Auburn forming committee to discuss claiming more national titles

NCAA Football: SEC Championship-Missouri vs Auburn

Athletic director Jay Jacobs confirmed that Auburn would form a committee to discuss claiming more national championships.

Auburn officially claims two titles – 1957 and 2010, but the school will decide whether to claim titles in 1910, 1913, 1914, 1983, 1993 and 2004 as well. The Tigers could claim more titles even before this fall, according to AL.com.

“We want to do what’s best for Auburn, regardless of what the rest of the world thinks or says,” Jacobs said. “The things that I said about it back in January is the same I feel today. If other schools are counting championships a certain way, then we should count that same exact way.

“I think we’ve got to get to some place before we start the fall or let’s quit talking about it for a while,” Jacobs said.

Auburn has been talking about this since January, when Jacobs said the school could claim as many as seven more national titles than the official two. By all indications of what Jacobs is saying, if Auburn should claim more titles it seems it will be prior to the start of the 2014 season, unless the committee feels otherwise. He’s said now on two occasions he wants to take a hard look at it ‘transitioning into the playoff era’ and ‘there’s no better time to do so’.

Former head coach Tommy Tuberville told USA Today that he feels Auburn should be recognized as the 2004 national champions. The 13-0 Tigers were shunned in the BCS Championship but won the Sugar Bowl over Virginia Tech. The BCS doesn’t even recognize a 2004 national champion because USC’s title was stripped in lieu of NCAA violations. The Trojans torched Oklahoma 55-19 in the championship game.

“What I was disappointed with is we didn’t have the media step up and say, ‘OK, there’s got to be a champion so who is it? It obviously should have been us,” Tuberville told USA Today. “Oklahoma lost. Maybe they could say it should be split because they played in the game. But Auburn went undefeated.

“If it’d been Michigan, if it had been Alabama, there would have been more of a push toward saying, hey they should be named No. 1. But Auburn, for some reason, we never got to first base on it. There was no support out of the administration.”

The NCAA does not recognize Auburn as the 2004 national champion; it recognizes nobody. The 1913, 1983 and 1993 championships are recognized in the NCAA record book.

Photo Credit: John David Mercer-USA TODAY Sports

REFERENCES

COMMENTS

You must be logged in to post a comment. Please sign in or register

  • What’s the deal with the state of alaBAMA and feeling the need to claiming National Championships…

  • College football fans play along with the media way too easily. There is no reason for any fan to recognize any former make-believe Div.1 national champion. Any program that had a good schedule and a same or better record than the vote getters should claim as many as they want. The Division 2 and 3 playoffs have been demonstrating this for decades. Outsiders like recruits are going to weigh the claims by their own standards anyway. Conference and Division championships are also a sharp contrast because the criteria is firm. A round robin conference championship is the most legit championship in college football. Coaches and athletes know this and respect these more accordingly. Having said that understatement of program history is more impressive than the slightest overstatement.

  • If the NCAA recognizes us for 5 Championships in the record books then maybe we should do the same. I don’t think the 2004 team should get one, even though we did get screwed when OK got to the title game over us. USC vs. Auburn in 2004 would have been one hell of a game…

    Is AD Jacobson suggesting that claiming 5 NCAA Championships will give us better consideration in the playoff era?

  • Okay so we are just claiming what we want, huh? Well then I’m claiming Mizzou was the 2007 national champion. Technically they were according to the “Anderson and Hester” poll… This is ridiculous

  • If it makes them feel better about the dismal seasons than why not…it’s not like they win on a regular basis. It’s as close to having a dynasty as they’ll ever know :)

  • LMAO CLAMING A TITLE. SOUNDS LIKE BEGGING TO ME. THAT’S LIKE CLAIMING VICTORY IN THE VIET NAM WAR WE DIDNT WIN

  • Honestly I don’t really have any issue with them claiming 2004. In all honesty, I DO feel that Auburn was the best team that year. Claiming the rest at this point doesn’t make much sense to me, but if they have a valid argument then I guess it’s whatever.

  • Yeah, they can claim 2004, but then I imagine the NCAA could immediately form a panel to strip them of it!
    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/14/sports/ncaafootball/14auburn.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&