College & Magnolia Examine Anti-Auburn Bias.

[AUChizad]

Fuck this guy for this.

http://www.collegeandmagnolia.com/2014/7/29/5945125/bias-against-auburn-i-dont-believe-so

Josh Dowdy's original piece is located HERE. (Posted at the bottom)

Phillip Marshall from AuburnUndercover has said it perfectly to me for years: often times Auburn's own worst enemy is Auburn. Those aren't his exact words, but that's the general statement he's made. When he said this, he meant the tendency for Auburn fans to always jump to negative conclusions, beliefs of being attacked by the media, doubts about their own program, etc.

Have their been times Auburn has been attacked in the media with baseless accusations? Absolutely. We also have more NCAA violations than most schools, so it comes with the territory. Never mind that our last violation was 20 years ago. Never mind that many of those violations were minor and would be laughed at today. I can't find the article Marshall wrote a few years back with the details, but once I finally read them I was amazed at what was considered a "major" violation that resulted in most of our probations. The general belief among many in college football is that Auburn cheats. At this point all I do is roll with it and let results of any investigations speak for themselves. If Auburn is doing something wrong and gets caught, then let's punish those involved, clean house of them, and start over. I want Auburn to do things the right way.

So does this translate into any bias? Well... I don't really think that it does. In the "modern era" of Auburn football (from Pat Dye to now), Auburn has been left hanging in 1983 and 2004, as Josh pointed out.

In 1983 I was not exactly aware of football. I wasn't really aware of anything, since I was only a year and a half old during that football season. That being said, looking back on things I don't see Miami jumping Auburn for the championship as evidence of any "bias" against Auburn. Auburn struggled to beat their opponent in the bowl game. Miami beat the #1 team in the nation. Auburn was still just on the rise from the doldrums of the Barfield days. If there's any "bias" inherent in this, it's that against teams who were not the big thing at the time or had been for a while. That "bias" still exists today, but it's not specific to Auburn. Miami was in a similar position in 1983. They just happened to beat the #1 "unbeatable" team while we struggled with the #8 team in the Sugar Bowl. Voters may have genuinely felt that made them deserving to be #1 themselves. Do I think they were right? No, not really. Looking back on the schedule Auburn played that year, it's hard to argue it's not one of the toughest in college football history. That's not to take away from Miami and what they did that year. I just believe Auburn was the better team looking through the eyes of history.

A look at 2004 has to begin with 2003. Auburn was expected to be one of the best teams in college football in 2003. Instead they struggled all season long to run Bobby Petrino's offense without Bobby Petrino. Tommy Tuberville was almost fired. We had a new offensive coordinator to start the 2004 season. No one expected Auburn to do what they did. And everyone expected USC and Oklahoma to be the best. They started #1 and #2, after all. Oklahoma opened that season against Bowling Green. A team that Auburn had scheduled but the game was bought out in order for them to play Oklahoma. This left Auburn scrambling to find an opponent. They found The Citadel. Remember all the gnashing of teeth about us scheduling them? Well, they weren't the first choice.

Regardless of what happened, Auburn started the season ranked in the middle of the top twenty-five, while the two teams that would ultimately play in the BCSCG started #1 and #2. When they never lost throughout the season, it was hard for anyone to bump them. A case against pre-season polls? Sure. I'll buy that. A case proving bias against Auburn specifically? I don't believe so. Utah finished undefeated that year, as well.  The rules against BCS busters were a bit different back then, but they still had cause for outrage, as well.  Unfortunately, we'll never know just how good that 2004 team was against either Oklahoma or USC. But that's due to the system that was in place, not because of a bias against Auburn. It was the 2004 season that ultimately led to the AP deciding it did not want to be a part of the BCS formula going forward, after all.

Personally, I believe this past season shows there isn't a real bias against Auburn. There were other one loss teams in college football. Auburn benefited from the unreal games played, the stats of the offense, and the prowess of the SEC in recent seasons. This led to Auburn being chosen for the championship game. If you believe a bias against Auburn exists, then it seems hard to justify how a team that finished 3-9 the previous season became the best 1-loss team in the nation by year's end as judged by those who vote in the polls.

I may be in the minority, here. So let's find out what the readers of College and Magnolia feel. Vote in the poll below. It will be similar to Josh's poll, but we'll be able to see all results on this one and hopefully get a wider range of answers. Though it's only one question and you can only choose one answer, so think about it hard before choosing. Feel free to discuss below. This is liable to become a heated topic, so please keep it civil.

Original piece:
http://www.collegeandmagnolia.com/2014/7/28/5939651/Auburn-AP-Bias-Championship-Claims

Editor's Note: I'm going to have a response article and poll option here on the site this afternoon or tomorrow. It just depends on if I can write it during my lunch hour or not. Put me in the column of someone who has never really believed there was a "bias" against Auburn. But we'll get to that. For now take a look at what Josh has put together...

What defines an Auburn fan? Because Auburn has a creed, the Auburn Family can be described as sharing a common set of beliefs. George Petrie said "Auburn men and women believe in these things." The extent of overlap between Auburn people and Auburn fans we will leave for another day. Today we will ask a few questions about what Auburn fans believe.

Actually, I already I asked the questions, and today I'm sharing with you the results. I wrote a survey and asked for responses on Twitter and facebook. I used two copies of the exact same survey, but with slightly different titles and links, so as to keep the Twitter and facebook data separate. So that's another comparison we can make—whether what Auburn fans believe appears differently in Twitter Auburn fans and facebook Auburn fans.

What questions did I ask? Well, first allow me to explain the inspiration for the survey.

In my post last week I suggested a one-loss Auburn team would likely not be included in the 2014 College Football Playoff. I admitted to assuming the CFP committee will share the anti-Auburn bias that the AP pollsters and Coaches' and Harris pollsters have shown in the past, though the committee has not yet had opportunity to exhibit said bias. My assumption caused me to learn something. Not all Auburn fans believe the AP voters have exhibited nonobjective disdain for Auburn in casting their votes.

As I stared at a comment on the screen—experiencing the confusion of my first ever exposure to an Auburn fan questioning anti-Auburn bias in the AP poll—I eventually found myself thinking, this is probably one of those guys who thinks we shouldn't claim additional past national championships. I then became curious as to whether any correlation exists between the two positions. That is, do other fans who don't perceive anti-Auburn bias among the AP voters also think we should not claim national championships for 1983, 2004 and other past seasons?

Here is the survey. Feel free to mark your answers if you like, but I've already received more than the 100 responses (for each copy of the survey) that a free SurveyMonkey account allows me to access.

Now let's get into the data. Only 13% of the Twitter responders answered No to question no. 3. That is, 13% do not believe the AP has shown any bias against Auburn. Of the responders that make up that 13%, 54% do not want to see Auburn claim additional past national championships. So there really isn't a correlation there. The Twitter responders who don't perceive AP bias are split on whether Auburn should claim national championships ex eventu.

What about on facebook? Only 7% of those responders answered No to question 3, but 86% of that 7% oppose claiming old championships. So there's more of a correlation among the facebook responders, but that correlation exists among a smaller sample size than for the Twitter responders, and it also follows the most significant distinction between the two data sets.

The one major distinction between the Twitter and facebook responders is that more of the Twitter Auburn fans support claiming old national championships. Of the Twitter responders, 65% support claiming old championships, while only 46% of facebook users want to see Auburn add to its past national championship tally. Ap_bias__old_championships_and_auburn_fans_medium

What if we look at it in the other direction? Of the 35% of Twitter responders who oppose claiming old championships, only 21% do not perceive some AP bias against Auburn. Of the 53% of facebook users who oppose ex eventu championship claims, even fewer, 11%, perceive no AP anti-Auburn bias. What's this all boil down to?

According to the survey:

Auburn's proposed claims to past national championships are more popular among Auburn fans on Twitter than on facebook.
Most Auburn fans perceive at least some bias against Auburn among AP voters.
The survey is inconclusive regarding correlation between opposition to claiming old championships and denial of AP anti-Auburn bias.
Most Auburn fans who oppose claiming old championships, still perceive some anti-Auburn AP bias.
One more point about question 3. On Twitter 30% reported belief in anti-Auburn bias in only critical cases such as 1983 and 2004, while more responders (57%) believe in anti-Auburn basis in other years as well. The facebook numbers are comparable (35% for critical cases, 58% for critical cases and other years). So for both data sets the belief in consistent anti-Auburn bias among the AP is more widespread than the belief in bias limited to critical cases.

When combining the data, we see that 89.5% of all responders believe in at least some anti-Auburn AP bias. The fact that most people believe something doesn't make it true. But that brings us back to question no. 1. Most of the responders (69% on Twitter; 71% on facebook) self-identified as Auburn fans of 20 or more years. Most of the responders at least claim first-hand familiarity with 2004. Likely many of them were around in 1983. So the perception of anti-Auburn bias in the AP is common among Auburn fans who have had their eyes on things for a while.

Hopefully, none of this will matter in 2014-15. We'll win 12 games, and then the SEC championship game and then be selected by the committee for the playoff, even though we'll be fifth in the AP poll!

Josh Dowdy is a College & Mag contributor and the author of Orange Is Our Color: The Tuberville Years through Navy-tinted Glasses.

[Kaos]

All I heard was blah blah blabbiry blah.

[wesfau2]

So they sampled 100 of their facebook and twitter followers to find out that no bias exists?

WTF?

[Townhallsavoy]

The whole article was weak.  8 paragraphs to tackle a subject that many people have spent years on.

[AUChizad]

No bias.

http://espn.go.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/85727/what-if-looking-back-at-aus-2013-season

Looking back at Auburn's 2013 season
July, 30, 2014

By Greg Ostendorf

With fall camp beginning Friday, Auburn will turn its focus to 2014 and put last season behind it. But what a season it was. The Tigers, who were picked fifth in the West, went on to win the SEC championship and came 13 seconds from winning a national championship.

It was a sensational run by Gus Malzahn in his first year as head coach, reestablishing Auburn as a premier program in college football, but it didn’t come without a few breaks. It happens to every great team. A certain play or a certain call goes their way and keeps the dream season alive. Call it destiny if you will.

As we take one more look back at 2013, let’s revisit a few of those plays or moments that went Auburn’s way and see how they helped shape the Tigers’ season.

Week 3: What if illegal touching was called on C.J. Uzomah’s touchdown?

Everybody remembers Uzomah’s touchdown grab with 10 seconds left to beat Mississippi State, but what people forget is that the play was actually reviewed to see if Uzomah stepped out of bounds before making the catch. The touchdown stood after the refs ruled he was pushed out by a defender, but what if they had instead called illegal touching and pushed Auburn back five yards? With so little time left, the Tigers might have had one more shot at the end zone, but the more likely outcome would have been a mid-range field goal attempt and a shot at overtime. The right call was made, but if the refs didn’t see the contact on the replay or if Uzomah failed to haul it in, there is a chance Auburn could have still been looking for that elusive SEC win.

Week 8: What if Johnny Manziel doesn’t hurt his shoulder?

Let’s set this up. It’s the beginning of the fourth quarter, Texas A&M is already up 31-24 and Manziel rushes for eight yards down to the Auburn 2-yard line. The only problem is that the reigning Heisman Trophy winner injures his shoulder on the play and is forced to come out. Backup Matt Joeckel comes in, throws an incomplete pass and the Aggies have to settle for a field goal. After an Auburn touchdown, Joeckel comes back on the field and the Aggies go three-and-out. Auburn would score again, and though Manziel eventually returned to the game, we all know how it ended. Had Manziel stayed on the field, that field goal might have been a touchdown and that three-and-out might not have happened.

Week 12: What if Josh Harvey-Clemons is a step slower?

Georgia’s defense looked to be in good position on the 78-yard touchdown pass that is now known as the “Prayer at Jordan Hare.” In fact, both Tray Matthews and Harvey-Clemons could have made the interception on the play, but as it turns out the two former Georgia safeties collided and batted the ball in the air where Ricardo Louis pulled it in for the touchdown. On second glance, Harvey-Clemons arrived late and essentially knocked it out of his teammate’s hands. Had he been a step slower to the ball, Matthews would have likely intercepted it or at least batted it down, forcing a turnover on downs, and we would have been talking about Georgia’s fourth-quarter comeback rather than the miracle play that kept Auburn’s season alive.

Week 14: What if Brandon Greene doesn’t get called for holding?

The easy one from the Iron Bowl would have been what if the last second ticks off and Alabama never gets a chance to attempt the 57-yard field goal? The game goes to overtime, where nobody knows for sure what the outcome would have been. I take you back to a holding call on the Tide's Greene with three minutes left. Had he not been called, Alabama would have had first-and-goal from the Auburn 5-yard line leading 28-21. Instead, the Tide was pushed back 10 yards, and after an incomplete pass, Cade Foster's 44-yard field goal attempt was blocked. Even if Alabama doesn’t pick up the first down on the play with holding, it still would have been in much better field-goal range to put the game away.

[Townhallsavoy]

Ostendorf more like Ostendork, amirite?

[AUJarhead]

No bias.

http://espn.go.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/85727/what-if-looking-back-at-aus-2013-season

None at all.

http://search.espn.go.com/greg-ostendorf/

Greg Ostendorf


    Covers Auburn and the SEC.
    Joined ESPN in 2012.
    Graduate of the University of Alabama.

[War Eagle!!!]

No bias.

http://espn.go.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/85727/what-if-looking-back-at-aus-2013-season

That is unfuckingbelievable...

[AUChizad]

What if it didn't rain in Baton Rouge? What if the onside kick was correctly called successful. What if Aaron Murray's touchdown was correctly called down at the one? What if McCarron never connected on the 99 yard touchdown pass late in the Iron Bowl? What if Jonathan Jones didn't pull his hamstring on the pivotal FSU punt return in the national championship game? What if Tre Mason stayed on the sideline instead of cutting back to the defenders on the final play?

[War Eagle!!!]

This one got me...I never respond or comment but felt the need this time. What a fucking douche...

[AUJarhead]

I'd be ok with this article if he did it for every school.

[GH2001]

Fact is, you could run down a list of what ifs like that for every single good team in CFB.

What if Fatass Mount Cody doesnt throw his blubber in front of 2 Tennessee FGs? They lose to a mediocre Tenn team instead of winning a natty.

What if Notre Dame had actually lost a regular season game in 2012 (they came close several times) and not been overhyped thus providing a mismatch for Bama in the NCG and someone worth a crap had actually played the mighty tagghhdd?

What if Jimbo Fisher doesn't call for a Fake Punt againt Auburn before halftime?

What if Aaron Murray's TD had better replay angles to see he clearly did not score?

Tommy Hodson...don't make me go there. Still stings. But....

What ifs are for pansies. You could go on and on with them forever if you wish to. Ask Georgia fans - they know.

[AWK]

I read this... and stopped...

Phillip Marshall from AuburnUndercover has said it perfectly to me for years: often times Auburn's own worst enemy is Auburn.

[Godfather]

What if Greg Ostendorf's mom had balls?

[Saniflush]

What if Greg Ostendorf's mom had balls?

She doesn't?

[GH2001]

What if Greg Ostendorf's mom had balls?

What if his dad had not?

[WiregrassTiger]

Greg is right. We should've been a 6 loss team last year and the only noble thing to do is forfeit those games.

[Saniflush]

Greg is right. We should've been a 6 loss team last year and the only noble thing to do is forfeit those games.

We should make it seven for late penalties and interest.

[WiregrassTiger]

We should make it seven for late penalties and interest.

Maybe 8, in order to show good faith effort toward making amends for just being lucky.

[Buzz Killington]

That's right, stupid barners.