I understand it is the only reference point, but you really can't predict who would have won that game. Oklahoma earned a national championship bid 2 straight years and both years prevented the 2 best teams from playing. You think USC would have won. That's fine, but you don't know for sure and that is why you play the game.

I understand it is the only reference point, but you really can't predict who would have won that game. Oklahoma earned a national championship bid 2 straight years and both years prevented the 2 best teams from playing. You think USC would have won. That's fine, but you don't know for sure and that is why you play the game.

It's just that after two years of seeing this Auburn talk on here, it gets old. Do we know for sure? No. SO STOP TALKING ABOUT IT...

So, are you saying Leinart, Bush and White didn't get any better as well? It's a point of refrence, and is the only real marker to show that USC was the clear favorite in 04 reguardless of who they played in early January. I know it hurts the SEC homers feeling to hear, but that's just how it was...

 

You just do not get it do you? Im not saying Auburn would have won. But what happens the year before has no influence at all over what might have happened the next year. Case in point. Villanova handled Florida, who had all their star players in the NCAA tourney in 2005, In 2006, Florida manhandled Villanova who had Ray, Foye, and the others.

You just do not get it do you? Im not saying Auburn would have won. But what happens the year before has no influence at all over what might have happened the next year. Case in point. Villanova handled Florida, who had all their star players in the NCAA tourney in 2005, In 2006, Florida manhandled Villanova who had Ray, Foye, and the others.

I don't get it and you are refrencing a DIFFERENT SPORT. :lol: Classic. For the final time. Auburn didn't EARN a spot in that title game because they (like just about all of the SEC) refuse to play the BCS game. You can hate it, and complain all you want, but it's ignoring reality...

I don't get it and you are refrencing a DIFFERENT SPORT. :lol: Classic. For the final time. Auburn didn't EARN a spot in that title game because they (like just about all of the SEC) refuse to play the BCS game. You can hate it, and complain all you want, but it's ignoring reality...

 

All I am saying is there is no way you can say that USC would have beat Auburn. We will never know that and to say they would is just silly is simply a biased anti-SEC statement.

All I am saying is there is no way you can say that USC would have beat Auburn. We will never know that and to say they would is just silly is simply a biased anti-SEC statement.

5Wide gave his opinion, and it's one I've heard from everyone but the SEC homers. Is there a chance they could have pulled the major upset? Sure. That's why they play the game. But to fans who watch objectively, there was no stopping USC at that point in that season. I see nothing wrong with what he said, and I think most of the country would agree. Auburn was likely better than Oklahoma, but the schedule, and poor season the year before left them in a BCS hole that was too large to climb out of...

5Wide gave his opinion, and it's one I've heard from everyone but the SEC homers. Is there a chance they could have pulled the major upset? Sure. That's why they play the game. But to fans who watch objectively, there was no stopping USC at that point in that season. I see nothing wrong with what he said, and I think most of the country would agree. Auburn was likely better than Oklahoma, but the schedule, and poor season the year before left them in a BCS hole that was too large to climb out of...

 

Do I think Auburn deserved to play in that National title game? Yes I do. But at the same time so did Oklahoma and USC.

All I am saying is I think its way off to use the logic that USC would have beaten Auburn anyways.

I know thats your opinion. But last year no one gave Texas a chance at beating USC. ESPN had a series about if them maybe being the greatest college football team ever, but they got beat.

Also I dont believe hardly anyone thought Ohio St would beat Miami a few years ago.

So to say Auburn couldnt beat USC and that they werent just as good is merely opinion with no solid logic behind it.

 

No, to say Auburn would have beat USC is merely opinion with no solid logic behind.

 

You make the point yourself by bringing up the fact that it would have been an upset along the lines of Ohio State over Miami.

 

Two things...the USC team last year was clearly not as good as the previous year because the defense was nowhere near the same. Also, Texas last year was better than Auburn from the previous year, and they had one of greatest college QB's of all time in Vince Young. Auburn didn't have anything close to a game changer of that caliber.

 

And, to clarify one more point, I never said Auburn couldn't beat them. I realize that anything is possible when two teams step on the field. To say Auburn would have won can't be backed up with anything that is close to convincing. And, again, you make that point yourself by comparing it to the Ohio State/Miami matchup.

No, to say Auburn would have beat USC is merely opinion with no solid logic behind.

 

You make the point yourself by bringing up the fact that it would have been an upset along the lines of Ohio State over Miami.

 

Two things...the USC team last year was clearly not as good as the previous year because the defense was nowhere near the same. Also, Texas last year was better than Auburn from the previous year, and they had one of greatest college QB's of all time in Vince Young. Auburn didn't have anything close to a game changer of that caliber.

 

And, to clarify one more point, I never said Auburn couldn't beat them. I realize that anything is possible when two teams step on the field. To say Auburn would have won can't be backed up with anything that is close to convincing. And, again, you make that point yourself by comparing it to the Ohio State/Miami matchup.

 

Hey I am a big Texas fan and am glad they won the game last year. But how can you just simply say Texas was better than Auburn? We simply do not know that.

5Wide gave his opinion, and it's one I've heard from everyone but the SEC homers. Is there a chance they could have pulled the major upset? Sure. That's why they play the game. But to fans who watch objectively, there was no stopping USC at that point in that season. I see nothing wrong with what he said, and I think most of the country would agree. Auburn was likely better than Oklahoma, but the schedule, and poor season the year before left them in a BCS hole that was too large to climb out of...

 

Hey, I'm an SEC homer and I still say that. I wonder if I'm still welcome...:scared:

Hey, I'm an SEC homer and I still say that. I wonder if I'm still welcome...:scared:

I think your card has been revoked... :lol:

Hey I am a big Texas fan and am glad they won the game last year. But how can you just simply say Texas was better than Auburn? We simply do not know that.

 

It's an opinion. But, it's refreshing to know you think highly enough of it to take it for fact.

 

Anyway, it's an opinion, based on what I saw. You can form your own opinion, if you want to. And if you think Auburn was better, that's fine as well. I don't care. I'm just telling you what I think and why.

 

Texas beat the 3rd best team in the country on their home field. Then they rolled through the rest of their schedule. Then they outscored one of, if not the best, offenses in the history of college football en route to beating the 2nd best team in the country. They had Vince Young, one of the best QB's in collegiate history. And they had a great defense. In my OPINION, that adds up to them being better than the Auburn team from the previous year.