USC may lose BCS title but Auburn is still feeling the burn
Tommy Tuberville banged the drum for his Auburn team after the Sugar Bowl, and rightfully so.
So we’ve already established that this is a major kegger day in Knoxville (click here for the updated USC story). The Lane Kiffin/Weenie Roast officially begins at 3 p.m., when the NCAA is scheduled to drop the probation hammer on USC.
But how do you feel today if you’re an Auburn fan? USC may get stripped of its 2004 BCS national championship, and the Tigers never were allowed to even play in that game, despite going through the season undefeated.
Is this a day for Auburn to feel vindicated or just angry?
Rewind to 2004: Auburn went 12-0 through the regular season but finished third in the BCS standings, behind USC and Oklahoma (which also went 12-0). To any SEC follower, the thought of going through the conference season undefeated and not winding up in the national title game is ludicrous. But the Tigers had to settle for the Sugar Bowl, and they defeated Virginia Tech, 16-14.
Auburn’s case for being in the BCS title game even was supported by Virginia Tech coach Frank Beamer, who said, “We started out playing Southern Cal and I believe this Auburn team is better.”
So you can imagine what the opinion was of Oklahoma — especially after the Trojans destroyed the Sooners, 55-19, to claim the title.
“Neither team is better than us,” Auburn coach Tommy Tuberville proclaimed. “We’ll play them anytime, anywhere.”
Never got that chance.
Now what? The BCS added to its bylaws in 2007 — after the NCAA began looking into potential violations at USC — that gives it the power to strip a championship from the winner. Quoting:
“When the NCAA or a conference makes a finding of violations … and imposes a sanction of forfeiture or vacation of contests in which an ineligible student-athlete participated, we will presume that vacation of participation in a BCS bowl game is warranted.”
This doesn’t mean the BCS (which is independent of the NCAA) is suddenly going to declare Oklahoma the winner and give Auburn a runner-up trophy. If it opts to strip USC, there just won’t be a champion listed for 2004.
Conversely, the Associated Press will not change its final rankings from that season: USC will remain No. 1 and Auburn (which drew three first-place votes) will be No. 2.
The Tigers probably deserve a little more than that.
But then, they also deserved more in 2004.
♦
Follow me on Twitter @JeffSchultzAJC and Facebook.com/JeffSchultzAJC
♦
Recent posts
♦ Kiffin pays price at USC (funny), but Carroll and Bush skate
♦ Avery Johnson snubs Hawks for the 12-70 Nets
♦ Braves getting the least from those making the most
♦ Why would Avery Johnson pick Nets (other than money)?
♦ If confidence counts, Dudley has Thrashers on verge of Cup
♦ Countdown: Bucs (busted), Argentina (hubba), Chills (duck!)
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
301 comments Add your comment
Spike
June 10th, 2010
3:12 pm
Gatorgal.. Get back to ironing my shirts, and bring me a beer.
Tyler Durdin
June 10th, 2010
3:13 pm
I’m actually in favor of leaving in vacant. If not then it should be split between AU and OU. But it sickens me when idiots like Spike and Gstateben say Auburn didn’t deserve to play because of the SOS. Auburn beat five 10 win teams that year…the most ever in one season (tied with a few other teams I think).
And now we have a whole other group of retards who think that because USC beat Auburn the season before they didn’t deserve to play for it. Good Lord. Now I remember why I hate comment sections.
Jason
June 10th, 2010
3:14 pm
2004 is gone. As an Auburn grad, I don’t want a national championship due to someone else’s mistakes. The system failed in 2004 and USC’s cheating doesn’t change that fact.
The 2010 season is just around the corner and I’m much more interested in it than what happened six years ago.
Thirty Points to your Twenty-Four Points
June 10th, 2010
3:15 pm
Get every living member if both the 04′ Auburn Tigers and Okl Sooners together to play fir the title. It will be interesting to see some of the lineman who no longer play.
Oh, and one more thing…..
(((((30-24)))))
Auburn Proud
June 10th, 2010
3:16 pm
We should win that and you know it. We don’t cheet and we won’t ever cheet. If the cheeters all fall down we will still be standing. We are Auburn proud.
Mark C.
June 10th, 2010
3:16 pm
Are LSU fans going to get a billboard congratulating USC on their no-peat?
Shug
June 10th, 2010
3:17 pm
Needless to say, I have a certain affiliation with that loveliest of villages down on the plains, but I have no doubt that those 2004 Tigers were actually no better than the fifth best team in the nation that particular season. Do not get me started on 1983 however. That was an injustice—best record in the nation, toughest schedule in the nation (by far), best talent in the nation, and we get reamed because of a mysterious infatuation with an overblown Miami team winning a home game against an incredibly overrated Nebraska team. AAaaaaah, the humanity, the injustice.
Big Man
June 10th, 2010
3:18 pm
Why does everyone just say Auburn was screwed because they played in the SEC? I’m in SEC country and although I felt Oklahoma was overrated(could be blinded by my hate for them since they got luck Snoop Minnis’s dumb arse flunked out before the bowl game in 01 and beat my FSU Noles) a case could easily be made for OK and USC. Let’s not act like USC didn’t come thru the Plains and SMACK Auburn 27-0 the previous year in Matt Leinart’s first road game…..
Spike
June 10th, 2010
3:18 pm
Tyler, it is not just me saying it. Just about the whole country was saying it back in 2004. Why don’t you list the schedule from 2004 to prove me wrong. Then everybody can see who you played and judge for themselves, big mouth. Then we can decide for ourselves who the idiot and retard is.
76-Dawg
June 10th, 2010
3:20 pm
I don’t care much for or like Auburn very much but I do care about the SEC and one of the worst conference screwings or overlooks of all times happened to Auburn in 2004. The sorry ass Media got Southern Cal and Oklahoma together because they wanted to see the top two Quarterbacks go at each other.UGA had a great team in 2004 and was dominated by Auburn 24-6 . That’s good enough for me as to whether Auburn should have been playing for the national title. If Southern Cal is stripped of the national title then Auburn deserves to be awarded the title because they finished undefeated and beat Tenn. in the conference championship game.
Tyler Durdin
June 10th, 2010
3:20 pm
Spike-I already listed the NCAA SOS stats from 2004 which rated Auburn’s schedule the 5th hardest in the country. I’ll repost for the semi-literate among us:
5. Auburn – 0.618 (oppoenents winning %)
11. Oklahoma – 0.607
18. USC 0.581
Rob
June 10th, 2010
3:21 pm
Poor Auburn – lololololololololololol111111!!!
Spike
June 10th, 2010
3:24 pm
No, Tyler,no. List who the non conference opponents were in 2004. If you don’t, I will name names. What, to embarrased? Oh, and fear the thumb.
Rodney
June 10th, 2010
3:27 pm
2004 had too many SEC teams still either on probation and therefore under full strength or coming off and not up to full strength. The cumulative effect of all of the probations hurt the SEC and rightfully so. Today, with everyone at full strength there is no way an undefeated SEC team will get passed by. By the way, UGA’s hey day was when the conference was down. Today, they struggle with all back at full strength.
Ed
June 10th, 2010
3:27 pm
BobDog is the only one that got it right. Auburn had its chance on the field to show how they stacked up to USC and it failed miserably in the two years previous to 2004. Add to that Oklahoma’s dominance in the early 2000s, and Auburn did not really have a legitimate case for making it into the game over those two. A real football fan would never make the case that because “one” player’s parents were put up in a house means USC was not the champion on the football field. ROLL TIDE!
Al
June 10th, 2010
3:29 pm
Btw, Auburn was also cheated in 1984 after beating Michigan in the Sugar Bowl. Auburn was ranked #3 (with #1 Nebraska and #2 Texas having lost their bowl games)and should have moved up. Miami jumped from #5 to #1 in the final rankings.
D.Langner & B.Newton
June 10th, 2010
3:30 pm
Shug, you da man! All arguments begin and end with the 1983 travesty.
David
June 10th, 2010
3:31 pm
USC and OK started out ranked 1 and 2 in 2004 and never lost; so those are the breaks. Auburn got bitch-slapped by USC on the field in 2002 (in L.A.) and 2003 (in auburn); that was probably a factor in the voters’ minds. Auburn’s non-conference schedule was very weak, including Citadel. That hurt them. It makes no sense to award the title to a team that didn’t play #1 or #2. OK only lost to the team that was caught cheating. Regardless of whether they claim or title or not, they didn’t have the experience of preparing for, playing in, and winning the BCS NC game. Joe Paterno has 2 or maybe 3 undefeated seasons where Penn State did not will the national title. It happens.
John
June 10th, 2010
3:33 pm
Aubarn was denied a shot because of their schedule. It used to be very soft. This year they open with Ark. St. Bama plays Penn State. Ga had a tough one last year. Aubarn has always played the cream puffs.
Spike
June 10th, 2010
3:34 pm
David.. Watch it or Tyler will call you a retard or idiot. That passes for logic and reasoning from an Auburn man.
PMC
June 10th, 2010
3:34 pm
The problem was the preseason rankings that year not even that Auburn played Buffalo.
Oklahoma was Jokelahoma… they still are. Sponge Bob Bowl Flop is still the coach. It was absolute crap that Oklahoma was awarded that game. They got it because they were ranked ahead of Auburn all year due to preseason rankings. They played their share of terrible teams… they do get the lambs of the Big 12 north as well.
Al
June 10th, 2010
3:37 pm
So, what you are saying also; is that Alabama deserved to be less respected because in recent years they had lost to Auburn SIX times in a row!! I’m a UA grad . . .
Al
June 10th, 2010
3:40 pm
Bama OPENS with St. Jose State; and also plays DUKE and GEORGIA STATE!! That’s because Bammer mullets always play creme puffs.
dawgster
June 10th, 2010
3:44 pm
People, if you are going to award a title for the 2004 season if USC is stripped, then the only fair thing would be to have Co Champions in Auburn and Ok…I do believe that indeed USC probably was the best team, but like it or not they violated NCAA rules or otherwords “Cheated”….I know a case can be made for other teams in other years that may or may not should have been NC’s but i’m only talking about 2004 and the specifics involved. And since Auburn and OK cannot decide it on the field then the fact they both would be undefeated, untied, you make them Co-champions..Doesn’t matter who beat who and by how much the year before or what…In 2004 both Auburn and OK without USC in the picture should be Co-champions….
schmeckdawg
June 10th, 2010
3:44 pm
Hey GAYtor gal have you or anyone else ever seen tebow with a girl, and I don’t mean riley cooper.
Blue
June 10th, 2010
3:44 pm
One point to consider regarding Beemer validating it; MOST good teams are better at the end of the year than the beginning. So saying Auburn was better at the end of the season that USC was at the beginning is kind of irrelevant. He has no idea how good Auburn was in the beginning nor how good USC was at the end.
Tom
June 10th, 2010
3:45 pm
BobDog…you don’t know what you are talking about. Auburn went to Southern Cal in 2002 and lost in the last minute 24-17…The next year we clearly were manhandled in Auburn 23-0 in a game we could not get anything going offensively with a offensive line coach calling plays for the first time in his career. Anyone who knows anything about football will tell you that Auburn from 2004 versus the 2003 team is like night and day. Al Borges totally changed our offense and we led the SEC in offense. We destroyed everyone we played except a close game to defending National Champs LSU coached by Nick Saban. Every other game was over at halftime or the third quarter. We dominated everyone…The bowl game against VT was also 16-0 with like 7 minutes left and two blown coverage bombs made that game look more close than it was. We dominated VT too…certainly more than Southern Cal did. Funny how the SEC is the best…always…just not when Auburn wins…what a crock. Florida and LSU can win titles with 1 and two losses, but Auburn goes undefeated and can’t even share it…go figure
cantondawg
June 10th, 2010
3:46 pm
I think USC should still be recognized as NC. 99.9% of the people involved for their NC were following the rules. I think you should punish the guilty parties. Do something like take Reggie Bush’s heisman trophy away.
the real Old Gold
June 10th, 2010
3:48 pm
Final AP Poll. Give Auburn their title.
1. USC (62) 13-0 1,622 1
2. AUBURN (1) 13-0 1,559 3
3. OKLAHOMA 12-1 1,454 2
4. UTAH 12-0 1,438 5
5. TEXAS 11-1 1,391 6
6. LOUISVILLE 11-1 1,261 7
7. GEORGIA 10-2 1,204 8
8. IOWA 10-2 1,111 11
9. CALIFORNIA 10-2 1,060 4
10. VIRGINIA TECH 10-3 996 9
11. MIAMI FLA 9-3 917 14
12. BOISE ST 11-1 888 10
13. TENNESSEE 10-3 868 15
14. MICHIGAN 9-3 842 13
15. FLORIDA ST 9-3 754 17
16. LSU 9-3 711 12
17. WISCONSIN 9-3 482 16
18. TEXAS TECH 8-4 476 23
19. ARIZONA ST 9-3 463 21
20. OHIO ST 8-4 423 24
21. BOSTON COLLEGE 9-3 314 25
22. FRESNO ST 9-3 203 —
23. VIRGINIA 8-4 157 18
24. NAVY 10-2 126 —
25. PITTSBURGH 8-4 99 19
Emril Lagasse
June 10th, 2010
3:48 pm
BAM!
PMC
June 10th, 2010
3:48 pm
I’m not sure Auburn or Oklahoma would even want a paper championship.
2004 simply has no champion.
Ron Mexico
June 10th, 2010
3:52 pm
GatorGal, get a life fat girl, nobody cares about the gaytors.
schmeckdawg
June 10th, 2010
3:52 pm
If the usc condoms have to forfeit the wins from that year, they should have to give back ALL of the money they received as well as the bowl ban and scholarship reductions. Ironic also that kiffin was the offensive coordinator on that staff. Hmmmmmmmm!
Ron Mexico
June 10th, 2010
3:53 pm
And I think Bush should be suspended for a whole season for this crap.
ToomersTigers
June 10th, 2010
4:07 pm
As an Auburn fan/grad I can say that the BCS title is a sham anyway. We don’t need some ridiculous “system” to show we had the best football team in America in 2004. We already know that.
harleyman
June 10th, 2010
4:08 pm
What’s that Lane? “Thank you sir, may I have another?”
No One Knows You're a Dawg
June 10th, 2010
4:14 pm
Best part of the NCAA report is the “Will Farrell Rule” which reads in part:
“Prohibition of all non-university personnel, including boosters, from . . . having access to the sidelines and locker rooms for football and men’s basketball games.”
The report states the reason for this rule as follows:
“Another reason to question the assistant football coach’s credibility in denying that he knew agency partner A is the fact that the two shared a close relationship with a mutual friend (“mutual friend”), a comedian and actor who has appeared in various roles in television and motion pictures.”
(h/t EBSBS)
dan anders
June 10th, 2010
4:15 pm
Auburn actually did play USC in 2002 and 2003. Finished second in both of those games too.
Steve
June 10th, 2010
4:20 pm
To the morons who think Auburn should be “given” the title, what is wrong with you? There is no FOR SURE thing that they would have won in the NC game. Oklahoma actually has a better argument then Auburn does. At least they got to the game. Plus, if they did give Auburn their first NC, would you really want it that way? I sure as hell would not. Get ready for 5 losses in a row to the Dawgs!
Spike
June 10th, 2010
4:20 pm
Tyler.. Where are you? We are still waiting…….
Spike
June 10th, 2010
4:22 pm
Old Gold.. Don’t see Tech on your list from 2004.
schmeckdawg
June 10th, 2010
4:23 pm
oakland raiders+the university of tin uh c+the southern cal condoms=lame kiffin.
What is it they say about karma!!!!!!
Drexel Gal
June 10th, 2010
4:24 pm
Math and perception lessons: Three [3] teams were undefeated, but only two [2] could fit in the title game. And, Auburn didn’t help itself by playing Louisiana tech, The Citadel, and Louisiana Monroe. Get over it. Besides, the Tigers’ next game after the bowls finsihed was a LOSS to Georgia Tech, 17-3.
ReddJonn68
June 10th, 2010
4:24 pm
Until there is real backlash, from the same media that cries foul when there is something wrong at individual schools, against the Corporations known as the BCS or NCAA college football will never again crown a true champion. It cracks me up to watch these analysts on any network, who has the guts look at the camera & tell the nation the BCS works ! We are forgetting the main ingredient in this recipe known as college football, the PLAYERS. As long as you have the big contracts, it’s like adding more fuel to a runaway train !!!!
Falconaddict
June 10th, 2010
4:30 pm
Wonder if GatorGal went totally smooth or left a landing strip? Mmmm…
Steve
June 10th, 2010
4:31 pm
Good point Drexel. They had a cake schedule. Did the Plainsmen, War Eagles, Tigers figure out their mascot yet??? Maybe they can be the Crybabies?
schmeckdawg
June 10th, 2010
4:32 pm
Nice call ReddJonn68!!!! Every sport in D1 and every other division has a playoff to determine the REAL NC. If they can make March Madness work they could damn sure make a D1 Football Playoff work; but, it’s like you said, it is all about the $$$$$$$$$$!
schmeckdawg
June 10th, 2010
4:38 pm
Falconaddict, GAYtor Gal is sitting in her trailer braiding her arm pit hair!
Lane
June 10th, 2010
4:38 pm
Hey Steve…..bone up on your college football history. It would not have been Auburn’s first National Championship. I can’t believe UGA fans are busting on Auburn for their choice of their choice of non-conference teams. When UGA stops playing Georgia Southern, La-Lafayette, Idaho State, etc……. then you will room to talk.
the TRUTH
June 10th, 2010
4:40 pm
In the Year 200 Mayans were building a great pyramid and GT was still getting their arses whooped.