Can a 1 loss Auburn make the title game?

A victory over Auburn this weekend on the plains would be sweet. They haven't exactly shown a penchant for defense this season, so I'm hoping we can hit our stride against them and CTG can finally get things together on D, and we pull off the biggest upset the SEC has seen for a long time. It could happen, people. Does anyone remember 2006?

However, a Dawg victory on the plains would probably also mean the end of the SEC's stranglehold on the BCS national championship. Unless Oregon is upset by Arizona or Oregon State, the Ducks will probably play TCU for all the marbles. And that's a shame.

Even if we win, I would still rather have Auburn win out, beat Bama in the Iron Bowl, beat the Florida/South Carolina winner in the SEC championship game, and go to the BCS title game with one loss, rather than have the SEC not represented and have two nobodies who played precisely no one all year in the title game by default, on account of having played the 140th and 150th toughest schedules in the country.

That, and I despise LaMichael James. If Oregon and TCU end up in the title game I will be pulling for TCU, but I'd rather have someone there to show them how we do things in the south. So, while I'm hoping for a miracle on the plains this weekend, I'm also hoping the voters and the BCS computers have some common sense.

TCU is a good team and Oregon does have a nice offense.

That said I hope we beat Auburn and then they win out and get to go over an undefeated BSU and TCU. That would be the perfect scenario to get the Justice Department involved and get us to a playoff.

Believe it has basically been established that a 1 loss SEC Champion will go to the NC game.....at least while the SEC remains the best conference in college football. Plus AU will have the Heisman Trophy winner playing in the game......that would be too big of a marketing "coup" and huge money maker to say no to AU.


(btw, they "owe" AU one anyway)

Don't know how many folks watched the Alabama/LSU football game, I did. That is what SEC football is all about.

Both teams were focused and what I saw was a field full of head hunters. I saw more brutal hits in that one game than I have witnessed in a season full of run and guns, gimmick offenses and anything else that has passed by my eyes. Just another reason that the SEC is head and shoulders above any conference in the country.

I have a solution to all of this BCS talk. Know that it will not be done, just playing the hypothetical game.

Bring TCU, Oregon, Boise State and any other school into the SEC for one (1) year. Take your choice, two go to the Eastern Division, two go to the Western Division. Any year, don't care, just come and play a full season in the SEC.

I see speed, fancy dancy and all of that "stuff" in a lot of conferences. What I see in the SEC is hard nosed, slobber knocking football. Not that there isn't speed and fancy dancy in the SEC, the deal is this . . . . we have what the others don't . . . . . two divisions, that have to go through an elimination game in Atlanta, that probably leaves the team that loses somewhere down in the final rankings. That losing team could beat over 90 percent of the teams in the country.

Just one old fart that sees the game of football without rose colored glasses.

Auburn/Georgia, hard to say, do think however that this is the game that CTG's defense shows up to play a complete game. Know all about the AU offense, really good, don't think that they have played against a defense that has the speed we have. Don't think I will have to eat crow on this, though if I do, please pluck the feathers before cooking. One last thought on the AU game . . . . I truly hope we score first. UGA 38, AU 25.

Second last thought, MB, four receiver sets, spread them out. AU cannot cover. Orson Charles in the slot. Listen and learn MB.

Go Dawgs!

Great post Buc. I will give you a definite "bump" on the post. That was a great football game. Enjoyed it.

Believe you could be right about the AU game, and I hope you are. No need to eat crow for predicting a win. It would definitely be a chance for CTG to put himself on a platform. I think the thing with AU is that you have to be extremely physical with them. I think we need to lock up man to man, and keep as many guys free to stop the run as possible. Would like to see Tree play the role of a rover. Going to be a special player. I get excited thinking about the kid. He is a big, physical safety that can run. The kind of UGA safety that many feared years ago. Reminds of the TD, GB mold and he is only a frosh. Like the competitive nature that CTG is installling in that D. Better come to work everyday, or just plan on holding that helmet in your hand on Saturday. Absolutely love it.

Dead on with the offense. Want to see a spread set. 3 WR's and a TE, or Orson in the slot, doesn't matter. I don't think they can run with the likes of Green and King. And Durham is faster than I thought. He finds a way to create separation. Don't think they have a LB that can match up with Charles. Use him Bobo. He is a major weapon defenses are not used to seeing.

Don't want to put to much into this, but it seems Richt and the coaching staff have a little extra moxy going into this game from what I have seen. Seem to have an underlying confidence going into this one. I have seen Richt making comments that usually aren't his style. Didn't really make a big stink over CTG giving the choke sign. Didn't really seem like it bothered him at all. I believe he even stated that he hired CTG for his passion. I think the man is realizing his life line at UGA is quickly running out. Seems to be a little different in some of his answers. Hope he truly believes what he is saying.

GO DAWGS. Win a big one and finish the year right.

Buc wrote:

Second last thought, MB, four receiver sets, spread them out. AU cannot cover. Orson Charles in the slot. Listen and learn MB.

Go Dawgs!

Buc, maybe if you drew a picture with crayons or maybe finger paints, Bozo might understand what you are saying. Will he listen and/or learn? Hope so, but doubtful.