Not in 1942, they didn't. In 1942 there might have been 1 or 2 games televised a week nationally. Chances are sportswriters out west never saw Georgia play.

quote:
Are you of the assumption that sports writers didn't attend games?

In 1942? I am of the opinion that local sportswriters attended the games and then a recap general sketch of the game was sent out over the wire services like AP and UPI.
California sportswriters did not fly cross country tow watch Georgia games, and they were not generally televised.

quote:
My point is, they were there during the era and probably understood the game and it's players better than someone looking at a computer generated report 50 years later.

Are you under the opinion that biases did not exist for regional teams? They do now and they did then. The larger media centers out west and in the northeast held considerable sway. I would say an unbiased person looking at statistics, strength of schedule etc probably had a much more unbiased view of team strengths. Even tody biases exist for Notre Dame that was formed abck in the 30s, 40s, 50s and 60s.

You seem to forget that televised games were a rarity until the 80s and through today. There would be a couple of regional games but, except for bowl season people in Georgia would rarely see a west coast team play and west coast people rarely saw east coast teams play. I'm an old guy, so I remember those things.

quote:
Is it your opinion that Clemson won the natty in 2019 since one of the NCAA's selectors rated them higher than LSU after the championship?

Absolutely not. But the consensus says LSU won the championship, right? So it is immaterial. It takes more than one, right?

Look. It's time for me to go and work out. If you want to continue this we can later. But you are arguing against the criteria you set forth.(Consensus) That can't be a good thing.