Just A Little Ticked About...

#1
Lexvol

Lexvol

I'm Your Huckleberry
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
22,284
Likes
241
#1
After Auburn put three players in the top ten, and four in the first round don't you think they should have shared a NT?

If they had been from any other major conference the AP would have voted them co champs just to be contrary.

This draft is proof of a marvelous coaching job at UT last year.

Even in a down year the SEC was packed with star power.

 
#2
#2
Auburn got screwed, no doubt about it.

But, they didn't win any part of the NC.
 
#3
#3
Auburn has had probably the second or third best draft performance. Oklahoma has easily doen the best, with 11 players drafted so far, including 2 first rounders. Florida State and Auburn are tied for about second best, IMO.

I think that the Big XII has done slightly better than the SEC in drafted talent so far, but they are both definitley done well.
 
#4
#4
Originally posted by Lexvol@Apr 24, 2005 2:52 PM
After Auburn put three players in the top ten, and four in the first round don't you think they should have shared a NT?

If they had been from any other major conference the AP would have voted them co champs just to be contrary.

This draft is proof of a marvelous coaching job at UT last year.

Even in a down year the SEC was packed with star power.
Click to expand...

i dont think they should have....screw Auburn! I enjoyed OU getting railed
 
#5
#5
Auburn had a team technically that shouldve drawn consideration...but because their AD was a tightwad and didnt outbid to play bowling green they lost valuable points by playing the citadel instead. Did they get wronged....yeah....but they also screwed their own squad by practicing bad business, and as they are Auburn....screw em. :twocents:
 
#6
#6
^ Absolutely. I quite frankly don't care if a team is in the SEC. Want SOS points? Schedule tough teams outside of your league.
 
#7
#7
Originally posted by Lexvol@Apr 24, 2005 2:52 PM
After Auburn put three players in the top ten, and four in the first round don't you think they should have shared a NT?

If they had been from any other major conference the AP would have voted them co champs just to be contrary.

This draft is proof of a marvelous coaching job at UT last year.

Even in a down year the SEC was packed with star power.
Click to expand...

why are u ticked about auburn.

u should be worried about the vols. let auburn take care of their own problems.
 
#8
#8
Originally posted by checkerboard_charly+Apr 24, 2005 6:41 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (checkerboard_charly &#064; Apr 24, 2005 6:41 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Lexvol@Apr 24, 2005 2:52 PM
After Auburn put three players in the top ten, and four in the first round don&#39;t you think they should have shared a NT?

If they had been from any other major conference the AP would have voted them co champs just to be contrary. 

This draft is proof of a marvelous coaching job at UT last year.

Even in a down year the SEC was packed with star power.
Click to expand...

why are u ticked about auburn.

u should be worried about the vols. let auburn take care of their own problems.[/quote]
I think the frustration is more a case of the Southeastern Conference being dissed than Auburn, so that is something we should care about.

The AP very well would have given a share of the Championship to a top Big Ten, Big Twelve, or PAC-10 team if they were in Auburn&#39;s position.

Heck, if it had been Miami or Florida State, they&#39;d have been given a co-Championship too.

I agree totally that the national press as a whole has an anti-SEC bias&#33;
:furious3:
 
#9
#9
its all money u guys.

the media wanted to see oklahoma and usc. and that is what they got.

obviously they were wrong but oh well.

money makes the world go round and round.
 
#10
#10
Auburn&#39;s OOC schedule was a complete joke.

LSU had a horrible OOC schedule the previous year but got away with it.

 
#11
#11
Originally posted by checkerboard_charly@Apr 24, 2005 7:06 PM
its all money u guys.

the media wanted to see oklahoma and usc. and that is what they got.
Click to expand...

Yeah but what does that have to do with the AP not voting Auburn a share of the National Championship after the bowl games, as they did with Southern Cal when LSU won the BCS Championship Game?

Please explain how &#39;money&#39; affected that.

All I know is that when an SEC school wins the BCS Championship, the media thumbs their collective nose at the BCS and gives their &#39;championship&#39; to an undefeated Southern Cal.

When Southern Cal wins the BCS Game, the media goes along with the BCS and screws over an undefeated Auburn. On the face of it, that is
:bs:

Of course Auburn could have helped their cause by scheduling a better oppponent after their original opponent backed out of the game. However, I still think the media--and the Coaches Poll--do not give the SEC the credit it is due&#33;
 
#12
#12
Originally posted by U&#045;T@Apr 24, 2005 7:24 PM
Auburn&#39;s OOC schedule was a complete joke.

LSU had a horrible OOC schedule the previous year but got away with it.
Click to expand...

And Southern Cal&#39;s in-conference schedule is a joke&#33;&#33; Additionally, I think PAC-10 schools should be penalized by the pollstrers for being too cowardly to have a Conference Championship Game.
:twocents:
 
#13
#13
That is very subjective to many voters in the AP and College Coaches.....USC&#39;s SOS was not horrible.

Auburn screwed itself
 
#14
#14
Sorry to rant, but this subject gets me fired up&#33;&#33;

Don&#39;t forget that they changed the BCS formula this past season to make the polls---thus the media--more powerful in determining who gets in the BCS Bowl Game.

LSU made it to the Big Game based on a formula that was more objective, in my opinion [with a Johnny Majors accent] . It sux to have journalists, many of whom don&#39;t know jack about college football, as an important part of choosing who goes to the Big Game.

Likewise, good coaches focus on their own team and the opponents on their schedule. Many votes in the Coaches Poll are done by ADs (who vote based on self-interest) or coaches who read the papers on Sunday and/or glance at the box scores of games.
 
#15
#15
Sorry to say this, But really come on now. The way USC played that night, no one could have beat them. That was a beating.
 
#16
#16
Originally posted by vols2345@Apr 24, 2005 7:43 PM
Sorry to say this, But really come on now.  The way USC played that night, no one could have beat them.  That was a beating.
Click to expand...

You can look at that 1 game, but I&#39;m looking at their whole season.

Southern Cal only played 4 teams with winning records last (regular) season.

Also, of their 4 non-conference opponents, only 1 school--Va Tech--had a winning record.

That is what most would call a crappy schedule.
 
#17
#17
Get over it...they would have beat anyone that night. You can&#39;t penalize a school just bc their record isnt as hard as someone elses. They won every game, and so did OU. Just bc Auburn is an SEC school doesn&#39;t mean we should cry about it. It was almost 5 months ago
 
#19
#19
Auburn knew what they were getting into when they scheduled a weak out of conference schedule. You need to dominate out of your conference as well as in to get to the national championship game. I thought yall would have put this behind you by now.
 
#20
#20
Originally posted by vols2345@Apr 24, 2005 8:08 PM
Auburn knew what they were getting into when they scheduled a weak out of conference schedule. You need to dominate out of your conference as well as in to get to the national championship game. I thought yall would have put this behind you by now.
Click to expand...

Citadel...o yea :beer:
 
#21
#21
Originally posted by TroyCG@Apr 24, 2005 5:27 PM
And Southern Cal&#39;s in-conference schedule is a joke&#33;&#33; Additionally, I think PAC-10 schools should be penalized by the pollstrers for being too cowardly to have a Conference Championship Game.
:twocents:
Click to expand...

The NCAA requires a conference to have 12 teams in order to split into two divisions and thus have a championship game. The Pac-10 isn&#39;t allowed to have a championship game.
 
#23
#23
Originally posted by TroyCG@Apr 24, 2005 5:55 PM
You can look at that 1 game, but I&#39;m looking at their whole season.

Southern Cal only played 4 teams with winning records last (regular) season.

Also, of their 4 non-conference opponents, only 1 school--Va Tech--had a winning record.

That is what most would call a crappy schedule.
Click to expand...

You&#39;re calling Notre Dame crappy? There was this one game the Domers played last year... I think they beat Tennessee in Knoxville or something. But you&#39;re right, I guess they suck anyways. Also, BYU was supposed to have a far better year than they did, but USC actually tried to schedule a decently tough team, unlike Auburn. Colorado State was supposed to be the same way. USC got unlucky, but they beat them both by a combined 91-10.
 
#25
#25
Yeah - that&#39;s the funniest thing about this goofy "USC played a weak schedule" argument. The Pac-10&#39;s relative strength is something that was beyond USC&#39;s control. It was Auburn who could have scheduled any three non-conference games they wanted and chose The Citadel, La Tech and La-Monroe.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top