LOL: Auburn retroactively claims 1913, 1983 & 1993(!!) NCs
This has been blowing up on Twitter.
Auburn previously claimed only two MNCs: 1957 and 2010.
Their website now says they claim the 1913, 1983 and 1993 MNCs.
1993. You know, the year they were banned from a bowl as well as a TELEVISION ban.
This would be like ohio claiming the 2012 MNC.
I went there for the Iron Bowl last year. They put up a statue of Cam Newton outside their stadium. They are capable of claiming / doing ANYTHING.
He played really good, but In what world does a guy get a statue after playing at a school for 1 year?
The statue wasn't in celebration of his success on the field... it's in celebration of Auburn out-bidding Mississippi State for his services.
The placque reads: "In honor of Auburn's success in paying for Reverand Newton's brand new church when Miss. St. only offered to pave the old church's driveway."
I had a dog and his name was BINGO!
Everyone takes money? Then why did the NCAA crater the Michigan basketball program and let Auburn and the entire $EC get away with what they do.
I don't know, ThadMattasagoblin. I'm sure you have fascinating insights, though.
ESS EEE SEE....More MNC than any other conference!! WHOOOOOOO
They also claimed National titles in 2019, 2034, and 2036
Nobody selected Auburn as their MNC in 2004.
Despite their new claims being a joke, they were actually selected by someone.
- 1913- Billingsley Report
- 1983- Billingsley, College Football Researchers, New York Times, Sagarin
- 1993- National Championship Foundation
If Michigan wanted to do this, they could claim 1925, 1926, 1964, 1973 and 1985.
I read that like "too close to call."
"Not sure if we won or not, there; wish there were some way to tell . . . Oh well, file the papers."
Let's just go ahead and claim those questionable ones too! lol
Yes. If you want to beat the SEC you gotta compete like the SEC.
They claim a bunch of paper NC's, you claim a bunch of paper NC's. They have a couple of bagmen, you have a couple of bagmen. We can totally do this.
This would be like ohio claiming the 2012 MNC.
The state of Alabama seems to be confused as to what a National Championship is, but I guess that's to be expected seeing as they aren't deep fried, covered in grease, or on a stick.
And that's just butter.
But they did pay money for them, so there's that.
Well, that's cute.
Auburn should build a statue for the Bag Man.
I suppose that there are two questions that now arise if they are going to claim the 1993 championship:
1) Did they have to carjack Florida State to manage this?
2) Does it mean that Pat Dye can rest just that much easier?
OK, maybe three...
3) Is this just a ploy to give Terry Bowden another thing to discuss?
Three of MSU's "national championships" are claimed when their team was ranked 3 and 4. Their coaches wiki page does not even list them because they are so ridiculous. Teams seem to do this more and more.
We should claim the two years for Bo and say he won those as national championships.
We went 9-0-3, the only undefeated team in the land! We should claim that ! /s
Alabama was 13-0 in 1992. Let's claim it anyway.
Multi National Corporation?
Mythical National Championship
Texas (11-0) lost to Georgia (Cotton Bowl) by 1 pt.
Auburn was extremely fortunate to escape Michigan in the 1984 Sugar Bowl - by a butt hair (by Al Del Greco's butthair to be precise) 9-7.
1983 Miami (FL) (10-1) had an almost identical season to Auburn (10-1). They lost badly to Florida (by 25 pts) in season opener. Then beat Nebraska in Orange Bowl by lousy point.
Except there is one gigantic difference between Auburn and Miami's season:
Nebraska was 12-0 and ranked No. 1 all year in every single game it played.
Auburn's Sugar Bowl opponent Michigan was 9-2 and ranked 8th.
Auburn, your '83 wishbone offense was cool, but your '83 MNC argument is invalid.
is another reason why Miami (FL) (No. 5) blew their doors off in the rankings after the Hurricanes beat Nebraska in the Orange Bowl.
Auburn struggled to beat a team (Michigan) who had lost by 1 pt to Washington (8-4) and by 10 pts to Illinois (10-1, who got shellacked 45-9 to UCLA in Rose Bowl).
And we kept Bo Jackson completely out of the end zone. Their only scoring was on 3 field goals. Hardly the stuff of legends.
If everyone else is going to claim stupid "national titles" like A&M, Auburn, etc. have done recently, we might as well claim the 5 or 6 fake ones we have too. That'd put us up to 16 or 17 I believe
I guess.
That looks suspiciously like an ad in the bowl.
FIRE BRANDON !!!!1!!!one!!!1!!
According to sources, Auburn also claims two superbolw trophies from the 90's and, thanks to a glich in the space-time continuum, Cam Newton took MVP honors in both games.
You guys know Michigan has some sketchy national title claims from way back when, right? Particularly 1947. Obviously not THIS bad, but we can only talk so much unless you can say Michigan's oft-cited national title claim is a little ludicrous.
and there are MANY.....Auburn is perhaps the dirtiest and sleaziest
"1993. You know, the year they were banned from a bowl as well as a TELEVISION ban.
This would be like ohio claiming the 2012 MNC."
Living here, they kind of do. There are t-shirts I've seen around that advertise them as "The real national champions" and list all the top teams in order of record where it shows them on top at 12-0 followed by Alabama at 13-1, Notre Dame 12-1 and so on.
I was at a sports bar last night full of memorabilia from all the local pro and college teams, as is typical. But the single biggest thing was a blown up newspaper article the size of half a friggin' wall where the headline read something along the lines of 2012 OSU being the only undefeated team in college football.
You'll get the occasional rational OSU fan that will admit Alabama was probably the better team. But I'm not sure I've heard a single one of them say that they didn't deserve a title because of the sanctions.
As for Auburn claiming the titles, I don't mind.
For starters, pretty much every program will claim as many titles as possible. We certainly claim a few that fans of other programs dispute. Notre Dame is another great example. Alabama used to be notorious for it before leaving no doubt on these recent few.
But we haven't had a playoff or even a BCS for most of college football history. Any time you have two teams with the same record and few if any common opponents, to me it never seemed right to award one the outright title and the other just a #2 finish purely because both polls agreed. For example, why is Nebraska a split champ for 1997 but Penn State doesn't get to claim 1994? It's not because of record, it's not because of bowl results. It's because Penn State was voted #2 in two subjective polls and Nebraska managed to grab a #1 vote in one of the two polls. In my opinion, being that they never lost a game I think PSU has every right to call themselves national champions for that year if they want. Years where every team finishes with one loss, it becomes even blurrier I think.
So claim whatever titles you want. There was no playoff and most years not even a #1 vs #2 game for most of CFB's history. Why shouldn't an undefeated Michigan team claim 1947 for example? I'm calling it ours.
Michigan does claim 1947. They were named MNC by the AP in a post-bowl vote.
Let them claim what they want; the court of public opinion basically ignores most of these MNC claims, and at some point you are just making a stink for the alumni and marketing departments.