Auburn versus Alabama

#2
#2
Wow! Very true. Of course...Bammers would deny it all.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#4
#4
Takeaways from that article:

1) SEC teams in Alabama have major inferiority complexes for some reason.
2) Barn's trophy should have come with plenty of Desitin to soothe whatever those bad Bammers did to them.
 
#5
#5
AbeFroman said:
Takeaways from that article:

1) SEC teams in Alabama have major inferiority complexes for some reason.
2) Barn's trophy should have come with plenty of Desitin to soothe whatever those bad Bammers did to them.
Click to expand...

Dude, number 1 is so true. I didn't realize they were that way until I moved down here. It's a huge peeing contest about everything. Bama fans can't stand the fact that Auburn won the title. It is driving them crazy. Couple that with the fact that Malzahn is not leaving and it's like a funeral down here for the "die hard" Bammers. They were real excited when Malzahn was up for the Vandy job.
 
#6
#6
Meh... Give me Bammer's history over Auburn's. A slightly better last 30 years doesn't put them over the top, IMO.

I'd rather have the history+last 30 years of multiple SEC teams over Auburn, unless you take a lot of pride in finishing unbeaten and not being able to show anything for it. Plus Bama has the best coach in the game and looks poised to roll going forward, while I still don't see the future being that great for the Barn. I'd rather have UT's, Florida's, LSU's, and Alabama's program over Auburn's at the moment.
 
#7
#7
tvolsfan said:
Meh... Give me Bammer's history over Auburn's. A slightly better last 30 years doesn't put them over the top, IMO.

I'd rather have the history+last 30 years of multiple SEC teams over Auburn, unless you take a lot of pride in finishing unbeaten and not being able to show anything for it. Plus Bama has the best coach in the game and looks poised to roll going forward, while I still don't see the future being that great for the Barn. I'd rather have UT's, Florida's, LSU's, and Alabama's program over Auburn's at the moment.
Click to expand...

As would I.......I just find it funny they look down on Auburn so bad and Auburn has pretty much gotten the best of them in recent history
 
#8
#8
I think 30 years is quite significant. The 1982 date marks the end of the Bear era - he was a great coach no doubt but he also coached in an age of hoarding players, free wheeling booster support and selective law enforcement for player's bad behaviors.

Since those "glory days" for Alabama, Auburn has been stride for stride with Bama but no Bammer would admit to that.
 
#9
#9
volinbham said:
I think 30 years is quite significant. The 1982 date marks the end of the Bear era - he was a great coach no doubt but he also coached in an age of hoarding players, free wheeling booster support and selective law enforcement for player's bad behaviors.

Since those "glory days" for Alabama, Auburn has been stride for stride with Bama but no Bammer would admit to that.
Click to expand...


What self respecting SEC fan thinks like that? Tennessee?

33 years of at least 10 win seasons. (1st)

22 SEC championships. (1st)

13 NC (1st)

Auburn?______________( ) I hope I left you enough room for the barns contributions.
 
#10
#10
TUSKtimes said:
What self respecting SEC fan thinks like that? Tennessee?

33 years of at least 10 win seasons. (1st)

22 SEC championships. (1st)

13 NC (1st)

Auburn?______________( ) I hope I left you enough room for the barns contributions.
Click to expand...
Did you miss the part of the article making fun of / dismissing silliness of this nature?

The author actually predicted your response, laughed at you and then moved on.
 
#11
#11
BigPapaVol said:
Did you miss the part of the article making fun of / dismissing silliness of this nature?

The author actually predicted your response, laughed at you and then moved on.
Click to expand...


That's OK, Numbers make me happy too. Here's another: :peace2: and counting.
 
#15
#15
Auburn has had Bama's number over the past 30 years, without a doubt. It's definitely a major point of shame for most Bama fans.

However, the author proceeds to chide Bama fans for pointing to the entire history of both programs, and then proceeds to do just that by pointing out when Bama started claiming pre-wire titles, and for making the completely false claim that Auburn would have 9 titles under the criteria that Bama uses.

Further, AU's overall success during the 30 years is thanks to an incredibly successful decade in the 80s. Picking 1982 is convenient for the author's thesis, but it's a totally subjective choice other than that. Yes, Auburn broke the 9 game streak, but what other reason is there to pick that date? If he chose to take the entire decade of the 80s then Bama would have another 2 Iron Bowl victories, two more winning seasons (Auburn finished 5-6 in '80 and '81) 2 more bowl appearances with one victory, two more Top 10 finishes, and another SEC title ('81).

He could have picked the last 20 years (21 if you go from 1990-2010), and Auburn would still have an 11-10 record in the Iron Bowl. But then AU would fall behind in SEC titles (3-2), wins (180-174), bowl appearances (16-14), bowl wins would be equal (10-10), and top 10 finishes (8-4).

If one were to look at the factors leading to AU's success against Bama since 1980 (or 82), the biggest key was their dominance against Bill Curry and Mike Shula (combined 0-7 against the Barn). Remove those guys, and Bama's record is 12-10 in the Iron Bowl.

Subjective analysis cuts both ways.
 
#16
#16
bamawriter said:
Auburn has had Bama's number over the past 30 years, without a doubt. It's definitely a major point of shame for most Bama fans.

However, the author proceeds to chide Bama fans for pointing to the entire history of both programs, and then proceeds to do just that by pointing out when Bama started claiming pre-wire titles, and for making the completely false claim that Auburn would have 9 titles under the criteria that Bama uses.

Further, AU's overall success during the 30 years is thanks to an incredibly successful decade in the 80s. Picking 1982 is convenient for the author's thesis, but it's a totally subjective choice other than that. Yes, Auburn broke the 9 game streak, but what other reason is there to pick that date? If he chose to take the entire decade of the 80s then Bama would have another 2 Iron Bowl victories, two more winning seasons (Auburn finished 5-6 in '80 and '81) 2 more bowl appearances with one victory, two more Top 10 finishes, and another SEC title ('81).

He could have picked the last 20 years (21 if you go from 1990-2010), and Auburn would still have an 11-10 record in the Iron Bowl. But then AU would fall behind in SEC titles (3-2), wins (180-174), bowl appearances (16-14), bowl wins would be equal (10-10), and top 10 finishes (8-4).

If one were to look at the factors leading to AU's success against Bama since 1980 (or 82), the biggest key was their dominance against Bill Curry and Mike Shula (combined 0-7 against the Barn). Remove those guys, and Bama's record is 12-10 in the Iron Bowl.

Subjective analysis cuts both ways.
Click to expand...

Yeah, all that is great but you are missing the argument. I don't hear Auburn fans saying how bad Bama is (or has been), but Bama fans constantly down Auburn as being the red headed step child of the state when in recent history, that's not the case. Granted the author of the work picked dates to help his case but if you just look at the recent history there is not much difference in the two teams (at least not enough to pound your chest as a Bama fan comparing yourself to Auburn).
 
#17
#17
bamawriter said:
Auburn has had Bama's number over the past 30 years, without a doubt. It's definitely a major point of shame for most Bama fans.

However, the author proceeds to chide Bama fans for pointing to the entire history of both programs, and then proceeds to do just that by pointing out when Bama started claiming pre-wire titles, and for making the completely false claim that Auburn would have 9 titles under the criteria that Bama uses.

Further, AU's overall success during the 30 years is thanks to an incredibly successful decade in the 80s. Picking 1982 is convenient for the author's thesis, but it's a totally subjective choice other than that. Yes, Auburn broke the 9 game streak, but what other reason is there to pick that date? If he chose to take the entire decade of the 80s then Bama would have another 2 Iron Bowl victories, two more winning seasons (Auburn finished 5-6 in '80 and '81) 2 more bowl appearances with one victory, two more Top 10 finishes, and another SEC title ('81).

He could have picked the last 20 years (21 if you go from 1990-2010), and Auburn would still have an 11-10 record in the Iron Bowl. But then AU would fall behind in SEC titles (3-2), wins (180-174), bowl appearances (16-14), bowl wins would be equal (10-10), and top 10 finishes (8-4).

If one were to look at the factors leading to AU's success against Bama since 1980 (or 82), the biggest key was their dominance against Bill Curry and Mike Shula (combined 0-7 against the Barn). Remove those guys, and Bama's record is 12-10 in the Iron Bowl.

Subjective analysis cuts both ways.
Click to expand...

1982 is an appropriate metric on 2 levels - it represents the end of the Bear era and is a 30 year interval. If you want to compare over the last 10, 20, 30 Auburn stacks up much better than Bama fans acknowledge.

The point is that Bama fans view their program as vastly superior to Auburn's but the truth is that post Bear Bryant, Auburn is on par if not slightly ahead.
 
#18
#18
bamawriter said:
Auburn has had Bama's number over the past 30 years, without a doubt. It's definitely a major point of shame for most Bama fans.

However, the author proceeds to chide Bama fans for pointing to the entire history of both programs, and then proceeds to do just that by pointing out when Bama started claiming pre-wire titles, and for making the completely false claim that Auburn would have 9 titles under the criteria that Bama uses.

Further, AU's overall success during the 30 years is thanks to an incredibly successful decade in the 80s. Picking 1982 is convenient for the author's thesis, but it's a totally subjective choice other than that. Yes, Auburn broke the 9 game streak, but what other reason is there to pick that date? If he chose to take the entire decade of the 80s then Bama would have another 2 Iron Bowl victories, two more winning seasons (Auburn finished 5-6 in '80 and '81) 2 more bowl appearances with one victory, two more Top 10 finishes, and another SEC title ('81).

He could have picked the last 20 years (21 if you go from 1990-2010), and Auburn would still have an 11-10 record in the Iron Bowl. But then AU would fall behind in SEC titles (3-2), wins (180-174), bowl appearances (16-14), bowl wins would be equal (10-10), and top 10 finishes (8-4).

If one were to look at the factors leading to AU's success against Bama since 1980 (or 82), the biggest key was their dominance against Bill Curry and Mike Shula (combined 0-7 against the Barn). Remove those guys, and Bama's record is 12-10 in the Iron Bowl.

Subjective analysis cuts both ways.
Click to expand...

but his analysis was about the most relevant time period to current and he didn't have to remove any periods to get to his argument. You had to remove periods in the middle of the argument. He dismisses the forever ago period as irrelevant. It isn't necessarily, but to most current fans, it is. He also laughed at the fabricated 13, just like everyone else does.
 
#19
#19
volinbham said:
1982 is an appropriate metric on 2 levels - it represents the end of the Bear era and is a 30 year interval. If you want to compare over the last 10, 20, 30 Auburn stacks up much better than Bama fans acknowledge.

The point is that Bama fans view their program as vastly superior to Auburn's but the truth is that post Bear Bryant, Auburn is on par if not slightly ahead.
Click to expand...

Actually, 1982-2010 is 29 years, not 30. And while 1982 is the last year of the Bryant era, doesn't it make sense to start in 1983, since that's the first year w/o the Bear? But the author didn't do that, because it gives Auburn 1 more win. '81 would make for an even 30 years, but would boost Bama's numbers and detract from Auburn's.
 
#20
#20
BigPapaVol said:
but his analysis was about the most relevant time period to current and he didn't have to remove any periods to get to his argument.
Click to expand...

How so? Wouldn't the last 20 years be more relevant than the last 30(29)?

Why not take the last 40? Maybe becuase it would add 8 SEC titles, 3 NCs, and 9 Iron Bowl victories for Alabama?

Again, subjective analysis cuts both ways.
 
#21
#21
bamawriter said:
How so? Wouldn't the last 20 years be more relevant than the last 30(29)?

Why not take the last 40? Maybe becuase it would add 8 SEC titles, 3 NCs, and 9 Iron Bowl victories for Alabama?

Again, subjective analysis cuts both ways.
Click to expand...

Well sure the more recent the better. I was under the impression that he handled that relatively well. Taking any period that includes a drunken Bear as coach out the equation makes sense. He's the true difference in the history. Post Bear, AL has a been a very good program, but nothing extraordinary in the SEC.
 
#22
#22
BigPapaVol said:
Well sure the more recent the better. I was under the impression that he handled that relatively well. Taking any period that includes a drunken Bear as coach out the equation makes sense. He's the true difference in the history. Post Bear, AL has a been a very good program, but nothing extraordinary in the SEC.
Click to expand...

He didn't take Bear out of the equation. He started in 1982, Bear's last year.

He picked the earliest year to start from that spins the numbers most favorably toward AU. The only other point he could have started from to skew the numbers more favorably toward AU would be 2002. But 9 years just doesn't seem like as big a deal as 29, does it?

Any other year and the gap either shrinks, or goes back into Bama's favor.
 
Last edited:
#23
#23
BigPapaVol said:
but his analysis was about the most relevant time period to current and he didn't have to remove any periods to get to his argument. You had to remove periods in the middle of the argument. He dismisses the forever ago period as irrelevant. It isn't necessarily, but to most current fans, it is. He also laughed at the fabricated 13, just like everyone else does.
Click to expand...


Won't work, it's always the long run. Football teams are apart of whatever longevity exist in our lives. Looking again at your avy, it must matter. You don't look at your wife and kids in slices and unique numerical perspectives and you don't with that other member of your family, your favorite football team. That someone outside the family has an opinion about them, wouldn't take long to qualify.
 
#24
#24
bamawriter said:
Actually, 1982-2010 is 29 years, not 30. And while 1982 is the last year of the Bryant era, doesn't it make sense to start in 1983, since that's the first year w/o the Bear? But the author didn't do that, because it gives Auburn 1 more win. '81 would make for an even 30 years, but would boost Bama's numbers and detract from Auburn's.
Click to expand...

Add one or subtract one and the overall result is the same - parity. That is is the point.
 
#25
#25
TUSKtimes said:
Won't work, it's always the long run. Football teams are apart of whatever longevity exist in our lives. Looking again at your avy, it must matter. You don't look at your wife and kids in slices and unique numerical perspectives and you don't with that other member of your family, your favorite football team. That someone outside the family has an opinion about them, wouldn't take long to qualify.
Click to expand...

No one is saying Alabama isn't as tradition filled or as successful a program as there is out there.

What the author is saying is that over the last 30 years - a significant time period - Auburn is at parity with Alabama BUT somehow viewed as inferior over that time period.

No one is saying Auburn has equalled the success of Alabama since each has been playing football.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top