Posters on several boards have commented on the closeness of the Auburn-bama score and suggested it will cost Auburn in the BCS ratings. I did a little bit but consider these rival games for thought: Auburn 21---bama 13 Oklahoma 38--OK State 35 (with OSU missing a last second field goal that would have forced OT) USC 23--Cal 17 LSU 27--Miss. 24 Tenn. 38--Vandy 33 So at least in these, Auburn had the biggest margin. So why should it cost Auburn more than Oklahoma?
Cal is much higher ranking than Alabama. :lsup: and Tenn. aren't going for Nat'l Champs, so they're not under such a microscope. The Oklahoma thing is kind of odd though.
Plus, Iron Bowl was a national telecast and is the most recent game in the minds of the voters. None of those other games were national and voters have pretty much forgotten about them.
You can't just look at one set of games like that and justify your place in the polls. What I would focus more on is that Auburn thoroughly dominated Bama, and it was in a hostile environment against a really good defense. I would be more disappointed in the fact that Auburn did not gain in the polls and become #2 in both polls this past week. If Auburn finishes #3 in both polls, I am afraid that the "controversy" factor will be minized and the BCS will skate. That's why I was hoping you guys would finish #2 in both polls, so that even if you didn't overtake OU in the BCS, it would definitely add more fuel to the fire for the 4+1 playoff system.
I think auburn did pretty much what we did against ole miss last year. We completely dominiated Eli and the Ole Miss offense, but our offense kept them in the game.
That's because Alabama is in the toughest conference and has to face, besides Auburn, the likes of LSU, Arkansas, South Carolina, Tennessee... I'd like Bama's chances against OSU pretty well.
