Started By
Message
re: SEC Football Teams All Time Historical Rankings according to CFB Warehouse
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:18 am to SoCalHog
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:18 am to SoCalHog
quote:
Lots of trolling here, but the simple fact is Alabama won the '64 championship the same as the won the 2015 championship (which I'm sure your children will claim 20 years from now). Ranked at the top at the end if the regular season, but didn't win when it counted. Nobody recognizes bama as the champion that year except for bama, and apparently draconian sanctions.
Perfect example of a revisionist attempting to apply modern day rules to the 1960's. It's mostly teenagers who do this because they haven't learned to fully develop their thoughts.
1
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:18 am to BigOrangeBri
quote:
Which is what LSU managed to get over an entire season
1 season, not 5
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:19 am to BigOrangeBri
quote:
Sorry your team got caught cheating. 850 wins in the record books and that will never change. Again, 850 wins.
879 on the field of play. That is what matters to the people who actually play the game.
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:20 am to Alert Mi
quote:
You thought Korin knew what he was talking about so you decided you would fall in with him.
You really had no idea that the NCAA didn't recognize NC's, did you?
That is fricking hilarious.
quote:
Teams listed in bold reflect the NCAA's designation as "Consensus National Champions" by virtue of their selection from 1950 onward by one or more selectors from Associated Press, UPI, Football Writers Association of America, NFF/College Football Hall of Fame, and USA Today.
quote:
1964
Alabama 10–1 Bear Bryant AP, B(QPRS), L, UPI
Arkansas 11–0 Frank Broyles BR, CFRA, FWAA, HAF, NCF, PS, SR
Michigan 9–1 Bump Elliott DuS
Notre Dame 9–1 Ara Parseghian DeS, FN, NFF
LINK
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:20 am to redeye
The fact that they listed Notre Dame and Michigan too should tell you how silly that is
This post was edited on 8/2/15 at 2:22 am
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:21 am to Alert Mi
quote:
Perfect example of a revisionist attempting to apply modern day rules to the 1960's. It's mostly teenagers who do this because they haven't learned to fully develop their thoughts.
Yea, I'm 48, so try again hoss.
Also, it's young people like you who do the revisionist work. I never hear people who were around in '64 argue that Arkansas didn't win the national title that year.
This post was edited on 8/2/15 at 2:25 am
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:26 am to redeye
quote:
quote:
Perfect example of a revisionist attempting to apply modern day rules to the 1960's. It's mostly teenagers who do this because they haven't learned to fully develop their thoughts.
Yea, I'm 48, so try again hoss.
Okay, I'll try again. It's mostly teenagers or those who have underdeveloped minds who do this.
For God's sake, you actually believe the NCAA recognizes national champions. That should end the conversation but, you having an underdeveloped mind, I doubt it will.
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:30 am to redeye
quote:
Teams listed in bold reflect the NCAA's designation as "Consensus National Champions" by virtue of their selection from 1950 onward by one or more selectors from Associated Press, UPI, Football Writers Association of America, NFF/College Football Hall of Fame, and USA Today.
The NCAA is simply listing selectors and telling the general public who the consensus champions were in any particular year. They do this a general service.
If you will notice, they do not in any way indicate that they "recognize" any champions as legit.
If so, where in the hell are all their NCAA trophies?
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:37 am to Alert Mi
quote:
Okay, I'll try again. It's mostly teenagers or those who have underdeveloped minds who do this.
For God's sake, you actually believe the NCAA recognizes national champions. That should end the conversation but, you having an underdeveloped mind, I doubt it will.
No, I don't and I explained that already. They recognize selectors, just as the link I gave above describes.
And seriously, I know your trolling, but I don't even get the revisionist stuff you're talking about. For example, our younger fans would agree with you, because they don't know better, but those of us who are older know very well that Arkansas was the 1964 co-champions. Similarly, 50 years from now, everyone will consider USC the 2003 national champs, because the AP said so.
This post was edited on 8/2/15 at 2:41 am
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:38 am to Alert Mi
quote:
The NCAA is simply listing selectors and telling the general public who the consensus champions were in any particular year. They do this a general service.
If you will notice, they do not in any way indicate that they "recognize" any champions as legit.
If so, where in the hell are all their NCAA trophies?
I just said the same thing above and for the second time now.
This post was edited on 8/2/15 at 2:41 am
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:49 am to Alert Mi
quote:
879 on the field of play. That is what matters to the people who actually play the game.
Again, sucks y'all got caught. 850
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:51 am to SoCalHog
quote:
Nobody recognizes bama as the champion that year
Except for the AP and UPI. All the crying and whining about it a half century later won't change a thing.
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:51 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
The fact that they listed Notre Dame and Michigan too should tell you how silly that is
No, it tells me that Notre Dame and Michigan were also considered national champions by someone. But the point was that Alabama, Arkansas and Notre Dame were all awarded their title by "consensus selectors", which is jargon used by the NCAA for "selectors we acknowledge". It's not so different from 2003, when the AP awarded it's trophy to USC, while LSU was awarded the Coaches and won the BCS title game. 50 years from now, I'm sure some people will say LSU's claim isn't legit, because it didn't come from the AP.
This post was edited on 8/2/15 at 2:58 am
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:52 am to Draconian Sanctions
Yes, I know. LSU also had a 3 win season and three 4 win seasons.
At our worst, we've at least had mediocre seasons. LSU went full SMU after death penalty
At our worst, we've at least had mediocre seasons. LSU went full SMU after death penalty
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:53 am to BigOrangeBri
quote:
Again, sucks y'all got caught. 850
879. It doesn't matter what is "official". The teams Alabama beat, and the players on those teams, know they were beaten.
Pretty soon, within two seasons, only Michigan will have more wins than Alabama.
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:57 am to Alert Mi
quote:
Pretty soon, within two seasons, only Michigan will have more wins than Alabama.
So, Notre Dame is gonna go win-less the next two years and bama is gonna Win 33 games? That's impossible.
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:57 am to redeye
quote:
But the point was that Alabama, Arkansas and Notre Dame were all awarded their title by "consensus selectors", which is jargon used by the NCAA for "selectors we acknowledge".
You dummy. Consensus isn't code speak that the NCAA uses for selectors they acknowledge. They don't acknowledge anyone or anything concerning NC's or selectors.
Consensus means, in this context, generally accepted by a majority of something.
You are too ignorant, almost, to discuss this with.
Posted on 8/2/15 at 2:59 am to BigOrangeBri
quote:
So, Notre Dame is gonna go win-less the next two years and bama is gonna Win 33 games? That's impossible.
What is 900-879? Is that 33, Mr. Tennessee?
Posted on 8/2/15 at 3:02 am to redeye
quote:
But the point was that Alabama, Arkansas and Notre Dame were all awarded their title by "consensus selectors", which is jargon used by the NCAA for "selectors we acknowledge"
You dumb Arkansas bastard. All those teams weren't consensus national champions and they weren't selected by consensus selectors.
There is no such thing as a consensus selector. As a group, the majority of selectors form a consensus of opinion.
What is wrong with you?
This post was edited on 8/2/15 at 3:12 am
Posted on 8/2/15 at 3:12 am to Alert Mi
quote:
What is wrong with you?
I gave you all the information you need to understand it. If you're too fricking stupid to comprehend what was written, then that's your problem. Go argue with wikipedia and the NCAA about what they wrote, or jump off a fricking bridge, because I don't really care.
Page 10 of 15
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News