Started By
Message
re: I propose we stop using pre 1950's-or whatever date- as a tool for shite talking
Posted on 4/17/14 at 5:03 am to Korin
Posted on 4/17/14 at 5:03 am to Korin
that's true
it being retroactively awarded seems to be the reason the school has not recognized the championship... which overall I like as a policy. If you didn't win the popularity contest that kinda sucks when you were deserving but it is silly to pretend you did
it being retroactively awarded seems to be the reason the school has not recognized the championship... which overall I like as a policy. If you didn't win the popularity contest that kinda sucks when you were deserving but it is silly to pretend you did
0
Posted on 4/17/14 at 5:26 am to cas4t
Why not go all the way and just forget anything pre 2000 even happened?
Posted on 4/17/14 at 5:52 am to cas4t
Who is this drected to? Are we going to vote on eligible years to include?
Posted on 4/17/14 at 6:01 am to parkjas2001
quote:
You mean pre 2000, right?
quote:
You mean pre 2000, right?
quote:
You mean pre 2000, right?
quote:
You mean pre 2000, right?
Right , LSU?
Posted on 4/17/14 at 6:43 am to cas4t
I propose we just ignore the 70's.
Posted on 4/17/14 at 6:46 am to Pettifogger
quote:
Totally agree. For pretty much anything, actually.
Posted on 4/17/14 at 7:03 am to AllBamaDoesIsWin
Your 6 pages late
Posted on 4/17/14 at 8:17 am to NYCAuburn
He's a Saints fan. He's not accustomed to cheering for teams prior to 2006.
Posted on 4/17/14 at 8:51 am to DoubleDown
I am never going to stop bragging about that 1941 Alabama national championship team
Posted on 4/17/14 at 8:52 am to cas4t
quote:
this board, does not revolve around football 24/7
Maybe 23/7, but don't kid yourself, this place wouldn't exist if it wasn't for football.
Posted on 4/17/14 at 8:52 am to StopRobot
Our 1960 NC is still good then?
Posted on 4/17/14 at 9:40 am to DoreonthePlains
quote:
Although it is a kinda fun factoid that the first great (NC deserving) college football season by a southern team was LSU in 1908
quote:
Vanderbilt from 1904 disagrees.
Wrong on both counts. The first great (and greatest feat to this day) by a southern team is 1899 Sewannee Tigers.
Outscored their opponents 322-10 (Auburn was the only team to score on them). They won 5 games in 6 days (over Texas, aTm, Tulane, LSU and Ole Miss) outscoring them 91-0. That was with traveling 2500 miles by train over that period.
Posted on 4/17/14 at 10:31 am to DoubleDown
I've forgotten more about the Saints than you know son. I see you're a New Orleans resident. Thanks for your tax contributions to our wonderful state!
Posted on 4/17/14 at 2:20 pm to molsusports
quote:
People forget that Vanderbilt was once in the discussion for the best football program in the South. Cheers to that history.
Anyway, if you go back and look I think my statement stands. To my knowledge LSU is the first Southern team named in any sort of declared National Championship - up till then it is nothing but Princeton, Rutgers, Yale, Harvard, Minnesota, and Michigan type schools from the northern US.
Vanderbilt deserved more recognition for sure though.
Haha I was just being argumentative and bringing up the glory years. It is interesting how football used to be dominated by northern and/or private schools. Then scholarship rules changed. People just wanted to keep the rich schools down. Bastards.
quote:
1921 - Vanderbilt
1922 - Vanderbilt
Strange. I've seen where Vandy was awarded (I think by outlets of the day, none of which apparently carried much sway) the 1906 and 1911 NCs but never seen 1921 or 1922. We have 4
Posted on 4/17/14 at 2:38 pm to cas4t
Agreed. Reminiscing on the greats like Herschel, Bo, Namath, etc is nice, but why do I really care about football records from before my mom was old enough to wear a bra? I mean, I don't even care about old coaching regimes if a new guy's in his his third term.
Posted on 4/17/14 at 2:53 pm to LBC
Applying your logic to history American History doesn't matter, it was so long ago. That Bible book?
Irrelevant. Ancient History.
No. Just no. The game was played back in those days and the ones that played it coached it and were involved in it made it possible for you to enjoy what we all do today. You are entitled to your opinion but erasing history? I don't think so.
Irrelevant. Ancient History.
No. Just no. The game was played back in those days and the ones that played it coached it and were involved in it made it possible for you to enjoy what we all do today. You are entitled to your opinion but erasing history? I don't think so.
Posted on 4/17/14 at 2:54 pm to antibarner
quote:
That Bible book?
Irrelevant. Ancient History.
yea, frick women and gays
Posted on 4/17/14 at 3:00 pm to cas4t
quote:
frick women and gays
i'm all for variety but not of that type
Posted on 4/17/14 at 3:13 pm to molsusports
Frick women and gays....obvious you never read the Book. Have someone explain it to you some time.
You want to forget past history in football. Next time we hand out a Heisman, we will just call it the Trophy. Mike the Tiger? Send him back to the jungle having a mascot is old news..old school and tradition and history is not relevant.
Jordan-Hare Stadium? Change the damn name screw those old guys. They don't matter anymore. Getting the picture? Forgetting the past takes away from the present. Tradition and history are a HUGE part of college football and your idea of forgetting about it is just not a good one.
You want to forget past history in football. Next time we hand out a Heisman, we will just call it the Trophy. Mike the Tiger? Send him back to the jungle having a mascot is old news..old school and tradition and history is not relevant.
Jordan-Hare Stadium? Change the damn name screw those old guys. They don't matter anymore. Getting the picture? Forgetting the past takes away from the present. Tradition and history are a HUGE part of college football and your idea of forgetting about it is just not a good one.
This post was edited on 4/17/14 at 3:14 pm
Posted on 4/17/14 at 3:50 pm to madmaxvol
quote:
Wrong on both counts. The first great (and greatest feat to this day) by a southern team is 1899 Sewannee Tigers.
Outscored their opponents 322-10 (Auburn was the only team to score on them). They won 5 games in 6 days (over Texas, aTm, Tulane, LSU and Ole Miss) outscoring them 91-0. That was with traveling 2500 miles by train over that period.
They gave up 10 points to that overrated 1899 Auburn team that couldn't even score on the 1899 Georgia Bulldogs? Sorry, transitive property agrees that the 1904 Vanderbilt team is still the first NC-worthy Southern team.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News