Started By
Message
0
Posted on 4/5/16 at 10:19 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
It matters to those who desire uniformity. Anything prior to 1936 is a mess because there are so many systems, both from the period and from modern times, awarding multiple teams in a given year their national championship. Houlgate and Dickinson were just two of many.
And so, since those that desire "uniformity", feel that it should take precedence over history, they just declare what that uniformity should be and put down people who view it factually. You don't see how dumb that is? Who are you to declare what should count and what shouldn't?
quote:
Too bad history is subject to lots and lots of interpretation. The people of the period didn't have the gift of hindsight. We know better now though.
This from the guy who was scoffing retroactive titles in this thread. I see, retroactive titles are bad, but putting some screwball's retractive standard to history is somehow "hindsight". Sorry, your opinion does not trump history.
This post was edited on 4/5/16 at 10:20 pm
Posted on 4/5/16 at 10:24 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
I don't need those sites. I have history on my side:
But you believe some assclown can retroactively view that title as not worthy in "hindsight" and expect it to matter.
Posted on 4/5/16 at 10:27 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
2. In 1941, Houlgate awarded us his championship IN 1941. He had also been around since 1927 while the AP had only been around since 1936.
Houlgate did not award Alabama his championship IN 1941. That was retroactively applied.
Posted on 4/6/16 at 6:38 am to boxedlunch
That Reddit link I posted had some old articles included. It appears you're correct.
This is too big to embed but it talks about the Houlgate Poll in the bottom right.
This is too big to embed but it talks about the Houlgate Poll in the bottom right.
Posted on 4/6/16 at 8:53 am to Korin
Why the hell is this thread still going? I posted this while drunk on some home brew Saturday night.
Posted on 4/6/16 at 9:05 am to Korin
quote:
And yet you claim 1941.
No, its exactly why Bama should not claim 1941. If you were not awarded the AP or UPI after 36 up through the BCS era you shouldn't claim it
Posted on 4/6/16 at 9:08 am to StopRobot
There have only been two national champions in the history of CFB...tOSU and Bama. All those other ways of deciding champions don't count anymore.
Is that the way we do it?
Is that the way we do it?
Posted on 4/6/16 at 9:12 am to Sid E Walker
quote:
There have only been two national champions in the history of CFB...tOSU and Bama. All those other ways of deciding champions don't count anymore. Is that the way we do it?
We all know the only way to count titles is to pick the system that screws Alabama the most
- Pre Saban it was the "ONLY AP TITLES COUNT"
- After 2015 it was "ONLY CFP TITLES COUNT"
- Now it is "ONLY AP TITLES EXCEPT THE ONES THAT INCLUDED BOWL GAMES YOU LOST COUNT"
Posted on 4/6/16 at 10:00 am to Korin
quote:
That Reddit link I posted had some old articles included. It appears you're correct.
I posted the 1941 article earlier. The scout post they talked about in the reddit post had a bunch of interesting stuff. Rare that you can get such good conversations about titles on an Alabama board.
Posted on 4/6/16 at 10:01 am to StopRobot
quote:
No, its exactly why Bama should not claim 1941. If you were not awarded the AP or UPI after 36 up through the BCS era you shouldn't claim it
Will anybody actually post who came up with these "rules" and why we should take them seriously?
Posted on 4/6/16 at 10:02 am to boxedlunch
I haven't talked to a single Alabama alum/person with brain cells who likes the idea of claiming 1941. Not everyone agrees we should flat out remove it at this point, but a lot of us do, and everyone thinks it is a joke.
That is pretty much universal thought outside of the mullet nation portion of the base.
That is pretty much universal thought outside of the mullet nation portion of the base.
Posted on 4/6/16 at 10:04 am to Sid E Walker
quote:
There have only been two national champions in the history of CFB...tOSU and Bama. All those other ways of deciding champions don't count anymore.
Is that the way we do it?
I'm gathering from some of the people in this thread that whatever system has been established is retroactively applied older titles because we know more now. Therefore, yes, apparently only Ohio State and Alabama have one titles. One each.
Either that or there's some really stupid people posting here.
Posted on 4/6/16 at 10:40 am to Sid E Walker
quote:
There have only been two national champions in the history of CFB...tOSU and Bama. All those other ways of deciding champions don't count anymore.
Is that the way we do it?
Only the BCS and CFP should count.
Posted on 4/6/16 at 12:54 pm to Korin
quote:
Only the BCS and CFP should count.
BCS & CFP titles:
1. Alabama - 4
2. Florida, Florida St., LSU, Ohio State - 2
3. Auburn, Texas, Miami, Oklahoma, Tennessee - 1*
(*USC also had 1, but stripped.)
So, Bama has twice as many as the next tier.
Page 7 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News