Started By
Message
re: 1950: Who DESERVED the National Title
Posted on 7/25/25 at 11:58 am to AUTiger789
Posted on 7/25/25 at 11:58 am to AUTiger789
I'll give Kentucky the 1950 title if we get the 1949 and 1954 titles.
Bud Wilkinson had to go undefeated the year before every single title he won.
1949 the year before 1950
1954 the year before 1955
1955 the year before 1956 (given we got the title in 1955)
We can make a strong argument that Wilkinson deserved 5 titles instead of 3. Or, if we give you 1950 he deserved 4 titles.
Bud Wilkinson had to go undefeated the year before every single title he won.
1949 the year before 1950
1954 the year before 1955
1955 the year before 1956 (given we got the title in 1955)
We can make a strong argument that Wilkinson deserved 5 titles instead of 3. Or, if we give you 1950 he deserved 4 titles.
This post was edited on 7/25/25 at 12:06 pm
Posted on 7/25/25 at 12:00 pm to linewar
quote:
Stuff like this is why many older SEC fans harped for years on anti-SEC bias in the media. My dad (in his 80's) HATED Kirk Herbstreit for the longest time, and now just barely tolerates him. It's also why he hates Notre Dame with a passion - in a time when champions were crowned by subjectivity from a base of voters, some teams got the benefit of the doubt that SEC teams did not.
The last 27 seasons have more than shown that there should not have been an anti-SEC bias, but now it's come almost a complete 180 - SEC teams get the benefit of the doubt now.
Was it anti-SEC bias when the Bear was given two titles and preceded to lose their bowl games. Which, not ironically, was the years that caused each of the two main wire services to change their awarding to after the bowl.
This post was edited on 7/25/25 at 12:07 pm
Posted on 7/25/25 at 12:00 pm to Bigbens42
So now it's Saban's fault that the Tide lost to an inferior Oklahoma team?
Next, it will probably be the officials cheated.
Next, it will probably be the officials cheated.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 1:18 pm to ChapelHillSooner
quote:
Was it anti-SEC bias when the Bear was given two titles and preceded to lose their bowl games. Which, not ironically, was the years that caused each of the two main wire services to change their awarding to after the bowl.
I'm not completely against the thought, but I don't know that it's apples to apples. What you're referencing could also be "pro-Bear" bias, considering he was the coach of the 11-1 1950 Kentucky team. I think it was potentially more a recognition of his body of work and reputation rather than a perception of the SEC as a whole.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 1:42 pm to AUTiger789
Quote
“The Vols lone loss came to a very bad Mississippi State team (4-5) in Starkville, 0-7. ”
After that game whiny General Neyland vowed to never bring a team back to State. And he was true to his word. It would be almost 40 years before a Tennessee team would play again at Scott Field.
Blaming the location of the loss is weak. Maybe that day State was simply the better team.
Though I can understand his anger since that game cost UT the National Championship.
Growing up my Dad had zero for Tennessee and that was the reason why.
“The Vols lone loss came to a very bad Mississippi State team (4-5) in Starkville, 0-7. ”
After that game whiny General Neyland vowed to never bring a team back to State. And he was true to his word. It would be almost 40 years before a Tennessee team would play again at Scott Field.
Blaming the location of the loss is weak. Maybe that day State was simply the better team.
Though I can understand his anger since that game cost UT the National Championship.
Growing up my Dad had zero for Tennessee and that was the reason why.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 2:50 pm to AUTiger789
quote:
Oklahoma was awarded the AP Trophy with a 10-0 record before the bowl game, but then went to the Sugar Bowl and lost to Kentucky, 7-13.
this game is probably different if Oklahoma thinks they are playing for the national championship rather than an exhibition after winning the national championship.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 3:00 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
this game is probably different if Oklahoma thinks they are playing for the national championship rather than an exhibition after winning the national championship.
So, who "deserved" the NC? It's not a head-to-head matchup because the Sooners just weren't trying.
Now that's some serious soothsaying skill, junior.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 5:17 pm to bamameister
how was the game thought of at the time?
i would say the same thing to arkansas and ole miss fans who try to claim titles that were never awarded to them because they won exhibition bowl games, at least one of those was at alabamas expense
i would say the same thing to arkansas and ole miss fans who try to claim titles that were never awarded to them because they won exhibition bowl games, at least one of those was at alabamas expense
Posted on 7/26/25 at 5:46 pm to AUTiger789
Well the AP and crystal football trophies are in Norman, OK.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 6:05 pm to bamameister
That’s the defense y’all use for 1964 and 1973.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 6:07 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Arkansas was voted #1 in the FWAA poll that season which counted bowls. FWIW, that’s listed as a major poll by the NCAA nowadays but who knows if it was treated that way in the 60s.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 6:11 pm to GoGators1995
quote:
Arkansas was voted #1 in the FWAA
lol
quote:
that’s listed as a major poll by the NCAA
since when has the NCAA sanctioned a national champion in fbs?
This post was edited on 7/26/25 at 6:11 pm
Posted on 7/26/25 at 7:26 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Guess you don’t know that LSU has their lone FWAA trophy displayed right next to your AP and crystal football trophies for 2007. You’re welcome!
Posted on 7/26/25 at 7:38 pm to AUTiger789
I posed the question to Gemini:
The 1950 college football national championship is one of the most debated in history, with no single definitive answer. Multiple teams have a claim:
* Oklahoma (AP, Coaches Poll Champion): Oklahoma finished the regular season undefeated (9-0) and was recognized as the national champion in the final Associated Press (AP) poll and the United Press (UP) coaches poll. However, the polls were issued before bowl games, and Oklahoma subsequently lost to Kentucky in the Sugar Bowl.
* Kentucky: Coached by Bear Bryant, Kentucky finished 11-1 and defeated undefeated #1 Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl. Based on computer rankings (like Jeff Sagarin's, which was released in 1990 and retroactively applied), Kentucky claims the 1950 championship.
* Tennessee: The Volunteers had an 11-1 record, including a victory over #3 Texas in the Cotton Bowl. While ranked #4 in the final AP Poll, several other selectors (Billingsley Report, DeVold System, Dunkel System, College Football Researchers Association, and National Championship Foundation) recognize Tennessee as the 1950 champion.
* Princeton: Princeton went a perfect 9-0 and was ranked #6 in the final AP Poll. They are recognized as national champions by the Poling System and Boand System.
Ultimately, "who deserved" the trophy is subjective and depends on which criteria you prioritize – pre-bowl poll results, post-bowl game results, or various retroactive computer rankings. There's no consensus.
The 1950 college football national championship is one of the most debated in history, with no single definitive answer. Multiple teams have a claim:
* Oklahoma (AP, Coaches Poll Champion): Oklahoma finished the regular season undefeated (9-0) and was recognized as the national champion in the final Associated Press (AP) poll and the United Press (UP) coaches poll. However, the polls were issued before bowl games, and Oklahoma subsequently lost to Kentucky in the Sugar Bowl.
* Kentucky: Coached by Bear Bryant, Kentucky finished 11-1 and defeated undefeated #1 Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl. Based on computer rankings (like Jeff Sagarin's, which was released in 1990 and retroactively applied), Kentucky claims the 1950 championship.
* Tennessee: The Volunteers had an 11-1 record, including a victory over #3 Texas in the Cotton Bowl. While ranked #4 in the final AP Poll, several other selectors (Billingsley Report, DeVold System, Dunkel System, College Football Researchers Association, and National Championship Foundation) recognize Tennessee as the 1950 champion.
* Princeton: Princeton went a perfect 9-0 and was ranked #6 in the final AP Poll. They are recognized as national champions by the Poling System and Boand System.
Ultimately, "who deserved" the trophy is subjective and depends on which criteria you prioritize – pre-bowl poll results, post-bowl game results, or various retroactive computer rankings. There's no consensus.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 7:41 pm to AUTiger789
shite like this is why I immediately stop listening to people who say the pre BCS era of determining the national champion was the best. Not discrediting those titles but it's so damn murky with who the true champion was especially the further back you go it becomes wild to me why it took so long for even something like the BCS to come into play and an even longer for an actual playoff system
Posted on 7/26/25 at 7:44 pm to Godawgs4
quote:
After that game whiny General Neyland vowed to never bring a team back to State. And he was true to his word. It would be almost 40 years before a Tennessee team would play again at Scott Field. Blaming the location of the loss is weak.
Which also supports taking into account that Kentucky had to travel to Knoxville. Playing on the road in the SEC had never been easy.
In fact, in those days, I wonder where the team slept? I bet Starkville didn’t have a ton of hotels.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 7:50 pm to clamdip
Kentucky was SEC champion in 1950.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 7:51 pm to AUTiger789
The Tennessee Volunteers were the back to back 1950 natty champs and 1951 natty champs.
Neyland sure had it rolling when he was not deployed overseas to be a general in various different wars.
Neyland sure had it rolling when he was not deployed overseas to be a general in various different wars.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 12:10 pm to GoGators1995
i thought it was a traveling trophy?
Popular
Back to top


0






