Bama's 12 National Championships

[GalensGhost 0]

Alabama's claim of 12 national championships and it's insistence on clinging to that fraudulent number in the face of mountains of evidence to the contrary is a desperate and sad plea for attention and recognition.

Leave them alone and let their sad little mewlings fade into complete irrelevance -- just as Ole Miss has.

Did you know that Ole Miss has recently started claiming to have three NCs? Taking a page from the Bama book, they made up a number and now claim it as true when all who follow college football know that 0 + 0 does not equal 3.

Has there ever been anything as pitiful as these two dinosaurs -- one dying and one dead -- honking on and on about things that never really happened as if it will delay their demise?

[WarTiger 3,909]

Let's break down UAT's delusion on MNC's shall we....

If you read the NCAA records (online), you won't be left with a sense that Bama can legitimately claim 12 NCs.

Let's go down that road, and see what the fuss is about!

1925: There was no national champion (or championship) in 1925. Without exception, every poll mentioned in the NCAA record book was assigned retroactively no less than 1 year later, and as many as 55 years later. The two polling methods Bammer quotes are Helms (applied retroactively in 1941) and Football Annual/College Football Researchers Association (whose retroactive application of their method was no earlier than 1982, and is described in the NCAA Record Book as "conducted on a poll by Harry Carson Frye"). I just didn't get a good feeling about this, so I did a little more research.

What I found was that Dartmouth appears to have the only legitimate claim to the 1925 championship, as the method used (Dickinson) came into being prior to 1925, although it was not marketed to newspapers until 1926. Dickinson's method seems to be the first to employ strength-of-schedule and a trophy (the Rissman Trophy). There is a lengthy write-up about the Dickinson poll on the USC website (usctrojans.collegesports....aah.html); if you read it, it's pretty obvious that this was the prevailing method of the day.

Scratch the 1925 championship.

1926: According to Dickinson, Stanford is the National Champion. But - Alabama tied Stanford in its final game of the season (the Road Bowl), and both were otherwise undefeated. Was Dickinson applied after the head-to-head matchup? The answer is YES - check the Stanford website - they received the Rissman Trophy. If there's any doubt - Notre Dame (believe it or not) has/had permanent possession of the trophy; the Rissman Trophy may have an inscription indicating the 1926 National Champion. My educated guess is that it's got "Stanford" next to "1926", but if you want to be sure, call the Notre Dame Athletic Department; maybe they can tell you for sure. Without any better information....

Scratch the 1926 championship.

1930: Of all the polls mentioned in the NCAA records for 1930, only three were actually used in 1930: Dickinson, Boand, and Houlgate. All three selected Notre Dame.

Scratch the 1930 championship.

1934: Here's our first potential dilemma. Of the polls in use mentioned in the NCAA records, six are actually in existence in 1934, and they're evenly split between Minnesota and Bammer. The edge would seem to be in Minnesota's favor (Dickinson picked'em), but if we look further at the NCAA data, on p. 89, it only says Minnesota - who at least shared the 1935 National Championship, and won the 1936 National Championship outright.

Scratch the 1934 championship.UAT didn't win the SEC this year either. Tulane finsihed 8-0 while UAT finished 7-0.

1941: Woops.... it's Minnesota again. Of the seven polls in existence at the time, Minnesota comes out on top in six (including Dickinson, and the Associated Press). Bammer comes out on top in only one (existing) poll, and no retroactive polls. No question here...

Scratch the 1941 championship.

1961: No doubt here - it's Bammer's first National Championship.

1964: No cigar! Bammer was undefeated until it lost to #5 Texas (the unanimous 1963 National Champion) in the Orange Bowl. And if you can't beat #5, then you can't be #1.

Scratch the 1964 championship.

1965: Not much doubt here - Michigan State loses its bowl game, and Bammer moves up to #1 from #4. Bear gets National Championship #2.

1973: No cigar here! #1 ranked Bammer loses to #4 Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl 24-23. Notre Dame is the consensus National Champion; to say Bammer is better than Notre Dame in 1973 is beyond delusional. If you can't beat #4, then you can't be #1.

Scratch the 1973 championship.

1978: Looks like a winner... Bammer loses early in the season to USC, but not long after, USC loses to Arizona State. Both win their bowl games, and finish 10-1. Bammer wins the AP poll, USC the UPI poll. It's Bammer's third National Championship.

Benefit of the doubt, let them keep this one(even though they clearly don't deserve it)...

My take

Lost to USC head to head...Scratch the 1978 title. How can you claim an MNC after losing to the other team that has an equal record and won the head to head matchup?

1979: No question here... Bammer's 4th National Championship.

1992: No question here either - Bammer's 5th National Championship

So, UAT has FIVE MNC's(including 1978) not the overinflated 12 they claim in every conversation. While reality says they have FOUR when 1978 is removed.

[ROLL TIDE FOREVER AMEN 0]

Reply to post above.

The same way AU can claim 8, that’s how. In case, you are not old enough to remember. (That’s not a smart-ass comment) This was BEFORE the BCS. There was not a BCS back then. NC were awarded before, REPEAT BEFORE, the bowl games. Bowl games were scouting and free for all fun games. Sure, you wanted to win them, don’t get me wrong.

However, it was more about letting everybody play and the pomp and circumstance of the pageantry. It did not determine what had already been decided. They were extra add on's.

*Note: This reminds me of the 70's and early 80's arguments. "Hey, Bama (whoever) lost their bowl game, did you see that? They should not be ranked that high!" This is why the BCS was created.

Having said that, this is the nutshell of the Bama double standard, auburn can (can't) claim eight stuff.

For each and every contested (questionable)NC Bama is recognized by the NCAA for winning. We did not win another that we should have won. JUST LIKE AUBURN. Same rules, same guidelines. THERE are eight that AU could have, should have, and could claim whatever. Ok, fine that’s looks ok to me. What rules are we using to establish that? Auburn fan explains that here: (Me listening to Auburn fan explain one by one all eight NC that they could claim and the how and why behind it.)

OK, APPLYING THE SAME REASON YOU JUST GAVE ME TO BAMA. Bama could claim 20.

Therefore, we both have beef about the same thing, yet we are arguing amongst ourselves. But I guess that’s an Alabama birthright.

[WarTiger 3,909]

For each and every contested( questionable)NC Bama is recognized by the NCAA for winning

not true.. The NCAA doesn't recognize any national champions in college football.

[ROLL TIDE FOREVER AMEN 0]

For each and every contested( questionable)NC Bama is recognized by the NCAA for winning

not true.. The NCAA doesn't recognize any national champions in college football.

227084[/snapback]

Touche' my friend. You are correct. Polls I should have said.

[quietfan 233]

I guess it's that time of year...nothing to talk about until fall except to rehash the same ol' eternal but pointless debate over the past....

Want to start a pool on how long it takes before the oran...uh, er..."non-blue" jersey debate rises from the tomb?

As always, it's going to be a L-O-N-G spring/summer

[BamaGrad03 0]

pcola i dont understand why you constantly avoid my points and try to put words in my mouth.

I was merely stating that if you use the formula that allows Auburn for 7 (or 8)...you HAVE to use the same formula for alabama...which puts us near 20. I already said that I think Alabama should claim 10 not 12.

But for you to discredit our AP titles or Coaches Poll titles is LAUGHABLE. Auburn fans are the only ones who want to nitpick a team's AP titles.

Again...as previously stated...take away the NC talk. Take it all away. Regardless of how much Au fans try and try to marginalize alabama's tradition...please explain to me why EVERY OTHER group of schools fans always puts alabama in the top 5 programs...usually top 3?

Its funny that you dog bama for their sec championship where they went 7-0...yet your school is all about claiming "co division" championships.

I know you think UAT is vastly superior to Auburn (and every other school in th country) in all things, and the very mention of Auburn having eight MNC's is terribly difficult to swallow.

I never said I thought alabama was vastly superior to every other school in the country. As a matter of fact, when I went to california for the NCAAs...everytime i met a ucla fan or someone not from the south...i went on and on about both alabama AND auburn. Because I want Auburn to do well and represent my state.

See the difference between you and I...i dont harbor some deep rooted hatred for my rival school...I dont hate my rival more than i love my school...and I dont let that hate for my rival COMPLETELY turn me blind to facts and logic...You will never ever ever give alabama any credit. Must suck to have all that downright hatred for a bunch of 18 to 22 year olds...just because they decided to play in tuscaloosa instead of auburn.

[WarTiger 3,909]

See the difference between you and I...i dont harbor some deep rooted hatred for my rival school...I dont hate my rival more than i love my school...

I don't hate my rival more than I love my school, either.

and I dont let that hate for my rival COMPLETELY turn me blind to facts and logic...

Oh really?? You are as blind to any facts and logic that any of us present to you in regards to Auburns athletic accomplishments. Its extremely painful for you to admit that Auburn is even Equal to UAT at anything, much less better. Pot meet kettle..

I have repeatedly offered facts to back up my statements and views.

You will never ever ever give alabama any credit. Must suck to have all that downright hatred for a bunch of 18 to 22 year olds...just because they decided to play in tuscaloosa instead of auburn.

You are right, I will NEVER, EVER give UAT credit for ANYTHING. Why? Because your own fan base gives yourself all the credit you need, and a lot of it created in your own minds. Have to fuel that over-inflated ego. I have never expressed any hatred for any 18 to 22 year olds...Those are YOUR WORDS, not mine. What I hate is the UAT fan that refuses to take off the crimson glasses and see the real world. I live in Pensacola, and there are by far more UAT and Auburn fans here than any other school. I worked with them, meet them on the street..etc. I have been the target of rude, asinine comments from UAT fans here. The UAT fans here are the most pompous, obnoxious and arrogant fan base of anything here. Even the gator fans aren't as bad as UAT fans. I hate the UAT fan that thinks they are the be-all end-all of the college football world. For that reason, I HATE UAT. A UAT fan isn't capapble of having a football conversation with ANYBODY without feeding their own ego by bringing up these 12 mythical national championship. Haven't found one yet. Has nothing to do with 18-22 year old kids. I LOVE AUBURN FIRST AND FOREMOST. IF you saw my house, you would know that.

It has been my experience (note that) that I have NEVER heard ANY UAT fan say ANYTHING POSITIVE ABOUT AUBURN...So forgive me if I simply don't believe your statement about your trip to Cali.

All that being said, I'm done with this conversation. This is my last visit to this thread. Alabama had their run, but the 70's are over. We are in 2006 now, join us, won't you? AUBURN now controls the state and will for a very long time....GET USED TO IT.

[BamaGrad03 0]

It has been my experience (note that) that I have NEVER heard ANY UAT fan say ANYTHING POSITIVE ABOUT AUBURN...So forgive me if I simply don't believe your statement about your trip to Cali.

Wow you must have missed a LOOOOOT of my posts over here.

[ECEstudentUA 9]

I guess it's that time of year...nothing to talk about until fall except to rehash the same ol' eternal but pointless debate over the past....

Want to start a pool on how long it takes before the oran...uh, er..."non-blue" jersey debate rises from the tomb?

As always, it's going to be a L-O-N-G spring/summer 

227094[/snapback]

You are so right, this fight could go on for days and days. But thank god football season starts and everyone forgets about all this crazy talk. Neither side is going to "win" this fight, let it be.

[freebody 0]

I live in Pensacola, and there are by far more UAT and Auburn fans here than any other school.  ...  The UAT fans here are the most pompous, obnoxious and arrogant fan base of anything here.

227111[/snapback]

I hear there are a lot of folks down in Pensacola that pull for bama, particularly among the entertainment industry. I understand some of those dancers are pretty obnoxious about it, and like to yell "Roh Ty" while performing......

[quietfan 233]

I live in Pensacola, and there are by far more UAT and Auburn fans here than any other school.  ...  The UAT fans here are the most pompous, obnoxious and arrogant fan base of anything here.

227111[/snapback]

I hear there are a lot of folks down in Pensacola that pull for bama, particularly among the entertainment industry. I understand some of those dancers are pretty obnoxious about it, and like to yell "Roh Ty" while performing......

227188[/snapback]

...That's probably Phillip Fulmer's fault, too.

[Nay4AU 2]

To me some of bammers MNCs are questionable such as 1941 but it doesn’t really bother me that they claim them. What bothers me is when the claim WE have 12 and Auburn has ½.

when bryant was coaching bowls were completely different then they are now. For a long stretch back then...bowls were viewed as a reward not something you HAD to win. So we played a lot of players who didnt play much during the year or deserved the reward. That also has a lot to do with why we were rewarded NCs before a bowl loss.

NC were awarded before, REPEAT BEFORE, the bowl games. Bowl games were scouting and free for all fun games. Sure, you wanted to win them, don’t get me wrong.

However, it was more about letting everybody play and the pomp and circumstance of the pageantry. It did not determine what had already been decided. They were extra add on's.

I understand that college football was different in those days. MNCs were awarded before the bowl games. However do you guys have any facts to back up your claims that they were just exhibition games were everyone was given an opportunity to play? I’ve never heard this before. I’m not saying you guys don’t know what you are talking about but I just can’t see someone such as the Bear not trying to everything possible to win a football game.

[jumbo 0]

We are in 2006 now, join us, won't you? AUBURN now controls the state and will for a very long time....GET USED TO IT.

aupcolatiger thanks so much I can not agree more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[BamaGrad03 0]

We are in 2006 now, join us, won't you? AUBURN now controls the state and will for a very long time....GET USED TO IT.

aupcolatiger thanks so much I can not agree more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

227219[/snapback]

Interesting since I didnt start the post.

[aumoore 0]

All the lip bumping in the world will not change history or how it is interpreted. I for one prefer to look toward the future.

Let Bama fans have their past while we prepare for our future.

[AWK 0]

I really dont care about this, you cant change the past by arguing about it now. Everyone should be arguing about the 2006 season, and how Hawaii is gonna go 12 - 0

[autigeremt 6,646]

I'm putting 10,000.00 on Temple for the National Title.

[AWK 0]

I'm putting 10,000.00 on Temple for the National Title. 

227398[/snapback]

And im investing 10,000.00 on whatever tigeremt is taking

[WREGL3 0]

Reply to post above.

The same way AU can claim 8, that’s how.

We are not claiming 8 you (less than complimentary name - mod note: watch yoself), someone was trying to make a point which you are too thick to get. Using Bammers methods we could claim 8 but we don't because we aren't stupid and you bummers are. YOU GET IT NOW?

War Damn Eagle!!

[SKCAUB 0]

Boys, Boys...no name calling, please. We are THE civilized Board. And if we run the Bamars off it just won't be as much fun.....

The fact is, Bamar claims a few that are questionable...and they got jobbed a few times (1966 in particular), just as we were (1983).... Let it be.

[ECEstudentUA 9]

I'm putting 10,000.00 on Temple for the National Title. 

227398[/snapback]

And im investing 10,000.00 on whatever tigeremt is taking

227410[/snapback]

Make that two of us.

[ROLL TIDE FOREVER AMEN 0]

Reply to post above.

The same way AU can claim 8, that’s how.

227448[/snapback]

We are not claiming 8 you (less than complimentary name - mod note: watch yoself), someone was trying to make a point which you are too thick to get. Using Bammers methods we could claim 8 but we don't because we aren't stupid and you bummers are. YOU GET IT NOW?

War Damn Eagle!!

227448[/snapback]

No kidding there Einstien, lay off the Jack Daniel's a little before spouting off your trash mouth next time.

I didn't say you were, I said you could which is synonymous with can in the inferred sense. Read the posts. Thank goodness you are not the majority representation on this board. Such a credit. :huh:

[Guest Tigrinum Major]

Let me add my two cents: Bama has a long and rich history that includes many championships. Actual number, I am not here to debate. For every 1941, there is a 1966, which is analogous to both our 1983 and our 2004 seasons.

The less we focus on their past accomplishments, the more you will be able to enjoy our present and future success. They have much to be proud of, as Bama fans. We, as Auburn fans, also have many accomplishments to be proud of, including and not limited to, football championships.

Now everyone go have a War Eagle day.

By the way, there are better ways to counter a post than call people names and imply that they might be "thick". Those types of comments usually lead to more namecalling and threadlocking. Keep the insults clever and humurous and we will all get along better.

Ask RTFA, many of my posts on his home site go unanswered or either we all end up having a good laugh. Rarely, do they include namecalling. True?

[Bama Bo 0]

Ask RTFA, many of my posts on his home site go unanswered or either we all end up having a good laugh.  Rarely, do they include namecalling.    True?

227626[/snapback]

I'm not RTFA, but TM is correct. We appreciate our barner members over there, as I at least think most of you guys appreciate us bammers over here.

BTW, I'm not getting involve in the NC argument. I'm not gonna convince any of you that I'm right, and you're not gonna convince me I'm wrong. So, it's pointless for me to get involved.