Started By
Message
Setting the record, and all of you, straight on Bama's NC's
Posted on 5/28/15 at 1:28 am
Posted on 5/28/15 at 1:28 am
I dropped by to read about some SEC related material and what do I see, per usual, peons ridiculing Alabama and her NC's in basically every other thread.
So, wtf, I'll put this post here on the SEC board, instead of the Alabama board.
Break out your reading glasses, you old geezers, and get ready for some troof.
I've created and posted parts of this, all my own material, in threads on various boards over the years. Now, for the good folks at SEC Rant who seem so very, very concerned with Alabama, I've combined it all into one sweet compilation.
Here we go:
The truth of Alabama's championships, untainted by derision and falsehoods, are these:
Keep in mind that a shared NC, in times past, was a NC. Also, keep in mind that we can't apply BCS or playoff rules to times past because that is just not how things work.
Also, if Alabama won a UPI trophy one season and another team won an AP trophy the same season, Alabama were still NC's. Of course, the other team was also. Alabama was never so powerful to be able to tell the AP or UPI when or how to award their beautiful trophies. It would have been quite rude of Alabama to simply refuse to accept an AP trophy or a UPI trophy because we didn't agree with whether or not they awarded trophies before or after bowl games. That was their business, not Alabama's.
Pre-WW-II, the Rose Bowl was, in fact, considered a de facto NC game as it was the only post season game with any prominence whatsoever. Any pre-war title claim based on the Rose Bowl is as solid as it gets.
But by the 1940's there were so many bowls popping up that they came to be seen as little more than exhibition games (esp after the Rose began its Pac-10/Big-10 tie in). So, by the 1950's, polls are really all that should count. Remember that the AP was not a respected selector by any stretch of the imagination until they changed their voting rules in 1958. UPI was the only respected poll until that time.
The fact that polls chose to name champions before the bowls simply reflects the opinion of the country. Bowls were not considered particularly meaningful until the late '60's to early '70's - basically when TV became a huge part of the game. That's why the AP didn't permanently switch to post-bowl polls until around '68 and the UPI didn't until '74.
So, wtf, I'll put this post here on the SEC board, instead of the Alabama board.
Break out your reading glasses, you old geezers, and get ready for some troof.
I've created and posted parts of this, all my own material, in threads on various boards over the years. Now, for the good folks at SEC Rant who seem so very, very concerned with Alabama, I've combined it all into one sweet compilation.
Here we go:
The truth of Alabama's championships, untainted by derision and falsehoods, are these:
Keep in mind that a shared NC, in times past, was a NC. Also, keep in mind that we can't apply BCS or playoff rules to times past because that is just not how things work.
Also, if Alabama won a UPI trophy one season and another team won an AP trophy the same season, Alabama were still NC's. Of course, the other team was also. Alabama was never so powerful to be able to tell the AP or UPI when or how to award their beautiful trophies. It would have been quite rude of Alabama to simply refuse to accept an AP trophy or a UPI trophy because we didn't agree with whether or not they awarded trophies before or after bowl games. That was their business, not Alabama's.
Pre-WW-II, the Rose Bowl was, in fact, considered a de facto NC game as it was the only post season game with any prominence whatsoever. Any pre-war title claim based on the Rose Bowl is as solid as it gets.
But by the 1940's there were so many bowls popping up that they came to be seen as little more than exhibition games (esp after the Rose began its Pac-10/Big-10 tie in). So, by the 1950's, polls are really all that should count. Remember that the AP was not a respected selector by any stretch of the imagination until they changed their voting rules in 1958. UPI was the only respected poll until that time.
The fact that polls chose to name champions before the bowls simply reflects the opinion of the country. Bowls were not considered particularly meaningful until the late '60's to early '70's - basically when TV became a huge part of the game. That's why the AP didn't permanently switch to post-bowl polls until around '68 and the UPI didn't until '74.
44
Posted on 5/28/15 at 1:29 am to CtrlAltimerDelete
Every argument about our 1973 title being bogus only "proves" that we should have been named champion in '77. Any argument about our 1964 title only "proves" that we were robbed in 1966. If you think 1941 sucks, then explain 1945?
Alabama claims 4 titles from before the AP poll was created in 1936. Prior to the establishment of the AP and UPI/Coaches Polls, there was no "gold standard" in regard to football polls.
Since the inception of the AP and UPI polls, each of Alabama's national titles but one were awarded by either the AP or UPI/Coaches poll. 1941 is completely bogus.
You can argue the merits or procedures used by the AP and UPI polls, but the bottom line is that many other teams claim titles from these polls in their official records (Notre Dame, OU, etc.)
People argue that Alabama claims titles that were awarded before bowl losses. Many people fail to realize two things.
1) Prior to the late 60s/early 70s, bowls were not widely used as evaluating tools for final rankings. They were exhibition games to reward teams and fans for a successful season, but there wasn't a whole lot of value placed in the outcome of the games. It wasn't like today when anyone with a pulse at the end of the season can go play in the Chuck E. Cheese Bowl. Some time ago, bowls were a legitimate reward for the best teams, but most voters placed more value on the body of work during the regular season.
2) Some teams elected to not participate in bowl games. Notre Dame is a prime example. The Irish, as an independent school, declined bowl invitations for almost 40 years. Many of their national titles were won during seasons when they did not participate in a post-season bowl. From the 30's or 40's until the early 70s they did this. Notre Dame claims about 11 national titles now, but had the luxury of not playing in a game they'd have likely lost in the post-season during many of those championship runs.
Tell me how is it fair, on one hand, to say that a team like Alabama, Texas, Oklahoma, etc..., that stepped up and played real competition in a bowl game, should not have won a title because they lost said bowl game. And then, on the other hand, say it's okay for ND to claim umpteen national titles while they played a weak schedule and declined the challenge of a bowl game?
How many of their elite teams, during the 40s-60's, would have had their records tarnished because of a bowl loss, as many claim about some of Alabama's titles?
Finally, Alabama went undefeated and untied in 1945 and 1966. To honor Army during the 1945 season, they were awarded the national title that season. I won't argue the legitimacy of that title because they deserved it and it was a gesture of patriotism and solidarity to do that. But still, Alabama had a very good team and could lay claim to that title. We do not.
In 1966, Alabama had claimed a share of the title in 64 and 65, but the national media wanted to send a message to Southern football teams because many Southern schools had not integrated their athletic programs yet. ND and MSU played to a tie in East Lansing, and ND and Parshegian sat on the ball the last couple of minutes of the game to preserve the tie and the high ranking.
Meanwhile, Alabama went undefeated and outscored opponents by an average of 20+ points and obliterated their opponent in the bowl game. ND and MSU claim a split national title, and Alabama finished third in voting despite starting the season ranked #1. We do not claim this title.
Alabama claims 4 titles from before the AP poll was created in 1936. Prior to the establishment of the AP and UPI/Coaches Polls, there was no "gold standard" in regard to football polls.
Since the inception of the AP and UPI polls, each of Alabama's national titles but one were awarded by either the AP or UPI/Coaches poll. 1941 is completely bogus.
You can argue the merits or procedures used by the AP and UPI polls, but the bottom line is that many other teams claim titles from these polls in their official records (Notre Dame, OU, etc.)
People argue that Alabama claims titles that were awarded before bowl losses. Many people fail to realize two things.
1) Prior to the late 60s/early 70s, bowls were not widely used as evaluating tools for final rankings. They were exhibition games to reward teams and fans for a successful season, but there wasn't a whole lot of value placed in the outcome of the games. It wasn't like today when anyone with a pulse at the end of the season can go play in the Chuck E. Cheese Bowl. Some time ago, bowls were a legitimate reward for the best teams, but most voters placed more value on the body of work during the regular season.
2) Some teams elected to not participate in bowl games. Notre Dame is a prime example. The Irish, as an independent school, declined bowl invitations for almost 40 years. Many of their national titles were won during seasons when they did not participate in a post-season bowl. From the 30's or 40's until the early 70s they did this. Notre Dame claims about 11 national titles now, but had the luxury of not playing in a game they'd have likely lost in the post-season during many of those championship runs.
Tell me how is it fair, on one hand, to say that a team like Alabama, Texas, Oklahoma, etc..., that stepped up and played real competition in a bowl game, should not have won a title because they lost said bowl game. And then, on the other hand, say it's okay for ND to claim umpteen national titles while they played a weak schedule and declined the challenge of a bowl game?
How many of their elite teams, during the 40s-60's, would have had their records tarnished because of a bowl loss, as many claim about some of Alabama's titles?
Finally, Alabama went undefeated and untied in 1945 and 1966. To honor Army during the 1945 season, they were awarded the national title that season. I won't argue the legitimacy of that title because they deserved it and it was a gesture of patriotism and solidarity to do that. But still, Alabama had a very good team and could lay claim to that title. We do not.
In 1966, Alabama had claimed a share of the title in 64 and 65, but the national media wanted to send a message to Southern football teams because many Southern schools had not integrated their athletic programs yet. ND and MSU played to a tie in East Lansing, and ND and Parshegian sat on the ball the last couple of minutes of the game to preserve the tie and the high ranking.
Meanwhile, Alabama went undefeated and outscored opponents by an average of 20+ points and obliterated their opponent in the bowl game. ND and MSU claim a split national title, and Alabama finished third in voting despite starting the season ranked #1. We do not claim this title.
Posted on 5/28/15 at 1:30 am to CtrlAltimerDelete
And on to the actual seasons. We will start with '25 and '26. Many, many, many teams claim NC's from this time period and Alabama doing it is nothing unusual, nothing out of the ordinary at all.
1.) 1925. The facts in the case for 1925 are that Alabama, at the time, was widely considered to be the champions of college football during that year to all the football going public alive at that time. If you were a football fan and followed football, the University of Alabama was the team to be envied this particular year.
'Bama (10-0) traveled out to sunny LA for their first of many Rose Bowls. They defeated a 10-0 Washington team.
Dartmouth, the team that was even halfway in the picture, was 8-0, didn't play a bowl game, and played 4 non-1a teams out of 8 opponents.
'Bama, if there was no such thing as a NC at that time, was certainly the best team in the country. Deal with it. This is the game that made 8,000 Northern sportswriters and West Coast fans commit suicide. Bama(10-0)
2.) 1926. This one is really easy. People were not stupid back in those days. They had just as much sense as modern day folk. They knew champions when they saw them. Let me lay it out for 'ya:
Stanford was 10-0-1 after the TIE in the Rose Bowl with 'Bama. Alabama was 9-0-1 after the TIE with Stanford in the Rose Bowl. Pretty close, right?
Wrong.
Stanford played 6 of what are now considered non-1A opponents out of a total of 10 reg. season games. How many non-1-A opponents did 'Bama face? One, yes, just one.
Therefore, Alabama was what we call in our time National Champions 2 years in a row.
3.) 1930 Another clear cut NC for 'Bama. 'Bama went 9-0 reg. season and then ventured out to sunny LA again, they got tired of seeing us, and stomped a hole clean through the chest cavities of a very strong 9-0, at the time, Washington State team. The final score = Champions 24, Wash. State 0.
Ouch, that one hurt the pride of lot's of folks out on the West Coast.
What did Notre Dame do? They went undefeated at 10-0 just like 'Bama but they stayed at home and said "no mas, no mas" we don't wants to play no bowl game.
Advantage = 'Bama. (Bama 10-0)
4.) 1934. A very strong Alabama team this year. Gritty and determined.
In 1934, Alabama surged through a regular season destruction, utter destruction of all opponents, and finished it all off with a face shattering of a very strong Stanford team whose record, at the time, stood at 9-0-1.
We shamed them and once again made everyone curse those stupid Southern boys who kept bursting apart cherished ideas about football supremacy on the West Coast and in the North.
The score was 29-13 in favor of who? That's right, 'Bama.
3 time Rose Bowl Champions by this time.
1.) 1925. The facts in the case for 1925 are that Alabama, at the time, was widely considered to be the champions of college football during that year to all the football going public alive at that time. If you were a football fan and followed football, the University of Alabama was the team to be envied this particular year.
'Bama (10-0) traveled out to sunny LA for their first of many Rose Bowls. They defeated a 10-0 Washington team.
Dartmouth, the team that was even halfway in the picture, was 8-0, didn't play a bowl game, and played 4 non-1a teams out of 8 opponents.
'Bama, if there was no such thing as a NC at that time, was certainly the best team in the country. Deal with it. This is the game that made 8,000 Northern sportswriters and West Coast fans commit suicide. Bama(10-0)
2.) 1926. This one is really easy. People were not stupid back in those days. They had just as much sense as modern day folk. They knew champions when they saw them. Let me lay it out for 'ya:
Stanford was 10-0-1 after the TIE in the Rose Bowl with 'Bama. Alabama was 9-0-1 after the TIE with Stanford in the Rose Bowl. Pretty close, right?
Wrong.
Stanford played 6 of what are now considered non-1A opponents out of a total of 10 reg. season games. How many non-1-A opponents did 'Bama face? One, yes, just one.
Therefore, Alabama was what we call in our time National Champions 2 years in a row.
3.) 1930 Another clear cut NC for 'Bama. 'Bama went 9-0 reg. season and then ventured out to sunny LA again, they got tired of seeing us, and stomped a hole clean through the chest cavities of a very strong 9-0, at the time, Washington State team. The final score = Champions 24, Wash. State 0.
Ouch, that one hurt the pride of lot's of folks out on the West Coast.
What did Notre Dame do? They went undefeated at 10-0 just like 'Bama but they stayed at home and said "no mas, no mas" we don't wants to play no bowl game.
Advantage = 'Bama. (Bama 10-0)
4.) 1934. A very strong Alabama team this year. Gritty and determined.
In 1934, Alabama surged through a regular season destruction, utter destruction of all opponents, and finished it all off with a face shattering of a very strong Stanford team whose record, at the time, stood at 9-0-1.
We shamed them and once again made everyone curse those stupid Southern boys who kept bursting apart cherished ideas about football supremacy on the West Coast and in the North.
The score was 29-13 in favor of who? That's right, 'Bama.
3 time Rose Bowl Champions by this time.
Posted on 5/28/15 at 1:31 am to CtrlAltimerDelete
What did any team that was even close do? Minnesota went 8-0 and beat a bunch of 4 win teams and naturally, didn't play in a bowl game, no sir, not their style.
Chalk another one up for Alabama.(Bama 10-0)
And on we go:
1941. Not a NC. The year 1941 was put on the list to keep Alabama fans humble.
#5.) 1961. AP + UPI + just about everything and everyone else chose 'Bama. Enough said. 5 so far, many more to come. ('Bama 11-0)
#6.) 1964. The AP & UPI, the two big dogs, chose Alabama plus a couple of other selectors. To hell with Arkansas or anyone else. Sure, the AP gave out their trophy before bowl games; that is the way it was. Who is Alabama to tell the AP that what they were doing was wrong? They were just a humble football team doing it's best. ('Bama 10-1)
Let's get real everyone. Don't revise history. 5 years from now, BCS championships may be considered to be invalid, especially in light of the new playoff system. That does not negate the fact that your team may have won a BCS championship. It is what it is. ('Bama 10-1)
#7.) 1965. #7. A great one. This particular trophy is very beautiful and well designed. For this one, I am going to give a link to a much more well thought out summary than I can come up with.
Here you go:
Anxious to avoid the uproar that followed its regular season final poll last year, AP waited until after New Year's to crown the 1965 national champion.
Good move. At the end of the regular season Michigan State, Arkansas and Nebraska were all 10-0, with Alabama at 8-1-1 (the Tide lost their opener to Georgia and tied Tennessee). The bowl match-ups had Arkansas playing LSU in the Cotton, Michigan State vs UCLA in the Rose, and Nebraska vs Alabama in the Orange. Each game followed the other on TV.
The three top-ranked teams all lost. Arkansas, denied the '64 national title it deserved, had its 22 game winning streak snapped in Dallas. LSU took a 14-7 lead in the second quarter then shut the Razorbacks out in the second half.
Michigan State, UPI's national champ, had opened the regular season with a 13-3 win over UCLA. The Spartans hoped to close the year on the same note, but couldn't overcome the Bruins' 14-0 halftime lead. The victory was UCLA's first Rose Bowl win ever.
So the Orange Bowl, in its second year at night, became the national championship game. Underdog Alabama built up a 24-7 lead by halftime then held off a Nebraska comeback to win 39-28.
Bama's Bear Bryant joined Minnesota's Bernie Bierman (1940-41), Army's Red Blaik (1944-45), Notre Dame's Frank Leahy (1946-47) and Oklahoma's Bud Wilkinson (1955-56) as the only coaches to win back-to-back national titles.
Infoplease
End of story. For 'Bama fans, it was a story book ending. ('Bama 9-1-1)
Chalk another one up for Alabama.(Bama 10-0)
And on we go:
1941. Not a NC. The year 1941 was put on the list to keep Alabama fans humble.
#5.) 1961. AP + UPI + just about everything and everyone else chose 'Bama. Enough said. 5 so far, many more to come. ('Bama 11-0)
#6.) 1964. The AP & UPI, the two big dogs, chose Alabama plus a couple of other selectors. To hell with Arkansas or anyone else. Sure, the AP gave out their trophy before bowl games; that is the way it was. Who is Alabama to tell the AP that what they were doing was wrong? They were just a humble football team doing it's best. ('Bama 10-1)
Let's get real everyone. Don't revise history. 5 years from now, BCS championships may be considered to be invalid, especially in light of the new playoff system. That does not negate the fact that your team may have won a BCS championship. It is what it is. ('Bama 10-1)
#7.) 1965. #7. A great one. This particular trophy is very beautiful and well designed. For this one, I am going to give a link to a much more well thought out summary than I can come up with.
Here you go:
Anxious to avoid the uproar that followed its regular season final poll last year, AP waited until after New Year's to crown the 1965 national champion.
Good move. At the end of the regular season Michigan State, Arkansas and Nebraska were all 10-0, with Alabama at 8-1-1 (the Tide lost their opener to Georgia and tied Tennessee). The bowl match-ups had Arkansas playing LSU in the Cotton, Michigan State vs UCLA in the Rose, and Nebraska vs Alabama in the Orange. Each game followed the other on TV.
The three top-ranked teams all lost. Arkansas, denied the '64 national title it deserved, had its 22 game winning streak snapped in Dallas. LSU took a 14-7 lead in the second quarter then shut the Razorbacks out in the second half.
Michigan State, UPI's national champ, had opened the regular season with a 13-3 win over UCLA. The Spartans hoped to close the year on the same note, but couldn't overcome the Bruins' 14-0 halftime lead. The victory was UCLA's first Rose Bowl win ever.
So the Orange Bowl, in its second year at night, became the national championship game. Underdog Alabama built up a 24-7 lead by halftime then held off a Nebraska comeback to win 39-28.
Bama's Bear Bryant joined Minnesota's Bernie Bierman (1940-41), Army's Red Blaik (1944-45), Notre Dame's Frank Leahy (1946-47) and Oklahoma's Bud Wilkinson (1955-56) as the only coaches to win back-to-back national titles.
Infoplease
End of story. For 'Bama fans, it was a story book ending. ('Bama 9-1-1)
This post was edited on 5/28/15 at 1:32 am
Posted on 5/28/15 at 1:32 am to CtrlAltimerDelete
#8.) 1973. Love this one. 'Bama was undefeated at the end of the season and the UPI decided we were the best team in the country. It is a nice trophy too, kind of big. See, what many people don't understand is that at this time and during the preceding years, bowl games did not determine NC's, they weren't really important during this stage in the continuing evolvement of college football.
Wait, wait, how can that be, you may say. That is just the way it was. Bowl games were meant to be consolation prizes, not determinants of who was the NC. That was already decided after the regular season.
Once again it comes down to modern man attempting to place his mindset and values and ideas about how things should have been done to times past. Guess what? It doesn't work that way.
'Bama shared this one with Notre Dame, the team that beat them in a fantastic and 6 or 7 lead changing Sugar Bowl game. Don't believe Alabama won a NC this year? Come on down and take a look at the UPI trophy. That ain't no People's National Championship, folks. ('Bama 11-1)
The rest of them aren't really worth going over because you should all be more familiar with them.
Wait, wait, how can that be, you may say. That is just the way it was. Bowl games were meant to be consolation prizes, not determinants of who was the NC. That was already decided after the regular season.
Once again it comes down to modern man attempting to place his mindset and values and ideas about how things should have been done to times past. Guess what? It doesn't work that way.
'Bama shared this one with Notre Dame, the team that beat them in a fantastic and 6 or 7 lead changing Sugar Bowl game. Don't believe Alabama won a NC this year? Come on down and take a look at the UPI trophy. That ain't no People's National Championship, folks. ('Bama 11-1)
The rest of them aren't really worth going over because you should all be more familiar with them.
Posted on 5/28/15 at 1:38 am to CtrlAltimerDelete
Posted on 5/28/15 at 1:41 am to CtrlAltimerDelete
What the actual frick man. You just wrote a novel and nobody will read it
Posted on 5/28/15 at 1:42 am to texag7
Thanks, texag7. I'm just glad you got through it. It is practically a small book; I may publish it one day. I usually try to post this whenever I find auNecks, posting their stock, and just as long, diatribe on why Alabama really only has 4 NC's.
Some Plainsman created a website and posted a breakdown of why Alabama really only has "legit" NC's in '92, '09, '11, and '12 and they all quote it like it's written law.
This post was edited on 5/28/15 at 1:49 am
Posted on 5/28/15 at 1:43 am to CtrlAltimerDelete
woh
Posted on 5/28/15 at 1:52 am to CtrlAltimerDelete
drop bye grenada i show u a sweet compillation ur feet stuff down my boots so u cant run when i reem ur cullbuck arse so deep it kwinch ur thurst and make u wish golston was won givin u the d
This post was edited on 5/28/15 at 1:55 am
Posted on 5/28/15 at 2:00 am to CtrlAltimerDelete
Good grief y'all are some whiney little bitches. You have an unbelievably successful football program; what the frick does it matter if some morons on a message board try to take away from that by trying to take away one or two of your umpteen championships?
Posted on 5/28/15 at 2:03 am to MSUbulldogs03
quote:
Good grief y'all are some whiney little bitches. You have an unbelievably successful football program; what the frick does it matter if some morons on a message board try to take away from that by trying to take away one or two of your umpteen championships?
Not one or two, all but 4 or 5. If I had 10 homes, I wouldn't want 5 of them burnt to the ground by people who didn't think I deserved all of them.
Posted on 5/28/15 at 2:05 am to CtrlAltimerDelete
dude.... Posted on 5/28/15 at 2:08 am to MSUbulldogs03
u sound like carter he run are farm in to ground with taxes ur name need to be left wing spoonbill
Posted on 5/28/15 at 2:10 am to CtrlAltimerDelete
Not one person will read that...
Posted on 5/28/15 at 2:13 am to CtrlAltimerDelete
To close it out, I'll post an image of a national paper syndicate labelling Alabama as NC's back when, according to revisionists, there was no such thing as a national champion.
Enjoy and I'll talk to all of you tomorrow.
Enjoy and I'll talk to all of you tomorrow.
Posted on 5/28/15 at 2:15 am to AU4real35
quote:
Not one person will read that...
Right, except for all the auNecks posting that they won't read it, as if they can't not read any bit of information about Alabama.
I hope you liked it.
Posted on 5/28/15 at 2:15 am to CtrlAltimerDelete
CAD-Notes:
Bama = Best.
Bama = Best.
Posted on 5/28/15 at 2:22 am to CtrlAltimerDelete
Posted on 5/28/15 at 2:23 am to AU4real35
quote:
Not one person will read that...
Page 1 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News