU "Loss" in 2003 that you are referring to. Keep in mind, LSU lost to a ranked Florida Gators. Just food for thought.

I cannot for the life of me understand why I'm defending LSU, Southern Cal and Oklahoma????? :confused:

[GeauxTo]

I cannot for the life of me understand why I'm defending LSU, Southern Cal and Oklahoma????? :confused:

Neo, you are not confused at all... you're just getting smarter. Deep in their hearts, everyone likes the Bayou Bengals!
;)

[Neo]

Neo, you are not confused at all... you're just getting smarter. Deep in their hearts, everyone likes the Bayou Bengals!
;)

Honestly, I don't like LSU even though my cousin Tracy graduated from there, but I was cheering them and Saban on in the NC game back in 2003. :)

[GatorNation]

This isn't Nebraska. We don't like clobbering patsys.
;)

Lol.... :D

[GatorNation]

What it boils down to is quit scheduling Division IAA patsies. Problem solved.


Agreed. There are plenty of 1A teams that will pad a schedule. No need to dip into the lesser ranks. Though some 1AA teams look for the 1A bullies to see how they stack up. Just ask LSU: Western Illinois gave them a tough time until the fourth quarter in 2003. Probably more of a scare than the Bayou wanted. ;)


Comparing the 2003 LSU squad to the 2004 Auburn squad is laughable at best. The 2003 LSU squad I believe could have taken out anyone at anytime or anyplace.

Except my Gators. :D

[BigSpur]

In all fairness to Auburn, Citadel was a last minute addition because another team that is a lot better dropped Auburn off thier schedule at the last minute sending Auburn scrambling to find a team that would play. Unfortunetly I can not remember who the team was that dropped Auburn, but Ill do a little research and find out.

[Neo]

In all fairness to Auburn, Citadel was a last minute addition because another team that is a lot better dropped Auburn off thier schedule at the last minute sending Auburn scrambling to find a team that would play. Unfortunetly I can not remember who the team was that dropped Auburn, but Ill do a little research and find out.


Bowling Green.......

[ColonelKurtz]

No one is challenging that Colonel. As a last minute thing, they had to do what they had to do. What we have a problem with is Auburn screaming for respect while scheduling another Div. IAA cupcake for 2005. There are plenty of Div. I cupcakes around, they could have scheduled one of them.

Eheh, I didn't wanna be the one to say that.

[BigSpur]

Bowling Green.......

you are correct. :)

[Tidetalk]

Even funnier, Fresno St called Auburn and wanted to play them. Auburn wouldn't call them back so Fresno added USC instead.

[Neo]

Even funnier, Fresno St called Auburn and wanted to play them. Auburn wouldn't call them back so Fresno added USC instead.

To me....Putting aside the fiasco involved with Bowling Green pulling out of the deal.....

It sounds like Auburn is afraid to play Division I patsies and likes to "bully" the Division IAA boys around.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. There's NO reason why a Division I team should schedule a Division IAA or lower team when there is an available Division I team. I don't care if it was Southern Cal. Make them take the Division I team.

Respect??? Start playing Division I opponents and that will be a start. Take USC for example, not counting 2001 (Sept. 11th attacks) USC has not played a Div. IAA or lower team in almost 15 years. Go figure????

How can USC do it, but Auburn can't????

[autiger1126]

Comparing the 2003 LSU squad to the 2004 Auburn squad is laughable at best. The 2003 LSU squad I believe could have taken out anyone at anytime or anyplace. Coach Saban had that team firing on all cyllinders and it showed.


Hardly laughable. It would be laughable, however, to say that an undefeated team couldn't beat a team that got beat. I'm not saying whether Auburn would have one or lost, but it's ignorant to say that LSU would have beaten anyone, anywhere.

On a side note, that would have been a great game to see.

[WDavE]

Neo,

You make me laugh to some degree.

Somehow in your infinite all knowing wisdom. You can tell which team was better between two different years. You stated the 2003 LSU team that lost to Florida was infinitely better then and Auburn team that went 13-0 the next year. I believe the adjective used was laughable. What do you base that on? Expertise? Play Station?
I remember the year before and the Auburn players reporting that the LSU players telling them to ease up in the third quarter since the game was already over in essence. I believe we won 31-7 that year. Which has no bearing on anything. Just as your example did.

You use USC as an example of a team not playing a I-AA team in several years. Looking at the Pac-10 as a whole. They wouldn't need to. There are cupcakes galore available. Miami has played 10 in 15 years so I miss the point. Also, look at USC SOS ranking compared to ours with a I-AA team and get back to me on that.

Since used LSU as an example earlier.
2002 LSU played the Citadel
2003 Western Illinois
2005 App. St.

That would be 3 out of 4 years


The funny part is SOS was supposedly removed from the BCS formula just the year before.




Hey Tide fan..

Who did you replace Penn St with again? Isn't it Florida International. Didn't one of your wins over a I-AA enable you to become bowl bound this last year? As I look USM is your headliner for next year in OCC. Wow!


Just to clarify my postion. I hate playing a I-AA team. Other then tickets being readily available which allows me to take my two sons to the games. I see no benefit.
My reponses are to assumptions and untruths that have been posted here.

[Neo]

Neo,

You make me laugh to some degree.

Somehow in your infinite all knowing wisdom. You can tell which team was better between two different years. You stated the 2003 LSU team that lost to Florida was infinitely better then and Auburn team that went 13-0 the next year. I believe the adjective used was laughable. What do you base that on? Expertise? Play Station?

I'm a statistic and numbers person and the numbers don't lie. LSU's season in 2003 was statistically better than Auburn's 2004 year. Waitaminute...In fact, YOU are the one that started the comparison between the two. I just indulged your fantasies. See post below...

Another factoid:
LSU played a I-AA team in 2003 and still won the NC and had a loss to boot.
So, I'm not buying.



I remember the year before and the Auburn players reporting that the LSU players telling them to ease up in the third quarter since the game was already over in essence. I believe we won 31-7 that year. Which has no bearing on anything. Just as your example did.


Yeah and I know people that said they saw Elvis at a Dairy Queen. :rolleyes:



You use USC as an example of a team not playing a I-AA team in several years. Looking at the Pac-10 as a whole. They wouldn't need to. There are cupcakes galore available. Miami has played 10 in 15 years so I miss the point. Also, look at USC SOS ranking compared to ours with a I-AA team and get back to me on that.


Who said I was talking about Southern Cal?????? How about you get back to me on that. :cool:



Since used LSU as an example earlier.
2002 LSU played the Citadel
2003 Western Illinois
2005 App. St.

That would be 3 out of 4 years

The funny part is SOS was supposedly removed from the BCS formula just the year before.


I'm not condoning the actions of LSU's scheduling either. Both teams are wrong to schedule Div. IAA pansies. As for who has played the most IAA teams, lets use the last ten (10) years as a guide:

Auburn
1995: Tennessee-Chattanooga
1996: UAB (1st year in Div. I)
1997: NONE
1998: NONE
1999: Appalachian State
2000: NONE
2001: NONE
2002: Western Carolina
2003: Western Kentucky
2004: The Citadel
2005: Western Kentucky

LSU
1995: NONE
1996: NONE
1997: NONE
1998: NONE
1999: NONE
2000: Western Carolina
2001: NONE
2002: The Citadel
2003: Western Illinois
2004: NONE
2005: Appalachian State

The facts sure bite you in the rear-end when you don't want them to. :cool: I think that speaks for itself. Before downing one team, make sure the facts are on your side. :cool:

[GeauxTo]

Auburn
1995: Tennessee-Chattanooga
1996: UAB (1st year in Div. I)
1997: NONE
1998: NONE
1999: Appalachian State
2000: NONE
2001: NONE
2002: Western Carolina
2003: Western Kentucky
2004: The Citadel
2005: Western Kentucky

LSU
1995: NONE
1996: NONE
1997: NONE
1998: NONE
1999: NONE
2000: Western Carolina
2001: NONE
2002: The Citadel
2003: Western Illinois
2004: NONE
2005: Appalachian State

The facts sure bite you in the rear-end when you don't want them to. :cool: I think that speaks for itself. Before downing one team, make sure the facts are on your side. :cool:

Great points, Neo. Auburn has been so busy smoking cigars, dancing on team logos, and sending players onto the field before the band finishes their halftime performance that they've become completely classless and clueless. I used to respect Auburn, but their team (and coaches) antics show a lack of class that you'd be hard pressed to find anywhere else. They are going to lose big this year. People want a piece of their arrogant butts. It is a real likelihood that Auburn won't beat LSU for the next 5-6 years; hell, maybe never again. I can't wait for them to come to the Bayou this year... talk about an ass kicking!
;)

[autiger1126]

I'm a statistic and numbers person and the numbers don't lie. LSU's season in 2003 was statistically better than Auburn's 2004 year. Waitaminute...In fact, YOU are the one that started the comparison between the two. I just indulged your fantasies. See post below...


If you are a statistics man then I'm sure you know the most important statistic of all, record. Zero loss team, Auburn, One loss team, LSU.

[Neo]

If you are a statistics man then I'm sure you know the most important statistic of all, record. Zero loss team, Auburn, One loss team, LSU.

Yeah....and what does it tell you that a one (1) loss team was statistically better than an undefeated team and won the MNC to boot? :cool:

[autiger1126]

Yeah....and what does it tell you that a one (1) loss team was statistically better than an undefeated team and won the MNC to boot? :cool:

It tells me that it was a down year in 2003 and that if Auburn was the same team in 2004 as they were in 2003 they would have won the MNC.

[Neo]

It tells me that it was a down year in 2003 and that if Auburn was the same team in 2004 as they were in 2003 they would have won the MNC.

Like this past season right????

Keep dreaming..... :rolleyes:

[troxel3]

Auburn has done it again......

Good take from Matt Hayes....
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The e-mails came pouring in from the Plains the day after Southern California disposed of Oklahoma and secured the national title. Auburn was robbed. Auburn would've given the Trojans a better game. Auburn this, Auburn that. Auburn, Auburn, Auburn.

advertisement

At this point, I'll introduce Pat Hill. You know him as Fresno State's brash and bold coach, a guy who has built a program from the scrap heap and will play anyone, any time, any place to gain respect.

So I placed a call to Hill last week and told him Auburn just added a home game against Division I-AA Western Kentucky to complete its 2005 schedule. And before I could ask the question, he gave the answer.

"We called them," Hill interrupted. "We wanted to play them. I guess their schedule was already filled."

No, it wasn't. Fresno officials called before Auburn added Western Kentucky, and Hill is speaking with a politically correct tone because, well, he'd love a shot at Auburn somewhere down the road. Yeah, good luck with that. Auburn has bigger fish to flop.

Like The Citadel. Or Western Kentucky. Or big, bad Ball State.

This is why Auburn wasn't one of two teams playing in the Orange Bowl national title game last season, why the Tigers were stuck in the Sugar Bowl politicking for respect. Respect? Play someone with a pulse outside your conference, then we'll talk.

Wait, I take that back. Aubie played USC in the 2002 and '03 seasons and lost by a combined 47-17. The Tigers also played Georgia Tech in 2003 and lost 17-3. Hence, the reason for last year's brutal nonconference slate of Louisiana-Monroe, The Citadel and Louisiana Tech. And the reason the Tigers weren't playing USC in the Orange Bowl.

Look, Auburn shouldn't have to apologize for its schedule; it plays in the SEC, the toughest conference in college football. But like it or not, teams must prove themselves outside of their conferences to earn style points. It's as much a beauty pageant as it is a demolition derby.

Auburn was put in this predicament after Southern Miss bailed out of a game because of conflicts with the new Conference USA schedule. But here's the hitch: Southern Miss informed Auburn last September. University officials knew for five months -- through a magical unbeaten season, through the controversy of not being able to play for the national title because of a pathetic nonconference schedule -- that they needed a nonconference game for 2005, yet they chose to continue down the same path.

A university spokeswoman says Auburn needs seven home games per season to make budget. Fresno State didn't want a game in return -- "We usually play on the road; we know that," Hill says -- but Auburn steered clear of a team that is 10-8 against BCS teams since 2000.

Fresno State eventually signed up to play at two-time defending national champ USC -- which also will play nonconference games at Hawaii, against Arkansas and at Notre Dame. Notice the lack of cupcake directional schools.

Albert Einstein once defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Change was staring Auburn in the face not so long ago. And the choice was Western Kentucky.

[JBryant12]

i already posted this aritcle under sec talk forum but it got moved to Auburn sports...

[troxel3]

my bad,,,,,,been gone for a while.

[autiger1126]

I guess that means you gave up your argument. Just curious as to why you're always so negative?

[Neo]

I guess that means you gave up your argument. Just curious as to why you're always so negative?


Nah...

It's just easier to iceskate uphill than to try and convince Auburn to quit scheduling Div. IAA pansies.

[autiger1126]

That wasn't what the argument was about. You are obviously beaten if you're changing the subject. I don't like the fact that we schedule I-AA opponents, but that's how it is. In case you forgot, we were talking about how you are a statistics man and you said a one loss team was better than an undefeated team. You said it was laughable.... in case you forgot.

[Neo]

That wasn't what the argument was about. You are obviously beaten if you're changing the subject. I don't like the fact that we schedule I-AA opponents, but that's how it is. In case you forgot, we were talking about how you are a statistics man and you said a one loss team was better than an undefeated team. You said it was laughable.... in case you forgot.

In case you forgot to READ the post....I'll post it here again for you. Not to mention, it was a fellow Auburn fan that began the comparision.

I'm a statistic and numbers person and the numbers don't lie. LSU's season in 2003 was statistically better than Auburn's 2004 year.

[WDavE]

As a engineer, I'm also a stats man.


To go with yours on schedules.

Since 1999, here are the total number of games against teams with at least 9-wins ( excluding bowl games ):

Notre Dame: 24
Auburn: 23
Oklahoma: 20
FSU: 19
Miami: 18
Ohio State: 18
USC: 16
Michigan: 14

Games against opponents with 10-wins or more:

Auburn: 18
Notre Dame: 15
Miami: 12
Michigan: 11
Ohio State: 10
USC: 9
Oklahoma: 9

[autiger1126]

In case you forgot to READ the post....I'll post it here again for you. Not to mention, it was a fellow Auburn fan that began the comparision.

And in case you forgot, I stated that the most important statistic was win-loss, which LSU of 2003 was not better than Auburn of 2004! This was your original quote which STARTED the comparison of the two teams against each other, not there schedule, which was brought up by the Auburn fan.

You are not helping your case. These are two (2) totally different seasons and teams, but since you brought it up and want to compare two (2) totally different seasons, here are some factoids for LSU's 2003 squad compared to Auburn's 2004 squad;

LSU averaged 34.9 ppg during the regular season and LSU defeated 10 of their opponents convincingly by an average of 20+ points per game. In that year, they SMACKED Auburn 31-7.

Auburn averaged 33.41 ppg during the regular season. They beat 7 of their opponents by 20+ points per game. They scraped by LSU this year on a poor officiating call and won 10-9.

And then you said this later, which was stupid on your part and now you're caught in an argument you can't win.


Comparing the 2003 LSU squad to the 2004 Auburn squad is laughable at best. The 2003 LSU squad I believe could have taken out anyone at anytime or anyplace. Coach Saban had that team firing on all cyllinders and it showed.

As for the famous LSU "Loss" in 2003 that you are referring to. Keep in mind, LSU lost to a ranked Florida Gators. Just food for thought.

It's laughable that you can't see your own mistake. Auburn beat four ranked teams during the regular season.... they didn't lose any games to a ranked opponent. Give up and accept defeat.

[Neo]

Listen kid...

You're probably 18-19 years old and don't even remember Bo Jackson let alone can comprehend what I'm saying.

Statistics don't consist of just wins and losses. They are comprised of TOP, MOV, Yards, TO's, etc, etc.

As for 2003's LSU squad, they beat four (4) teams in the Top-25 also including their bowl game. If you wanna see something funny, compare the margin of victories (MOV) between the two. :D

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/teamsched?teamId=99&year=2003

The fact is you Auburn fans are acting like spoiled rotten little babies for not getting your way. Earlier, I agreed that I think that Auburn deserved a shot, but it was the comparison to LSU's 2003 squad that sent this into a tangent. Auburn is sooo jealous of OK and Southern Cal, they wanna go around and spit their venom at everyone including a team that's innocent in this and that's LSU.

The facts of the case are this:

1. Oklahoma and Southern Cal did NOT have a Div. IAA team on their schedules. Auburn did and will have one in 2005.

2. Southern Cal would have smacked Auburn even worse than Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl. Last year, even though I hate to admit it, Southern Cal was the best team in CF. :mad:

If you want respect, quit beating up the 5th graders in Div. IAA. There are a plethora of Div. I pansies that Auburn could have scheduled, but didn't. Why? I agree with the media and the college football world on this one to an extent. Auburn had problems with Virginia Tech of all teams. If they would have won that game convincingly, I think they would have a share of the MNC right now.

[autiger1126]

I DO NOT WANT TO ARGUE ABOUT THE SCHEDULE. Is this clear.... or did I not say this before that I don't agree with Auburn scheduling I-AA opponents. Auburn beat 4 teams in the top 10 including the bowl game. LSU beat 1. Congratulations...you read my profile to get my age. Bo Jackson is the greatest athlete that has ever lived, and he happened to go to the school that I love, so who can blame me for liking him. I can also read your profile and I now see why you are so negative about everything, but I'm not going to bring that up because I don't want to start an argument with other people on this board. So... it would be a good idea not to bring other things into the argument because you can't think of anything better to say. LSU lost at home by 12. MOV is an overrated statistic. If it wasn't, Auburn wouldn't have put in the second string team in by the end of the third quarter. By the way, how old are you? I never said anything about being upset for not winning the national title. If anything you seem jealous of Auburn since you keep complaining about them. I'm not spitting my venom at any other team, just at you for saying that the game would have been laughable. As for VT, they had won 8 straight games, so I don't really see your point there as to how they would have been a bad team. Plus, if you watched the game, I'm sure you noticed that Auburn clearly won the game with ease. VT scored twice late in the fourth quarter to make it close. Even if we had won the game convincingly, by say 40 points, we still wouldn't have overtaken USC in the BCS, Coaches, or AP. But the NC is not what this argument is about.

[QuackAttackVan]

And then you said this later, which was stupid on your part and now you're caught in an argument you can't win.


He always seems to do that. :D

[JBryant12]

IMO Jim Thorpe was the best athlete ever....

[QuackAttackVan]

Good Call JB.

Jim Thorpe wowed the sporting world by winning gold medals in the pentathlon and the decathlon in the 1912 Olympics in Stockholm. Later that year, against opponents like the fabled Army football team, he scored 25 touchdowns for the Carlisle Indian School. Then Thorpe played six years of professional baseball as an outfielder for the New York Giants, the Cincinnati Reds and the Boston Braves. In 1916 his football team, the Canton Bulldogs, won their first of three unofficial national championships, and Thorpe served as the first president of what is now the National Football League. O

[autiger1126]

Well Bo Jackson was one of the greatest athletes. Jim Thorpe was pretty damn good. Speaking of Thorpe didn't an Auburn player win that award this year...isn't that a statistic.

[QuackAttackVan]

http://www.jimthorpeassoc.org/jimthorpeassoc.org-asp//Carlos%20Rogers%20Wins%20Thorpe%20Award.asp

2004 Jim Thorpe Award

Carlos Rogers, Auburn

[WDavE]

You keep pointing to stats:

Let's take a look:

Rushing offense:
2003 LSU 185.71 ypg. 2004 Auburn 183.31 ypg.

Passing Offense:
2003 LSU 232.6 ypg 2004 Auburn 237.4 ypg

Total Offense:
2003 LSU 418.36 ypg 2004 Auburn 420.69 ypg

Scoring:
2003 LSU 33.93 2004 Auburn 32.08

Rushing D:
2003 LSU 67 ypg 2004 Auburn 104.2 ypg

Passing D:
2003 LSU 185 ypg 2004 Auburn 173.6 ypg

Total Defense:
2003 LSU 252 ypg. 2004 Auburn 277.62 ypg

Scoring:
2003 LSU 11.0 2004 Auburn 11.3

Somehow I miss the laughable part.

[JBryant12]

The stats make it look pretty close to me....maybe Neo thinks that the SEC had a down year this year...and that the LSU team that won the National Championship would have been able to beat Auburn's team this year since this years LSU team almost beat Auburn and i think we can all agree that this years LSU team wasnt as good as the one who won the Championship....:)

[autiger1126]

You keep pointing to stats:

Let's take a look:

Rushing offense:
2003 LSU 185.71 ypg. 2004 Auburn 183.31 ypg.

Passing Offense:
2003 LSU 232.6 ypg 2004 Auburn 237.4 ypg

Total Offense:
2003 LSU 418.36 ypg 2004 Auburn 420.69 ypg

Scoring:
2003 LSU 33.93 2004 Auburn 32.08

Rushing D:
2003 LSU 67 ypg 2004 Auburn 104.2 ypg

Passing D:
2003 LSU 185 ypg 2004 Auburn 173.6 ypg

Total Defense:
2003 LSU 252 ypg. 2004 Auburn 277.62 ypg

Scoring:
2003 LSU 11.0 2004 Auburn 11.3

Somehow I miss the laughable part.
Those are the same stats I was just looking it. Doesn't make much sense does it?

[autiger1126]

The stats make it look pretty close to me....maybe Neo thinks that the SEC had a down year this year...and that the LSU team that won the National Championship would have been able to beat Auburn's team this year since this years LSU team almost beat Auburn and i think we can all agree that this years LSU team wasnt as good as the one who won the Championship....:)

I can see that perspective, but to say the game would be laughable is absurd. As for LSU almost beating Auburn this year, IMO I think that was the game that got Auburn to an undefeated season. They really took off after that. They were a lot different team at the end of the season than at the beginning.

[JBryant12]

yeah i dont see where Neo is getting laughable but he must have his reasons....

[QuackAttackVan]

::calling Neo::

[autiger1126]

::calling Neo::
You ready for the argument to start back up?

[QuackAttackVan]

I am just interested in his retort. I have gotten into several arguments with him as well where I feel he has thrown himself into a wall and can't get out.

Was wondering why he thought it was laughable.

[JBryant12]

ya better be knowin Neo hes gonna have a bunch to say...:)

[Neo]

The stats make it look pretty close to me....maybe Neo thinks that the SEC had a down year this year...and that the LSU team that won the National Championship would have been able to beat Auburn's team this year since this years LSU team almost beat Auburn and i think we can all agree that this years LSU team wasnt as good as the one who won the Championship....:)

BINGO!!!!!!! We have a winner!!!! :)

This year was a down year for the SEC. As for Autiger's stats, yes those are deadlocked. He is correct. What he didn't count is the fact that MOV is a respectable and recognized statistic.

2003 LSU: 23.7 appv (Average Points per Victory)
2004 AU: 20.7 appv (Average Points per Victory)

[uscballer101]

We definitely helped LSU's stats that year...

[autiger1126]

BINGO!!!!!!! We have a winner!!!! :)

This year was a down year for the SEC. As for Autiger's stats, yes those are deadlocked. He is correct. What he didn't count is the fact that MOV is a respectable and recognized statistic.

2003 LSU: 23.7 appv (Average Points per Victory)
2004 AU: 20.7 appv (Average Points per Victory)

Ok, but that still doesn't explaing why you think it's laughable. I didn't post the stats by the way. Just curious as to what you thought of OSU beating Miami in 2002, who was the better team? Because I know Miami's MOV was better than OSU

[uscballer101]

The fact of the matter is, it doesnt matter what year you go undefeated in the SEC, cause if you do any year its an accomplishment, Auburn got shafted, it doesnt matter if they played the Citadel, they went undefeated in the SEC, thats enough for them to be in the NC...