So this is probably a Selma question or a question I should have waited till the off season to ask. but hyping the TSIO I ran across the 93 game. That is the only tie I have ever remembered in my life and I was a kid when it happened.. I know the phrase “ties are like kissing your sister” but the 93 game felt more like a win cause we trolled Tennessee.
My question is. Did ties in general feel as bad as a loss or was it something different?
Context mattered.
The key component with Tennessee in 1993 is the fact we had not lost a game in over two years AND the fact that we were down 8 points, so a tie was the best we could attain. Had we been down by 7 and PLAYED FOR A TIE, there would have been serious calls from the fanbase (but nobody else) to fire Stallings.
Largely, it mattered whether:
a) the game ENDED in a tie OR
b) somebody PLAYED for a tie
Alabama had three tie games when it could happen during my fandom:
1981 USM
1985 LSU
1993 Tennessee
The reactions to those three in order were, "we blew it," "I'm confused," and "whew!"
The most frustrating of those three was probably the 1985 LSU game. We scored to cut the gap to 14-13 with something like 83 seconds left. Perkins then opted to kick the point after and tie the game. Frank Broyles was puzzled beyond words and there was another aspect: Alabama had no timeouts left and yet Perkins's "reasoning" (excuse?) was to say, "I thought we would get down there and get a turnover." Now bear in mind that
LSU HAD NOT TURNED THE BALL OVER THE ENTIRE GAME!!!
But Perkins says his - excuse, which is what it was - was "I thought we'd get a turnover." Fine, except LSU had a better QB than we did, and they had three timeouts. And so they drove all the way down to attempt a last play 24-yard field goal that Ron Lewis shanked. So we.....well, we felt "relieved" we were still technically in the SEC race, but we were now depending on Tennessee to mess the bed against Ole Miss, Kentucky, or Vandy.
I guess - if one gets technical - we can say that Perkins's thought process went like this, maybe this can be defended:
a) we have no timeouts left and they have three
b) that puts the entire game on the onsides kick for us
c) if we win, Tennessee HAS to win all three of their games
d) and their all-SEC quarterback is gone for the season, so maybe.....
The win would NOT have won us the SEC, it would only have kept us alive.
I just always thought Perkins's approach in that particular game was quite cowardly. I'm guessing his logic was, "Well, Wickersham will have to throw the ball to move down the field, so maybe we can pick it off." But in 1985, Wickersham had both more attempts and completions than any other QB in the SEC. The problem is that Alabama's 1985 defense - which included Cornelius Bennett, Curt Jarvis, and Big John Hand - was a "bend but don't break" defense. We gave up "only" 16.2 ppg that year...but there were 25 better scoring defenses than us.
Now I will add, those numbers are inflated, too. For example, we led Mississippi State, 44-6, in a rainstorm and Perkins wanted his backups to get some reps, so MSU closed the gap artificially to 44-28. Georgia's only TOUCHDOWN on us was a blocked punt with a minute left, although yes, those points go against the defense.
As far as 1981 USM, the game was not on TV, and the story I heard later - because we stopped the clock and enabled USM to line up and tie the game - was some youngster called timeout when he shouldn't have and Coach Bryant threw himself on the sword, which was his job.
So it all depended on context.
