awbern fans in meltdown mode right now

[bamasa37sb34]

But, yeah, back to the boogs................

Brandon, you seem to be in a very small minority of aub fans who are not disgusted by this judging from blogs and message boards.

 

[AUTaxMan]

But, yeah, back to the boogs................

Brandon, you seem to be in a very small minority of aub fans who are not disgusted by this judging from blogs and message boards.

I know this. They are being emotional and irrational. Again, wins matter if you want a MNC. Opponents do not. You play one quality OOC opponent a year and that is enough. There is no real advantage to playing two except for the marginal recruiting exposure you might achieve that you otherwise would not have.

 

[n05114]

But, yeah, back to the boogs................

Brandon, you seem to be in a very small minority of aub fans who are not disgusted by this judging from blogs and message boards.

Count me as another Auburn fan who's not disgusted by the news. If we play UCLA, fine. If we don't, fine. We have the SEC season and Clemson, which translates into a top-10 schedule.

And the national exposure angle is overrated. Didn't Bama open the season with UCLA sometime around '97? How'd that exposure work out for you guys over the next 10 years? You spent that time battling S. Carolina for the coveted 8th-best team in the SEC award.

In a way, I do applaud Auburn for sticking to their guns and not scheduling the game just because some twit in NYC who hasn't touched a football since he was seven wanted us to.

Finally, Auburn and Alabama have two different philosophies towards football. And in my time of watching both (the past 27 years), Auburn's philosophy has, WITHOUT A DOUBT, resulted in more success. And it ain't because we're more recognizable or because ESPN loves us.

 

[n05114]

Me too....you can't be a big boy without playing against big boys.

But losing sucks regardless of who it is against

I would agree with this, too. That's why I'm glad to see that Auburn has, historically, played the 2nd-toughest schedule in the SEC (Florida is the toughest).

I'm also glad to see that in those tough games Auburn has the 2nd-best winning % in the SEC (once again, behind only Florida).

If you look at success vs. the Big Boys along the number of games played vs. Big Boys, Auburn is top-5 nationally. But why let facts get in the way of a good bashing.

Just a guess, but the 2009 UCLA Bruins will not qualify as a big boy.

 

[AUTaxMan]

I would agree with this, too. That's why I'm glad to see that Auburn has, historically, played the 2nd-toughest schedule in the SEC (Florida is the toughest).

I'm also glad to see that in those tough games Auburn has the 2nd-best winning % in the SEC (once again, behind only Florida).

If you look at success vs. the Big Boys along the number of games played vs. Big Boys, Auburn is top-5 nationally. But why let facts get in the way of a good bashing.

Just a guess, but the 2009 UCLA Bruins will not qualify as a big boy.

I don't understand why the Bammers are so interested in our schedule anyway.

 

[bamasa37sb34]

I don't understand why the Bammers are so interested in our schedule anyway.

Know and then appropriately make fun of thy enemy op: