On the Proper Spirit of Rivalry Between the Georgia Bulldogs and the Auburn Tigers, Those Stalwarts in Orange and Blue
Although extenuating circumstances unrelated to the Georgia Bulldogs’ loss in the World’s Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party caused the cancellation of Kit Kitchens’s weekly podcast, we will be back on the air this week in preparation for Saturday’s outing against the Auburn Tigers. We recorded the show on Monday evening, and, when asked why I hate Auburn, I offered an explanation, but I added a caveat that I have come into contact with more agreeable Auburn fans in the last five years than I did in the 35 or so years prior to that.
Although I seldom miss an opportunity to emphasize how seriously I take the Deep South’s Oldest Rivalry, our feud is an institutional one rather than a personal one, and I am appreciative of sentiments such as this one from War Eagle Atlanta:
Go by and check out our sister SB Nation blog Dawg Sports, with whom we still have diplomatic ties. Mind your manners, as Georgia week is like a family reunion, and although four years of frustration have built up, maintaining a respectful rivalry with our Dawg cousins is important, or at least for a Georgia immigrant like me. Besides, head Dawg Sports writer T. Kyle King always has interesting and realistic commentary and we just may enlist his full support for our BCS run after this weekend is all over.
I appreciate War Eagle Atlanta’s healthy attitude, which is why I decided initially to let it slide when I discovered Dawg Sports had been linked to in the following passage:
Waiting on this guy’s yearly screed on how much he hates Auburn (because some of our fans took clippings from their fancy bushes at Sanford Stadium after an Auburn win or something … I forget) and the back-and-forth on Track’em. My thoughts on Georgia? Meh. I like playing them and there is no hate here. I like the history of the rivalry and the common roots of the opposing players. We’re due, BTW. Dude should take a deep breath and just except the inevitable this year. With pain comes release.
I agree that Auburn is due, and I accept the inevitable this year (although I accepted it last year, too, and I turned out to be wrong, for whatever that’s worth), but I don’t think I engage in annual screeds, unless recounting historical facts accurately counts as a screed. In any case, the interaction between the two camps generally has been positive lately, so I am disinclined to do anything to upset the apple cart unduly.
That said, I received an e-mail from Jeremy Henderson, who called my attention to a posting of his in which he reproduced a 1959 letter from James Foy, the recently deceased dean of student affairs at Auburn, to David Cleghorn, the editor of The Red and Black. Cleghorn had written a column in the University of Georgia student newspaper in which he expressed strong disagreement with the decision of the Better Relations Committee (a body made up of Auburn, Georgia, and Georgia Tech students) to discourage the use of "Turkey Buzzards" as an epithet applicable to matriculants at an institution symbolized by an eagle at which "War Eagle!" was (and remains) a battle cry.

While technically inaccurate, it isn’t as though "Turkey Buzzards" was a baseless jab.
Dean Foy, taking issue with Cleghorn’s position that Auburn students were "bitter because they can’t make some kind of name out of Bulldog," responded by doing what I recently criticized Todd Grantham for doing; namely, responding in kind as a grown man engaged in a trash-talking battle with a college student. Here is the epistle penned by the Auburn director of student affairs to the editor of the Georgia student newspaper:

What have we learned, boys and girls? I submit that we have learned the following:
- The Auburn dean of students did not know the difference between "you" and "your."
- The Auburn dean of students did not know the difference between "petal" and "pedal."
- The Auburn dean of students did not know how to spell "abhorrent," "enhance," or "students."
- The Auburn dean of students had no qualms about writing personal correspondence to students on rival campuses in which he referred to those collegians as "sons of bitches," only to deny immediately thereafter that he would ever do what he had just done.

In Dean Foy’s defense, however, he did know how to spell "Auburn," which is not a claim all members of the Tiger faithful are able to make.
That’s what I love about the Deep South’s Oldest Rivalry, folks. Whenever our memory of the intensity of this rivalry starts to fade, we are reminded of the origins underlying our stereotypes of one another, and the reasons for their continued durability.
Naturally, I appreciate Jeremy’s e-mail, and the spirit of good-natured yet heartfelt rivalry in which it was intended; likewise, I credit Dean Foy for the sly sentiment underlying his letter, and I mean no disrespect to the memory of this recently-departed Auburn icon, who meant as much in the Loveliest Village as his Georgia counterpart, William Tate, meant in the Classic City. (Regarding the apparent deficiencies in Dean Foy’s education, I am certain the Tiger faithful would be quick to point out that the longtime Auburn administrator was an Alabama alumnus.)
Dean Foy’s salty language, however, reminds me of a scene in the movie "Patton" in which George Patton (not the Georgia defensive tackle) refused to share a victory toast with America’s Russian allies. Through a translator, the U.S. general informed his Soviet colleague that he wasn’t interested in drinking with any "Russian son of a bitch." Offended, the Soviet general replied that he thought General Patton was a son of a bitch, too. General Patton laughed and said, "I'll drink to that. One son of a bitch to another."
That is the spirit in which I look forward to this weekend’s renewal of the Deep South’s Oldest Rivalry, which has remained uninterrupted for more than a century except by worldwide warfare and the death of a player from injuries sustained in a game. Rather than offer a screed explaining why I hate Auburn, I prefer to meet Jeremy Henderson, War Eagle Atlanta, and the good people on the opposite side of this ancient divide in the spirit of respectful mutual institutional disdain without personal animosity, as a rivalry this storied between two programs with such a long history of cross-pollination demands.
Here’s hoping we have a good game, guys. Let’s drink to that, Auburn fan and Georgia fan alike, one son of a bitch to another.
Go ‘Dawgs! Auburna delenda est!
22 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Damn, I was all ready to point this out!
Regarding the apparent deficiencies in Dean Foy’s education, I am certain the Tiger faithful would be quick to point out that the longtime Auburn administrator was an Alabama alumnus.
Do you remember that spelling bee you won in the first grade? Rock? "R-O-K"?
It's fun, it's entertaining, its educational!
What more can one ask for?
If you're gonna do it, go ugly early.
This week's match-up features
the best 5 loss team in the nation vs. the worst defense fielded by an undefeated team. Something has got to give. Fortunately for Auburn, the Dawgs have been the Mother Teresa of college football this season.
"We're Due"?
No disrespect intended to Mr. J.M. Comer, but from the perspective of a Georgia fan, saying “we’re due” in regard to the Deep’s South Oldest Rivalry is absurd. In terms of the all-time series, a Georgia win would make us even over 114 games. While UGA has taken the last four games, the record is only one game in our favor over the past twenty years (10-9-1). With all due respect, 10-9-1 is not “we’re due”. 3-17 is “we’re due.” Georgia fans know “we’re due,” and you ain’t due.
Leaving insightful football commentary and analysis to other people since 2006.
I assumed the comment was in regard to our four-win streak
If it was made in reference to the historical evenness of the rivalry and an inevitability of a return to equilibrium, then obviously my criticism is groundless. However, as I mentioned, we’re still a game behind, all-time. From the perspective of the series’ historical parity, we’re still due one game.
Leaving insightful football commentary and analysis to other people since 2006.
Fair enough.
I think his point, and my point in arguing that it’s highly unlikely either team would win five in a row against the other, is that the Deep South’s Oldest Rivalry has not typically seen lengthy streaks of dominance by one team. Georgia’s rivalry with Auburn has tended to be back-and-forth, unlike the World’s Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party, which has tended to see 20-year periods of dominance: Georgia in the 1930s and ’40s, Florida in the 1950s and ’60s, Georgia in the 1970s and ’80s, and Florida in the 1990s and 2000s.
Go 'Dawgs!
I've said it before, and I'll say it again.
While I do not object at all to the term “Deep South’s Oldest Rivalry”, I have some problems with the reason “Deep South” is specified.
UNC-UVA traditionally is called “The South’s Oldest Rivalry”. Ours is specified as “Deep South”, presumably because it’s not old enough to make a claim for the entire region, the South. The first UVA-UNC game was played on 22 October 1892, after the 20 February 1892 game that started the Georgia-Auburn rivalry.
If one measures the age of a series of games played between two programs by the number of games played, then the Tarheel-Cavalier contest is, indeed, older. They’ve played 115 times (including twice in 1892), while UGA-AU stands at two fewer games: 113. If, on the other hand, one measures age by the passage of time (and isn’t that usually how it’s done?), then ours is older by about eight months. We also had our continuity interrupted when no game was played in 1943, while UNC-UVA have met 92 consecutive years.
I definitely am not one to present much of a challenge to tradition where college football is concerned, and I can accept the “Deep” qualification in our rivalry’s nickname.
I’m just sayin’.
Thanks for the clarification.
I had always assumed (but never confirmed) that North Carolina-Virginia antedated Georgia-Auburn chronologically (which is the only reasonable way of defining “oldest,” as opposed to “most played”).
Are the Cavaliers and the Tar Heels in the same ACC division? If not, are they permanent interdivisional rivals? I’m curious whether the possibility exists for the series to be interrupted.
Clearly, though, the best way for Georgia and Auburn to put this issue to rest is to catch up with North Carolina and Virginia. Since they’re only two games ahead of us, the obvious solution is for Georgia and Auburn to meet in the SEC Championship Game thrice, thereby giving us the advantage, both numerically and chronologically. We squandered a golden opportunity to have that happen this year, but there’s always next year.
Go 'Dawgs!
UNC and UVA are in the same division.
(I know this only because I have looked into this Oldest Rivalry issue, which I deem an acceptable deviation from my strong stance against ever knowing anything about how the ACC’s divisions are arranged. I do not and will not know in which division UNC and UVA play.)
There is no prospect for their series to be interrupted in their current conference configuration. Accordingly, as you point out, our rivalry can catch them by having championship game rematches.
easier said than done
Honestly, I think “The Deep South’s Oldest Rivalry” has a much better ring to it anyway.
by knowshon loves legos on Nov 10, 2010 2:28 PM EST up reply actions
I still hate Auburn...
But not as much as I hate Florida.
"If we score, we may win. If they never score, we'll never lose."
-Erk Russell
by DavetheDawg on Nov 10, 2010 10:15 AM EST via mobile reply actions
From here forward
All CFB smack-talk should be relegated to such polite terms. Forthwith:
Hear ye! Canines of candor, I from the squad of the mighty Gators requests that you cease & desist referring to our natty attire as shorts made from denim and return to proper spelling away from the aforementioned “Gaytors,” “Gayturds,” or “Gaytards”. Lo, we do NOT eat boogers and dine more appropriately on healthy local food. Appropriately, we shall cease and desist with uncouth taunts such as “OMG SCORBORD BICHEZZZ”. I bid to you, Good Day.
You sold me...queer giraffes.
i heard Spaulding Smails went to UF
gators eat boogers
by knowshon loves legos on Nov 10, 2010 2:33 PM EST up reply actions
Postscript:
Jeremy Henderson sent me a cordial follow-up e-mail in which he pointed out that (although it is clipped off at the top of the copy of Dean Foy’s letter) the words “not sent” were handwritten atop it, indicating that he drafted it, but thought better of putting it in the mail.
That, obviously, is to Dean Foy’s credit, but it remains a fine expression of the spirit of this rivalry, just the same. I agree with Bourbon_Meyer on the need for quality smack-talk, and I extend my condolences to the Auburn family on the recent passing of the man who was their version of Dean Tate.
Go 'Dawgs!
I certainly don't wish NCAA controversy upon anyone...
…and I like the Cam Newton story, so I hope his allegations aren’t true, but after the latest (and seemingly most credible) story that’s come out via ESPN, I can’t help but laugh at some of the possible scenarios being laid out to explain this mess by some Auburn fans. For instance, take this quote from TrackEmTigers:
This doesn’t look good at all. But until they provide ONE shred of actual evidence I am going to stand by Cam. It strikes me as odd that these quotes seem to be taken out of context. Why else would they just use the short phrases unless they didn’t tell the whole story. I’ll give you an example. For Cecil’s comment we could put it in the form of a question.
Recruiter: Cecil if Cam comes to play at MSU he will be taken care of if you know what I mean.
Cecil: Are you talking more than a scholarship?
Recruiter: Something like that…
Cecil: I’ve heard enough. No thanks.
Now we have emotional Cam that really wanted to go play for mullen pissed off because some agent offered him money so he pretty much can’t go to state. He call the recruiters to say the following:
Cam: Sorry coach, but I’,m going to Auburn
Recruiter: But why Cam, we’re offering to help your family and your church out here.
Cam: Sorry coach, but the money was too much. I can’t take that kind of risk.
Now, is this scenario possible? Sure…but I’m having a hard time believing that two statements could be so egregiously taken out of context and mispurported. The writer later states that the situation is probably going to bite Auburn in the tail, so I’ll give him his due, but this is just a little too much.
They might as well just be saying:
It’s ok! We’ve got bleach!

by vineyarddawg on Nov 10, 2010 9:50 PM EST up reply actions
For what its worth (and it ain't worth much)
This is my favorite week on DawgSports. I mean, where else can you get intelligent discussion of UGA football and the proper use of passive periphrastic construction in the same place? A terrific re-phrasing of one of ancient history’s most famous lines juxtaposed next to the (Deep) South’s oldest football rivalry. How can you not love this?
Finally – not that anyone cares, but if there are any “Punic War Buffs” in the DawgSports Nation, this is really good: http://www.amazon.com/Ghosts-Cannae-Hannibal-Republic-ebook/dp/B0036S4AOK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=books&qid=1289443449&sr=8-1
by Blogger who came in from the cold on Nov 10, 2010 9:48 PM EST reply actions
Just curious ...
Have you ever read that Thorn Bird lady’s Colleen McCullough’s historical novels about Rome, beginning with The First Man in Rome? I’m not terribly well-versed in Roman history, but I enjoyed those books for what they were and respected the research the author did (and appreciated the fact that she included copious research notes in the books). She took occasional liberties, but acknowledged and explained them. She made it easy to distinguish between documented historical data and the minor deviations she took in the interest of plot. Of particular interest to me were the insights into some of the details of day-to-day Roman life (e.g., roles of servants, religion, marriage customs, diet, domestic architecture).
I have not
mainly because those books came out when my children were young and I had all I could do to keep up with them and work at the time. The years 1989-1994 are an intellectual wasteland for me. Most everything I have heard about them is favorable though.
by Blogger who came in from the cold on Nov 11, 2010 9:24 AM EST reply actions

by 
































