Posted this in another forum in response to some knuckleheads spouting off about the games Bama "should have lost". I have always been puzzled by all the shoulda, coulda, stuff.
I mean, what does "should have lost" mean anyway?
Bama "should have lost" what, Tennessee? Because they blocked two field goals? A game they were only in position to lose because Ingram lost a fumble on his own 20 (his only fumble all year)? UT stuck that one in to make it 12-10 then recovered an onside kick to get a chance at the FG. So that’s a game Bama "should have lost"?
I guess they "should have lost" against Auburn since they "shouldn’t" have been able to mount "The Drive"?
They "should have lost" vs. LSU because of a bad call on the sideline with Bama up by 6… even though LSU had NINE, coun’t em, NINE total yards in the fourth quarter?
Even this game… Texas had McCoy go out early, but they also essentially recovered two onside kicks! Do you have any idea how low the odds are of that happening in the same game?
In competition it’s always hard to say a team "should have lost". Reality is, one way or another, the winning team managed more plays than the losing team. Period.
That said, predicting an undefeated season is next to impossible for any team. The close games Bama had proved that, like all other humans, they aren’t infallible. All it takes is a well-conceived trick play or two (Auburn) or a turnover at the wrong time (Tenn) and any team, regardless of talent disparities, can find itself in the soup.
This, to me, is why
Auburn fans suck we watch sports.
Congrats team, you have made us proud! Enjoy your offseason and prepare for next like you have a bulls-eye on your back. Tt is a metaphorical reality.