Started By
Message
re: Last football national championship for each SEC team
Posted on 2/1/15 at 11:39 am to WildTchoupitoulas
Posted on 2/1/15 at 11:39 am to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Wow, I've never seen a Bama fan actually defend 1941.
I hope you aren't confusing me with an Alabama fan. Of course, since you clearly give your opinion on topics you know little about, I wouldn't put it past you.
0
Posted on 2/1/15 at 11:43 am to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
but officially, the University doesn't count that towards national championships awarded as per the media guide.
I know full well that LSU doesn't count 1908 among their titles. Unlike you, I don't give opinions on topics that I'm not informed on. However, that's not what you said. You said they did not acknowledge it. The link I gave clearly shows the do "acknowledge" it. Perhaps you choose the wrong word when you said "acknowledge", but they obviously do acknowledge it or you wouldn't be able to see it on their website.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 12:47 pm to boxedlunch
quote:
The link I gave clearly shows the do "acknowledge" it.
No, it doesn't.
That was an article on the official website "In recognition of LSU’s great undefeated football team of 1908" That's what the athletic daprtment officially said in your link.
And:
"Today’s story is an excerpt from the book"
And then the body of the material linked, including your quote, is actually from a book published outside of the university - admittedly by the SID.
That is not a university sanctioned document, the university is simply acknowledging the book, not the NC title.
quote:
I don't give opinions on topics that I'm not informed on.
umhmm...
Posted on 2/1/15 at 1:02 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Neither of which are in the football national championship business
And you are?
Posted on 2/1/15 at 1:03 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Wow, I've never seen a Bama fan actually defend 1941.
He's not a Bama fan. Not even close.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 1:17 pm to ctiger69
quote:
Texas A&M= (1939) 76 years ago
Damn..
Posted on 2/1/15 at 1:19 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
No, it doesn't.
That was an article on the official website "In recognition of LSU’s great undefeated football team of 1908" That's what the athletic daprtment officially said in your link.
And:
"Today’s story is an excerpt from the book"
And then the body of the material linked, including your quote, is actually from a book published outside of the university - admittedly by the SID.
That is not a university sanctioned document, the university is simply acknowledging the book, not the NC title.
I'm sorry, but you're displaying all the characteristics of a retard here. LSU putting something on their website that acknowledges that LSU had a share of NCF's site for 1908 is not an acknowledgement? Come on. Next, you'll be calling me an Alabama fan.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 1:20 pm to ctiger69
2011 - Billingsley and Dunkel indeces....
Posted on 2/1/15 at 1:38 pm to boxedlunch
quote:
LSU putting something on their website that acknowledges that LSU had a share of NCF's site for 1908 is not an acknowledgement?
Not when they preface it with:
quote:
Today’s story
Now say your prayers and go to bed.
You want to pick nits?
I started off joking that Bama's claim to 1941 is less valid than LSU's claim to 2011 which is itself invalid, imo. 1941 < 2011 < validity.
And you want to argue for three pages over it?
I don't care what team you're a fan of, urine idiot.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 1:39 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Yea, this seems like arguing for the sake of argument.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 1:56 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
I started off joking that Bama's claim to 1941 is less valid than LSU's claim to 2011 which is itself invalid, imo. 1941 < 2011 < validity.
For jokes to be funny, there has to be some truth to them. None of the "titles" you listed hold a candle to the respectability that Houlgate had in 1941.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 1:59 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
Yea, this seems like arguing for the sake of argument.
To be honest, I argue for the sake of trying to stop the massive ignorance that pervades in these discussions that occur because people think that looking something up on a compiled list gives them all the information they need to discuss something.
Often, there's not people who bother to point out the massive ignorance in some of the statements you see.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 2:00 pm to boxedlunch
Agree, but I don't think Wild is a big proponent of those types of arguments. Lots of bigger fish to fry.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 2:09 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
Agree, but I don't think Wild is a big proponent of those types of arguments. Lots of bigger fish to fry.
While I've found him to be more reasonable than myself in demeanor here, it gets to me that in a topic so varied as national championship claims, that people can get a exact viewpoint just by posting a list. How many times in this thread alone has a list which contains no information at all on the respectability of a "title" been posted as if somehow it contains all the answers.
James Howell has all my respect as a researcher and I like his power index. In all my conversations with him, I've found nothing that would indicate he doesn't know his stuff. The same with Congrove. However, I know full well that they count for nothing in the scheme of "national titles". No school has ever claimed a title because one of these two guys as ever given them the title. Outside of their websites, they get little recognition. Comparing either, or both, to a title that went out on a syndicated wire in it's day smacks of ignorance to me.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 2:11 pm to boxedlunch
I totally agree. The whole national championship thing is such a crapshoot, but people love to puff their chest out about things.
Personally, as an Alabama fan, I think that 1941 is crap and the pre-1940 claims are very reasonable in light of the Rose Bowl wins but it wouldn't bother me if they were only recognized as "Rose Bowl" victories and not national titles.
Quite frankly - I find all the SEC Titles as impressive as the various national title claims.
Personally, as an Alabama fan, I think that 1941 is crap and the pre-1940 claims are very reasonable in light of the Rose Bowl wins but it wouldn't bother me if they were only recognized as "Rose Bowl" victories and not national titles.
Quite frankly - I find all the SEC Titles as impressive as the various national title claims.
This post was edited on 2/1/15 at 2:12 pm
Page 6 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News