re: Pathetic that we have a bunch of grown adults still in denial about 2003 split title

quote:

---

the NCAA has never sanctioned a football championship at the FBS level. the Pac-10 and USC by proxy signed up for the BCS as the official national championship.

---

quote:

---

You are contradicting yourself here. You were correct in your first sentence, meaning there was no “official” national championship.

---

It’s not a contradiction at all. The NCAA didn’t endorse the BCS, the conferences did. There were 62 schools who signed onto the original BCS agreement in 1998 - USC and LSU were both part of that group. It was later expanded to include all of D-1A (now FBS).

The universities agreed “this is how we are going to determine our champion.” The AP can give a trophy to whomever they want, it doesn’t change the fact that LSU was the champion under the system that both LSU and USC agreed to utilize.

In fact, the AP could still choose to name a different champion than the CFP. If, for example, a big media push led the AP to award their trophy to the team that finished #5 in the final CFP rankings, that school could certainly declare themselves “national champions.” But it doesn’t mean anyone would have to take them seriously.

USC’s 2003 claim is functionally no more valid than UCF’s 2017 claim. Both are listed in the NCAA record book. Neither was earned under the system that the schools actually agreed to use to determine the national champion.

It’s pathetic that you would even think this, let alone type it out and publish it for the world to see.

quote:

---

The universities agreed “this is how we are going to determine our champion.” The AP can give a trophy to whomever they want, it doesn’t change the fact that LSU was the champion under the system that both LSU and USC agreed to utilize.

---

Please link to the signed contract with the wording you put in quotes or even wording that means effectively the same thing. The conferences agreed to a bowl system with specific payouts, bowl tie-ins, and selection criteria. It was a last ditch effort by the bowls to prevent a true playoff system from being implemented. It was not functionally different from the Bowl Alliance and Bowl Coalition except it brought the Big 10, PAC-10 and Rose Bowl into the fold. They still relied on the poll system for legitimacy as evidenced by their agreement with the Coaches’ Poll to crown the winner of their game as their champion and present their trophy. If the polls were rendered irrelevant as so many of you are claiming, why did they need the Coaches’ Poll for validation?

quote:

---

But it doesn’t mean anyone would have to take them seriously.

---

You’re correct about that. No one had to take the BCS seriously either. That’s my point. The system still relied upon public perception for legitimacy. Where you are wrong is in not acknowledging that most people DO take USC’s AP title in 2003 seriously whether you think they should or not. The system was too narrow and flaw to avoid the perception by many that USC had a legitimate case and that the title had not been settled on the field as a result.

quote:

---

USC’s 2003 claim is functionally no more valid than UCF’s 2017 claim. Both are listed in the NCAA record book.

---

Functionally no national championship claims are any more valid than another lacking an official NCAA sanctioned championship. All are entirely dependent on the degree to which public perception views them as legitimate. The AP poll has been accepted as legitimate since its inception, including during the BCS era. If they were to deviate from the CFP, they would no longer be viewed as legitimate since the system is now robust enough that the vast majority consider that the title has been settled on the field. That wasn’t the case in 2003. UCF’s claim comes from a source never considered legitimate by the majority of the public and during the CFP era. That makes any such claim a non-starter when it comes to broad public acceptance.

get so worked up


the hell you talking about.

quote:

---

We just had threads with large numbers of posters claiming that LSU was the national champion in 2003.

---

Yea. The audacity of them to claim that after they won the actual national championship game.

quote:

---

It is 100% false

---

THIS is 100% false

One team played in an actual national championship game, one did not.

I guess you think bama's 1941 natty is legit too.

quote:

---

The AP poll has been accepted as legitimate since its inception, including during the BCS era.

---

Hardly. Nothing legitimate about switching up how you chose from year to year to manipulate things the way you want them.

In 1964, Alabama won both the AP and Coaches Polls, only because both were taken prior to the bowls. Bama lost to Texas in the Orange Bowl. The Football Writers, who waited until after the bowls, chose Arkansas, the only undefeated team, as national champions. Alabama finishes the season with a bowl loss.

If you agree with the reasoning behind awarding Bama the title in 1965, Arkansas, as best team after the bowls, gets the national title in 1964.

If you stick to the AP and Coaches Poll results whenever they were taken, Alabama does not get the title in 1965. Michigan State is national champion.

So which is it??

The simple fact is that one of the 2 teams claiming the 03 title ACTUALLY played in a NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP game and one didnt.

quote:

---

2003 co-national championship

---

Didn't happen

Soooo…..if Michigan wins that game ranked #4 would they have been the AP national champions? Nope

The national champions actually played in a national championship game that year. The national champion is LSU. Sorry if that upsets you

quote:

---

In the link above is the AP national championship trophy awarded to Southern California in 2003.

---

Yeah they look thrilled to be holding that chicken shite trophy. LMAO

Downvoted