re: Many schools have been gypped out of national titles, but 1983 Auburn was one of the worst

quote:

---

You can’t determine OU’s position on being in the game based on the result. No one knew it would unfold like that. Auburn was just unfortunate. OU also played no FCS programs.

---

Oklahoma also played very few tough games. Using final AP rankings, you beat #5 Texas and #18 Texas Tech. Auburn meanwhile beat #7 Georgia, #13 Tennessee (twice), and #16 LSU.

That’s 4 wins against ranked opponents compared to Oklahoma’s two. The FCS argument is just an excuse… was there really any difference in an FCS opponent compared to OU playing 3-8 Houston? Both are guaranteed wins either way. Playing twice the number of Top 20 opponents is far more difficult.

quote:

---

1993

---

I agree 1983 Auburn should have been crowned as NC but the 1993 team was on probation and was ineligible for both the SEC title and a bowl game. So, while they were a good team, kind of a stretch to say they deserved the title.

quote:

---

Then in 1978 Bama shared the title with USC despite the Trojans massacring the Tide at Legion Field.

---

a 10 point win isn't a massacre.


And that USC team lost to an average Arizona State team 20-7.

quote:

---

Bama wins undeserved title in 1964 because it lost its bowl game… AP changes in 1965 to awarding its champ after the bowls.--Underserved? those were the rules of the time and Bama won it.

Bama wins undeserved title in 1973 because it lost its bowl game… UPI changes in 1974 to awarding its champ after the bowls.--Undeserved? those were rules of the time and Bama won it.

Then in 1978 Bama shared the title with USC despite the Trojans massacring the Tide at Legion Field.--The voters voted and Bama won it. Just because you don't like the format then doesn't mean anything.

Sure ‘66 and ‘77 Bama teams might have been deserving, but Bama has won 3 titles it really had no business winning

---

How quickly Aubie forgets in these 'shared titles" that in 1957 Aubie shared the title with Ohio St and Aubie didn't play in a bowl game because of probation. So I just know you're gonna say that was undeserved and Ohio St was the REAL national champ.

quote:

---

Bear Bryant believed he won Bama’s first.

---

What?
Where did you dream this? He often talked about Bama winning its first in 1925 in the book "Coach" and that is what made him want to attend Bama.
If you are gonna take the Rose Bowl games, which were considered the national title game pre AP era then Southern Cal, Notre Dame would like to have a word. Notre Dame didn't even start playing in bowls until 1970
which by your logic gives them a national title in 1973, 1977 and 1988.
Here's from Wikapedia:

quote:

---

It is a tradition by players to touch it on their way out of the locker room. Above the sign is a listing of Notre Dame's eleven national championships.

---

quote:

---

Bama didn’t claim all their extra titles until the 1980’s, so your argument doesn’t hold up. Bear Bryant believed he won Bama’s first.

---

What does that have to do with the fact that nobody claims titles in the 90s and 2000s in years they didn't win the AP or Coaches?

Alabama (outside of the fraud of 1941) did what a lot of schools did - go back to the pre poll era and claim titles based on polls after the fact (since none existed at the time). Any title for any reason pre-poll era was awarded after the fact.

And Alabama's claims for pre-poll era titles are all teams that won (or in one case tied another undefeated) in the Rose Bowl against a conference champion from a different region of the country. You can argue that those aren't truly national titles or others were as or more deserving, but Alabama claiming them is pretty standard and reasonable given the college football landscape of the day. More so than many, because they didn't just play their region, they finished the year playing the best team from another region (in their region).

You are reaching! Your shared titles are plural. Auburn's is singular.
In 1957 the Tigers compiled a perfect 10–0 record (7–0 in the SEC), shut out six of ten opponents, won the SEC championship, and outscored all opponents by a total of 207 to 28.
Woody Hayes and the northern media..
It was deserved.

quote:

---

the 1993 team was on probation and was ineligible for both the SEC title and a bowl game. So, while they were a good team, kind of a stretch to say they deserved the title.

---

Not sketch at all. They were the best team in the country and had the longest winning streak in the country spanning over two season. Just bc Bama paid Ramsey to set Pat Dye up and get Auburn on probation isnt a reason to not claim it.

frick bama

quote:

---

Not to mention Miami's win over Nebraska was a big deal.. they were undefeated and had beaten the holy frick out of most of their opponents.

---

Good point. So this thread should be Auburn was "gyped" (apologies to all of our Roma friends on the board) out of a chance to play undefeated Nebraska rather than should be No. 1.