- 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
0
Posted on 12/11/12 at 11:18 am to alajones
The 1936 team tied a 2-6-1 Texas team that lost to #1 Minnesota 47-19. Our claim is pretty weak.
The 1935 team lost to a middle of the pack SWC team in Rice (8-3) while Minnesota went undefeated in the more respected Big 10. I don't even think we have a claim that year.
The 1935 team lost to a middle of the pack SWC team in Rice (8-3) while Minnesota went undefeated in the more respected Big 10. I don't even think we have a claim that year.
This post was edited on 12/11/12 at 11:21 am
Posted on 12/11/12 at 11:23 am to RedStar
Didn't aTm just put up a flag for a National Championship from like 40 years ago?
I'm pretty sure it was rewarded to them in 2012 kind of all of a sudden. They now claim it. Nobody gives a shite though.
I'm pretty sure it was rewarded to them in 2012 kind of all of a sudden. They now claim it. Nobody gives a shite though.
Posted on 12/11/12 at 11:36 am to RedStar
I believe we should claim it. Its not like some years where 6 teams won a 'national title'. I do not think it is Bama like at all. I do not think just because it is over 100 years old, it should be deemed irrelevant. Its part of our history.
Posted on 12/11/12 at 11:39 am to RedStar
Dude ever heard of a guy named Jim Thorpe?
Posted on 12/11/12 at 11:46 am to LSU=Champions
quote:
I couldn't give a shite less about a NC nearly in the 1800s.
I agree. Kind of like how silent films from the early 20th Century aren't real films.
Posted on 12/11/12 at 11:46 am to Baloo
35 and 36 have no claim. LSU would never claim those anyways because we lost out bowl games. Which of course doesn't matter but that's their thinking.
1908 is legit. Michigan claims their NCF title.. Or titles.
LSU has a bunch.. 7 or 8 national titles through various organizations. 08, 58, 03, and 07 are the only legitimate ones.
1908 is legit. Michigan claims their NCF title.. Or titles.
LSU has a bunch.. 7 or 8 national titles through various organizations. 08, 58, 03, and 07 are the only legitimate ones.
Posted on 12/11/12 at 11:52 am to RedStar
quote:
1908 National Champions
There was no national championship in 1908. There are two reasons why people claim "NCs" from back then, and both reasons are stupid.
1) Some newspaper proclaimed your team champs. This especially happened if you won the Rose Bowl (once that game existed). The problem is that there were multiple newspapers proclaiming multiple champs just about every year.
2) Some computer geek invented an program to retroactively rank the teams. This is the lamer of the two reasons to claim an NC before 1936.
quote:
Carlisle Indian School
Was where Jim Thorpe played. Pennsylvania was the center of football back then. History, its fun.
This post was edited on 12/11/12 at 11:57 am
Posted on 12/11/12 at 11:54 am to RedStar
quote:
National Championship Foundation saw fit to award the 1908 National Title to LSU
Retroactively! There was no national championship!
Posted on 12/11/12 at 11:55 am to RedStar
quote:
1908 is a legitimate National Championship by the standards of the time.
Here's the catch. THERE WERE NO STANDARDS AT THE TIME.
Posted on 12/11/12 at 12:29 pm to Baloo
quote:As far as I know, without looking it up, an actual credible poll awarded us the MNC that year. And it is one that many other schools recognize and claim MNCs under. 1908 is the same. Why shouldn't we?
The 1936 team tied a 2-6-1 Texas team that lost to #1 Minnesota 47-19. Our claim is pretty weak.
Posted on 12/11/12 at 12:47 pm to TxTiger82
quote:
Here's the catch. THERE WERE NO STANDARDS AT THE TIME.
quote:
Retroactively! There was no national championship!
So we're supposed to just pretend that those games and seasons didn't exist?
Posted on 12/11/12 at 12:48 pm to RedStar
quote:
Sure it's a split title, but so is 2003
Actually 1958 was a split title, too, if you view the UPI (Iowa) as a legitimate poll, which is was in that era.
Posted on 12/11/12 at 12:51 pm to kjacksonp
quote:
Actually 1958 was a split title, too, if you view the UPI (Iowa) as a legitimate poll, which is was in that era.
Undefeated LSU won the UPI and every other poll that ranked teams save one. Iowa at 8-1-1 was ranked number one by Football Writers Association of America. Not really legitimate, in my book at least.
Posted on 12/11/12 at 12:55 pm to alajones
1936 is the first year of the AP title. Minnesota won it. Sagarin gives us the title, but I'm not comfortable claiming that as a title.
What's different about 1908 is that the National Championship Foundation awarded that title. The two major selectors of national titles prior to 1936 are the NCF and the Helms Foundation. Those are the legitimate institutions and I've got no problem with claiming a national title from an independent body that has been recognized by the major sports aggregation website (CFB Data Warehouse and sports-reference) as the "legitimate" national title awarding body. Post-1936, we should use the AP and then later the Coaches Poll as well.
What's different about 1908 is that the National Championship Foundation awarded that title. The two major selectors of national titles prior to 1936 are the NCF and the Helms Foundation. Those are the legitimate institutions and I've got no problem with claiming a national title from an independent body that has been recognized by the major sports aggregation website (CFB Data Warehouse and sports-reference) as the "legitimate" national title awarding body. Post-1936, we should use the AP and then later the Coaches Poll as well.
Posted on 12/11/12 at 12:58 pm to Y.A. Tittle
You are correct. My bad. It was the FWAA.
Posted on 12/11/12 at 12:59 pm to RedStar
I wondered that myself. maybe because it was more like Rugby and we only recognize Modern era football titles 
but 442-11 is bad arse X's and O's for damn sure.
Bamas 1st was in 1925...still googling it myself
good read on early collegiate football
but 442-11 is bad arse X's and O's for damn sure. Bamas 1st was in 1925...still googling it myself
good read on early collegiate football
This post was edited on 12/11/12 at 1:07 pm
Posted on 12/11/12 at 12:59 pm to Baloo
quote:I am as long as other teams are doing it.
but I'm not comfortable claiming that as a title.
Posted on 12/11/12 at 1:04 pm to alajones
I don't know of anyone who claims as Sagarin Rating title as a legit title. I'm not saying no one does, but I can't think of anyone who does.
Posted on 12/11/12 at 1:07 pm to Baloo
With the amount of debate here it is pretty easy to see why you may not want to claim those titles. The basis for said claim is a shaky. I'm fine not being like Bama and claiming all those titles plus Lance Armstrong's titles as well as every Yankee World Series title.
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News