Bama Denied MNC in 1966???????

[DKW 86 7,419]

I thought only was irrelevent when it came to playing for the MNC? Something tells me there is a load of turds somewhere about to implode if they read a book about how they were screwed out of the 1966 MNC bid by the press. Afterall, we were told over and over that "That would never happen to Bama!"

[Captain Liger 0]

there is a load of turds somewhere about to implode if they read a book about how they were screwed

David, you're assuming turds know how to read. What have I told you about assuming??

[WinCrimson 61]

I don't get whats so funny about it. We shelled 31-0 that year.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

I don't get whats so funny about it. We shelled 31-0 that year.

Then you need remedial reading help. Reread what David said. The point is that bammers everywhere were droning on and on about how Auburn was denied a shot at the title in 2004 because they're Auburn and Alabama would never get dissed like that because of their "tradishun." But it not only could happen, it did.

And on top of that, had bammer's offense not sucked last year and they had somehow managed to go undefeated...they'd have been sitting in 3rd going into the bowls just like us in 2004. Ain't no way bammer would have jumped USC or Texas.

[DKW 86 7,419]

I don't get whats so funny about it. We shelled 31-0 that year.

Then you need remedial reading help. Reread what David said. The point is that bammers everywhere were droning on and on about how Auburn was denied a shot at the title in 2004 because they're Auburn and Alabama would never get dissed like that because of their "tradishun." But it not only could happen, it did.

And on top of that, had bammer's offense not sucked last year and they had somehow managed to go undefeated...they'd have been sitting in 3rd going into the bowls just like us in 2004. Ain't no way bammer would have jumped USC or Texas.

What Titan said.

[UA-CT 1]

To understand why Alabama was denied the NC that year, you would have to understand what was going on at that time. Racial segregation, practiced in the south, kept Alabama from a Title in 1966. It was INDIFFERENCE that kept Auburn from a NC in 2004.

[sogaaufan 27]

To understand why Alabama was denied the NC that year, you would have to understand what was going on at that time. Racial segregation, practiced in the south, kept Alabama from a Title in 1966. It was INDIFFERENCE that kept Auburn from a NC in 2004.

You have got to be kidding me. You are going to blame it on civil rights? I understand what was going on then, but that is still a stretch even for uaters.

It wasn't INDIFFERENCE that kept AU from the NC in 2004, it was a broken system that didn't allow but two teams the opportunity to play for it. Unlike years past when "if a laundromat wanted give us a championship, we'll take it."

Got 12, what a joke.

[UA-CT 1]

To understand why Alabama was denied the NC that year, you would have to understand what was going on at that time. Racial segregation, practiced in the south, kept Alabama from a Title in 1966. It was INDIFFERENCE that kept Auburn from a NC in 2004.

You have got to be kidding me. You are going to blame it on civil rights? I understand what was going on then, but that is still a stretch even for uaters.

It wasn't INDIFFERENCE that kept AU from the NC in 2004, it was a broken system that didn't allow but two teams the opportunity to play for it. Unlike years past when "if a laundromat wanted give us a championship, we'll take it."

Got 12, what a joke.

Maybe it's you that needs to read the book...

[DKW 86 7,419]

So why didnt racism stop you from claiming a MNC before then? That has to be the lamest thing I have EVER and I do mean EVER heard.

[MDM4AU 332]

To understand why Alabama was denied the NC that year, you would have to understand what was going on at that time. Racial segregation, practiced in the south, kept Alabama from a Title in 1966.

WOW! What a load of bovine grain byproduct that is!

[UA-CT 1]

To understand why Alabama was denied the NC that year, you would have to understand what was going on at that time. Racial segregation, practiced in the south, kept Alabama from a Title in 1966.

WOW! What a load of bovine grain byproduct that is!

Like I said guy read a book or use Google any moran can do that.

[UA-CT 1]

So why didnt racism stop you from claiming a MNC before then? That has to be the lamest thing I have EVER and I do mean EVER heard.

George Wallace wasn't on the steps of the University in 64 or 65. Alabama had alot of bad publicity in 1966.

[MDM4AU 332]

To understand why Alabama was denied the NC that year, you would have to understand what was going on at that time. Racial segregation, practiced in the south, kept Alabama from a Title in 1966.

WOW! What a load of bovine grain byproduct that is!

Like I said guy read a book or use Google any moran can do that.

It takes a MORON to misspell MORON. Pick up a 3rd grade spelling book genius instead of "Rammer Jammer" or "The Bahr."

[UA-CT 1]

To understand why Alabama was denied the NC that year, you would have to understand what was going on at that time. Racial segregation, practiced in the south, kept Alabama from a Title in 1966.

WOW! What a load of bovine grain byproduct that is!

Like I said guy read a book or use Google any moran can do that.

It takes a MORON to misspell MORON. Pick up a 3rd grade spelling book genius instead of "Rammer Jammer" or "The Bahr."

I haven't read Rammer Jammer, and I'll bet you didn't use Google. Reguardless of what you think, as a southerner you are viewed differently around the rest of the country. The fact that I misspelled a word is irrelevant. It does however, prove to me that you probably don't have much of an argument or are too young to argue constructively. You did however, prove that I misspelled moron.....Nice going

[MDM4AU 332]

To understand why Alabama was denied the NC that year, you would have to understand what was going on at that time. Racial segregation, practiced in the south, kept Alabama from a Title in 1966.

WOW! What a load of bovine grain byproduct that is!

Like I said guy read a book or use Google any moran can do that.

It takes a MORON to misspell MORON. Pick up a 3rd grade spelling book genius instead of "Rammer Jammer" or "The Bahr."

I haven't read Rammer Jammer, and I'll bet you didn't use Google. Reguardless of what you think, as a southerner you are viewed differently around the rest of the country. The fact that I misspelled a word is irrelevant. It does however, prove to me that you probably don't have much of an argument or are too young to argue constructively. You did however, prove that I misspelled moron.....Nice going

No one is arguing with you. My opinion is your notion is full of crap.

You deserve to have your misspelled words pointed out when you talk smack in the woodshed. So go be condescending to your sister or someone who actually entertains the thought that you are somewhat credible because you read an article on the internet that backs up your conspiracy theory.

Why did racism not play a factor in any of the other 472 MNCs that UAT claims? It sure didn't seem to hurt the Tide in 1978(?) when USC beat the tide on the field. Racism has been an issue in this country for longer than football has been a game especially in the South. UAT claims 4 or 5 in the 60's alone. What is so special about '66 that wouldn't work for '65 or '64? UAT shares '64 with Arkansas..another Southern team.

Show me a credible source that backs up your notion and I will consider your position. Until then, get better smack or take your ball and go home!

[UA-CT 1]

To understand why Alabama was denied the NC that year, you would have to understand what was going on at that time. Racial segregation, practiced in the south, kept Alabama from a Title in 1966.

WOW! What a load of bovine grain byproduct that is!

Like I said guy read a book or use Google any moran can do that.

It takes a MORON to misspell MORON. Pick up a 3rd grade spelling book genius instead of "Rammer Jammer" or "The Bahr."

I haven't read Rammer Jammer, and I'll bet you didn't use Google. Reguardless of what you think, as a southerner you are viewed differently around the rest of the country. The fact that I misspelled a word is irrelevant. It does however, prove to me that you probably don't have much of an argument or are too young to argue constructively. You did however, prove that I misspelled moron.....Nice going

No one is arguing with you. My opinion is your notion is full of crap.

You deserve to have your misspelled words pointed out when you talk smack in the woodshed. So go be condescending to your sister or someone who actually entertains the thought that you are somewhat credible because you read an article on the internet that backs up your conspiracy theory.

Why did racism not play a factor in any of the other 472 MNCs that UAT claims? It sure didn't seem to hurt the Tide in 1978(?) when USC beat the tide on the field. Racism has been an issue in this country for longer than football has been a game especially in the South. UAT claims 4 or 5 in the 60's alone. What is so special about '66 that wouldn't work for '65 or '64? UAT shares '64 with Arkansas..another Southern team.

Show me a credible source that backs up your notion and I will consider your position. Until then, get better smack or take your ball and go home!

Do your own research. The book in question is about the 1966 team that went undefeated and untied getting snubbed because of politics. It's about George Wallace's segregation polices in 1966, his infamous stand on the University steps that year and how it ultimately cost the 1966 team a national championship. Whether you find it credible or not I could care less, the fact is that's what the book is about. The year in question is 1966, the year that segregation in the south was at it's peak or more publicised. The years before and after are irrelevant.

[GalensGhost 0]

To understand why Alabama was denied the NC that year, you would have to understand what was going on at that time. Racial segregation, practiced in the south, kept Alabama from a Title in 1966.

WOW! What a load of bovine grain byproduct that is!

Like I said guy read a book or use Google any moran can do that.

It takes a MORON to misspell MORON. Pick up a 3rd grade spelling book genius instead of "Rammer Jammer" or "The Bahr."

I haven't read Rammer Jammer, and I'll bet you didn't use Google. Reguardless of what you think, as a southerner you are viewed differently around the rest of the country. The fact that I misspelled a word is irrelevant. It does however, prove to me that you probably don't have much of an argument or are too young to argue constructively. You did however, prove that I misspelled moron.....Nice going

No one is arguing with you. My opinion is your notion is full of crap.

You deserve to have your misspelled words pointed out when you talk smack in the woodshed. So go be condescending to your sister or someone who actually entertains the thought that you are somewhat credible because you read an article on the internet that backs up your conspiracy theory.

Why did racism not play a factor in any of the other 472 MNCs that UAT claims? It sure didn't seem to hurt the Tide in 1978(?) when USC beat the tide on the field. Racism has been an issue in this country for longer than football has been a game especially in the South. UAT claims 4 or 5 in the 60's alone. What is so special about '66 that wouldn't work for '65 or '64? UAT shares '64 with Arkansas..another Southern team.

Show me a credible source that backs up your notion and I will consider your position. Until then, get better smack or take your ball and go home!

Do your own research. The book in question is about the 1966 team that went undefeated and untied getting snubbed because of politics. It's about George Wallace's segregation polices in 1966, his infamous stand on the University steps that year and how it ultimately cost the 1966 team a national championship. Whether you find it credible or not I could care less, the fact is that's what the book is about. The year in question is 1966, the year that segregation in the south was at it's peak or more publicised. The years before and after are irrelevant.

No, the years before and after are germane to this argument. This is the most absurd thing I've ever heard of.

If the guy wants to write a book, he should have talked to me first. I've got a good idea for him. Alabama's popularity (what there was of it) stems DIRECTLY from the civil rights movement and the fact that its white-bread football success coincided with the civil rights movement. It's why when you see a mullet-wearing semi-literate greaseball in this state, more than likely he's a bama fan. He's a bama fan even though he has no personal affiliation or connection with the school because his grandfather was a bama fan and his dad was a bama fan . He's a bama fan because bama's football success during that era validated grandpa's segregationist way of thinking. Bama's football success actually made it much more difficult to integrate the south. That's the book I want to write.

[UA-CT 1]

To understand why Alabama was denied the NC that year, you would have to understand what was going on at that time. Racial segregation, practiced in the south, kept Alabama from a Title in 1966.

WOW! What a load of bovine grain byproduct that is!

Like I said guy read a book or use Google any moran can do that.

It takes a MORON to misspell MORON. Pick up a 3rd grade spelling book genius instead of "Rammer Jammer" or "The Bahr."

I haven't read Rammer Jammer, and I'll bet you didn't use Google. Reguardless of what you think, as a southerner you are viewed differently around the rest of the country. The fact that I misspelled a word is irrelevant. It does however, prove to me that you probably don't have much of an argument or are too young to argue constructively. You did however, prove that I misspelled moron.....Nice going

No one is arguing with you. My opinion is your notion is full of crap.

You deserve to have your misspelled words pointed out when you talk smack in the woodshed. So go be condescending to your sister or someone who actually entertains the thought that you are somewhat credible because you read an article on the internet that backs up your conspiracy theory.

Why did racism not play a factor in any of the other 472 MNCs that UAT claims? It sure didn't seem to hurt the Tide in 1978(?) when USC beat the tide on the field. Racism has been an issue in this country for longer than football has been a game especially in the South. UAT claims 4 or 5 in the 60's alone. What is so special about '66 that wouldn't work for '65 or '64? UAT shares '64 with Arkansas..another Southern team.

Show me a credible source that backs up your notion and I will consider your position. Until then, get better smack or take your ball and go home!

Do your own research. The book in question is about the 1966 team that went undefeated and untied getting snubbed because of politics. It's about George Wallace's segregation polices in 1966, his infamous stand on the University steps that year and how it ultimately cost the 1966 team a national championship. Whether you find it credible or not I could care less, the fact is that's what the book is about. The year in question is 1966, the year that segregation in the south was at it's peak or more publicised. The years before and after are irrelevant.

No, the years before and after are germane to this argument. This is the most absurd thing I've ever heard of.

If the guy wants to write a book, he should have talked to me first. I've got a good idea for him. Alabama's popularity (what there was of it) stems DIRECTLY from the civil rights movement and the fact that its white-bread football success coincided with the civil rights movement. It's why when you see a mullet-wearing semi-literate greaseball in this state, more than likely he's a bama fan. He's a bama fan even though he has no personal affiliation or connection with the school because his grandfather was a bama fan and his dad was a bama fan . He's a bama fan because bama's football success during that era validated grandpa's segregationist way of thinking. Bama's football success actually made it much more difficult to integrate the south. That's the book I want to write.

Galen, are you an Auburn grad? Are you suggesting that Bama football kept the south segregated?

[DKW 86 7,419]

To understand why Alabama was denied the NC that year, you would have to understand what was going on at that time. Racial segregation, practiced in the south, kept Alabama from a Title in 1966. It was INDIFFERENCE that kept Auburn from a NC in 2004.

You have got to be kidding me. You are going to blame it on civil rights? I understand what was going on then, but that is still a stretch even for uaters.

It wasn't INDIFFERENCE that kept AU from the NC in 2004, it was a broken system that didn't allow but two teams the opportunity to play for it. Unlike years past when "if a laundromat wanted give us a championship, we'll take it."

Got 12, what a joke.

Maybe it's you that needs to read the book...

If Dunnavant is attributing the 1966 snub to reverse racism, I would hate to meet anyone that stupid to believe one freaking word written in the book.

Look guys, there are 7-8 new books out right now, RIGHT NOW on Bama/Bear. They are all basically rewriting the same old stories that were written the last 25-30 years. How many times can you rewrite the same old stories? Well what you can do is come up with some new OUTRAGEOUS slant. bama didnt get to play for the 1966 MNC maybe because everyone in 1966 just plain thought that ND and MSU were better teams. Use Occam's Razor guys. The simplest answer really ususally is the best answer. This one of thousands of conspiracy theories that Bama was the victim of reverse discrimination is just plain LOONEY TUNES. They had won MNCs before, so they claim. This outrageous hook is just plain TOTAL

Man, do you Turd folks have a randomizer program to manufacture these INCREDIBLY lame conspiracy theories over and over and over again? Do you just take random words now and then just fill in the blanks to manufacture the conspiracy theory du jour?

UA-CT, do you realize that probably 80% of your fan base will tell you that this snub CANNOT HAVE EVER HAPPENED TO BAMA? I bet that 80% will not even be able to bring themselves to admit that it actually did happen. Maybe you dont remember all the Turds that told us ad nauseum that the 2004 overlook for us would NEVER, and I mean NEVER, happen to Bama. I predict that you wont even be able to find this book in 3 years. It will be yard sale fodder by Christmas and on the .50 rack at the local library by spring.

[UA-CT 1]

To understand why Alabama was denied the NC that year, you would have to understand what was going on at that time. Racial segregation, practiced in the south, kept Alabama from a Title in 1966. It was INDIFFERENCE that kept Auburn from a NC in 2004.

You have got to be kidding me. You are going to blame it on civil rights? I understand what was going on then, but that is still a stretch even for uaters.

It wasn't INDIFFERENCE that kept AU from the NC in 2004, it was a broken system that didn't allow but two teams the opportunity to play for it. Unlike years past when "if a laundromat wanted give us a championship, we'll take it."

Got 12, what a joke.

Maybe it's you that needs to read the book...

Man, do you Turd folks have a randomizer program to manufacture these INCREDIBLY lame conspiracy theories over and over and over again? Do you just take random words now and then just fill in the blanks to manufacture the conspiracy theory du jour?

UA-CT, do you realize that probably 80% of your fan base will tell you that this snub CANNOT HAVE EVER HAPPENED TO BAMA? I bet that 80% will not even be able to bring themselves to admit that it actually did happen. Maybe you dont remember all the Turds that told us ad nauseum that the 2004 overlook for us would NEVER, and I mean NEVER, happen to Bama. I predict that you wont even be able to find this book in 3 years. It will be yard sale fodder by Christmas and on the .50 rack at the local library by spring.

I believe you. Especially if that 80% was taken from a bunch of highschool kids. Using lame @$$ made up percentages never validates an arguement ,but now I think I see why you started this thread to begin with. Auburn in 2004 did deserve to be in the National Championship game. Unfortuantely, there were two and even three other teams that deserved to be in that game as well. The BCS series is definately flawed but the point of the BCS was to have only 1 champion and everyone knew that coming in. The 1966 squad had no such guidelines or stipulations,and they were the only team that remained unbeaten and untied. They were defending national champions 2x. It makes absolutely no sense that they were not the 1st NCAA college football team to win three national titles back to back to back. This book IS OLD NEWS, and this is NOT a new idea. A southern team (particularly Alabama) was not going to be crowned national champions in 1966.

[Guest Tigrinum Major]

Then why were they in 1964 and 1965? Your premise is flawed by the years leading up to 1966.

[WarTiger 3,901]

Guys, this is a typical bammer argument, where they are crying over something from 40 years ago, and say something rediculous as racism played a role in them being denied the MNC. This is total BS and everyone knows it, even the bammers. If it were the case, they likely wouldn't have won the MNC's the years before. It just doesnt wash, any more than the retroactive MNC's that SPUAT lays claim too. Each notion is equally BOGUS.

Let's not forget that in their minds, UAT wasn't guilty of anything in 2002 either. Yet are still on probation for it....imagine that..

When are you guys going to learn. The bammers are full of excuses, and they are always going to say someone is out to get "almighty bama". Yet have no problem laying claim to titles that they NEVER won. .

To sum it up, bammer does nothing wrong(in their minds, of course) and everybody else is out to get them.

[GalensGhost 0]

Galen, are you an Auburn grad? Are you suggesting that Bama football kept the south segregated?

Unfortunately, I am not an AU grad. My degree is from another institution (and not a mental one).

I am not saying Bama football caused the South to be segregated, only that the convergence of the death of the Old South (white south), the civil rights movement and Alabama's football ascendency fostered a culture where people who might have had no interest in college football -- or college in general for that matter -- swore blind allegiance to Bryant and his Yankee-whupping Southern white boys.

Alabama's success was a stark contrast to the rest of their lives which were being beset from all sides by dramatic societal changes. Alabama's football teams gave disaffected white southernerers something to hold on to. It validated the values they held most dear -- that good ol' hard-drinkin' southern boys were inherently superior to those damm yankees that were meddling in the affairs down here. Bama's football success appealed to the Quixotic "never forget" post-reconstruction anger that still simmered underneath the surface. As hard as it is to believe, the state was really just two, two and a half generations removed from the Civil War. The great unwashed masses felt betrayed by the country, abandoned by the passions of the Civil War, devalued by the decline of the agricultural economy and confused by the societal changes that swirled around them. When Bryant with his larger than life personna started winning football games, they latched on to him like a messiah. In him and his team's success, they saw a validation of their own existence. A generation later, they still worship at his altar.

Did Alabama's football success segregate the south? Absolutely not. Did it entrench and empower the people who opposed the inevitable societal changes? Absolutely. Was any of that Bryant's fault? Nope. It was just the convergence of circumstances. Now there's a book for you.

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

To understand why Alabama was denied the NC that year, you would have to understand what was going on at that time. Racial segregation, practiced in the south, kept Alabama from a Title in 1966. It was INDIFFERENCE that kept Auburn from a NC in 2004.

So what your saying is that the title decsion was based off the media's perception of what was the popular choice and what wasn't? and things with the media and college football in that regards has changed how over the last 40 years?

I call BS on the segregation bit, and I know what was going on then cause my mother lived in Alabama at that time. Why wasn't the 65 denied for the same reason, mean police just beat, whipped, and tear gassed a bunch of people in Selma. Racial segregation went on prior to and after 1966.

[UA-CT 1]

Galen, are you an Auburn grad? Are you suggesting that Bama football kept the south segregated?

Unfortunately, I am not an AU grad. My degree is from another institution (and not a mental one).

I am not saying Bama football caused the South to be segregated, only that the convergence of the death of the Old South (white south), the civil rights movement and Alabama's football ascendency fostered a culture where people who might have had no interest in college football -- or college in general for that matter -- swore blind allegiance to Bryant and his Yankee-whupping Southern white boys.

Alabama's success was a stark contrast to the rest of their lives which were being beset from all sides by dramatic societal changes. Alabama's football teams gave disaffected white southernerers something to hold on to. It validated the values they held most dear -- that good ol' hard-drinkin' southern boys were inherently superior to those damm yankees that were meddling in the affairs down here. Bama's football success appealed to the Quixotic "never forget" post-reconstruction anger that still simmered underneath the surface. As hard as it is to believe, the state was really just two, two and a half generations removed from the Civil War. The great unwashed masses felt betrayed by the country, abandoned by the passions of the Civil War, devalued by the decline of the agricultural economy and confused by the societal changes that swirled around them. When Bryant with his larger than life personna started winning football games, they latched on to him like a messiah. In him and his team's success, they saw a validation of their own existence. A generation later, they still worship at his altar.

Did Alabama's football success segregate the south? Absolutely not. Did it entrench and empower the people who opposed the inevitable societal changes? Absolutely. Was any of that Bryant's fault? Nope. It was just the convergence of circumstances. Now there's a book for you.

What a bunch of rhetorical Neo-Nazi nonsense. Get a grip, everyone that supports the Crimson Tide is not a post Civil War, yankee hating racist. I think your childlike infatiation of Auburn and hate of Alabama has really clouded your perception of the University. BTW, Finding out that you did not even attend Auburn has made your comments seem that much more hypocritical. Good luck on your book.