Alabama will now claim 4 MNC for this year

[CarolinaSoonerFan]

They were given trophies from 4 organizations for this year on Friday.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4808660

[soonerloyal]

Meh, that's what, only 301 now? We can catch up. :P

[RacerX]

http://members.cox.net/racerx4ou/license_20030703115745_2536.jpg

[jkjsooner]

I loved it that ABC listed their national title count as 7 prior o the game. That had to irk 'Bama fans who really believe they had 12.

[Sabanball]

Now this IS class--ragging on the NC because we claim some NC's that were not awarded by the messianic, almighty AP pre-WWII. F*** the teams that won recognized NC's in the '20's, because you all don't recognize them. Guys, this is getting SO old. Please, grow up. We've won 7 championships from the organization that seemingly is the only one that you recognize. We're right up there with you and Notre Dame.


Why not just be congratulatory, like many of us Bama fans were toward you when you won it all in 2000 after a miserable decade of program mismanagement? Constantly beating this dead horse over our claimed NC's doesn't make you look good--in fact, it's petty. You would have people believe we just awarded these NC's to ourselves--when in fact all you have to do is visit our trophy case and see that these NC awards were given to us by organizations at the time that gave out the award.

Concentrate your energy on beating Texas instead of crap like this and you will be much better off, my good friends....

[OK2LA]

Remind me again how I'm supposed to be "concentrating my energy" on beating Texas.

[PDXsooner]

Why not just be congratulatory, like many of us Bama fans were toward you when you won it all in 2000 after a miserable decade of program mismanagement?

Concentrate your energy on beating Texas instead of crap like this and you will be much better off, my good friends....

i've been saying this phony "bama/sooner alliance" is a waste of time for years, and your pompous statements do nothing to disprove what i've thought all along.

**** bama. you have 7 titles, not 13. USC retro claimed the 1939 title like 5 years ago. anyone with respect for the game SHOULD have a problem with such blatant rewriting of history. stop claiming phony titles and you'll stop being teased about it.

congrats, however on winning it this year. no question bama was the best team, and beating texas was awesome.

[Frozen Sooner]

i've been saying this phony "bama/sooner alliance" is a waste of time for years, and your pompous statements do nothing to disprove what i've thought all along.

**** bama. you have 7 titles, not 13. USC retro claimed the 1939 title like 5 years ago. anyone with respect for the game SHOULD have a problem with such blatant rewriting of history. stop claiming phony titles and you'll stop being teased about it.

congrats, however on winning it this year. no question bama was the best team, and beating texas was awesome.

8, actually, by the most uncharitable count.

It's not like Alabama went back and said "Oh, yeah, we forgot we won the national title this one year" like USC did. They've been pretty consistent in which years they lay claim to national titles and which they don't.

Alabama fans probably should take the ribbing about it a little better.

[caesarscott]

they should have 14 b/c they were cheated out of 1966 by the Eastern media. the only undefeated, untied team in the country. instead they gave it to ND and Mich State, mostly b/c of the civil rights problems in Alabama

[MeMyself&Me]

stop claiming phony titles and you'll stop being teased about it.

This. Sabanball, you shouldn't get so offended by it. Alabama fans count titles in a way that almost all other fans do not and, as such, people will roll their eyes at you and will, yes, tease you for it. If you want to say 13, get used to it. It's not just Sooner fans on the board.

Congrats on the win though. Alabama certainly deserves this one.

[Sabanball]

8, actually, by the most uncharitable count.

It's not like Alabama went back and said "Oh, yeah, we forgot we won the national title this one year" like USC did. They've been pretty consistent in which years they lay claim to national titles and which they don't.

Alabama fans probably should take the ribbing about it a little better.

Frozen Sooner, aka future lawyer in law school at UA--I'm calling you out. please tell these folks the trophies that we have in our trophy case--did we give them to ourselves? be honest. And tell them which organizations awarded them to us. Were they legitimate, at the time? Please, enlighten these people. You've seen personally and can attest to what awards we do and do not claim.

Ribbing? WE can take that--just like I'm sure you can take all the jokes about how you've lost so many times recently to Texas. I know...We're a backwards state and love Walmart--tease us about that all day long and I'll laugh with you. But you all have taken this "NC debate" to a new level, beyond just a little teasing. You're seemingly obsessed with it(you talk more about our claimed NC's than you do your own)--along with this stupid obsession with a chant that a conference that has won four straight BCS titles and your being "offended" by a few fans chanting sec, sec, sec....(THAT really bothers you???) I know you guys had a down year, but you and your program are above this kind of pettiness. Show class--I know you got it!

OU and Bama--two programs that have stood the test of time!

[Sooner47]

Frozen Sooner, aka future lawyer in law school at UA--I'm calling you out. please tell these folks the trophies that we have in our trophy case--did we give them to ourselves? be honest. And tell them which organizations awarded them to us. Were they legitimate, at the time? Please, enlighten these people. You've seen personally and can attest to what awards we do and do not claim.

Ribbing? WE can take that--just like I'm sure you can take all the jokes about how you've lost so many times recently to Texas. I know...We're a backwards state and love Walmart--tease us about that all day long and I'll laugh with you. But you all have taken this "NC debate" to a new level, beyond just a little teasing. You're seemingly obsessed with it(you talk more about our claimed NC's than you do your own)--along with this stupid obsession with a chant that a conference that has won four straight BCS titles and your being "offended" by a few fans chanting sec, sec, sec....(THAT really bothers you???) I know you guys had a down year, but you and your program are above this kind of pettiness. Show class--I know you got it!

OU and Bama--two programs that have stood the test of time!

Just curious.....how many NC's will you claim for this year? Let's see BCS, AP, Walter Camp, New York Times, etc, etc. If they each give you a trophy signifying your NC, will you count that as 5, 6, 7, 8 or however many or just one like you should? You said that your trophy case is full of NC trophies - do you count a separate NC of each one? If so, you're full of ca ca.

You're teased because everyone but Alabama seems fine with counting only NC's awarded by the recognized organizations like AP and BCS. That makes the counts comparable among schools. But Bama seems to feel the need to pump themselves up by counting every trophy you've ever received no matter how insignificant the organization. THAT'S why everyone laughs at you.

[MeMyself&Me]

Me thinks sabansballs is taking us just a little too serious...

Lighten up dude, your team just won a legitimate title. Quit worrying about what others are thinking.

[yermom]

Frozen Sooner, aka future lawyer in law school at UA--I'm calling you out. please tell these folks the trophies that we have in our trophy case--did we give them to ourselves? be honest. And tell them which organizations awarded them to us. Were they legitimate, at the time? Please, enlighten these people. You've seen personally and can attest to what awards we do and do not claim.



http://www.soonersports.com/sports/m-footbl/archive/m-footbl-national-championships.html

we didn't give ourselves 16 either

[Frozen Sooner]

Frozen Sooner, aka future lawyer in law school at UA--I'm calling you out. please tell these folks the trophies that we have in our trophy case--did we give them to ourselves? be honest. And tell them which organizations awarded them to us. Were they legitimate, at the time? Please, enlighten these people. You've seen personally and can attest to what awards we do and do not claim.

Ribbing? WE can take that--just like I'm sure you can take all the jokes about how you've lost so many times recently to Texas. I know...We're a backwards state and love Walmart--tease us about that all day long and I'll laugh with you. But you all have taken this "NC debate" to a new level, beyond just a little teasing. You're seemingly obsessed with it(you talk more about our claimed NC's than you do your own)--along with this stupid obsession with a chant that a conference that has won four straight BCS titles and your being "offended" by a few fans chanting sec, sec, sec....(THAT really bothers you???) I know you guys had a down year, but you and your program are above this kind of pettiness. Show class--I know you got it!

OU and Bama--two programs that have stood the test of time!

Hey, man, I was just saying that even by the most exacting of standards you have to credit Alabama with at least 8. I don't scoff at the claim of 13, because yeah-they were all granted by bodies that had credibility at the time.

The claim that nobody else counts championships granted by anyone but the AP or UPI/ESPN or BCS is complete bunk. Michigan, Notre Dame, Harvard, Army, Minnesota, Cal, and various other schools do the same. As pointed out above, USC flat-out manufactured one a couple of years ago.

It is correct that OU could claim either 16 or 17 national championships if we wanted to. It is a point of pride with OU fans that we do not, claiming only the years where we were named national champion by near-universal acclaim.

Alabama has a fine football tradition and doesn't need to make a darn thing up. This isn't like Oklahoma State claiming a faux basketball tradition by winning a national championship when nobody cared about the NCAA tournament and the best teams went to the NIT. 95% of the Alabama fans I've encountered over the last several months have been extremely respectful of Oklahoma's football tradition and as knowledgeable about it as anyone outside the Big 8/12 could be expected-in fact, a guy who works in the Alabama AD presented me with a signed copy of a published statistics book he compiled about OU Football.

And yes, I've been in the Bear Bryant Museum, and I certainly don't think any of the trophies in there are fake or made up.

[MeMyself&Me]

What I find ironic is that if we both counted titles the way they want to count them, we'd look better than them with our 16 to their 13.

If we counted titles the way we want to count them, they'd look better than us with their 8 to our 7.


And the truth is, if those 5 titles everyone else jokes about were really legitimate, Tide fans wouldn't get so offended by the teasing...

[Frozen Sooner]

Really? Because we get pretty pissed off when Texas fans claim ours aren't legitimate because they were all followed by probation.

[MeMyself&Me]

Really? Because we get pretty pissed off when Texas fans claim ours aren't legitimate because they were all followed by probation.

Man, I live in Texas and I've never been presented with that. I think I would just laugh at such a notion though if a whoren did say something like that.

[Frozen Sooner]

I've personally banned four or five Texas fans posting that nonsense.

[Crucifax Autumn]

http://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/supermanspiderman1.jpg

[MeMyself&Me]

Oh, I hear plenty of stuff from whorens like how all of OU's players are from Texas but mostly what I get from them has more to do with complete arrogance like they assume they have the best program with the best history in football despite the facts.

I have heard lOSUr fans say things about cheating and such. But, like I said, it's funny because it's the kind of thing that either they are saying in pure jest (from the few decent fans they have) or is said in pure jealousy (from the more typical fans), in either case, it's worth a laugh for different reasons.

Which I think is the same here. If those titles are legitimate, then the Tide fans need to see comments like this as fun ribbing from decent people or as insidious jealousy from fans that wish they had those titles. Either way, it's more fun to laugh at than get angry.

Given the history OUr fan base has (16 titles their way, or 7 our way) I tend to think most of what is said here regarding their title claims is going to be just good natured ribbing.

[Frozen Sooner]

I agree that it is. I just don't blame Sabanfan for getting a little tired of it.

[PrideTrombone]

OK, Alabama can have 13, but then Princeton has 18 and Yale has 17. All hail Princeton! :)

[CarolinaSoonerFan]

So the deal is that Bama does only count 1 for each year someone gave them a trophy for winning the championship.....Noone tell *exas this is how its done or else Mack will add about a dozen from his buddies @ the charter orgz.

[delhalew]

Frozen Sooner, aka future lawyer in law school at UA--I'm calling you out. please tell these folks the trophies that we have in our trophy case--did we give them to ourselves? be honest. And tell them which organizations awarded them to us. Were they legitimate, at the time? Please, enlighten these people. You've seen personally and can attest to what awards we do and do not claim.

Ribbing? WE can take that--just like I'm sure you can take all the jokes about how you've lost so many times recently to Texas. I know...We're a backwards state and love Walmart--tease us about that all day long and I'll laugh with you. But you all have taken this "NC debate" to a new level, beyond just a little teasing. You're seemingly obsessed with it(you talk more about our claimed NC's than you do your own)--along with this stupid obsession with a chant that a conference that has won four straight BCS titles and your being "offended" by a few fans chanting sec, sec, sec....(THAT really bothers you???) I know you guys had a down year, but you and your program are above this kind of pettiness. Show class--I know you got it!

OU and Bama--two programs that have stood the test of time!

I'm having trouble telling whether you are as pissed as you seem. This is an old joke SB...calm down.

Congrats on adding another trophy to the case.

[rollntider]

Hey guys actually Alabama has been awarded more than 13, even was awarded one for the 1966.(We do not claim that one) The modern era polls we claim which comes out to 8 now. Pre modern era polls we claim 5. Not sure why we claim the 1941 title, to me 1966 seems more legit. But the old ways were awarded and we took them. Contrary to popular belief we dont claim them all or we would claim 17 here is the link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I_FBS_National_Football_Championship )

Fact is why cant you claim one prior to the AP? THe AP was not around and those were in fact the organizations handing them out?

The 1941 you got me on, I don't understand why we claim it, but we do. But the 1920's and etc they were awarded. Are they any less legit because the AP didn't hand the title to us after we beat one of the best teams in the rose bowl? Not a flame or a smack talk, Just a question.

Roll Tide / Boomer Sooner guys.

[delhalew]

As I see it, its a matter of consistency. Before the AP there were different orgs doing different things giving the top spot to different teams.

It's just easier on everybody to stick to the AP, and now, the BCS.

As was mentioned we could claim 17 or something, but why bother...

[PDXsooner]

i just looked out my window, and saw bama claiming another title!!

[MeMyself&Me]

Hey guys actually Alabama has been awarded more than 13, even was awarded one for the 1966.(We do not claim that one) The modern era polls we claim which comes out to 8 now. Pre modern era polls we claim 5. Not sure why we claim the 1941 title, to me 1966 seems more legit. But the old ways were awarded and we took them. Contrary to popular belief we dont claim them all or we would claim 17 here is the link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I_FBS_National_Football_Championship )

Fact is why cant you claim one prior to the AP? THe AP was not around and those were in fact the organizations handing them out?

The 1941 you got me on, I don't understand why we claim it, but we do. But the 1920's and etc they were awarded. Are they any less legit because the AP didn't hand the title to us after we beat one of the best teams in the rose bowl? Not a flame or a smack talk, Just a question.

Roll Tide / Boomer Sooner guys.

I think most people laugh at the backdated titles. From:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alabama_Crimson_Tide_football#National_championshi ps


Former Alabama Sports Information Director Wayne Atcheson researched the team's history in the 1980s and expanded the number of national championships claimed at the time in the Tide's annual Media Guide from six "modern era" titles to a total of eleven by including five teams (1925, 1926, 1930, 1934, 1941) recognized prior to the modern era. According to Atcheson, he made the effort in the context of disputed titles being claimed by other schools, and "to make Alabama football look the best it could look." Though the claim was made in the spirit of competition with other claimants, Atcheson maintains that the titles he included are the school's rightful claims.

If you can't celebrate it at the time you won it, it's not much of a title.

[SteelClip49]

ALABAMA claims 13 because they included Auburn's 1957 AP title...as at the time they were known as ALABAMA Polytechnic Institute.

[MrJimBeam]

Does Bama get a NC for every time they won the SEC cause you know, the SEC is the greatest evar?

[jkjsooner]

When my 'Bama friend brings up the 13 national titles I always question him on the '41 title. It seems like an absurd claim.

I think we should pull an Auburn and claim titles for '49 and '54. I'm just joking but if you look at it, Wilkinson's teams had to go undefeated two consecutive years before they were awarded each of their three national titles.

I was watching 'Ole Miss play once and I noticed the national title claims on their upper deck. I looked closely and they claimed two years from 59-62. (I don't remember which two they were now but there are three years they were awarded it by someone.) Anyway, this was in the era of AP and UPI and Ole Miss was never awarded an AP or UPI title yet they claim it. This seems to be a problem with SEC schools.

[OUDoc]

As stated above, EVERYONE makes fun of Bama for the MNC math. Get a thicker skin or change the number (or stop caring what others post on their boards). We aren't going to change our minds any more than you are going to change your titles.

Congrats on the recent one though!

[Bama Yankee]

(I usually just post on the fark board, but I thought I chime in on this one :) )
So, people are willing to acknowledge the 8 titles Bama has won in the so-called "poll era" (1936 to present). I don't understand the problem with giving us credit for the following years:
1925: Bama beat an undefeated Washington team in the Rose Bowl (only bowl game played and therefore a "de-facto" National Championship Game) to finish the season 10-0. This game put Southern football on the map.
1926: Once again an undefeated Alabama team played in the Rose Bowl, this time against an undefeated Stanford (the United Press called the game "the football championship of America"). The game finished in a tie and Bama split the title with Stanford.
1930: Another undefeated season and Rose Bowl victory (this time a 24-0 win over previously undefeated Washington State)
1934: Again, an undefeated season and Rose Bowl victory (29-14 over previously undefeated Stanford). By this time they had added a couple of bowls, but the Rose was still the big game and still the de facto National Championship game.

I'll give you the 1941 title we claim is a somewhat of a stretch. But the undefeated teams of 1945 and 1966 could have at least gotten a share of a title. The 1966 team is still the only team in history to start the season ranked #1, win every game and still not win the National Championship.

So, even if you want to take out 1941 (I would like to see us drop that one myself and replace it with 1966), we would still have a dozen titles that are legitimate. Those who say we only have 8 should really explain how those from the 20's and 30's are not valid.
(okay, I'll go back to the fark board now... :D )

[SteelClip49]

They are not valid because most of the selectors went back and voted their champion. When the AP began it was viewed as the only major source and put an end to all the chaos of teams claiming what they wanted. Yeah...teams still claim what they want after the AP began but they don't count.

Notable claims after the AP began...

1938- Tennessee (AP: TCU)
1939- Southern Cal (AP: TAMU)
1941- Alabama (AP: Minnesota)
1942- Georgia (AP: Ohio State)
1947- Michigan (AP: Notre Dame)
1950- Kentucky (AP/UPI: Oklahoma)
1952- Georgia Tech (AP/UPI: Michigan State)
1960- Ole Miss (AP/UPI: Minnesota)
1961- Ohio State (AP/UPI: Alabama)
1962- Ole Miss (AP/UPI: Southern Cal)
1964- Arkansas (AP/UPI: Alabama)
1970- Ohio State (AP: Nebraska UPI: Texas)

Anytime titles are retroactively accounted for like most of the titles are pre-1936 then they are not universally recognized. The AP and UPI (Board of Coaches) created a consensus whereas other selectors were a math formula or just one person. Teams who claim pre-poll titles are just trying to one up others and just shows a sign of desperation.

OU could easily claim 1915, 1918, 1938, 1949, 1954, 1973, 1978 but we choose not too because it would look pointless to claim something we didn't win even if some selectors crowned us as national champions.

[MeMyself&Me]

(I usually just post on the fark board, but I thought I chime in on this one :) )
So, people are willing to acknowledge the 8 titles Bama has won in the so-called "poll era" (1936 to present). I don't understand the problem with giving us credit for the following years:
1925: Bama beat an undefeated Washington team in the Rose Bowl (only bowl game played and therefore a "de-facto" National Championship Game) to finish the season 10-0. This game put Southern football on the map.
1926: Once again an undefeated Alabama team played in the Rose Bowl, this time against an undefeated Stanford (the United Press called the game "the football championship of America"). The game finished in a tie and Bama split the title with Stanford.
1930: Another undefeated season and Rose Bowl victory (this time a 24-0 win over previously undefeated Washington State)
1934: Again, an undefeated season and Rose Bowl victory (29-14 over previously undefeated Stanford). By this time they had added a couple of bowls, but the Rose was still the big game and still the de facto National Championship game.

I'll give you the 1941 title we claim is a somewhat of a stretch. But the undefeated teams of 1945 and 1966 could have at least gotten a share of a title. The 1966 team is still the only team in history to start the season ranked #1, win every game and still not win the National Championship.

So, even if you want to take out 1941 (I would like to see us drop that one myself and replace it with 1966), we would still have a dozen titles that are legitimate. Those who say we only have 8 should really explain how those from the 20's and 30's are not valid.
(okay, I'll go back to the fark board now... :D )

Again, it's the backdating titles thing that makes people laugh. I'll post this again just to make sure we're on the same page. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alabama_Crimson_Tide_football#National_championshi ps


Former Alabama Sports Information Director Wayne Atcheson researched the team's history in the 1980s and expanded the number of national championships claimed at the time in the Tide's annual Media Guide from six "modern era" titles to a total of eleven by including five teams (1925, 1926, 1930, 1934, 1941) recognized prior to the modern era. According to Atcheson, he made the effort in the context of disputed titles being claimed by other schools, and "to make Alabama football look the best it could look." Though the claim was made in the spirit of competition with other claimants, Atcheson maintains that the titles he included are the school's rightful claims.

You see, Bama fans didn't even call 1925, 1926, 1930, 1934, and 1941 National Championships until an Alabama Sports Information Director decided to claim them in a Bama media guide in the 1980s.

Bama fans of the 20s, 30s, and 40s didn't recognize those teams as National Champions but somehow they became National Champions in the 1980s? That's the joke.

[Bama Yankee]

They are not valid because most of the selectors went back and voted their champion. When the AP began it was viewed as the only major source and put an end to all the chaos of teams claiming what they wanted. Yeah...teams still claim what they want after the AP began but they don't count.

Notable claims after the AP began...

1938- Tennessee (AP: TCU)
1939- Southern Cal (AP: TAMU)
1941- Alabama (AP: Minnesota)
1942- Georgia (AP: Ohio State)
1947- Michigan (AP: Notre Dame)
1950- Kentucky (AP/UPI: Oklahoma)
1952- Georgia Tech (AP/UPI: Michigan State)
1960- Ole Miss (AP/UPI: Minnesota)
1961- Ohio State (AP/UPI: Alabama)
1962- Ole Miss (AP/UPI: Southern Cal)
1964- Arkansas (AP/UPI: Alabama)
1970- Ohio State (AP: Nebraska UPI: Texas)

Anytime titles are retroactively accounted for like most of the titles are pre-1936 then they are not universally recognized. The AP and UPI (Board of Coaches) created a consensus whereas other selectors were a math formula or just one person. Teams who claim pre-poll titles are just trying to one up others and just shows a sign of desperation.

OU could easily claim 1915, 1918, 1938, 1949, 1954, 1973, 1978 but we choose not too because it would look pointless to claim something we didn't win even if some selectors crowned us as national champions.

I understand the hang up about the retroactive selections. My question is really about those Rose Bowl games from the 20's and 30's. Those four games I mentioned in my post pitted the two best teams in the country (or at least two great undefeated teams...and similar to our current system, the winner would be thought of as a fitting champion). Bama won three of them and tied the other (splitting the title). Who else would you consider to be the National Champion from those years? The games were billed as the "football championship of America". Regardless of whether someone went back and selected their champion years later, those de facto "title" games happened and at the time the winner was considered to be the National Champion. If you won all of your games then won the only postseason game against another undefeated team wouldn't you consider yourself the National Champion?

[MeMyself&Me]

Regardless of whether someone went back and selected their champion years later, those de facto "title" games happened and at the time the winner was considered to be the National Champion.

If they were considered National Championships at the time, you wouldn't have to retroactively claim them in the 1980s.


If you won all of your games then won the only postseason game against another undefeated team wouldn't you consider yourself the National Champion?

No. Sometimes teams go undefeated and aren't awarded a championship.

Also, this idea that the Rose Bowl determined a national title is suspect simply because of the fact that when polls started being used to make that determination years later, those polls were originally BEFORE the Rose Bowl game. If bowl games were nationally recognized as determining national champions, don't you think those original polling efforts would have just occurred after the bowl games when they started the polls?

[Bama Yankee]

Bama fans of the 20s, 30s, and 40s didn't recognize those teams as National Champions but somehow they became National Champions in the 1980s? That's the joke.

With all due respect, you are incorrect. Those teams from the 20's and 30's were most certainly considered National Champs by Bama fans of that era and more than that, they brought pride to the South and put Southern football on the map. You really should read up on the 1926 Rose Bowl, it was considered the turning point of Southern football (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/jarvis16.html).

"The long trip home was made even longer because the train had to make frequent stops at towns throughout the South. As brass bands played, the team would assemble on station platforms to be cheered by local citizens waving red and white bunting. Finally the train arrived at the Tuscaloosa station and the players were greeted by thousands of fans who had been waiting for hours. The Mayor proclaimed the day as an official holiday and schools and businesses were closed."

Sounds to me like fans knew who the National Champion was...

[MeMyself&Me]

With all due respect, you are incorrect. Those teams from the 20's and 30's were most certainly considered National Champs by Bama fans of that era and more than that, they brought pride to the South and put Southern football on the map. You really should read up on the 1926 Rose Bowl, it was considered the turning point of Southern football (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/jarvis16.html).

"The long trip home was made even longer because the train had to make frequent stops at towns throughout the South. As brass bands played, the team would assemble on station platforms to be cheered by local citizens waving red and white bunting. Finally the train arrived at the Tuscaloosa station and the players were greeted by thousands of fans who had been waiting for hours. The Mayor proclaimed the day as an official holiday and schools and businesses were closed."

Sounds to me like fans knew who the National Champion was...

I'm sure everyone was proud. And I can assure you that Oklahomans understand what having a prominent and respected college football team can do for a state/region. Just because people celebrate a football great football season like it's the best thing to happen in years/decades, doesn't make it a National Championship. Backdating a title to make yourself sound better is silly... and we aren't the only ones snickering. If you don't like it, fine... but I don't see it stopping any time soon.

[Bama Yankee]

If they were considered National Championships at the time, you wouldn't have to retroactively claim them in the 1980s.

The quote you referenced about the SID adding the titles states that he went back and added the titles before the "modern era". Just because the media guide at the time did not list the titles from the 20's and 30's did not mean that they didn't exist.



Also, this idea that the Rose Bowl determined a national title is suspect simply because of the fact that when polls started being used to make that determination years later, those polls were originally BEFORE the Rose Bowl game. If bowl games were nationally recognized as determining national champions, don't you think those original polling efforts would have just occurred after the bowl games when they started the polls?

After the advent of the modern polling system in 1936, some polls waited until after the bowls and other awarded before the bowls. Bama has benefited and suffered from both of those systems, btw.

Again, you should seriously do some research about the Rose Bowl (especially the 1926 game). When Alabama went out to Pasadena to play a heavily favored Washington team, no one outside of the south thought they had a chance. After that game, everyone knew that Alabama and Southern football was for real. You can try to dismiss the 1925 title as retroactive polling and Wayne Atcheson updating our media guide, but those who were around during that time know who the real National Champion was.

[MeMyself&Me]

My point was that if any of the bowls were already being used to determine you a national champion was, then when the polling systems started, they'd be taken AFTER the bowls, at least the most respected ones would. The fact is, nobody was looking at bowl games like that at the time so they weren't National Championship games.

Just because a great season and a great bowl win brought prominence to Alabama, that doesn't make it a national championship game. If that were so, Boise State would be claiming a couple this decade I think.


Back to my original point though, congrats on your most recent one and quit worrying about what others think about how you want to count them... there's no 'official' way of doing that anyway.

[CarolinaSoonerFan]

I understand the hang up about the retroactive selections. My question is really about those Rose Bowl games from the 20's and 30's. Those four games I mentioned in my post pitted the two best teams in the country (or at least two great undefeated teams...and similar to our current system, the winner would be thought of as a fitting champion). Bama won three of them and tied the other (splitting the title). Who else would you consider to be the National Champion from those years? The games were billed as the "football championship of America". Regardless of whether someone went back and selected their champion years later, those de facto "title" games happened and at the time the winner was considered to be the National Champion. If you won all of your games then won the only postseason game against another undefeated team wouldn't you consider yourself the National Champion?


BOISE STATE National champs 2009 using this logic? Not that I agree...Bama deserved this one.

[Bama Yankee]

BOISE STATE National champs 2009 using this logic? Not that I agree...Bama deserved this one.

Gee, I must have missed the part where Boise State played in the only postseason game this year... ;)

[MeMyself&Me]

Gee, I must have missed the part where Boise State played in the only postseason game this year... ;)

Actually, what they have in common with the '24 Bama team. There is no current reputable championship selector that is naming Boise State National Champions.

[Bama Yankee]

Also, this idea that the Rose Bowl determined a national title is suspect...

From The Independent, St. Petersburg, Florida, on Saturday, January 2, 1926

http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q16/skip_wilson/image28.png

Headline from The Desert News, Salt Lake City, Utah, Monday, January 3, 1927.

http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q16/skip_wilson/NewspaperArticle4PageHeadline.jpg

This headline and article originally appeared in The Evening News, San Jose, California, Friday, January 2, 1931.

http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q16/skip_wilson/NewspaperArticle5Headline.jpg
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q16/skip_wilson/NewspaperArticle51.jpg

[MeMyself&Me]

Cool. Better than I thought one would find on short notice but all I see are sensationalized headlines with no mention of any awarding authority for a National Championship in the articles themselves though. Who was it that awarded Bama those titles?

[jkjsooner]

I've heard Bama fans claim that the Rose Bowl was the defacto national title game. From wiki,


In the game’s early years, except during World War I, the Rose Bowl always pitted a team—not necessarily the conference champion—from the Pacific Coast Conference (PCC), the predecessor of the current Pacific-10 Conference

How exactly is a game that was designed to match a PAC 10 team against an eastern team be considered a defacto national title game?

I'm not one to take away all of 'Bama's pre-AP titles as football was a big deal even in that era. I'm a huge OU fan but I do recognize that only recognizing AP era championships (or "modern" post WW2 championships) is a little self serving as it conveniently corresponds to the rise of OU football.

But the claim from some Bama fans that the Rose Bowl was some sort of universally recognized national title game is also self serving and quite absurd.

[MeMyself&Me]

Never said football wasn't a big deal. Just that retroactively claiming titles is funny. It's particularly funny when some of the title claims are based on retroactive services as well.

Edit: Forgot to add, yeah, saying a Bowl game from that era was a National Championship game is pretty weak. Not only did the Rose Bowl simply placing an 'eastern team' against at Pacific Coast Conference team, that PCC team wasn't always even the conference champion. Also an issue, some conferences had limits to how often a team could compete in post season games. The conference OU was in for instance, didn't allow teams to go in consecutive years at through the mid 50s... not sure when they eliminated that rule but you should get the point.

[Bama Yankee]

Cool. Better than I thought one would find on short notice but all I see are sensationalized headlines with no mention of any awarding authority for a National Championship in the articles themselves though. Who was it that awarded Bama those titles?

You are a tough nut to crack... :)

There was no official "awarding authority" for a National Championship in 1925. Even the Dickinson System (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dickinson_System) (a mathematical system that was generally accepted in that era as a "major selector") didn't start until 1926 and at the request of Knute Rockne did retroactive polls for 1924 and 1925. Even the NCAA web site (http://www.ncaa.com/history/football-fbs.html) lists all pre-1936 champions as "Retroactive Poll Champions".

So, if there were no "official" awarding authorities in 1925 and the contemporaneous media reports I posted above declare that Alabama won the "National Grid Title" why can't you accept the fact that those titles are valid?

[MeMyself&Me]

You are a tough nut to crack... :)

There was no official "awarding authority" for a National Championship in 1925. Even the Dickinson System (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dickinson_System) (a mathematical system that was generally accepted in that era as a "major selector") didn't start until 1926 and at the request of Knute Rockne did retroactive polls for 1924 and 1925. Even the NCAA web site (http://www.ncaa.com/history/football-fbs.html) lists all pre-1936 champions as "Retroactive Poll Champions".

So, if there were no "official" awarding authorities in 1925 and the contemporaneous media reports I posted above declare that Alabama won the "National Grid Title" why can't you accept the fact that those titles are valid?

Let me get this straight, you now want to claim retroactive national titles based on sensationalized media headlines?

You say the Dickinson System was "accepted in that era as a "major selector"" yet it didn't pick Alabama...

[soonerbrat]

Now this IS class--ragging on the NC because we claim some NC's that were not awarded by the messianic, almighty AP pre-WWII. F*** the teams that won recognized NC's in the '20's, because you all don't recognize them. Guys, this is getting SO old. Please, grow up. We've won 7 championships from the organization that seemingly is the only one that you recognize. We're right up there with you and Notre Dame.


Why not just be congratulatory, like many of us Bama fans were toward you when you won it all in 2000 after a miserable decade of program mismanagement? Constantly beating this dead horse over our claimed NC's doesn't make you look good--in fact, it's petty. You would have people believe we just awarded these NC's to ourselves--when in fact all you have to do is visit our trophy case and see that these NC awards were given to us by organizations at the time that gave out the award.

Concentrate your energy on beating Texas instead of crap like this and you will be much better off, my good friends....


If OU counted championships like Bama does, we'd have just as many.

[Sooner04]

And you people wonder why I was so torn over the outcome of the Texas/Alabamuh game.

How about that mighty 8-2 team of 1941? National Champs because something called the "Football Thesaurus" says so even though every Arab in Beirut knows Minnesota is the true national champ of that season. It goes on and on.

[MeMyself&Me]

Torn? I just think it's funny. There's no official way to count it. Bama fans just have much looser standards that most fans when it comes to counting championships. Nothing wrong with that IMO. When I encounter an Bama fan that claims all those titles, I chuckle cause I can't always tell if they're being serious.

[Bama Yankee]

Let me get this straight, you now want to claim retroactive national titles based on sensationalized media headlines?

You say the Dickinson System was "accepted in that era as a "major selector"" yet it didn't pick Alabama...

No, I'm saying that there was no "official" awarding authority in 1925 and all the titles were awarded retroactively. You said that the 1926 Rose Bowl didn't decide the National Title (you said even Bama fans didn't recognize those teams as National Champions back then) even though the media reported it as such (how is "Alabama Defeats Washington Winning National Grid Title" a "sensational" headline?). You said it was "silly" to recognize retroactive titles, even though that's precisely what the NCAA web site does.

You are quick to dismiss Bama's retroactive titles as a "joke", but point to Dickinson's retroactive pick of Dartmouth (who refused to play in the Rose Bowl that year) over Alabama as evidence of our 1925 title being invalid.

Look, I realize that you don't like retroactive titles. But that's the way it was back then. There was not an official awarding authority in those days. Heck, there was no official awarding authority until about ten years ago. If all the major awarding services prior to 1936 have awarded retroactive titles and the NCAA refers to all the pre-1936 titles as "retroactive" why do you have such a hang up about retroactive titles? The fact that the Alabama SID decided to add our titles before the "modern-era" to the media guide in 1980 does not deminish the fact that we won them on the field and they were recognized by media at the time.

I have said that I am willing to acknowledge that Alabama overreaches with some of its National Title claims (especially the 1941 title); however, I believe the claims from the 20's and 30's are valid. Are you willing to acknowledge that Alabama deserves to claim at least some of those early titles (especially '25, '26 & '30 which have been recognized by the NCAA and listed on their web site)?

[Bama Yankee]

And you people wonder why I was so torn over the outcome of the Texas/Alabamuh game.

How about that mighty 8-2 team of 1941? National Champs because something called the "Football Thesaurus" says so even though every Arab in Beirut knows Minnesota is the true national champ of that season. It goes on and on.

I wish we didn't claim that one myself. To me, it is the only one that is not legitimate. I'll give you that one. But the others are legitimate claims, IMO.

[MeMyself&Me]

No, I'm saying that there was no "official" awarding authority in 1925 and all the titles were awarded retroactively. You said that the 1926 Rose Bowl didn't decide the National Title (you said even Bama fans didn't recognize those teams as National Champions back then) even though the media reported it as such (how is "Alabama Defeats Washington Winning National Grid Title" a "sensational" headline?). You said it was "silly" to recognize retroactive titles, even though that's precisely what the NCAA web site does.

It's sensationalist because there's no mention of a national title award in the story and, as you admit, there wasn't one.

You are quick to dismiss Bama's retroactive titles as a "joke", but point to Dickinson's retroactive pick of Dartmouth (who refused to play in the Rose Bowl that year) over Alabama as evidence of our 1925 title being invalid.

I was referring to 1926 and on and merely mentioned that the two years prior were backdated.

Look, I realize that you don't like retroactive titles. But that's the way it was back then. There was not an official awarding authority in those days. Heck, there was no official awarding authority until about ten years ago. If all the major awarding services prior to 1936 have awarded retroactive titles and the NCAA refers to all the pre-1936 titles as "retroactive" why do you have such a hang up about retroactive titles? The fact that the Alabama SID decided to add our titles before the "modern-era" to the media guide in 1980 does not deminish the fact that we won them on the field and they were recognized by media at the time.

They didn't have those retroactive titles back then. That's why it's not the way it was. They weren't counted by anyone until years later.

I have said that I am willing to acknowledge that Alabama overreaches with some of its National Title claims (especially the 1941 title); however, I believe the claims from the 20's and 30's are valid. Are you willing to acknowledge that Alabama deserves to claim at least some of those early titles (especially '25, '26 & '30 which have been recognized by the NCAA and listed on their web site)?

If you can show me that they earned the title and was awarded a title in the year in which they won it and show me that it was recognized at the time by someone (I mean, that's point isn't it) then I might. The fact that Bama fans didn't regard these years as National Titles until decades later makes it hard for someone outside of Bama to see them as such. The fact that Bama claims the 1941 title really casts a shadow on any of the questionable ones.

I got to ask you this one though. Do you recognize the 1869 Princeton team or the 1869 Rutgers team as the national champions of 1869 or is it both? I haven't seen any newspaper headlines to figure that one out. :D

[MeMyself&Me]

By the way, why is it so important for you to get Sooner fans (or any other fans for that matter) to recognize pre-national title national titles?

[Bama Yankee]

If you can show me that they earned the title and was awarded a title in the year in which they won it and show me that it was recognized at the time by someone (I mean, that's point isn't it) then I might. The fact that Bama fans didn't regard these years as National Titles until decades later makes it hard for someone outside of Bama to see them as such. The fact that Bama claims the 1941 title really casts a shadow on any of the questionable ones.

We're just going in circles now. I showed you contemporaneous media reports of Alabama winning the "National Grid Title" and you called them "sensational". Now you want me to show you a recognized title in the year in which they won it even though their was no "recognized" awarding service in 1925. I guess by definition you win that argument, since it is impossible to produce a "recognized" awarding service that did not exist at the time. The fact that you choose to ignore the media reports from the days after the game (along with historians who have written about the game) shows me that I probably wasting my time discussing this with you.

It has been fun though. Like I said, you are tough nut to crack... :)

[Bama Yankee]

By the way, why is it so important for you to get Sooner fans (or any other fans for that matter) to recognize pre-national title national titles?

LOL. It's not that important to me (I'm sure it's not that important to you either). I just responded to your earlier post with some info that I had researched earlier in a discussion with an Auburn fan (it does seem to be important to those guys... ;) ). I guess we're both stubborn dudes who like to argue over the internet... :D Anyway, no worries. Like I said, I enjoyed the debate and you made me dig a little deeper than normal (finding the newspaper articles from that era was not easy).

Okay, I'll go back to the Fark Board where I belong and leave you guys alone...

Boomer Sooner and Roll Tide

[MeMyself&Me]

Now you want me to show you a recognized title in the year in which they won it even though their was no "recognized" awarding service in 1925.

This is why people snicker and laugh by the way. And congrats on your latest.