Started By
Message
re: Auburn could claim 9 National Championships
Posted on 2/14/13 at 11:54 am to 14&Counting
Posted on 2/14/13 at 11:54 am to 14&Counting
quote:
I am certain that is where this conversation is headed
You are certainly wrong.
IMO LSU shouldn't claim the 2011 title. They shouldn't even claim the 1908 title, which they don't, even though it is recognized by the NCAA.
At the same time, Bama shouldn't claim the '41 title. You even have Bama fans in THIS VERY THREAD agreeing that the '41 claim is bogus.
I just can't belive that no one else sees the humor and irony that the same system that Bama bases its bogus '41 claim on awarded LSU the 2011 title OVER BAMA.
I guess there's just so much butthurt going around these days that no one has a sense of humor anymore.
quote:
No...I don't need to try and legitimize that one. The last 3 out of 4 will do quite nicely.
Your screen name belies that claim. 
2
Posted on 2/14/13 at 12:25 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
The fact that the Houlgate awarded LSU the 2011 title is a relevant point to the legitimacy of the Houlgate poll.
Any person with a brain or at least a lack of insane bias agrees that BCS titles have a higher degree of legitimacy than those older polls. It is an utter waste of time to try to explain that to someone - if you don't stipulate to that, then you are either unwilling or incapable of having this debate in a legitimate way.
As to 1941, if you want to tease us about it, go for it. I would, too. It's a stupid claim, just as auburn claiming to be the 2004 champions is a stupid claim (but at least 1941 Bama was AWARDED a title by a group that many people consider legit)
Any person with a brain or at least a lack of insane bias agrees that BCS titles have a higher degree of legitimacy than those older polls. It is an utter waste of time to try to explain that to someone - if you don't stipulate to that, then you are either unwilling or incapable of having this debate in a legitimate way.
As to 1941, if you want to tease us about it, go for it. I would, too. It's a stupid claim, just as auburn claiming to be the 2004 champions is a stupid claim (but at least 1941 Bama was AWARDED a title by a group that many people consider legit)
Posted on 2/14/13 at 12:37 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Posted on 2/14/13 at 12:40 pm to USMC Gators
quote:
After the 1958 season, the Houlgate System was no longer recognized as a selector by the NCAA.
So...what you're saying is Alabama's '41 title claim was legit in '41 because the NCAA recognized it as a selector?
Print the frakking shirts!
Posted on 2/14/13 at 12:43 pm to Crimson Legend
quote:
Crimson Legend
quote:
The fact that the Houlgate awarded Bama the 1941 title is a relevant point to the legitimacy of the Houlgate poll.
quote:
at least 1941 Bama was AWARDED a title by a group that many people consider legit
The same could be said of LSU claiming the 2011 title. I just don't happen to know anyone that thinks the Houlgate was EVER "legit".
Not even the NCAA:
LINK
But it is funny that the same polling organization that awarded the Tide the '41 title was the same one that awarded LSU the 2011 title over Alabama.
If you don't see the humor in that, you're taking it all too seriously.
Posted on 2/14/13 at 12:44 pm to USMC Gators
quote:
After the 1958 season, the Houlgate System was no longer recognized as a selector by the NCAA.
Yeah, their website doesn't have Alabama being awarded the '41 Houlgate title either.
LINK
Posted on 2/14/13 at 12:48 pm to weagle99
I have now added those to my NC banner for Auburn. It feels good to be part of a 9 time NC program. 
Posted on 2/14/13 at 12:50 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
When you post responses more than anyone else in the thread, it's hard to use the "I was just trolling" line. You seem to miss the point of trolling.
By the way, your link recognizes 2 national championships for auburn. Sort of undermines the whole thread, doesn't it?
By the way, your link recognizes 2 national championships for auburn. Sort of undermines the whole thread, doesn't it?
Posted on 2/14/13 at 12:59 pm to weagle99
quote:
1908, 1910, 1913, and 1914 Auburn teams under Coach Donahue were all named “Champions of the South”
How could the 1908 team be "champions of the South", when LSU went 10-0, beat them head to head, and won the championship of the conference they were both members of?
1908 LSU Tigers
New Orleans YMGC WON 41-0
Jackson Barracks WON 81-5
Texas A&M WON 26-0
Rhodes WON 55-0
@Auburn WON 10-2
Mississippi St. WON 50-0
Baylor WON 89-0
Haskell Indian Nations WON 32-0
@Louisiana Tech WON 22-0
@Arkansas WON 36-4
Season record 10-0
Points scored: 442
Points allowed: 11
SIAA Champions
National Champions LINK ](Not claimed by LSU, named NC by two sources, Mel Smith and National Championship Foundation; Penn and Harvard named NCs by 13 and 11 sources, respectively)
Posted on 2/14/13 at 12:59 pm to Nuts4LSU
DWI!
Signature has been changed...so it is done.
Signature has been changed...so it is done.
This post was edited on 2/14/13 at 1:01 pm
Posted on 2/14/13 at 1:07 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
How could the 1908 team be "champions of the South", when LSU went 10-0, beat them head to head, and won the championship of the conference they were both members of?
None of your business how, it just is what it is. 9 NC's for AU
Posted on 2/14/13 at 1:09 pm to weagle99
Lookout Aubie, Old Myth may counter those claims with some Co-Champ pennants.
Posted on 2/14/13 at 1:21 pm to parkjas2001
quote:
Signature has been changed...so it is done.
Print the overalls.
Posted on 2/14/13 at 1:30 pm to Grizzly
quote:
9 NC's for AU
Bama could claim 27 NC's if you go that way
Posted on 2/14/13 at 1:33 pm to FlukerFlakes
quote:
Bama could claim 27 NC's if you go that way
Link? Do the work and show us that claim could be true. Although you faked your way to 15 so 27 isn't a stretch at all I'm guessing.
Posted on 2/14/13 at 1:43 pm to Grizzly
quote:
9 NC's for AU
9? lol
Wake me up when you get 15.
Posted on 2/14/13 at 1:48 pm to attheua
quote:
LSU imo
Posted on 2/14/13 at 1:50 pm to FlukerFlakes
quote:
Sorry, I meant 28
LINK
Thread worthy.
Page 9 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News