Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
Pat Dye Field => War Damn Eagle => Topic started by: Ogre on January 06, 2010, 09:06:37 AM
-
Read and enjoy.
Got 12? Here's how Alabama bumped up its claim to a dozen national titles
By Jon Solomon -- The Birmingham News
January 06, 2010, 5:30AM
(http://media.al.com/birmingham-news-stories/photo/atcheson-0106jpg-8af78620a48bca43_large.jpg)
Former Alabama sports information director Wayne Atcheson, shown here in 2000 with one of the books on the Crimson Tide that he wrote, started the claim of 12 national championships for Alabama. (The Birmingham News)
Wayne Atcheson, the son of a small-town preacher, loves history and his Alabama football. These days, he enjoys serving as director of the Billy Graham Library in Charlotte.
What you might not know about Atcheson is his contribution to Alabama football history.
He is the reason Alabama's media guide claims 12 national titles. He is the reason Alabama fans wear "got twelve?" T-shirts. He is the reason some fans can already start marketing bumper stickers for a 13th national championship, a presumptive move that isn't the first presumptive move in the university's national title count.
Because before Alabama got 12, it only got six.
Atcheson is the former Alabama sports information director who added five pre-Bear Bryant national titles to the team's media guide in the 1980s. Those changes still resonate today with one burning question: Just how many national championships does Alabama have, anyway?
"They can rightfully claim 12," Atcheson said, although others disagree.
The NCAA record book recognizes Alabama with seven "consensus" national championships -- the six by Bryant and 1992. According to this list, "consensus" means a championship bestowed since 1950 by any, but not necessarily all, of the following: the Associated Press, United Press International, Football Writers Association of America, National Football Foundation/College Football Hall of Fame, USA Today/CNN or USA Today/ESPN.
On a separate list in the record book, the NCAA compares how "national poll champions" have fared in bowl games since 1900. That list gives Alabama nine national titles, including 1925 and 1926 but leaving off 1930, '34 and '41.
College Football Data Warehouse, an online history of the sport, recognizes Alabama with 11 -- all except the most controversial one, in 1941. The SEC follows the NCAA approach by starting its count at 1950 and recognizes Alabama with seven.
So how did an SID from the Ray Perkins era -- a period with zero SEC titles, much less any national titles -- shape such a core belief that many Alabama supporters today accept as gospel?
"I've talked to university officials about it. You're about the first reporter to ever ask me about it," said Atcheson, Alabama's SID from 1983 to '87 and later associate director of the Tide Pride donor program."I want to say the right thing here. I made the change because Coach Bryant had these 25 years and six national championships and they were emphasized so much. It was on all the stationery. And when I got there, it was a matter of seeing there were five others (before Bryant) and we should put them all together. It was as simple as that."
Atcheson said that in the 1983 media guide, he added the five pre-Bryant national titles now listed -- 1925, 1926, 1930, 1934 and 1941. Taylor Watson, curator at the Bryant Museum in Tuscaloosa, said it was actually the 1986 media guide.
This much is certain: The 1982 media guide, the last for Bryant, lists 1934 as the only pre-Bryant national championship, adding it in a footnote of Alabama's SEC history. In the year-by-year results in the '82 media guide, only Bryant's six national titles were listed.
Atcheson and Watson said it's important to put Alabama's claim of 12 in context because other schools have added debated championships, too.
"I tried to make Alabama football look the best it could look and just make it as great as it could possibly be," Atcheson said. "I was a competitor myself with the other schools, and what they bragged about and boasted about, I wanted people to know the best about my school."
Asked why 12 is the right number, Watson replied: "I don't know that it is the right number. But that's the great thing about college football. I hope we never have a playoff. I'll be going to my grave arguing that we should have won a national championship in 1966."
The Crimson Tide went 11-0 in '66, when Michigan State and Notre Dame shared the mythical title after tying each other. It's a lost championship that's as much a part of Alabama lore as its claim that it's going for No. 13 this week in Pasadena.
How Alabama got 12 symbolizes the never-ending story of college football: Obscure ranking systems, confusion on how to declare a champion, and constant debate.
-
The love fest is like a plague........."Black Death". Do not let them cough on you or your freaking toast.
-
In reality it doesnt really matter what Bama or anyone else says. Its what the NCAA says. Its very hard to count the "National Championships" under Frank Thomas or Wallace Wade when there wasn't even any "real" polling going on. Still, 5, 6 or 7 is more than we have and more than most have. The Got 12 crap does get old though. Its usually the sidewalk T shirt alum who hark on this the most. I see them everyday at "teh Wal Marts".
-
(http://i482.photobucket.com/albums/rr185/johnofbham/ernest_t.gif)
5+6 eekals stomp, stomp THIRTEEN!
I twernt bored yet but Jesus was 'roun fer tha first batch of champinships.
-
Be sure to click on each ring to read about their history. Nothing Auburn fans don't already know, but maybe it will sink in for the bammers considering the source this time.
The comment section is full of raging bammers.
This one Auburn dude tells it like it is.
I think it is very telling that Auburn, who admittedly and historically trails Alabama in any MNC tally regardless of source, refuses to reinvent itself just to "catch up," while Alabama shamelessly adds any title any organization gives them presently or retroactively simply to "better" itself.
In my count by what is considered the college football standard (mentioned in this article), Auburn has 1 and Alabama has 7. However, if Auburn chose as an institution to follow Alabama's lead, by the same merits and standards, no less than 8 MNC's could go into the media guide today. That would be 4 less than Alabama instead of 6 less.
Why would a school that has more to gain from this absurdity not participate in this ridiculous "cold war" of MNC's?
It's called self-respect and class.
I say let them claim all they want. The rest of the college football world already sees it for what it is.
It's true. If they'd just claim 7, they'd be taken seriously, and would maybe even garner some of the respect they think they deserve. They'd still be one of the leaders, but instead they have to go and claim eleventy billion and get laughed at.
In all seriousness, if I were a bammer, I'd be completely embarrassed by this and would be campaigning to claim the "official" ones, even the more controversial of those (1964-1978), only.
Oh, and before bammers shit their pants asking what's wrong with those four championships, here you go.
1964 National Championship- While the AP did award the NC to Bama (10-1-0), Arkansas had the better record, 11-0. Alabama played Texas in their bowl and LOST. The AP final poll was before the bowl.
1965 National Championship- The AP gave this to Bama. That year there were three teams with better records than Bama. Bama 9-1-1, Michigan St 10-1-0, Arkansas 10-1-0, Nebraska 10-1-0.
1973 National Championship- AP puts Bama 4th after their bowl game loss. Bama claims a NC from the UPI poll that was taken before they met Notre Dame in the bowl game and lost. There were 3 teams with better records than Bama that year. The embarrassment of naming Alabama number one caused the UPI to name champions after bowl games. Yet Bammer has no shame in claiming it of course.
1978 National Championship- AP gives this to Alabama(11-1-0) even though USC (12-1-0) had the better record Guess who Alabama lost to that year? USC!!!!!!!!!. UPI gave the NC to USC.
-
I have an Alabama glass from 1979 and it has 9 titles counting 1979. Then I have another mug from some time after 1992 and it has 12 counting 1992. I do not remember any titles between 1979 and 1992. I also read somewhere that Oklahoma could count 17 NC however they only claim 7.
-
I have an Alabama glass from 1979 and it has 9 titles counting 1979. Then I have another mug from some time after 1992 and it has 12 counting 1992. I do not remember any titles between 1979 and 1992. I also read somewhere that Oklahoma could count 17 NC however they only claim 7.
I'm sure that since 13's an unlucky number, if uat wins tomorrow night, there will be Got 14 shirts.
They'll count that 1966 ring bammers always bitch about how they "should" claim.
-
Oh, and before bammers poop their pants asking what's wrong with those four championships, here you go.
1964 National Championship- While the AP did award the NC to Bama (10-1-0), Arkansas had the better record, 11-0. Alabama played Texas in their bowl and LOST. The AP final poll was before the bowl. The rules change. I am sure when you took the SAT you scored at least 1200. Back then that was a great score but now it would not be. Rules change we can only judge by the rules that were used at that time.
1965 National Championship- The AP gave this to Bama. That year there were three teams with better records than Bama. Bama 9-1-1, Michigan St 10-1-0, Arkansas 10-1-0, Nebraska 10-1-0. Sadly this happens very often in football. All I have to say is 2004.
1973 National Championship- AP puts Bama 4th after their bowl game loss. Bama claims a NC from the UPI poll that was taken before they met Notre Dame in the bowl game and lost. There were 3 teams with better records than Bama that year. The embarrassment of naming Alabama number one caused the UPI to name champions after bowl games. Yet Bammer has no shame in claiming it of course. Same as 1964 rules change. I agree it is crap but that was the way it was at that time.
1978 National Championship- AP gives this to Alabama(11-1-0) even though USC (12-1-0) had the better record Guess who Alabama lost to that year? USC!!!!!!!!!. UPI gave the NC to USC. Alabama lost at the right time that year. LSU (2007) ring a bell.
-
When counting the way Bama does, Princeton has 26 and ND has 21. True story. Harvard and Yale also have near 20 and OU/USC both have near 20.
-
They'll count that 1966 ring bammers always bitch about how they "should" claim.
That is a tough one. Great read for me of course for you it is poop paper.
-
When counting the way Bama does, Princeton has 26 and ND has 21. True story. Harvard and Yale also have near 20 and OU/USC both have near 20.
You are correct sir. I do not claim 12.
-
The rules change. I am sure when you took the SAT you scored at least 1200. Back then that was a great score but now it would not be. Rules change we can only judge by the rules that were used at that time.
Arkansas had a better record going into the bowl games, AND uat lost theirs.
1965 National Championship- The AP gave this to Bama. That year there were three teams with better records than Bama. Bama 9-1-1, Michigan St 10-1-0, Arkansas 10-1-0, Nebraska 10-1-0. Sadly this happens very often in football. All I have to say is 2004.
They give the championship to the team with the 4th best record very often? When those teams are traditional programs like Michigan St & Nebraska, and Arkansas who apparently had the best year the year before?
1973 National Championship- AP puts Bama 4th after their bowl game loss. Bama claims a NC from the UPI poll that was taken before they met Notre Dame in the bowl game and lost. There were 3 teams with better records than Bama that year. The embarrassment of naming Alabama number one caused the UPI to name champions after bowl games. Yet Bammer has no shame in claiming it of course. Same as 1964 rules change. I agree it is crap but that was the way it was at that time.
Same indeed. Fourth best team going into the bowls, and then loses their bowl game.
1978 National Championship- AP gives this to Alabama(11-1-0) even though USC (12-1-0) had the better record Guess who Alabama lost to that year? USC!!!!!!!!!. UPI gave the NC to USC. Alabama lost at the right time that year. LSU (2007) ring a bell.
LSU didn't lose head to head to any teams with a better record than them going into the bowls. The only team with a slightly better record (Ohio State 11-1 vs. LSU 11-2), was ranked #1 going into that game. Just like your comparison with Auburn 2004, you're equating a debatable 3-way tie with another team that clearly has a better record AND ALREADY PROVED ON THE FIELD THAT THEY WERE THE BETTER TEAM.
-
Who really gives a shit? Not me.
-
Who really gives a shit? Not me.
Of course not. You're to busy perpetuating the 12 NC dogma to be let facts get in the way.
-
Arkansas had a better record going into the bowl games, AND uat lost theirs.
They give the championship to the team with the 4th best record very often? When those teams are traditional programs like Michigan St & Nebraska, and Arkansas who apparently had the best year the year before?
Same indeed. Fourth best team going into the bowls, and then loses their bowl game.
LSU didn't lose head to head to any teams with a better record than them going into the bowls. The only team with a slightly better record (Ohio State 11-1 vs. LSU 11-2), was ranked #1 going into that game. Just like your comparison with Auburn 2004, you're equating a debatable 3-way tie with another team that clearly has a better record AND ALREADY PROVED ON THE FIELD THAT THEY WERE THE BETTER TEAM.
Exactly. You ate a whole hoop of cheese and pooped in the refrigerator.
-
Who really gives a poop? Not me.
Apparently all of your mullet nation who grace the Wal Mart Frozen Pizza aisle with their "Got 12?" and "The Bear is Back....and his name is Nick" shirts. They wash them once a week so that they can wear them everyday. Think for a second RWS: What if ND had shirts they wore year round saying "Got 21?". You (and everyone else in the country) would think that they were crazy. What sets you Bammers apart is that you are the ONLY team who props up your "self proclaimed" NC's as legit NC's. Like I said earlier, you still have 5, 6 or 7 NC's regardless (depending on who you ask) and thats more than we have. Its just the fuzzy math your fanbase uses is very elementary and annoying.
And yes, you give a shit.
-
Apparently all of your mullet nation who grace the Wal Mart Frozen Pizza aisle with their "Got 12?" and "The Bear is Back....and his name is Nick" shirts. They wash them once a week so that they can wear them everyday. Think for a second RWS: What if ND had shirts they wore year round saying "Got 21?". You (and everyone else in the country) would think that they were crazy. What sets you Bammers apart is that you are the ONLY team who props up your "self proclaimed" NC's as legit NC's. Like I said earlier, you still have 5, 6 or 7 NC's regardless (depending on who you ask) and thats more than we have. Its just the fuzzy math your fanbase uses is very elementary and annoying.
And yes, you give a shit.
Like I've said before, I could give a shit less how many championships we have or don't have. Its a moot point when your last one was 18 years ago. I don't give a shit about something from 1960. My parents were like 4 years old. I don't really care what ND puts on a shirt. I think its silly for those in our fanbase to try and argue something that happened when they weren't even alive. How many championships Alabama has absolutely dick to do with anything in 2010. Whats the point in worrying about shit 50 years ago?
-
Like I've said before, I could give a shit less how many championships we have or don't have. Its a moot point when your last one was 18 years ago. I don't give a shit about something from 1960. My parents were like 4 years old. I don't really care what ND puts on a shirt. I think its silly for those in our fanbase to try and argue something that happened when they weren't even alive. How many championships Alabama has absolutely dick to do with anything in 2010. Whats the point in worrying about shit 50 years ago?
Okay. Well, we'll take in your .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% representation of the Bammer perspective into account.
:bc:
-
(http://i482.photobucket.com/albums/rr185/johnofbham/sothere.jpg)
-
As annoying as 12 is, they have actually been named national champs 25 different times by various organizations. Some are even too ridiculous for bammers to claim....
1941 - 9-2 - final AP ranking #20 - named champs by Houlgate System.
1950 - 9-2 - final AP ranking #16 - named champs by Bob Kirlin.
1963 - 9-2 - final AP ranking #9 - named champs by Jim Koger. Auburn was 9-1, finished #5, and beat Alabama.
1974 - 11-1 - final AP ranking #5 - named champs by Washington Touchdown Club.
1980 - 10-2 - final AP ranking #6 - named champs by Montgomery Full Season Championship.
These are just among the more ridiculous.
However, as much as it pains me to say this, if we use being named by at least TWO organizations as a guideline...Auburn would have 5 national titles (1913, 1957, 1983, 1993, and 2004). By that same criteria, Alabama would have 18.
If you go by titles named by at least 3 organizations, here is the SEC:
1. Alabama - 15 (1925, 26, 30, 34, 36, 45, 61, 64, 65, 66, 73, 75, 78, 79, 92)
2. Auburn - 4 (1913, 57, 83, 93)
2. Florida - 4 (1984, 96, 06, 08)
2. Georgia - 4 (1927, 42, 46, 80)
2. LSU - 4 (1908, 36, 58, 03, 07)
2. Tennessee - 4 (1938, 50, 51, 98)
7. Ole Miss - 3 (1959, 60, 62)
8. Arkansas - 2 (1964, 77)
9. Kentucky - 0
10. Miss State - 0
11. S. Carolina - 0
12. Vanderbilt - 0
-
As annoying as 12 is, they have actually been named national champs 25 different times by various organizations. Some are even too ridiculous for bammers to claim....
1941 - 9-2 - final AP ranking #20 - named champs by Houlgate System.
1950 - 9-2 - final AP ranking #16 - named champs by Bob Kirlin.
1963 - 9-2 - final AP ranking #9 - named champs by Jim Koger. Auburn was 9-1, finished #5, and beat Alabama.
1974 - 11-1 - final AP ranking #5 - named champs by Washington Touchdown Club.
1980 - 10-2 - final AP ranking #6 - named champs by Montgomery Full Season Championship.
These are just among the more ridiculous.
However, as much as it pains me to say this, if we use being named by at least TWO organizations as a guideline...Auburn would have 5 national titles (1913, 1957, 1983, 1993, and 2004). By that same criteria, Alabama would have 18.
If you go by titles named by at least 3 organizations, here is the SEC:
1. Alabama - 15 (1925, 26, 30, 34, 36, 45, 61, 64, 65, 66, 73, 75, 78, 79, 92)
2. Auburn - 4 (1913, 57, 83, 93)
2. Florida - 4 (1984, 96, 06, 08)
2. Georgia - 4 (1927, 42, 46, 80)
2. LSU - 4 (1908, 36, 58, 03, 07)
2. Tennessee - 4 (1938, 50, 51, 98)
7. Ole Miss - 3 (1959, 60, 62)
8. Arkansas - 2 (1964, 77)
9. Kentucky - 0
10. Miss State - 0
11. S. Carolina - 0
12. Vanderbilt - 0
Me thinks that Houlgate and Bob Kirlin were on some good tonic......
-
Me thinks that Houlgate and Bob Kirlin were on some good tonic......
Definitely Kirlin.
He also named 10-3 LSU national champs in 2001!! What a joke.
Miami was 12-0.
Oregon was 11-1.
Florida was 10-2.
Tennessee was 11-2
(both Florida and Tennessee beat LSU, along with 7-4 Ole Miss).
Texas was 11-2.
And Oklahoma was 11-2.
Hence the #7 final AP ranking for LSU. How that Kirlin guy came up with his champs, I have no idea.
-
This won't mean a lot on this board, since there are no Tennessee fans around, but I came across an interesting note on Coach Neyland. In 1969 the Sporting News voted him the #2 coach in football history. He was 173-31-12, which is a .829 winning %. Very impressive.
But look at this.
Tennessee plays both Vanderbilt and Kentucky. He won 40 of his games against these two teams.
He won another 53 against the following:
Carson-Newman,Centre, Chattanooga, The Citadel, George Washington, Maryville, Mercer, Sewanee, Southwestern Tennessee, Tennessee Tech, Transylvania, Washington & Lee, and Wofford.
And no, none of those teams were powers at the time. Sewanee's best days were over by then.
So of his 173 wins, 93 were pretty much "gimme" wins. That's 54% of his wins over those schools. He went 8-6-2 against Duke. 12-9 against Alabama. 4-2 against Auburn. He only played Georgia 2 times and Georgia Tech four times (2-2).
He was impressive, even against his better opponents, but his .829 winning % is pretty skewed.
-
Ole Miss is the same way. When Orgeron got there they arbitrarily decided to start claiming three. They even raised flags.
They have ze-fucking-ro.
-
Ole Miss is the same way. When Orgeron got there they arbitrarily decided to start claiming three. They even raised flags.
They have ze-fucking-ro.
that doesn't support the gg formula (uat = old mrs.)
-
that doesn't support the gg formula (uat = old mrs.)
It's direct support, actually.
Both schools pull a number out of their ass and claim that number of championships. The al.com article proved that the Bama twatwad did it. He chose a number arbitrarily. So did the Ole Miss admin.
It's a perfect correlation.
-
It's direct support, actually.
Both schools pull a number out of their ass and claim that number of championships. The al.com article proved that the Bama twatwad did it. He chose a number arbitrarily. So did the Ole Miss admin.
It's a perfect correlation.
the zero for ole piss doesn't support presumption of the equality between the two, since uat actually has at least one valid claim - it would instead be more of a mathematical similarity, or a relative/proportional equality in lieu of a direct equality. This is consistent with uat being a more exaggerated version of the old piss caricature. Either way, they can both kiss an asscheek.
uat ≈ old mrs.
-
Exactly. You ate a whole hoop of cheese and pooped in the refrigerator.
It's wheel btw...a whole wheel of cheese. hoop? who ever heard of a hoop of cheese... sheesh...you should claim the Movie Line National Championship! It is worth about the same as the MNC (of course I am jealous)
:poke:
-
the zero for ole piss doesn't support presumption of the equality between the two, since uat actually has at least one valid claim - it would instead be more of a mathematical similarity, or a relative/proportional equality in lieu of a direct equality. This is consistent with uat being a more exaggerated version of the old piss caricature. Either way, they can both kiss an asscheek.
uat ≈ old mrs.
No, the numbers are not equal, but the manner at which they were arrived is.
Both teams had their glory days back in the pre-integration world. While Alabama has had occasional bouts of relevance since, Ole Miss never has (and likely never will).
Both programs consider themselves the cream of the aristocratic crop (when both are really loaded with inbred, dumbass, wookie-looking rubes).
The fact that neither was satisfied enough with the reality of what the programs accomplished back in the pre-Civil Rights days and that both have since dipped into revisionist history to create a legend that more-or-less didn't exist is where the comparison applies. In that respect, they are mirror images of each other.
-
The fact that neither was satisfied enough with the reality of what the programs accomplished back in the pre-Civil Rights days and that both have since dipped into revisionist history to create a legend that more-or-less didn't exist is where the comparison applies. In that respect, they are mirror images of each other.
Interesting way of looking at it. I know that one of the reasons the bammers were so proud of the bahr was because the civil rights era made white Alabamians look like scum to the rest of the country. Bahr's boys winning college football games gave those people something to attach themselves and make them feel proud and superior, even though few of them ever set foot in tuscaloosa county (and even fewer set foot in a classroom there). Once the bahr was gone, adding the pre-bahr "accomplishments" served to create an impression that the bahr era was some sort of continuation of tradishun, as opposed to the aberration in their tradishun.
-
It's wheel btw...a whole wheel of cheese. hoop? who ever heard of a hoop of cheese... sheesh...you should claim the Movie Line National Championship! It is worth about the same as the MNC (of course I am jealous)
:poke:
OK how about I butcher another line.
I'm in a class base of imodium.
-
OK how about I butcher another line.
I'm in a class base of imodium.
:cage: