- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Greatest Programs of All-Time
Posted on 8/18/12 at 9:42 pm to Tiger Live2
Posted on 8/18/12 at 9:42 pm to Tiger Live2
Again though, only the BCS/Coaches and FWAA were vacated.
1
Posted on 8/18/12 at 9:52 pm to FightOn4ever
quote:
quote:
Which 11 are "consensus"?
'25
'26
'61
'64
'65
'73
'78
'79
'92
'09
'11
78, split with USC. one had AP, one had coaches
LINK
But yeah, either of those count as legit.
65 & 73 are also split
Posted on 8/18/12 at 9:54 pm to Tiger Live2
quote:
oh yea. Either way it's a vacated title, so no one won that year
Take it up with the NCAA.
This is not a flame, but did you know the BCS itself called 2003 a "split decision" and gave USC props. Said there were "split NC's. They did this for at least one year after the 2003 season.
This post was edited on 8/18/12 at 9:56 pm
Posted on 8/18/12 at 10:00 pm to USMC Gators
quote:
Again though, only the BCS/Coaches and FWAA were vacated.
And again, as I have said. since 98, only the BCS matters. Every school and conference agreed to play by the rules of the BCS, for better or for worse. They want to give Bama crap for claiming titles when they lost the bowl, even though the rules of the time had the National Champion named before the bowls. But then they want to claim non-BCS titles when the BCS is rules of the day. Sounds hypocritical to me
Posted on 8/18/12 at 10:04 pm to Tiger Live2
quote:
And again, as I have said. since 98, only the BCS matters. Every school and conference agreed to play by the rules of the BCS, for better or for worse. They want to give Bama crap for claiming titles when they lost the bowl, even though the rules of the time had the National Champion named before the bowls. But then they want to claim non-BCS titles when the BCS is rules of the day. Sounds hypocritical to me
NCAA says otherwise in their list.
In fact the BCS explicitly noted the "split NC" back when.
This post was edited on 8/18/12 at 10:09 pm
Posted on 8/18/12 at 10:09 pm to Tiger Live2
quote:
And again, as I have said. since 98, only the BCS matters. Every school and conference agreed to play by the rules of the BCS, for better or for worse. They want to give Bama crap for claiming titles when they lost the bowl, even though the rules of the time had the National Champion named before the bowls. But then they want to claim non-BCS titles when the BCS is rules of the day. Sounds hypocritical to me
I agree with you there, but the NCAA still recognizes the AP, FWAA, and NFF.
Posted on 8/18/12 at 10:51 pm to USMC Gators
Officially the NCAA recognizes no FBS national champions.
Posted on 8/18/12 at 10:54 pm to Tiger Live2
quote:
Officially the NCAA recognizes no FBS national champions.
There you go.
So arguing that you're right is pretty pointless...don't ya think?
Posted on 8/18/12 at 10:55 pm to Tiger Live2
Posted on 8/18/12 at 11:00 pm to USMC Gators
quote:
Because the championship team is not determined by an NCAA championship or tournament event, it is sometimes unofficially referred to as a "mythical national championship". Since the NCAA, the sport's governing body, does not determine or declare a national champion in this field, determination of such has often engendered controversy. A championship team is independently declared by various individuals and organizations, often referred to as "selectors". These choices are sometimes at odds with each other. While the NCAA has never officially endorsed an annual championship team, it has documented the choices of several selectors in the official NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision Records.
Does not mean they are declaring or endorsing any specific champion. Merely listing who was "declared" champion.
This post was edited on 8/18/12 at 11:02 pm
Posted on 8/18/12 at 11:03 pm to Zamoro10
Indeed. I am not sure why some are threatened by the "split NC". It's happened several times during the course of CF and there were no major bitch sessions then.
Posted on 8/18/12 at 11:07 pm to FightOn4ever
Because people like to think the BCS solved something...when it really continued to muddle things...evident by how they continually toyed with the criteria year after year after controversies.
The AP realized this early on...the Texas/Cal controversy...decided they didn't want their vote to be for sale or politicized by coach's politicking - ala Mack Brown...and said screw it...we've declared a champion since 1936 and will continue to do so on our own. This BCS-computer power deal is to create a TV bonanza...and we're not interested.
If some don't want to recognize the AP...(although they seem perfectly fine to recognize it when the AP jives with the BCS-Coach's Poll) so be it. But the AP awards a champion...with or without the BCS...same as it ever was.
The AP realized this early on...the Texas/Cal controversy...decided they didn't want their vote to be for sale or politicized by coach's politicking - ala Mack Brown...and said screw it...we've declared a champion since 1936 and will continue to do so on our own. This BCS-computer power deal is to create a TV bonanza...and we're not interested.
If some don't want to recognize the AP...(although they seem perfectly fine to recognize it when the AP jives with the BCS-Coach's Poll) so be it. But the AP awards a champion...with or without the BCS...same as it ever was.
This post was edited on 8/18/12 at 11:09 pm
Posted on 8/18/12 at 11:10 pm to Zamoro10
Posted on 8/18/12 at 11:45 pm to Zamoro10
quote:
Does not mean they are declaring or endorsing any specific champion. Merely listing who was "declared" champion.
I didn't say that it did. They don't award a champion, but they do recognize.
Posted on 8/19/12 at 12:17 am to genro
1965 Consensus Championship
Gumps get all the luck...
Gumps get all the luck...
quote:
On New Year's Day, the Crimson Tide lost to the #5 ranked Texas Longhorns in the Orange Bowl, to finish the season with a 10-1 record, and the Arkansas Razorbacks defeated the 7th ranked University of Nebraska 10-7 in the Cotton Bowl Classic. Since there were no further polls, Alabama's national championship was unaffected, despite Arkansas' undefeated, untied season. The Arkansas Razorbacks also did not win the UPI Poll in 1964 because it too named its national champion before the bowl games were played. However the Arkansas Razorbacks were named national champion by the Football Writers Association of America. After a one-year trial run in 1965, the AP Poll in 1968 began the still on-going practice of naming their national champion at the conclusion of the bowl games. The UPI Poll followed suit in 1974.
Posted on 8/19/12 at 12:20 am to USMC Gators
quote:
I didn't say that it did. They don't award a champion, but they do recognize.
Not to quibble but I don't think they do recognize.
They simply record...the conclusions of various outlets throughout history for posterity.
e.g. - here are the folks that thought this or these teams were the champions for X given year.
Posted on 8/19/12 at 7:48 am to Zamoro10
Alabama fans are not happy
Posted on 8/21/12 at 9:44 am to genro
quote:
This uses a formula that takes into account poll finishes, record, SOS, bowl results, NC's, etc..
Yeah. That formula was specifically designed to put Alabama as high as possible. Try using a non-biased ranking.
Posted on 8/21/12 at 9:46 am to genro
quote:
Most recognized NC's, most bowl appearances, most 10-win seasons, most bowl victories.
Notre Dame has the most recognized titles. Oklahoma has the most ten win seasons.
Posted on 8/21/12 at 9:51 am to genro
quote:
True. Those Championships in 25, 26, and 31 are retroactive, and I'm sure someone will bring this up. But if you look at the season, and the bowl results, you can see why Bama was eventually voted NC.
1. I don't think 31 was retroactive.
2. "voted"? Who was this body of voters?
Page 6 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News