Started By
Message
re: Bama fans, when Saban wins another title , will you rank him over Bear?
Posted on 10/7/13 at 12:46 am to Rickdaddy4188
Posted on 10/7/13 at 12:46 am to Rickdaddy4188
I don't like the must win six national title argument. The two eras are not even remotely the same. I think what Saban is doing is much more difficult as there are several teams in the west division alone in the top ten: then if you manage the regular season you usually face a top ten east team and then face either the first or second best team in the nation for the title. Bear didn't have to overcome those odds. Sorry Saban is already more impressive to me and it's not really close.
3
Posted on 10/7/13 at 12:54 am to labamafan
Let's change our mascot to the calling mamas instead!
Posted on 10/7/13 at 1:15 am to labamafan
OK , I am going to prove why your BCS point is actually the reverse of the point you are trying to make.
If Saban and Bama were the only perfect team nowdays he would get a shot at the title but in 1966 he wouldn't have.
In 2011 and 2012 Saban got a shot at 2 national titles , go back 50 years and LSU wouldn't have played Bama again , especially if they felt Bama was the better team , and an undefeated Notre Dame wouldn't have went to a bowl , thus those 2 national titles wouldn't be his.
As for 2009 who knows , Texas would have played in the Cotton bowl and probably would have dodged Bama 50 years ago and the media might have given the title to Texas.
So , my point is it's actually easier to get to the title game in the BCS era where polls and computers match the top 2 teams and you can control your own fate , rather than the politics and tie ins to bowls deciding your fate.
If Saban and Bama were the only perfect team nowdays he would get a shot at the title but in 1966 he wouldn't have.
In 2011 and 2012 Saban got a shot at 2 national titles , go back 50 years and LSU wouldn't have played Bama again , especially if they felt Bama was the better team , and an undefeated Notre Dame wouldn't have went to a bowl , thus those 2 national titles wouldn't be his.
As for 2009 who knows , Texas would have played in the Cotton bowl and probably would have dodged Bama 50 years ago and the media might have given the title to Texas.
So , my point is it's actually easier to get to the title game in the BCS era where polls and computers match the top 2 teams and you can control your own fate , rather than the politics and tie ins to bowls deciding your fate.
Posted on 10/7/13 at 9:06 am to labamafan
quote:
I don't like the must win six national title argument. The two eras are not even remotely the same. I think what Saban is doing is much more difficult as there are several teams in the west division alone in the top ten: then if you manage the regular season you usually face a top ten east team and then face either the first or second best team in the nation for the title. Bear didn't have to overcome those odds. Sorry Saban is already more impressive to me and it's not really close.
You definitely have a point. But the discussion doesn't end there.
In the BCS era, for an SEC team, you KNOW you are playing two elite games, and possibly more. Right now, Alabama's schedule is being mocked by LSU and we play FOUR elite games if we want to win it all. This was simply not the case in Coach Bryant's era. When you add in the fact that there is SO much more parity now, both in mid-level SEC teams and even in teams considered "easy", it's not close. Can you IMAGINE Coach Bryant watching Ole Miss pull in a class like this in his day? In national titles, I go with Saban. But you can't discount Coach Bryant's remarkable number of SEC titles.
Bottom line - no way to say definitively at this point. Coach Bryant would have to accomplish a similar feat in an age that guaranteed solid scheduling. Coach Saban would have to coach a lot longer to even have a chance at doing something comparable with the conference titles. Neither is clearly better than the other at this point.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News