re: Bogus National Title claims: Alabama claims 18 but most are questionable

quote:

---

Solid cluck.

---

quote:

---

Let me preface this by saying that the BCS, started in 1998, was the best thing that happened to college football. It forced the top 2 teams to play each other in their final game of the season. Prior to that, the bowl alliances most often kept fans of the sport from seeing the top 2 teams play in the final game. As a matter of fact, from 1936 to 1997, the AP No. 1 and 2 teams only faced off in bowl games 11 times. This is where the term Mythical National Champion comes from.

Therefore, I contend that, prior to the first BCS Title game, if the top 2 teams at the end of the regular season did not face off in a bowl game, then we will never know if the team that was arbitrarily awarded the title that season was really the best team. For the purposes of my argument, I will use the AP rankings from 1936 to 1997, and the BCS rankings from 1998 to present.

Alabama, which is a great program and arguably the greatest of all time, claims 15 national titles. But only 5 came in seasons in which they finished the regular season No. 1 or 2 and played the No. 1 or 2 team in a bowl game. Alabama's legit titles came in 1978, 1992, 2009, 2011, and 2012.

Granted, Alabama had good teams in those other years in which they claim titles, but there was always at least one other school that could make the claim as the best team. But, since they didn't decide it on the field, title claims in those years lack legitimacy.

Following my sound logic, Notre Dame, which claims 11 national titles, has no legit titles. Yes, you heard me right.

Southern Cal claims also claims 11 titles, but only 2 are legit. Oklahoma claims 7 titles but only one is legit. Ohio State claims 7 but only 2 are legit. There are lots more examples of this.

In conclusion, next time you see Alabama fans (or even Notre Dame fans) popping off about their national titles, just laugh at them and reference this write up. Both the BCS and the future playoff system will render many of those title claims silly (or in Notre Dame's case, all of them).

School (# of Legit Titles)...Title Seasons
Alabama (5): 1978, 1992, 2009, 2011, 2012
LSU (2): 2003, 2007
Florida (2): 2006, 2008
Florida St (2): 1993, 1999
Nebraska (2): 1971, 1995
Ohio State (2): 1968, 2002
Penn State (2): 1986, 1982
Texas (2): 1963, 2005
USC (2): 1962, 2004
Miami (FL) (2): 1987, 2001
Auburn (1): 2010
Oklahoma (1): 2000
Tennessee (1): 1998

---

FWIW - your logic reduces Alabama's title count to four. They lost heads up to USC in 1978 and should not have been given a share of that national championship when USC was the other team being considered.

No, Penn State was no. 1 when they lost to no. 2 Alabama in sugar bowl

That's the thing though, there was no system before the BCS.

quote:

---

No, Penn State was no. 1 when they lost to no. 2 Alabama in sugar bowl

---

I see what you are saying but I'm not a fan of the logic. The final poll result is probably more meaningful than the second to last poll result.

His logic follows that you can only win a natty if you are the number 1 or 2 team in the country and you play the number 1 or 2 team in the years final bowl. It does not matter the number of wins and losses on the year as long as you have the correct ranking. At the end of the 78 season number 1 Penn St played number 2 UA in the sugar bowl. Alabama won 14-7. therefore making that title legit in the eyes of Chicken.

quote:

---

I see what you are saying but I'm not a fan of the logic. The final poll result is probably more meaningful than the second to last poll result.

---

But USC that year did not play the number 1 team in a Bowl so they never had a shot at a title. According to Chicken.

quote:

---

How long have you had this one in the chamber clucker?

No way it was just by chance you unleashed this beast on Wednesday of LSU-bama week

---

This^^^

my week was going GOOD until this...

1925, 1926, 1930, 1934
STATS FOR THESE 4 TEAMS.

Record 39-0-1 3 Rose bowl wins and 1 tie.

27 Shutouts

Score in 40 games
Bama 1133 opponents 107

I think I cleared up your ignorant statement.

quote:

---

His logic follows that you can only win a natty if you are the number 1 or 2 team in the country and you play the number 1 or 2 team in the years final bowl

---

again

I see the argument but don't find it logical. Who the voters or polls thought was the #1/#2 team before the bowl game matters less than a more informed opinion after the bowl game. If we have a playoff in the future the #1/#2 seeds will presumably lose before facing each other sometimes and that would not make the championship that resulted less legitimate IMO.

I do find it especially strange to see a championship awarded like the 1978 championship that Bama won in light of who they split the championship with - but I don't really see any plausible distinction in favor of using rankings before the bowl games instead of after the bowl games.

FWIW - this isn't really an argument that benefits me as a LSU fan. The 2003 championship was a split with USC and LSU couldn't claim that one on the basis of Chicken's argument (unless you claim the BCS pre-bowl rankings are the only acceptable rankings - which I would not). The 2007 season would also be called into question with my logic because LSU didn't end up playing the #2 team if that was UGA after the bowl games.

IDC really. The whole championship system has obviously had its flaws and you can't really find objectively good answers to how things should have played out in retrospect.

quote:

---

But USC that year did not play the number 1 team in a Bowl so they never had a shot at a title

---

Does his argument really demand the teams play only in a bowl game or the results don't count? If so that is a ridiculous argument.