Started By
Message
re: Arkansas 55 Fernando Carmona called out by Texas Tech for being dirty
Posted on 12/29/24 at 10:28 am to Dirk Dawgler
Posted on 12/29/24 at 10:28 am to Dirk Dawgler
quote:
Is the Arkansas 64 claimed title one of those types? And I am to understand that their fans and school claim it as legitimate?
A couple of things... in 1964 the wire service gave the national championship out before the bowls. The Football writers gave theirs after the bowls. Arkansas got it... and if the wire services had given the trophy after the bowls.. Arkansas was the only choice. But they didn't. So Arkansas was not a wire service champ that year.
After checking... Every other team that had the same thing happen to them... Ohio State in 1957 and 1961. Iowa in 1958. And Ole Miss in 1960. They all claim the FWAA (after bowls) National Championship as well.
So I'm on Arkansas' side on this one. They deserve to be able to claim it.
This post was edited on 12/29/24 at 10:29 am
1
Posted on 12/29/24 at 10:32 am to GoldenDawg
quote:
That does look pretty despicable.
Typical arkansas. Trash team. Trash fans. Trash state.
That fat piece of shite exemplifies the entire program and state.
Posted on 12/29/24 at 10:36 am to Csmims
quote:
1964. And if they used the criteria Alabama uses it would be several more
Wrong.
Alabama wouldn't even claim 1964 if they were Arkansas.
Posted on 12/29/24 at 11:23 am to 3down10
quote:
Alabama is the only NC in 1964. It's a matter of how things worked at the time. Alabama enters the game against Texas as the national champions. It wasn't a national championship game, it did not have national championship consequences, it was just an exhibition game of pride.
Wait what?
There’s a clear difference between recognizing the polls use to name a national champion before the bowl games and incorrectly stating this is an “exhibition game” to diminish the game to substantiate your point of view. That’s just categorically false statement that the Orange Bowl was an exhibition game.
This post was edited on 12/29/24 at 11:24 am
Posted on 12/29/24 at 11:40 am to Lord of the Hogs
quote:
Lord of the Hogs
Mrs Noz is an extreme passive aggressive sociopath
Posted on 12/29/24 at 11:44 am to Dirk Dawgler
Who gives a rats arse about the NCAA?
Posted on 12/29/24 at 11:47 am to 3down10
Alabama argued one thing in 1964 and then completely reversed course 180 degrees in 1965 and argued the exact opposite
That's why Chicken has a longstanding thread on here exposing Alabama "national championship" lies.
That's why Chicken has a longstanding thread on here exposing Alabama "national championship" lies.
Posted on 12/29/24 at 11:48 am to 3down10
Arkansas' national championships are 1909, 1964, 1965 (by your own math!), 1968 and 1977
Posted on 12/29/24 at 11:48 am to Mizzouligan
Isn’t your mama from Arkansas?
Posted on 12/29/24 at 11:49 am to FireDanMullen
quote:
Wait what?
There’s a clear difference between recognizing the polls use to name a national champion before the bowl games and incorrectly stating this is an “exhibition game” to diminish the game to substantiate your point of view. That’s just categorically false statement that the Orange Bowl was an exhibition game.
The NCAA didn't even start counting bowl game stats until 2002.
They are(were) played a full month after the season was over, and it was only a handful of teams that were invited.
Teams like Notre Dame didn't even play in bowl games for 40 years until the AP started counting it and a push was made to start counting them for the polls. They started playing them again in 1969.
Why 1969? Because in 1968 is when they started doing the AP after the bowl games full time.
Some conferences had rules that prohibited teams from going multiple years in a row. Again, something that wouldn't change until the bowl games had consequences, aka not solely exhibition games. It took the Big10 awhile because they didn't want to be seen as "football schools", but in 1975 they caved in.
The big10 wouldn't even allow 2 schools to go to a bowl game the same year until 1975.
In what way are these not exhibition games?
Posted on 12/29/24 at 11:52 am to Harry Rex Vonner
quote:
Alabama argued one thing in 1964 and then completely reversed course 180 degrees in 1965 and argued the exact opposite
That's why Chicken has a longstanding thread on here exposing Alabama "national championship" lies.
Alabama didn't do anything.
The AP changed after 1964 because everyone was upset about Alabama over political reasons.
They decided to count bowl games in 1965, not Alabama.
And then they got butt hurt about Alabama winning it all in 1965 as a result of the bowl games, and decided to go back to counting it before the bowl games in 1966.
Its fricking hilarious the way they kept trying to change the rules to hurt Alabama because of the political climate of the time.
Final AP for 1964: Nov 30, 1964
Final AP for 1965: Jan 4, 1966
Final AP for 1966: Dec 5, 1966
This post was edited on 12/29/24 at 11:55 am
Posted on 12/29/24 at 11:54 am to 3down10
quote:
3down10
Alabama argued one thing in 1964 and then completely reversed course 180 degrees in 1965 and argued the exact opposite
That's why Chicken has a longstanding thread on here exposing Alabama "national championship" lies.
Posted on 12/29/24 at 11:55 am to Harry Rex Vonner
quote:
Alabama argued one thing in 1964 and then completely reversed course 180 degrees in 1965 and argued the exact opposite
That's why Chicken has a longstanding thread on here exposing Alabama "national championship" lies.
Alabama does not decide the format for the AP, nor did Alabama argue for anything.
They changed the rules to try and stop Alabama, not to benefit Alabama.
So it's quite the opposite of what you are claiming.
Chicken is just a butt hurt LSU fan.
This post was edited on 12/29/24 at 11:56 am
Posted on 12/29/24 at 11:57 am to 3down10
quote:
3down10
Does the founder of this site, Chicken, have a running thread exposing all the numerous Alabama lies about natties?
Yes.
Is Chicken's research and analysis immaculate?
Yes.
Posted on 12/29/24 at 11:59 am to Harry Rex Vonner
quote:
Does the founder of this site, Chicken, have a running thread exposing all the numerous Alabama lies about natties?
Yes.
Is Chicken's research and analysis immaculate?
Yes.
Alabama broke the frick outta Chicken.
Posted on 12/29/24 at 12:02 pm to 3down10
Arkansas has at least 5 legit national championships
I do admit that Alabama probably has at least 7, so congratulations to you
I do admit that Alabama probably has at least 7, so congratulations to you
Posted on 12/29/24 at 12:17 pm to 3down10
quote:
In what way are these not exhibition games?
An exhibition game by definition is one that isn’t recorded or counted in records or rankings. A college football spring game or NFL preseason game is closer by definition to an exhibition. Every scholastic record of Alabama counts the Texas loss in their 1965 season. Which, by definition, doesn’t make it an exhibition game.
If you want to argue the rules for who determined the national championship in the 1960s being before the bowl games took place as what it was at the time, fair enough. I personally think arguing about national championships pre-modern era is kind of gay but I mean whatever history is history but I think it’s a stretch at best saying bowl games were exhibitions.
Posted on 12/29/24 at 12:17 pm to Gunga Din
quote:
A couple of things... in 1964 the wire service gave the national championship out before the bowls. The Football writers gave theirs after the bowls. Arkansas got it... and if the wire services had given the trophy after the bowls.. Arkansas was the only choice. But they didn't. So Arkansas was not a wire service champ that year.
After checking... Every other team that had the same thing happen to them... Ohio State in 1957 and 1961. Iowa in 1958. And Ole Miss in 1960. They all claim the FWAA (after bowls) National Championship as well.
So I'm on Arkansas' side on this one. They deserve to be able to claim it.
You're just using bogus claims to justify other bogus claims.
The only valid titles from 1936 until the BCS era are AP and Coaches polls.
You are talking about a "poll" that consisted of 5 writers who voted in secret. They did so AFTER the bowl games only as part of their own agenda and an attempt to be different, not because it was how college football treated the games.
They even had to change their formula at one point because a single writer could tank a team and severely hurt their rankings due to only 5 voters.
For a population that complains about polls, bias and hating committees. It's funny people suddenly find a 5 man vote in secret credible. I think the poll is a joke.
Posted on 12/29/24 at 12:26 pm to FireDanMullen
quote:
An exhibition game by definition is one that isn’t recorded or counted in records or rankings. A college football spring game or NFL preseason game is closer by definition to an exhibition. Every scholastic record of Alabama counts the Texas loss in their 1965 season. Which, by definition, doesn’t make it an exhibition game.
If you want to argue the rules for who determined the national championship in the 1960s being before the bowl games took place as what it was at the time, fair enough. I personally think arguing about national championships pre-modern era is kind of gay but I mean whatever history is history but I think it’s a stretch at best saying bowl games were exhibitions.
Bowl games were 100% treated as exhibition games. That's just the reality.
People had more pride in what they did, so they still mattered a lot, but they were really just invitational exhibition games after the season was over.
You can literally see this by the way the conferences and different places treated them. Notre Dame wouldn't even play in them because they were just exhibition games. They were seen by some in a negative light(fricking academic snobs). It's a quite different setting.
Sure the history of stat keeping can be a little wonky. Like I said, the NCAA didn't even count player stats until little over 20 years ago.
Do you want me to give you the scores and stats for all of Alabama's spring games over the past 10 years? That's easy to do, does that make them not exhibition games?
This post was edited on 12/29/24 at 12:28 pm
Posted on 12/29/24 at 12:48 pm to 3down10
quote:
Do you want me to give you the scores and stats for all of Alabama's spring games over the past 10 years? That's easy to do, does that make them not exhibition games?
Exhibitions aren’t counted on records. Bowl games are counted in records as wins and losses. They always have been. It counts towards the teams overall record. Spring games don’t. Like how an exhibition game doesn’t count towards a team’s record. So, this analogy really doesn’t hold much weight.
quote:
Bowl games were 100% treated as exhibition games. That's just the reality.
If they were 100% treated as exhibition games, then a team wouldn’t record a win or losses after the bowl game. Bc that’s what an exhibition game is.
quote:
. Notre Dame wouldn't even play in them because they were just exhibition games.
Ok I mean that’s the 1 program that has a history of bending the themes of college football. Every other “blue blood” or traditional football school played bowl games regularly.
Again, I know your overall point is to discredit Arkansas 1964 championship bc of the system in play at time didn’t determine bowl games. I mean whatever I don’t really care about that. I just think it’s not really true to say bowl games were exhibitions. I mean by definition they weren’t. It counted towards your record, it’s literally listed below every team’s overall record is their bowl record. I don’t see how you can say it’s as circumstantial as a spring game lol
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News