Started By
Message
re: 1966 and 1975 Alabama
Posted on 7/9/18 at 3:12 am to SAINTS0321
Posted on 7/9/18 at 3:12 am to SAINTS0321
They're clearly more proven than a team who got shut out twice and only had 1 ranked win.
This post was edited on 7/9/18 at 4:41 am
0
Posted on 7/9/18 at 3:16 am to Oklahomey
quote:
1966 and 1975 Alabama
The national champion rejection of 1966 Alabama was a travesty, but when you had sportswriters and now a bunch of political and AD hotshots determining things the system's always gonna possess a political element in conjunction with the presumed meritocracy its why current Alabama always gets the benefit of the doubt in the national championship chase: they recruit the best, they have the best coach and they've become a dynasty for this era ESPN promotes the hell out of them its funny and scary at the same time akin to propaganda
Posted on 7/9/18 at 3:19 am to MSHawg1
quote:
I don't see many Alabama fans willing to admit that Bama actually wasn't the best team in 64.
Why should they when Joe FREAKING Namath was the QB?!
Posted on 7/9/18 at 4:33 am to SAINTS0321
SAINTS, you don’t seem to be a rational Alabama fan. I’m not sure how you can say Oklahoma was overrated in 1975. And while the Kansas loss was bad considering what we know of them overall as a football program, they actually finished 7-5 that year. Some of OU’s best teams were from 1973-1975 with Joe Washington, the Selmon Brothers; to name a few. Oklahoma went 10-0-1 in 1973; 11-0 in 1974; 11-1 in 1975 giving them a 32-1-1 start under Switzer.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 7:24 am to Oklahomey
An excellent thread topic. 
Coach Bryant said on numerous occasions that the '66 team was the best he ever had. I was at the Missouri game in '75 and Alabama was manhandled that night in B'ham! (so was I, but I digress. ). It'd be hard to put up too much of a fuss over the final polls even though a legitimate point could be made for all parties involved.
Coach Bryant said on numerous occasions that the '66 team was the best he ever had. I was at the Missouri game in '75 and Alabama was manhandled that night in B'ham! (so was I, but I digress. ). It'd be hard to put up too much of a fuss over the final polls even though a legitimate point could be made for all parties involved.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 7:28 am to viceman
quote:
What I have a hard time grasping is how they could be too good and not be integrated. Bear must have had every white guy that runs fast in the South on that team for them to have enough team speed.
We are not really sure that Grambling, Tennessee State, Florida A&M, or some of the other great black teams were not better than the 1960's powers like Alabama, Notre Dame, Texas, etc.
I have no problem measuring a program from 1970, by which time all the conferences (far as I know) were integrated.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 7:50 am to John Milner
Y'all should go ask the Nebraskas, Syracuses, and Penn States (among others) how good those Alabama teams were. They were intergrated and played all-white Alabama teams.
An Alabama team with and Oline that averaged 186lb per man demolished a Nebraska (integrated) team in an Orange Bowl, which was 1 of several arse whipping Alabama put on the totally integrated Cornhuskers during the segregation period.
An Alabama team with and Oline that averaged 186lb per man demolished a Nebraska (integrated) team in an Orange Bowl, which was 1 of several arse whipping Alabama put on the totally integrated Cornhuskers during the segregation period.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 8:42 am to coachcrisp
quote:
Y'all should go ask the Nebraskas, Syracuses, and Penn States (among others) how good those Alabama teams were. They were intergrated and played all-white Alabama teams. An Alabama team with and Oline that averaged 186lb per man demolished a Nebraska (integrated) team in an Orange Bowl, which was 1 of several arse whipping Alabama put on the totally integrated Cornhuskers during the segregation period.
oh boy
Posted on 7/9/18 at 8:50 am to Oklahomey
Kansas game eliminator..exposed in bowl games...bama would have destroyed them..turnovers would have killed them against great teams like bama
Posted on 7/9/18 at 8:51 am to SAINTS0321
Oklahoma media darling.. probation so no bowl games to get exposed in the early part...off probation got stuffed
Posted on 7/9/18 at 9:41 am to tattoo
You are proving my original point. Alabama fans are willing to accept championships that Bama did not earn on the field and not accept championships that Alabama does deserve just because of the AP poll. Thanks for proving my point beautifully.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 9:45 am to MSHawg1
quote:
Alabama fans are willing to accept championships that Bama did not earn on the field and not accept championships that Alabama does deserve just because of the AP poll.
I'm ok with that since that was the generally accepted method at the time.
I also don't have a problem with shared national championships, unlike many people.
This post was edited on 7/9/18 at 9:50 am
Posted on 7/9/18 at 4:31 pm to MSHawg1
quote:
MSHawg1
quote:
You are proving my original point. Alabama fans are willing to accept championships that Bama did not earn on the field and not accept championships that Alabama does deserve just because of the AP poll. Thanks for proving my point beautifully.
Come on man, you seem sensible. You are painting the Bama fanbase based on a minority even in this thread who hold an unreasonable view. Most Bama fans, even in this thread, have been reasonable. Those who aren't on msg boards are far better. You do realize that primarily zealots, who are given to bias, paranoia, illogic, etc. post on msg boards. I would not judge any fanbase by msg board posters.
In reality, the Bama fanbase, at least the ones who attend games, historically have been among the friendliest and most gentle in the sport. They are sometimes rightly accused of often not being fierce or enthusiastic enough. Some of that is because of being jaded by success, but some of it is their Southern nature. Have you been to BDS? My guess is that you were treated well by reasonable people. Not that there are not exceptions.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 5:02 pm to viceman
quote:
viceman
quote:
What I have a hard time grasping is how they could be too good and not be integrated. Bear must have had every white guy that runs fast in the South on that team for them to have enough team speed.
It's because the integration in most programs was nominal til the 70s. Mich State and USCw were exceptions. When MSU and ND played the famous tie in 1966, MSU had a multitude of black kids, I think ND had one.
In the SEC, though Bama was not the first to integrate, I think Vandy was, they were the first to flood their program with black players. Coach Bryant had tried to integrate UK in the 40s but was denied by the governor. He wanted to integrate Bama much earlier but knew the politicians and the populace as a whole were not ready. When he finally got the green light in 1969, though they didn't show up til 71, he soon flooded Bama's program. He was not a social pioneer, he was a football coach who was a great evaluator of talent. Also, he could identify with so many southern blacks at the time who were dirt poor like he had been in Fordyce, Ark.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 5:38 pm to tattoo
Ok, so in other words they didn't play many integrated teams, and the ones they did, had very few black players. This is how a non integrated all white team like 66 Bama could still be undefeated.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 5:46 pm to tattoo
quote:This is pretty much on the money. There was a 3 or 4 part article about Coach Bryant years ago in Sports Illustrated where he explained how the black player was like the white players were back 55 years ago, and longer....it's a tremendous read for anybody who loves college football history.
When he finally got the green light in 1969, though they didn't show up til 71, he soon flooded Bama's program. He was not a social pioneer, he was a football coach who was a great evaluator of talent. Also, he could identify with so many southern blacks at the time who were dirt poor like he had been in Fordyce, Ark.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 6:08 pm to Oklahomey
quote:
Is/Was there a conspiracy to not have them as the national champion because of how they captured the last two titles?
Yes. It had everything to do with Jim Crow.
No matter, Bama is laughing now with a bunch of freak Black players getting it done. So, libs, frick off.
Posted on 7/9/18 at 6:09 pm to ColoBama
That's all bs ...just Catholic homerism
Posted on 7/9/18 at 6:10 pm to skadoosh14
quote:
The Litkenhous Rankings, the Williamson System, the Billingsley Report (retroactively), and Berryman QPRS (retroactively) all took strength of schedule into account.
In the one poll that used a mathematical formula that factored in strength of schedule Bama came out number one in that poll. Now according to my research, the other polls were voted on by people, which means some may factored in strength of schedule, but in the end it was a popularity contest. I don't care who you(or anybody for that matter) recognize as 1941 Champ.Long before I was born. I just found it interesting that the one poll which used math turned out bcs like results. It didn't care that Minnesota was undefeated the year before, or that Bama had won Rose Bowls. It used a formula that took out human bias and looked at the facts from that year and said Bama was number one. I find it interesting that many of the same arguments are made today. "Sure Bama has only one loss, but they didn't win the conference, and tOSU played a harder schedule" to use a 2017 example. I have also noticed that the term "undefeated: resonates more in humans. Like humans think it means incapable of losing, but the formula recognized that Bama had one more win and many more over better opponents.
This post was edited on 7/9/18 at 6:29 pm
Posted on 7/9/18 at 8:28 pm to Oklahomey
That year the Hogs screwed over an undefeated A&M the last game of the season (after A&M beat Texas in an odd year when it wasn’t a T-Day game)
Page 3 of 4
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News