History shows Auburn is college football’s most unpredictable team

Redwood Forrest said:

Auburn football’s reputation is that of a randomized results generator, an especially spastic one, designed by deranged hornets and housed in an abandoned fireworks stand.

Well, your memories do not lie to you.

In fact, Auburn is even more unpredictable than any of us realized.

https://www.sbnation.com/college-fo.../most-unpredictable-team-overrated-underrated


So it is not just us bammers who get it. It is nice to see this known nationally. All hail the madness that is Auburn.

Click to expand...

But this is what gets me with college football voters and writers (no offense to you intended).

How is this a reflection of Auburn? Isn't it REALLY a reflection of how bleeping clueless, mindless, idiotic, stupid, ignorant and ill-informed to say nothing of overpaid nuts who get to keep their jobs that the voters actually are?

How is it any teams fault if the voters over or underrated them?


THIS is one of my biggest beefs with CFB writers. They praise their own genius if a team works out but if they don't, you never hear, "Hey, don't listen to me again, I'm stupid."

They rank team A at number 3 and team B at 21. Team B drills team A by fifty points and they move team B up and say team A was overrated.

By whom? Team A wins the next week and the first game is an aberration and yadda yadda yadda.


Now....there IS some truth to some of what's being said, but it shouldn't be a surprise to folks who watch the game closely.

selmaborntidefan said:

But this is what gets me with college football voters and writers (no offense to you intended).

How is this a reflection of Auburn? Isn't it REALLY a reflection of how bleeping clueless, mindless, idiotic, stupid, ignorant and ill-informed to say nothing of overpaid nuts who get to keep their jobs that the voters actually are?

How is it any teams fault if the voters over or underrated them?


THIS is one of my biggest beefs with CFB writers. They praise their own genius if a team works out but if they don't, you never hear, "Hey, don't listen to me again, I'm stupid."

They rank team A at number 3 and team B at 21. Team B drills team A by fifty points and they move team B up and say team A was overrated.

By whom? Team A wins the next week and the first game is an aberration and yadda yadda yadda.


Now....there IS some truth to some of what's being said, but it shouldn't be a surprise to folks who watch the game closely.

Click to expand...

Agreed - Herbstreit got Auburn right in 2010 and 2013. He understands football. Most of the guys who write about football never played a snap.

Sounds like Auburn is just a team that can't handle the pressure when expectations are high but plays more loose and better when expectations are low. Take the games last season against UGA and Bama played at Jordan-Hare. In addition to playing at home there was really not much pressure since not many outside of Auburn expected them to win. Bama on the other hand can handle pressure well because they are usually #1 or #2 preseason and still go on to win a championship.

B1GTide said:

Agreed - Herbstreit got Auburn right in 2010 and 2013. He understands football. Most of the guys who write about football never played a snap.

Click to expand...

He also said - when nobody believed him - that "Clemson is the best team in the country" in 2016.

Redwood Forrest said:

Auburn football’s reputation is that of a randomized results generator, an especially spastic one, designed by deranged hornets and housed in an abandoned fireworks stand.

Well, your memories do not lie to you.

In fact, Auburn is even more unpredictable than any of us realized.

https://www.sbnation.com/college-fo.../most-unpredictable-team-overrated-underrated


So it is not just us bammers who get it. It is nice to see this known nationally. All hail the madness that is Auburn.

Click to expand...

Btw - the 2015 citation by Kirk is a bit disingenuous and borders on unfair. It was a big deal here at the time.

The SEC voters DID pick Auburn to win the SEC, but they ALSO picked Alabama to win the West. We had a good laugh about it on here because that makes pretty much no sense at all. But to only cite one portion of that is sorta unfair.

Now here's the thing with 1993......yes, Auburn was unranked entering the season.....because they had a new coach who had never coached a Division I-A game, their record was 12-14-1 since the beginning of November 1990, and they'd just gotten socked with some pretty severe sanctions that wound up hurting them more later than in 1993.


But now go look at their schedule. They played TWO teams with more than five wins, Florida and Alabama. Both at home. Even a mid-level team should have been able to go 9-2, which likely would have gotten Auburn a ranking between 8 and 12. Alabama was not in the pre-season poll in 2002, either, and wound up 11th after the bowl games (which we didn't get). It was kind of the same thing. No pressure because we couldn't win it all.

But go look closer at those losses in 1991 and 1992. Yes, Auburn lost 11 games those two years combined, but FIVE of those were one-score contests and they had a tie. Some Auburn luck and the 10-11-1 in those two years becomes 16-7....at the same time Florida was 19-6 and won an SEC title and Tennessee was 18-6. In other words, they overlooked the fact Auburn had a solid core of players in a WEAK SEC (in 1993, 9 of the 12 SEC teams had 3 or more conference losses; in 1992, ten did, meaning just paying attention would have made the difference.


I'll quit now before the subtle suggestions I'm Auburn Deep State arise. But this isn't a reflection of Auburn for the most part.

Well most of their fans are psychotic so...

One thing about them IS very predictable—when they are very good they are VERY GOOD. we have had very limited success against them in the last 40 years when that’s been the case.

one thing is predictable, s.n.a.s.s.

TIDE-HSV said:

You must worship Skip Bayless. He sticks to his original position, no matter how much of a fool intervening facts and events make him seem...

Click to expand...

I assume he adopts the position of the Village Idiot as entertainment. But yeah, I saw Klatt and Shannon bury him after the UGA win because he could NOT admit Saban is awesome.

A lot of my Auburn friends have openly admitted how frustrating it is to be a fan of AU football due to its unpredictableness. I love talking about the 2003 USC-AU game, when AU was highly ranked by Sports Illustrated, and USC came into Auburn and shut them out (Matt Leinart's first game as starting QB for USC). My friends now use any preseason praise as a reason to be guarded against AU success during the season.

crimsonaudio said:

I'd still argue with him on that point.

Click to expand...

We definitely had the better team but Clemson was so much better in the most important position on the field which is QB. Anyone but Deshaun Watson and we annihilate that team whereas we we're playing handicapped at QB and still almost (should've) won the game..

deliveryman35 said:

One thing about them IS very predictable—when they are very good they are VERY GOOD. we have had very limited success against them in the last 40 years when that’s been the case.

Click to expand...

Since the series was resumed in '48 Bama is 13-23 vs ranked AU teams, AU is 14-34 vs ranked Bama teams. So, Bama's record is better vs ranked AU teams than AU's record vs ranked Bama teams. Saban's Bama is 2-3 vs ranked AU teams, AU is 3-7 vs ranked Saban's Bama. So, Bama's record vs ranked AU is better than AU's vs Bama. Also, Bama has fewer opportunities - during the Saban era, exactly half.

Certainly under Saban, any loss is earth-shaking. AU loss - meh.

The bottom line is that Bama's record is better vs ranked AU teams than vice versa. The reality is different than the perception.

CrimsonForce said:

We definitely had the better team but Clemson was so much better in the most important position on the field which is QB. Anyone but Deshaun Watson and we annihilate that team whereas we we're playing handicapped at QB and still almost (should've) won the game..

Click to expand...

I still think we win that game if Bo or Eddie are healthy. If both were healthy I have no doubt we win that game.

CrimsonForce said:

We definitely had the better team but Clemson was so much better in the most important position on the field which is QB. Anyone but Deshaun Watson and we annihilate that team whereas we we're playing handicapped at QB and still almost (should've) won the game..

Click to expand...

i think it's as simple as the defense not giving up that long scramble on third down late in the first half that eventually led to their td. if they go to the half with 0 on the board, i don't think they win regardless.

Auburn had won 10 games in consecutive years one time in history. That's ridiculous. Spurrier won 10+ games 3 years in a row at South Carolina. How is it Auburn has never done it? Or only had 10+ wins in back to back seasons one time. Bizarre.