Started By
Message
re: Banner Society - Naming the single definitive national champ for each season, 1869-2019
Posted on 8/5/20 at 2:10 am to UKWildcats
Posted on 8/5/20 at 2:10 am to UKWildcats
AP and UPI resides in Norman. Besides, Tennessee has a better claim than Kentucky to 1950.
0
Posted on 8/5/20 at 2:45 am to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
1964: Unbeaten Arkansas. Bama claims, but lost its bowl.
Who did Bama lose to?
Texas - that we beat earlier that season.
Hang the f'n banners!!!!!
Posted on 8/5/20 at 3:38 am to 3down10
the kids gymnastic club
This post was edited on 8/5/20 at 3:40 am
Posted on 8/5/20 at 3:41 am to hilltophog
quote:
Hang the f'n banners!!!!!
You're more than welcome to stop by the University to see the AP/Coaches trophies from 1964.
Posted on 8/5/20 at 5:12 am to hilltophog
quote:
Who did Bama lose to?
Texas - that we beat earlier that season.
Meh. You can't apply the standards of today to the standards of the 1960s. Teams like Notre Dame claim national championships from that era without ever going to a post-season bowl. Why? Because the championships were awarded before the bowl games due to the fact that bowls were seen as mere exhibitions awarding good teams for a good season.
Had Alabama gone 10-0 and declined a bowl invite like 9-0-1 Notre Dame did in 1966, this wouldn't even be a discussion point on the SEC Rant.
Posted on 8/5/20 at 6:04 am to SummerOfGeorge
Not going to read through all their list, but it's interesting that LSU has as many as Ohio State, and more than Texas. I didn't think we'd caught/passed them yet.
Posted on 8/5/20 at 7:24 am to PokeyTiger
quote:
Your selected clip is absolute BS — Nice Try
There’s nothing retro about the title except false accusations against a clean Program.
LSU always had the right to recognize that team as National Champions. NCAA does.
NCAA recognizes LSU as national champion for that season (along with Penn).
quote:
TAINTED
Posted on 8/5/20 at 9:21 am to SummerOfGeorge
No such thing as a pre poll era NC
Posted on 8/5/20 at 9:38 am to SummerOfGeorge
1983: Texas beats Auburn in Alabama, Auburn beats Georgia in Georgia, Georgia beats Texas in Texas.
All three finish with 1 loss, but none are champions (understood for Texas considering they lost the bowl game). What a crazy season that must have been. It happened years before I was born, but believe me: I heard a LOT about the 83 season from the years 2002-2005.
All three finish with 1 loss, but none are champions (understood for Texas considering they lost the bowl game). What a crazy season that must have been. It happened years before I was born, but believe me: I heard a LOT about the 83 season from the years 2002-2005.
Posted on 8/5/20 at 10:04 am to PokeyTiger
quote:
Your selected clip is absolute BS — Nice Try
There’s nothing retro about the title
From the OFFICIAL LSU ATHLETIC SITE.....
quote:
Many years later, in awarding retroactive national titles to colleges, the 1908 Tigers were named co-national champions with Pennsylvania by the National Championship Foundation.
quote:
awarding retroactive national titles to colleges, the 1908 Tigers were named co-national champions
quote:
awarding retroactive national titles
quote:
RETROACTIVE
Posted on 8/5/20 at 10:14 am to jatebe
There's no sense in arguing with PokeyTiger, jatebe. He's a tired old man who, in his final senile years, has decided to obsess over a team that never gives his program a second thought after the actual game is played. If he is indeed as old as he claims, someone needs to find out who his children are so they can commit him to a nursing home.
This post was edited on 8/5/20 at 10:15 am
Posted on 8/5/20 at 11:09 am to RollTide1987
quote:I know. I usually don't respond to him. He and the Willie guy are just trolls.
There's no sense in arguing with PokeyTiger, jatebe.
If any poster from Alabama trolled like these 2 guys, they would be banned.
Posted on 8/5/20 at 11:28 am to UKWildcats
quote:
1950 Belongs to Kentucky. What a time to be alive Oklahoma....lose to us in the Sugsr Bowl and still claim youre champs. What a crock.
Bowl games were exhibition games and the national champion was decided before them.
Posted on 8/5/20 at 11:35 am to 3down10
It would be so awesome if the NCAA would appoint a commission to actually go back and select a single national champ for each season. The melts would be amazing.
Posted on 8/5/20 at 11:44 am to jatebe
I get your logic, but it doesn't apply in any other sport situation.
In the NFL, if two teams are tied at 9-7 for the last playoff spot, the first tiebreaker between them is "head-to-head" competition. So, if both the Saints and the Rams are at 9-7, and the Rams beat the Saints, it doesn't matter if the Saints gave the Bucs their only two losses. The head-to-head is all that matters.
The bowls are not exactly like the playoffs, either. It wasn't until 1998 that you could guarantee a #1 vs #2 matchup. It's entirely possible (though, I have not looked at the numbers) that under the old BCS rules, that 1978 USC team would have been picked to play Penn State based on winning the head-to-head matchup. (Different rules make people vote differently.) But, it was impossible for that to happen, because USC was forced to play Michigan in the Rose Bowl due to its conference tie-ins.
Bama might have been the better team. But, the fact they win that essential tie just goes to show how different college football is from other sports in naming a national champion.
In the NFL, if two teams are tied at 9-7 for the last playoff spot, the first tiebreaker between them is "head-to-head" competition. So, if both the Saints and the Rams are at 9-7, and the Rams beat the Saints, it doesn't matter if the Saints gave the Bucs their only two losses. The head-to-head is all that matters.
The bowls are not exactly like the playoffs, either. It wasn't until 1998 that you could guarantee a #1 vs #2 matchup. It's entirely possible (though, I have not looked at the numbers) that under the old BCS rules, that 1978 USC team would have been picked to play Penn State based on winning the head-to-head matchup. (Different rules make people vote differently.) But, it was impossible for that to happen, because USC was forced to play Michigan in the Rose Bowl due to its conference tie-ins.
Bama might have been the better team. But, the fact they win that essential tie just goes to show how different college football is from other sports in naming a national champion.
Posted on 8/5/20 at 12:25 pm to RandySavage
quote:
It would be so awesome if the NCAA would appoint a commission to actually go back and select a single national champ for each season. The melts would be amazing.
Would be nice, but I think it's likely impossible to do objectively.
Take games from before bowl games were included as part of the season. 1 of those teams has already been awarded the national championship and is celebrating it, while the other team is constantly hearing the opposite.
1 of those teams isn't likely to take the game as seriously etc. If they thought they were playing for a national championship, they likely would have prepared differently.
People like to focus on Alabama, but it happened quite a bit with other teams also. Then you have the case of Notre Dame, who refused to play in any bowl games at all until the polls started doing national championships after the bowl games.
Then who people pick in 1978 for example is going to be a matter of bias. Which is funny because that was also the case many times in the poll era.
I was so glad to get the BCS and now playoffs to settle this crap. On the field is really the only way to do it.
Posted on 8/5/20 at 12:26 pm to Thorny
quote:
Banner Society - Naming the single definitive national champ for each season, 1869-2019
I get your logic, but it doesn't apply in any other sport situation.
In the NFL, if two teams are tied at 9-7 for the last playoff spot, the first tiebreaker between them is "head-to-head" competition. So, if both the Saints and the Rams are at 9-7, and the Rams beat the Saints, it doesn't matter if the Saints gave the Bucs their only two losses. The head-to-head is all that matters.
The bowls are not exactly like the playoffs, either. It wasn't until 1998 that you could guarantee a #1 vs #2 matchup. It's entirely possible (though, I have not looked at the numbers) that under the old BCS rules, that 1978 USC team would have been picked to play Penn State based on winning the head-to-head matchup. (Different rules make people vote differently.) But, it was impossible for that to happen, because USC was forced to play Michigan in the Rose Bowl due to its conference tie-ins.
Bama might have been the better team. But, the fact they win that essential tie just goes to show how different college football is from other sports in naming a national champion.
You forgot to include SoS. Even records meaning something is cringe worthy.
Posted on 8/5/20 at 1:34 pm to 3down10
Sorta like Oklahoma State's superior SOS in Dec. 2011... 
Posted on 8/5/20 at 2:02 pm to SummerOfGeorge
Can we talk about how cool vintage program covers are.
:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13672127/armynavyprogram1944__lg.jpg)
Posted on 8/6/20 at 1:58 pm to 3down10
quote:
You forgot to include SoS. Even records meaning something is cringe worthy.
Strength of Schedule only becomes important after head-to-head is eliminated by it either not available or it's tied.
In 1978, there was a head-to-head, and Bama lost it.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News