Started By
Message
re: There have been 22 SEC national titles in football in the poll era (1936)
Posted on 4/5/16 at 2:28 pm to RollTide1987
Posted on 4/5/16 at 2:28 pm to RollTide1987
The FWAA and NFF are listed alongside the AP and Coaches on the NCAA's site. 
1
Posted on 4/5/16 at 2:29 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Anything after 1936 besides AP and Coaches doesn't matter.
And yet you claim 1941.
Posted on 4/5/16 at 2:30 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
And anything from 98-13 other than the BCS winner doesn't matter either.
Yet some people don't get that.
Well that's completely different. The BCS was a system everyone agreed to play under with a trophy everyone agreed to play for. There was nothing like that prior (the Bowl Coalition and Bowl Alliance didn't have participation from the Big 10/Pac 12/Rose Bowl).
Posted on 4/5/16 at 2:32 pm to Korin
quote:
Well that's completely different. The BCS was a system everyone agreed to play under with a trophy everyone agreed to play for. There was nothing like that prior (the Bowl Coalition and Bowl Alliance didn't have participation from the Big 10/Pac 12/Rose Bowl).
You're saying the same thing I am.
My point was that people generally count AP/Coaches titles from the 30s (or whenever the hell it is) til 97, because those were the authorities. 98-13, teh BCS was the one and only authority. Yet some people still think USC was a "national champion" in 03 when they absolutely in no way were. Very big gripe of mine.
Posted on 4/5/16 at 2:37 pm to WG_Dawg
They weren't always the only authorities though, not up through the 60s.
The USC thing is iffy because the AP Poll was still part of the BCS and OU had no business being in the title game over them.
The USC thing is iffy because the AP Poll was still part of the BCS and OU had no business being in the title game over them.
This post was edited on 4/5/16 at 2:38 pm
Posted on 4/5/16 at 2:40 pm to Korin
quote:
The USC thing is iffy because the AP Poll was still part of the BCS
Yes, you're exactly right. It was a "part" of the BCS whole. It'd be no different than the colley matrix or dunkleman index claiming a different champ and the school claiming it. IDGAF how respected the AP was previously, starting in 1998 EVERY TEAM/conference agreed to abide by the rule, being that 1 and 2 would play each other in the BCS title game to crown the champ. And USC did not do that in 2003. Also of note is that the following year in 04 the AP even pulled out of the equation, effectively making them completely adn totally irrelevant.
quote:
OU had no business being in the title game over them.
that's conjecture that doesn't really have any bearing on who won the title.
Posted on 4/5/16 at 2:41 pm to WG_Dawg
You know damn well y'all would've claimed it in their situation (we would've too).
Posted on 4/5/16 at 2:47 pm to Korin
I never said I wouldn't, but that wouldn't make me right.
I claim the 27, 46, and 68 titles but that doesnt' mean that it's necessarily "right".
I claim the 27, 46, and 68 titles but that doesnt' mean that it's necessarily "right".
This post was edited on 4/5/16 at 2:49 pm
Posted on 4/5/16 at 2:56 pm to WG_Dawg
Even though 46 and 68 weren't AP or Coaches?
Posted on 4/5/16 at 2:56 pm to Korin
quote:
The FWAA and NFF are listed alongside the AP and Coaches on the NCAA's site.
As the NCAA doesn't award a national champion in the FBS, I really couldn't care less what their website says about it.
Posted on 4/5/16 at 2:57 pm to RollTide1987
Of course you don't.
Posted on 4/5/16 at 2:57 pm to Korin
quote:
And yet you claim 1941.
I don't claim it. My alma mater claims it. However, I do not acknowledge it and would like nothing more than for it to be redacted.
Posted on 4/5/16 at 2:59 pm to Korin
quote:
Even though 46 and 68 weren't AP or Coaches?
yeah, because someone put us #1 at the end. As I said, I know that if we were doing things "right", we should claim 2. But there's no uniformity in what schools do (see: bama) so I claim 5. The school only claims 2.
That's a bit different than what we were previously talking about though because starting in 98 there was a formal, official, and agreed upon system. Back then there wasn't really. From 1998 until forever (presumably) there should not be any split titles or confusion about who was the champion.
Posted on 4/5/16 at 3:00 pm to Korin
quote:
And yet you claim 1941.
off topic, but I have a lengthy strand of this championship banner that I took off the flag from BDS in 2004.
Posted on 4/5/16 at 3:00 pm to Korin
quote:
Of course you don't.
I don't. And you shouldn't either because it's very possible the Power 5 won't be associated with the NCAA here in the next 10 years.
Posted on 4/5/16 at 3:03 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
yeah, because someone put us #1 at the end. As I said, I know that if we were doing things "right", we should claim 2. But there's no uniformity in what schools do (see: bama) so I claim 5. The school only claims 2.
That's a bit different than what we were previously talking about though because starting in 98 there was a formal, official, and agreed upon system. Back then there wasn't really. From 1998 until forever (presumably) there should not be any split titles or confusion about who was the champion.
What about the school claiming 1942 even though it wasn't AP or Coaches?
Posted on 4/5/16 at 3:07 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
I don't. And you shouldn't either because it's very possible the Power 5 won't be associated with the NCAA here in the next 10 years.
They're also recognized on CFDW and Winsipedia. You know, the same sites y'all use to justify the retroactive claims.
Posted on 4/5/16 at 3:08 pm to Korin
quote:
What about the school claiming 1942 even though it wasn't AP or Coaches?
I believe the rationale there was number of selectors. No other team had more entities vote them #1 than us (if memory serves both us and OSU had the same number of people vote them #1).
And honestly, that '42 claim carries faaaar more weight than USC's 03 claim.
This post was edited on 4/5/16 at 3:09 pm
Posted on 4/5/16 at 3:09 pm to WG_Dawg
You just said the AP and Coaches were the authorities starting in the 30s and up through 97.
For the record, I have no problem with y'all claiming 42. Don't try and have it both ways though.
For the record, I have no problem with y'all claiming 42. Don't try and have it both ways though.
This post was edited on 4/5/16 at 3:10 pm
Posted on 4/5/16 at 3:11 pm to WG_Dawg
To expand a little more...
In '42 UGA finished the regular season 10-1 with wins over #3 bama (interestingly enough, at grant field. Idk why) and #2 GT in our finale. Only loss was to auburn. Afterwards, we shutout #13 UCLA in the rose bowl.
In '42 OSU finished the regular season 9-1 with wins over #13 and #4 and a loss to #6 wisconsin. They did not even play in a bowl game.
In '42 UGA finished the regular season 10-1 with wins over #3 bama (interestingly enough, at grant field. Idk why) and #2 GT in our finale. Only loss was to auburn. Afterwards, we shutout #13 UCLA in the rose bowl.
In '42 OSU finished the regular season 9-1 with wins over #13 and #4 and a loss to #6 wisconsin. They did not even play in a bowl game.
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News