Started By
Message
re: 1950: Who DESERVED the National Title
Posted on 7/27/25 at 12:14 pm to dawgfan24348
Posted on 7/27/25 at 12:14 pm to dawgfan24348
quote:
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
Are you trying to tell us that when the best teams NEVER have to play each other on the field, it calls into question their championship legitimacy? When I think about it, I bet that's where all this confusion and denial are coming from.
0
Posted on 7/27/25 at 4:30 pm to Draconian Sanctions
It's never been a traveling trophy. We have 3 of them displayed with our AP trophies in the locker room.
This post was edited on 7/27/25 at 4:31 pm
Posted on 7/27/25 at 6:04 pm to Porter Osborne Jr
Pretty much all the media was saying the same thing in 2011.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 7:04 pm to ChapelHillSooner
quote:
Was it anti-SEC bias when the Bear was given two titles
It was when he had 2 titles taken from him (both glaring examples of pro-ND bias).
Posted on 7/27/25 at 7:36 pm to AUTiger789
Head-to-head trumps transitive wins every time. Both UK and UT 11-1 with UT beating UK? UT over UK that season. Who UT lost to doesn't matter if UT and UK played head-to-head.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 8:08 pm to AUTiger789
Army is the obvious answer here
Posted on 7/27/25 at 8:13 pm to AUTiger789
This all may be true, but when a Bowl Game at the end of a Season was only a reward, and everyone knew it had NO MEANING, you really can not RETRO COUNT it. Hell OU players may have gotten fat, out of shape over Christmas or did not try to hard, I mean they WERE National Champs, NO MATTER WHAT, meanwhile UK had a point to prove.
Its like playing a Lottery and finding out you have the winning number to the Mega Pot, but there are 10 Smaller winners. Why would the guy who won the big prize care about the other prizes?
Its like playing a Lottery and finding out you have the winning number to the Mega Pot, but there are 10 Smaller winners. Why would the guy who won the big prize care about the other prizes?
Posted on 7/27/25 at 8:28 pm to AUTiger789
quote:
It is absolutely baffling to me that fans put up with this for so long.
It isn't to me at all.
The national championship of college football has evolved over time and so too has the way fans think about it. There was a time long ago where fans were happy to see their favorite team defeat their arch rival and win their conference. Bowl games were seen as a reward for a good season. It wasn't until broadcast television started to become a thing that more and more people began to focus on national title implications.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 8:47 pm to GoGators1995
oh that’s nice
Posted on 7/27/25 at 9:05 pm to MedDawg
The SEC champion played the Big 8 champion. Kentucky won.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News