What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Auburn football = the craziest (1 Viewer)

I assume this is a marketing play for recruiting, '5X' licensed product, etc. But the problem is everyone sees right thru it.

 
I'd like to take this opportunity to congratulate Bowling Green for their spectacular run of national championships from 1993-1997 and to be thankful for the opportunity to be the starting QB for most of that time.

:bowtie:

 
I'm fine with this, except for 93, as it's all marketing/recruiting BS anyways. Should've chosen 04 over 93.

I'VE GOT SOME T-SHIRTS TO PRINT, #####ES.

 
I'm fine with this, except for 93, as it's all marketing/recruiting BS anyways. Should've chosen 04 over 93.

I'VE GOT SOME T-SHIRTS TO PRINT, #####ES.
Why did they pass on 04? That's actually one I could semi-see.

 
What is the difference between this and the fictional "national championship" title they give out now?
They played a title game and everything. Maybe you missed it?
Yeah...."title"
Nobody cares about your dopey protest. They got a trophy, rings, hats, the whole thing.
Yeah, they got a trophy! So it's like official and stuff cause a computer said so.

 
What is the difference between this and the fictional "national championship" title they give out now?
They played a title game and everything. Maybe you missed it?
Yeah...."title"
Nobody cares about your dopey protest. They got a trophy, rings, hats, the whole thing.
Yeah, they got a trophy! So it's like official and stuff cause a computer said so.
Ok that game didn't happen in your world. I don't care. :shrug:

 
I assume this is a marketing play for recruiting, '5X' licensed product, etc. But the problem is everyone sees right thru it.
Alabama did the same thing in 1986. Don't be so disingenuous
You and I both know the differences (including the timing with Alabama changing its titles 30 years ago), and more importantly they're obvious to the consumer. Maybe I'm wrong and AU fans eat this up, but I doubt it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Honestly if Florida State did this I would be completely embarrassed. It just seems so corny. It's like some guy lying to himself that he has 20 grand in the bank while he's broke.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I assume this is a marketing play for recruiting, '5X' licensed product, etc. But the problem is everyone sees right thru it.
Alabama did the same thing in 1986. Don't be so disingenuous
You and I both know the differences (including the timing with Alabama changing its titles 30 years ago), and more importantly they're obvious to the consumer. Maybe I'm wrong and AU fans eat this up, but I doubt it.
What are the differences. I often read about how Bama counts more titles than other sources recognize.

 
I assume this is a marketing play for recruiting, '5X' licensed product, etc. But the problem is everyone sees right thru it.
Alabama did the same thing in 1986. Don't be so disingenuous
You and I both know the differences (including the timing with Alabama changing its titles 30 years ago), and more importantly they're obvious to the consumer. Maybe I'm wrong and AU fans eat this up, but I doubt it.
What are the differences. I often read about how Bama counts more titles than other sources recognize.
For one thing, sources recognize all of them. The issue is some are back when there were a lot of sources. No one is recognizing Auburn in '93 though.

 
What is the difference between this and the fictional "national championship" title they give out now?
They played a title game and everything. Maybe you missed it?
Yeah...."title"
Nobody cares about your dopey protest. They got a trophy, rings, hats, the whole thing.
Yeah, they got a trophy! So it's like official and stuff cause a computer said so.
Ok that game didn't happen in your world. I don't care. :shrug:
What game? The one where a computer picked what it thought was the best teams using a math formula?

 
What is the difference between this and the fictional "national championship" title they give out now?
They played a title game and everything. Maybe you missed it?
Yeah...."title"
Nobody cares about your dopey protest. They got a trophy, rings, hats, the whole thing.
Yeah, they got a trophy! So it's like official and stuff cause a computer said so.
Ok that game didn't happen in your world. I don't care. :shrug:
What game? The one where a computer picked what it thought was the best teams using a math formula?
Pretty sure some humans some input here as well.

 
What is the difference between this and the fictional "national championship" title they give out now?
They played a title game and everything. Maybe you missed it?
Yeah...."title"
Nobody cares about your dopey protest. They got a trophy, rings, hats, the whole thing.
Yeah, they got a trophy! So it's like official and stuff cause a computer said so.
Ok that game didn't happen in your world. I don't care. :shrug:
What game? The one where a computer picked what it thought was the best teams using a math formula?
Sure if that's what you want to think. :shrug:

 
Cool, Nebraska now has 14.

Nebraska has also been awarded nine other national championships by various polling organizations:%5B35%5D

  • 1915, 1921, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1993, 1999
And I think we can throw the undefeated teams of 1902, 1903, and 1913 in there also for 17. :thumbup:

 
Last edited:
gump said:
Premier said:
gump said:
FDAS said:
I assume this is a marketing play for recruiting, '5X' licensed product, etc. But the problem is everyone sees right thru it.
Alabama did the same thing in 1986. Don't be so disingenuous
You and I both know the differences (including the timing with Alabama changing its titles 30 years ago), and more importantly they're obvious to the consumer. Maybe I'm wrong and AU fans eat this up, but I doubt it.
What are the differences. I often read about how Bama counts more titles than other sources recognize.
For one thing, sources recognize all of them. The issue is some are back when there were a lot of sources. No one is recognizing Auburn in '93 though.
Same criteria to a degree on what AU is now claiming from what I can tell. AU had a few older championships they could have claimed. I'm not sure why they settled on only taking part of the ones that certain sources recognize. To me it's either you take them all, no matter who and how questionable, as Alabama did, or take only the "major" ones, which they have done up until now. What Auburn is doing is somewhere in between.

The guy who did the claiming for Bama was actually from my hometown. His father used to be the pastor at the church I grew up at. He's a super nice guy and he finds it all pretty amusing now from what little I've heard come from him on it. It's been a marketing bonanza for Alabama though. How many shirts and hats did they sell for years with "12" on it? Now they've gotten to resell the shirts and hats to those same people 3 more times. That alone made it worth doing for Alabama.

I'm an Auburn alum, I really could care less. I don't care about any claim to '04, just hate never getting a shot to play in the BCS Championship that year. This past year's team needed an Ohio State loss at the end and I could have easily handled them not making it to the game. Plus they obviously would have lost to Georgia as well without a fluke bounce. The 2004 team never getting that shot stings.

 
Premier said:
Honestly if Florida State did this I would be completely embarrassed. It just seems so corny. It's like some guy lying to himself that he has 20 grand in the bank while he's broke.
Please, none of these large programs today have any humility or greater since of morality over the other. It's all about marketing and in the end, money. FSU is the most recent example with Jameis Winston. I'm not claiming any of the others would have handled it differently but FSU is right up there at the top with the rest of the anything for money group.

 
Premier said:
Honestly if Florida State did this I would be completely embarrassed. It just seems so corny. It's like some guy lying to himself that he has 20 grand in the bank while he's broke.
Please, none of these large programs today have any humility or greater since of morality over the other. It's all about marketing and in the end, money. FSU is the most recent example with Jameis Winston. I'm not claiming any of the others would have handled it differently but FSU is right up there at the top with the rest of the anything for money group.
I never said any of these schools had any morality. They're all whores. But how is playing Jameis Winston the same as claiming a bunch of fake titles that everybody is laughing about?

Before you say what I know you're going to say, keep in mind he was never charged, which makes a pretty big difference IMO. If they played that guy after he caught a rape charge, I would've stopped donating and I'm sure a lot of others would have as well.

 
And while this is certainly about money for auburn it's also a little brother mentality with Bama. They're trying to catch up....Jacobs even said something a few months back like "well if they're doing it we should be too."

 
Let me get it right. You will donate if they play a likely rapist but won't if he's charged? Right.

For the record, I donated to FSU whether he was charged or not and actually prefer they did play him because he made me money on tickets by winning. I'm not piling on them for that I'm the first one not to care as long as I make a buck. It's up to FSU to police that, not me. But let's all admit all we care about is either the program winning or money.

As far as Auburn it's a recruiting and/or marketing thing. Again I think they should claim all or none of the obscure ones. Not the some of them approach they appear to be heading toward. It's about recruiting or marketing and therefore in the end, winning and/or money.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top