Started By
Message
re: Question for you Gumps. Houndstooth and NC discussion inside.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:03 pm to Darth_Vader
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:03 pm to Darth_Vader
I wonder why this is such a grey area. Why can't they have a defined start date like the North American professional leagues?
Teams in the NFL, NBA, MLB, etc all had and won championships prior to the first Superbowl, NBA Finals and World Series, but those sports only recognize those titles. Maybe this has something to do with them being professional organizations.
I just wish there was a defined period so that way there would be no argument one way or the other. I don't have a problem with Bama wanting to claim them all. I would want LSU to do the same if the shoe was on their foot. But there needs to be some legitimate ruling on them.
Teams in the NFL, NBA, MLB, etc all had and won championships prior to the first Superbowl, NBA Finals and World Series, but those sports only recognize those titles. Maybe this has something to do with them being professional organizations.
I just wish there was a defined period so that way there would be no argument one way or the other. I don't have a problem with Bama wanting to claim them all. I would want LSU to do the same if the shoe was on their foot. But there needs to be some legitimate ruling on them.
2
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:04 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Auburn for example has been awarded national championships in 1913, 1914, 1957, 1958, 1983, 1993, 2004 and 2010.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:04 pm to DvlsAdvocat
quote:
And like I said above, we didn't invent or create those titles...we just acknowledged that there were indeed titles awarded before Bear Bryant's tenure.
I still don't understand 1941. There were years which I would think Bama has a much more legitimate claim to the title, but 1941 is the one that was claimed out of all of them. Why is that? It would be on par with Virginia Tech claiming a national title this year if some computer poll randomly had them at number 1.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:08 pm to breeze
It's true. We've been "awarded" a total of 9 NC's but only officially claim two, although we do acknowledge them in our media guide. One in 1957 the other in 2010. as for the rest here is a rundown...
quote:
The AP Poll did not begin selecting a champion until 1936 nor the AFCA Coaches Poll until 1950, so many national champion titles previous to those date were awarded retroactively. The undefeated 1913 and 1914 teams coached by Mike Donahue were some of the best defenses in Auburn history. In fact, the 1914 squad allowed zero points all season, outscoring opponents 193-0. The 1983 team featuring Bo Jackson went 11–1 and finished the season by beating Michigan in the Sugar Bowl. Despite the team entering the game ranked third in the AP and both teams ranked ahead losing their bowl games, Auburn was jumped by fifth ranked Miami for the AP National Title. The 1993 team was ineligible to play in a postseason bowl game due to NCAA-imposed sanctions for paying Eric Ramsey[15] and finished ranked fourth by the AP. The undefeated 2004 squad (13–0) finished second in the AP and Coaches Top 25 polls, but the team was awarded the 2004 Fanspoll.com People's National Champion title.[16] After USC was stripped of the FWAA title, the organization discussed awarding the Grantland Rice Award to Auburn but ultimately voted not to award a trophy for 2004.[17] On June 6, 2011, the BCS officially stripped USC of its 2004 national championship, stating that there would be no champion for the 2004 season. Nonetheless, Auburn acknowledges the 2004 title, along with the 1913, 1983 and 1993 titles, in its media guide
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:11 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
unlike most programs Bama does claim them
Take a look at what Notre Dame, Ohio State, Michigan claim, just to start, then come and eat some crow and acknowledge your insecurity in trying to downgrade Bama's accomplishments.
quote:
other programs could claim many more titles than they do, especially when you go back beyond the 1930's
And they do.
quote:
But like virtually every other program we only really claim the ones awarded by the major services. The main reason Auburn and virtually every other program only claims these titles is to do otherwise just seems to be an attempt to over inflate someone importance.
You're just loading up on the fail in this thread.
quote:
I'm not saying this as a troll or to start a flame war. I'm mearly pointing out the fact from the outside looking in, to the rest of the college football world, Alabama claiming 13 NC's and bringing it up so much and making such a huge deal about it is beyond absurd
You're saying it as an instate rival fan, who is envious of your rival program. We get it.
quote:
But to over inflate that history in this manner is just off putting to others.
Not nearly so, as fabricating arguments and not actually knowing what you're talking about.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:17 pm to RollTideRockStar
quote:
Saw some LSU post above said they could claim 7 right now. I guarantee, IF they win this year, they'll try to say we only have 8 and they're tied with us.
LSU doesn't claim 7. He only stated that if LSU were to apply the same standards as Bama, they COULD claim 7. Even if someone claimed 8 after the win this year, they would still have to acknowledge Bama's 13 in order to maintain the same standard across the board.
But don't worry, I'm fairly certain nobody but Bama will ever use that standard.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:18 pm to jameison125
1941 is the single year that shouldn't be claimed, and most all Bama fans acknowledge that. The rest are:
4 - 10 win, undefeated seasons culminating in Rose Bowl victories, which sports writers in that time named NC's.
8 - Wire NC's, by either the AP or UPI/Coaches Polls.
Bama had 2 other undefeated and untied seasons in 1945 and 1966, which was not awarded NC's, even though they were the only undefeated/untied team left in 1966.
4 - 10 win, undefeated seasons culminating in Rose Bowl victories, which sports writers in that time named NC's.
8 - Wire NC's, by either the AP or UPI/Coaches Polls.
Bama had 2 other undefeated and untied seasons in 1945 and 1966, which was not awarded NC's, even though they were the only undefeated/untied team left in 1966.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:18 pm to TotalYatMove
quote:
LSU doesn't claim 7. He only stated that if LSU were to apply the same standards as Bama, they COULD claim 7. Even if someone claimed 8 after the win this year, they would still have to acknowledge Bama's 13 in order to maintain the same standard across the board.
But don't worry, I'm fairly certain nobody but Bama will ever use that standard.
Lsu has 4 undefeated Rose Bowl Champion teams pre-wire service?
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:19 pm to TotalYatMove
quote:
But don't worry, I'm fairly certain nobody but Bama will ever use that standard.
Yeah, you're wrong and don't know what you're talking about either.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:21 pm to Alahunter
quote:
1941 is the single year that shouldn't be claimed, and most all Bama fans acknowledge that. The rest are:
4 - 10 win, undefeated seasons culminating in Rose Bowl victories, which sports writers in that time named NC's.
8 - Wire NC's, by either the AP or UPI/Coaches Polls.
Bama had 2 other undefeated and untied seasons in 1945 and 1966, which was not awarded NC's, even though they were the only undefeated/untied team left in 1966.
I'm fully aware of the excellence of Bama's football history. It's 1941 which just makes it harder to take the other titles seriously. If Bama claimed both 1945 and 1966 and dropped 1941, they would probably get far less crap about their titles. 1941 is the one which makes everything look stupid.
I'm not trying to say all Bama fans are stupid or anything like that, I just can't understand why a school with the history and tradition of Bama would claim the 1941 national championship, especially when there are other years they could claim without getting ridiculed so much.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:22 pm to Alahunter
If teams like Ohio State and others claim these obscure NC's that nobody recognizes then is it good to follow suit and likewise make yourself and your program look to silly to the rest of the college football world?
As for "envy" of any program, please do not kid yourself. I acknowledge Alabama is a great program with a proud history, I've said as much in my last few threads. My allegiance to Auburn is not based on success or failure but rather my love for the institution. To be the fan of or have allegiance to anything based solely on the success of that entity is pathetic and shows a general lack of character.
I find the fact that you chose to reply to my post with the typical lame well worn insults I've seen regurgitated time and again very telling. Were I am emotional person I would perhaps pity you due to the fact that when someone resorts to such insults it's demonstrative of said person being capable of conjuring up an intelligent reply.
As for "envy" of any program, please do not kid yourself. I acknowledge Alabama is a great program with a proud history, I've said as much in my last few threads. My allegiance to Auburn is not based on success or failure but rather my love for the institution. To be the fan of or have allegiance to anything based solely on the success of that entity is pathetic and shows a general lack of character.
I find the fact that you chose to reply to my post with the typical lame well worn insults I've seen regurgitated time and again very telling. Were I am emotional person I would perhaps pity you due to the fact that when someone resorts to such insults it's demonstrative of said person being capable of conjuring up an intelligent reply.
This post was edited on 12/13/11 at 4:25 pm
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:23 pm to Alahunter
quote:
Yeah, you're wrong and don't know what you're talking about either.
True, and Yale and Princeton claim over 20. I guess they don't need to brag about it because people in Michigan and graduates of Princeton and Yale have other shite going on in their lives.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:23 pm to ohiovol
But folks don't regulate their arguments to just 41, and try to attack the others, when their own programs share titles in the years they claim. Take Auburn for instance.... They must acknowledge Ohio States claim to a NC and a share, since no other program claims titles that aren't more than legit.
Football (7) 1942, Coach Paul Brown
1954, Coach Woody Hayes
1957, Coach Woody Hayes
1961, Coach Woody Hayes
1968, Coach Woody Hayes
1970, Coach Woody Hayes
2002, Coach Jim Tressel
It appears Auburn is claiming bogus ones or at the very least, a shared one.
Football (7) 1942, Coach Paul Brown
1954, Coach Woody Hayes
1957, Coach Woody Hayes
1961, Coach Woody Hayes
1968, Coach Woody Hayes
1970, Coach Woody Hayes
2002, Coach Jim Tressel
It appears Auburn is claiming bogus ones or at the very least, a shared one.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:25 pm to ohiovol
Also, I'm fully aware that UT claims 4 titles that weren't awarded by either the AP or Coaches Poll (1938, 1940, 1950, and 1967). I can't really pretend I know if people really considered Tennessee co-champs each of those years since that was all long before I was born.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:27 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
If teams like Ohio State and others claim these obscure NC's that nobody recognizes then is it good to follow suit and likewise make yourself and your program look to silly to the rest of the college football world?
So now that facts are presented, you quickly gloss over your claims in your argument?
quote:
As for "envy" of any program, please do not kid yourself. I acknowledge Alabama is a great program with a proud history, I've said as much in my last few threads. My allegiance to Auburn is not based on success or failure but rather my love for the institution. To be the fan of or have allegiance to anything based solely on the success of that entity is pathetic and shows a general lack of character.
Yet you spend more time and energy, trying to make baseless and false claims about your rival program. Rather than talk about your own, which always falls short of the excellence of the institution across the state.
quote:
I find the fact that you chose to reply to my post with the typical lame well worn insults I've seen regurgitated time and again very telling. Were I am emotional person I would perhaps pity you do to the fact that when someone resorts to such insults it's demonstrative of said person being capable of conjuring up an intelligent reply.
There you go again. I presented you with some facts about other programa, in rebuttal to your false claims and you attack with other falsehoods. I can expect you to be dishonest in anything you discuss Bama related. It shows again and again, and your perceived anger towards me with your attack and deflection of acknowledging you were completely wrong is standard practice among liars, such as yourself.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:28 pm to ohiovol
quote:
since that was all long before I was born.
Were they not in every bedtime story you heard as a child? Did your elder family members not begin every story with "Back in 1940, which of course was the year UT won it's 2nd national championship in 3 years..." Surely you are taught to bring these up in everyday conversation.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:28 pm to TotalYatMove
Ah. Deflection to Ivy League schools accomplishments when confronted with facts. Amazing how folks can't admit being wrong and would rather deflect.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:32 pm to Alahunter
quote:
Amazing how folks can't admit being wrong and would rather deflect.
What was I wrong about. Was it that I mentioned no other school would use Bama's standards? Yes, I suppose you are right, there are a few others that have this insatiable desire to be able to say they relevant 80 years ago. I wonder if it is a part of every day life to them as well.
I wonder if anytime someone rags on an OSU fan for their team's poor performance, they mention those titles of the early 1900's. I wonder...
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:34 pm to TotalYatMove
quote:
Michigan and graduates of Princeton and Yale have other shite going on in their live
You clearly dont know any Michigan fans
Posted on 12/13/11 at 4:34 pm to ohiovol
quote:
I still don't understand 1941. There were years which I would think Bama has a much more legitimate claim to the title, but 1941 is the one that was claimed out of all of them.
Me either. I think 1941 is a joke. I wouldn't blink an eye if they said they were going to drop that one from the discussion. I never make a fuss over '41 though, because we got jobbed in 1966, when there is no doubt we should have been awarded the NC.
Page 6 of 9
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News