Question: Alabama's 4 Game Stretch Of Ranked Opponents

I remember a stat during 2010 during our 3 game stretch against @ark, UF, and @USCe (all ranked) that no one in the modern era had done it. The only other attempt was USCw under CPC (he failed as well). So we might be the only ones now to do it. I defer to Selma on stats like this, but I'm kinda leaning that we are the only ones to do 3 straight in the modern era. Could be wrong though, and if so this is unprecedented.

Totally agree - it has been hard to believe how easily Alabama has handled these teams. Still, as Saban would say, none of that matters right now. Remember LSU in 2011. They had an amazing season, too.

B1GTide said:

Totally agree - it has been hard to believe how easily Alabama has handled these teams. Still, as Saban would say, none of that matters right now. Remember LSU in 2011. They had an amazing season, too.

Click to expand...

They only did 2 ranked in a row twice. Their 3 game stretch (while no consecutive weeks) ended when they played us in Nola. But they had a very impressive season.

sanjosecrimson said:

since the team has a bye week coming up , I had time to relax and have been thinking about Bama's remarkable run so far . it led me to inquire about this question:

can anybody tell me and this board when was the last time Alabama played 4 straight ranked opponents let alone defeating 3 out of 4 thus far.
more amazing is the fact that 3 out of the 4 games during this stretch is on the road!!
2 were B2B Top 10 teams ( Tennessee and Texas AM).

TIA

Click to expand...

Technically, we went 4-0 against Florida, Michigan St, Clemson, and USC across 2015-16, but I assume that's NOT what you mean.

The first one that comes immediately to my mind is 1999 - Arkansas, Florida, Ole Miss, Tennessee.

We won the first three.

We played four in a row to end 1994 - MSU, Auburn, Florida, Ohio State - we beat three and lost to Florida by a single point. That's the only two times I know of during my fanhood that extends back to 1978.

Then I guess they were referring to top 5 teams during the bcs era when they put that stat out.

Btw - here's one that will shock you - but in 1983, Auburn played AND BEAT FIVE consecutive ranked opponents:

#5 Florida
#7 Maryland (with Boomer Esiason)
#4 Georgia
#19 Alabama
#8 Michigan

selmaborntidefan said:

Btw - here's one that will shock you - but in 1983, Auburn played AND BEAT FIVE consecutive ranked opponents:

#5 Florida
#7 Maryland (with Boomer Esiason)
#4 Georgia
#19 Alabama
#8 Michigan

Click to expand...

..and finished second in the nation behind Miami who upset Nebraska in the Orange Bowl...
Rival or not, they got ripped off. That was a Bo Jackson led, absolutely great football team.

Alasippi said:

..and finished second in the nation behind Miami who upset Nebraska in the Orange Bowl...
Rival or not, they got ripped off. That was a Bo Jackson led, absolutely great football team.

Click to expand...

The argument for the 83 auburn team has been made so many times, but if auburn still refuses to claim it why not just let it be like the 04 auburn team in that they were not champions. I see way more Bama fans trying to replace the 41 title with the 66 non title than I do from auburn fans trying to say that the 83 title is theirs. So I say Miami (who lost to Florida while auburn beat them) is the champ if auburn , with Jay Jacobs and Pat Dye at the top of the organization, still refuse to claim it. I find more Alabama fans arguing for the 83 season than Auburn fans.

Alasippi said:

..and finished second in the nation behind Miami who upset Nebraska in the Orange Bowl...
Rival or not, they got ripped off. That was a Bo Jackson led, absolutely great football team.

Click to expand...

They're first loss 20-7 to Texas at home put them in a hole football press had reason to keep hammering.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

tidegrandpa said:

They're first loss 20-7 to Texas at home put them in a hole football press had reason to keep hammering.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Them not destroying Michigan, and Osbourne going for 2 had more to do with it than their loss to Texas. Honestly I find more reason to give Nebraska than Auburn, because if they do the dye thing and settle for a tie then none of this is a debate. Even then it's still a hard argument of justifying that either Auburn or Miami should jump them. Auburn for the fact that it was an optional two point play that puts them in any capacity to argue for the title and Miami for the fact that they were #5 going into that game. Neither are 100% deserving, but again if Jay Jacobs didn't claim it when he had the opportunity a few years ago, then Auburn is not national champs in 1983.

selmaborntidefan said:

We played four in a row to end 1994 - MSU, Auburn, Florida, Ohio State - we beat three and lost to Florida by a single point. That's the only two times I know of during my fanhood that extends back to 1978.

Click to expand...

You are a treasure to have on this board. It is like having a Sheldon Cooper that loves Alabama football as a friend.

sanjosecrimson said:

really?? I was a teenager when auburn was good in the 80s. that's very impressive for auburn!!

Click to expand...

That's impressive for anybody.

OreBama said:

You are a treasure to have on this board. It is like having a Sheldon Cooper that loves Alabama football as a friend.

Click to expand...

Appreciate the kind words.

tidegrandpa said:

They're first loss 20-7 to Texas at home put them in a hole football press had reason to keep hammering.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

And the day someone can explain how that trumps Miami getting absolutely mauled, 28-3, and playing a softer schedule is the day there will be snow flurries in Hell

The 1983 season epitomized everything that was wrong with FBS football in that era. It was an era in which too many games ended in ties, and idiots with agendas decided national championships rather than play on the field. Sadly, we had to endure another decade of this stuff until the move to the BCS method, and then the playoff.

Who should have won it all that year? I'd vote for Nebraska, though they lost to Miami, simply because of how they lost to Miami. All they had to do was kick the extra point and they win a share of the championship. So they are less a champion because they tried for an honorable ending to the game? Not in my book.

B1GTide said:

The 1983 season epitomized everything that was wrong with FBS football in that era. It was an era in which too many games ended in ties, and idiots with agendas decided national championships rather than play on the field. Sadly, we had to endure another decade of this stuff until the move to the BCS method, and then the playoff.

Who should have won it all that year? I'd vote for Nebraska, though they lost to Miami, simply because of how they lost to Miami. All they had to do was kick the extra point and they win a share of the championship. So they are less a champion because they tried for an honorable ending to the game? Not in my book.

Click to expand...

Oh how right you are about the idiots running the college football. Tie games, top ranked teams seldom playing each other in a bowl. It was stupid that it went on so long.

B1GTide said:

The 1983 season epitomized everything that was wrong with FBS football in that era. It was an era in which too many games ended in ties, and idiots with agendas decided national championships rather than play on the field. Sadly, we had to endure another decade of this stuff until the move to the BCS method, and then the playoff.

Who should have won it all that year? I'd vote for Nebraska, though they lost to Miami, simply because of how they lost to Miami. All they had to do was kick the extra point and they win a share of the championship. So they are less a champion because they tried for an honorable ending to the game? Not in my book.

Click to expand...

I don't disagree with your first paragraph. However, if Nebraska had gone for the tie, then IMO the NC should have gone to Auburn. Since they went for it and failed, I still say Auburn deserved the NC over Miami. IMO, Miami did not deserve even a share of that title, unless Auburn lost the Sugar Bowl.