Started By
Message
2
Posted on 12/4/09 at 10:54 pm to Alahunter
If the AP was relegated to being only a mere part of a formula, they wouldn't have the grounds to crown their own independent champion.
They took on an independent role in the creation of their rankings and independently crowned USC the champion.
They took on an independent role in the creation of their rankings and independently crowned USC the champion.
Posted on 12/4/09 at 10:55 pm to Alahunter
quote:
there was a split then and not a "true" winner.
I'm not arguing that more than two teams could win the title. I'm arguing that one guy holed up in his office in 1945 awarding a #1 ranking to a team in 1934 is not legitimate.
The AP is comprised of numerous voters that are currently recognized as legitimate based on their experience as a sports journalist. The timing of the final ranking is immediately following the final football game of the year and is accepted by all FBS conferences and teams.
Bottom line: retroactively awarded championships should not count
This post was edited on 12/4/09 at 10:58 pm
Posted on 12/4/09 at 10:58 pm to Ross
The AP was independent before the BCS came to be.
Posted on 12/4/09 at 10:59 pm to Alahunter
Yes. And they are independent now, and for all intents and purposes were independent in 2003 with the added benefit of being part of the BCS formula.
Posted on 12/4/09 at 11:00 pm to Alahunter
quote:
The AP was independent before the BCS came to be.
Correct. And then they agreed to be a part of the BCS.
This is irrelevant to the discussion, though.
Posted on 12/4/09 at 11:01 pm to Ross
But the BCS is tainted, since it used an independent poll before they pulled out. They used an independent poll to decide what their poll would be. Without the AP and having changed how they do them, the outcomes could be different in the years before their "tweaking" of the poll.
Posted on 12/4/09 at 11:06 pm to Golfer
Just curious - why is it so important for Alabama fans to bring in the past, and in particular the far away past. Is this supposed to tell us that we are not in the same "class" as them?
This is the same crap I get when talking with ND fans. What a person is saying when they bring up their 'achievements' long ago is really like saying that they are up here and you are down here, and there is nothing you can do to change that. There is a word for it -- INSECURITY.
I guess we can bring in the, ah, "storied" past of Army, Princeton, and all of the great teams of the first half of the century.
This is the same crap I get when talking with ND fans. What a person is saying when they bring up their 'achievements' long ago is really like saying that they are up here and you are down here, and there is nothing you can do to change that. There is a word for it -- INSECURITY.
I guess we can bring in the, ah, "storied" past of Army, Princeton, and all of the great teams of the first half of the century.
Posted on 12/4/09 at 11:06 pm to Alahunter
quote:
But the BCS is tainted, since it used an independent poll before they pulled out. They used an independent poll to decide what their poll would be. Without the AP and having changed how they do them, the outcomes could be different in the years before their "tweaking" of the poll.
Wait, what?
Why would using the AP Poll taint the BCS? I mean, I would agree that it led to some deserved criticisms in 2003 and 2004; but I don't think the BCS is in itself tainted because it utilized the poll.
Posted on 12/4/09 at 11:06 pm to Alahunter
quote:
They used an independent poll to decide what their poll would be.
They used the AP poll as part of their formula, not the entire formula.
quote:
Without the AP and having changed how they do them, the outcomes could be different in the years before their "tweaking" of the poll.
Once again, each version of the poll have been approved and accepted by all 6 conferences and the 119 FBS teams. Everyone is playing under the same rules.
Posted on 12/4/09 at 11:08 pm to Golfer
Basically this thread has reverted to nothing. Not one Bama fan will talk about accepting retroactively awarded titles.
Posted on 12/4/09 at 11:09 pm to Golfer
I'm just using it as the argument as to looking back. By changing the way it's been done, in the process of using the BCS... had it been done the same way the year before, it could have led to a different champion. Until there is a playoff, any argument can be made as to why something isn't legit to being a true champion.
Posted on 12/4/09 at 11:12 pm to Alahunter
quote:
Until there is a playoff, any argument can be made as to why something isn't legit to being a true champion.
No, because then people will bitch about seedings and locations etc. The same way they do in the Basketball tournament.
quote:
I'm just using it as the argument as to looking back.
Once again, USC wasn't awarded the 2003 AP trophy in 2008. Why will no one answer this??
Posted on 12/4/09 at 11:13 pm to Golfer
I don't get what point that makes.
Posted on 12/4/09 at 11:15 pm to Alahunter
quote:
I don't get what point that makes.
Let me put it this way. If someone came out with a poll today that awarded Auburn as the 2004 National Champion you would count it, right?
Posted on 12/4/09 at 11:15 pm to Alahunter
Retroactive national championships suck? 
Posted on 12/4/09 at 11:16 pm to Ross
so there were no champions before the AP then?
Posted on 12/4/09 at 11:18 pm to Alahunter
quote:
so there were no champions before the AP then?
Sure there were, provided there was a poll/person/ranking/whatever that awarded the team the Championship THAT year. How is this so hard to comprehend.
There's a reason LSU doesn't claim the 1908 National Championship...and I'll let you take a guess why.
This post was edited on 12/4/09 at 11:19 pm
Posted on 12/4/09 at 11:19 pm to Golfer
quote:
There's a reason LSU doesn't claim the 1908 National Championship...
or Auburn in 1913
Posted on 12/4/09 at 11:19 pm to Golfer
So, what organizations did their awards in the years before the AP?
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News