Saw this on another board. Thought Tiger fans might find it intresting. When it comes to what major news organizations acknowledge for national championships, it all begins with 1936. That's the first year that a nationwide poll was started. Before that year there were no football polls at all. All "national champions" before that time were determined by mathematical power rating systems that differed widely from one to another. When major news organizations say that bama has 7 national championships, they are giving them credit only for the ones handed out by polls conducted by either the AP or the UPI. For bama, those are: 1961, 1964, 1965, 1973, 1978, 1979, 1992. Every other national championship that has ever been given to bama was awarded by a mathematical power ranking system, and not a poll. When assessing national championships, they can be broken down into two eras, the pre-poll era (1935 and before) and the era of national polls which began in 1936. Here's a breakdown of bama's national championship claims in those two eras. THE PRE-POLL ERA: 1925, 1926, 1930, 1934 In '25, '30, '34, bama was undefeated and untied. There were other teams who were also undefeated and untied in each of those years (Dartmouth in '25, Notre Dame in '30, Minnesota in '34), and each of them were given the national championship by several different power ranking systems. It all comes down to whose mathematical power ranking system you accept because bama never squared off against any of those teams in those years. I say bama has as good of a claim as any of those other teams, but anyone has to acknowledge that all three of those titles are disputed. 1926 is probably the ultimate example of a disputed national championship. Both Stanford and bama finished the regular season with a perfect record, they faced off against each other in the Rose Bowl and they tied 7-7. So give it to whomever you like, but both teams have an equal claim to the 1926 title. THE POLL ERA: 1941, 1961, 1964, 1965, 1973, 1978, 1979, 1992 I'll start out by saying that the championships that bama claims from '61, '65, '79, and '92 are undisputed by anyone. So I don't see any need to elaborate on those. Here's a breakdown of what happened in the disputed years of '41, '64, '73, and '78. 1941: With all due respect to the great tradition of bama football, this claim is completely ridiculus. In that year, bama lost twice and was shut out on both occasions, once by Mississippi State and once by Vandy. They finished 3rd in the SEC and were ranked 20th by the AP at the end of the season. Mysteriously, a guy named David Houlgate gave them the number one national ranking at the end of the season in his mathematical powering system. Because of this, bama claims the NC for that year. This in spite of the fact that Minnesota went undefeated and untied in the regular season, won their bowl game, and was given the national championship by almost everyone else on the planet. This claim is completely laughable. It is worth noting that Jeff Sagarin gave Florida State the 1992 national championship in his mathematical power ranking system, even though everyone else on the planet gave it to bama. If FSU fans tried to claim the 1992 championship, bama fans would laugh in their faces. The bama claim to a 1941 championship is equally laughable. 1964: This year could be called "the stupidity of the polls." The AP and the UPI had a longstanding tradition of awarding their national championship prior to the bowl games. In 1964, bama went undefeated in the regular season, but was beaten by Texas in the Orange Bowl, 21-17. Nonetheless, both the AP and the UPI had already given out their championships, and since most major news orgnanizations recognize only the AP poll, they usually count this one when talking about bama's MNC's. Unfortunately for bama, it doesn't hold any water. Arkansas went undefeated in the 1964 regular season and beat Nebraska in the Cotton Bowl. They were the ones who truly deserved the title since they were the only major division 1-A team with an unblemished record. But bama will always claim this one, nonetheless, even though they don't have a leg to stand on. 1973: "The stupidity of the UPI poll." By 1973, the AP had recognized the fallacy of awarding its national championship before the bowl games. The UPI had not. Both Notre Dame and bama went undefeated in the regular season. Those two teams met in the Sugar Bowl and Notre Dame won. The UPI had already awarded its national championship before the bowl games. The AP gave the championship to Notre Dame. Everybody on the face of the Earth recognized who the REAL national champion was, but bama still claims 1973 as a national title, even in spite of all rational thinking. Because of the ridiculus fiasco, the UPI finally corrected the error of its ways and started awarding their national championship after the bowl games. After the 1974 season, Notre Dame and Alabama met once again in the Orange Bowl, but thanks to the UPI's changing of its flawed ways, Notre Dame was awarded the national championship by both the AP and the UPI after beating bama in that game. 1978: Alabama was beaten in the 3rd game of the season by USC in a contest played on bama's home turf at Legion Field in Birmingham. USC, however, also lost a regular season game that year, and when both teams won their bowl games the AP gave the title to bama and the UPI gave it to USC. This is a classic disputed national championship. Both bama and USC claim it as an official national championship. A lot of people say the head-to-head victory for USC should be the deciding factor. You can make your own call. Once again, I will state that bama's national championships for '61, '65, '79, and '92 are undisputed by anyone. You can make your own decision about the quality of their claims for other years. But one thing is certain, when the University of Alabama claims 12 national championships, they are full of it
Great post. Those are some interesting facts, most of which I had no clue. The years that Bama was awarded national titles by UPI were clearly flawed. However, most believe that the BCS system is flawed as well. I think the best thing to do is let each school claim whatever they want to. What's it really hurting? It kinda reminds me of my college roomate. He would brag about his "conquests" every weekend. We all knew he probably got lucky, and probably more than once. However, the number seemed to be blurred by ego and alcohol, and the quality of the ones that he could prove was suspect. However, we let him talk.
Fantastic Post. I knew most of these facts but congratulations for putting it all together. You might have to consider the "mythical national championships" of 1964 and 1973 semi legitimate because even though Bama lost bowl games those years to Texas and Notre Dame the most recognized polls of those day did award the "mythical national championship" before the bowls were played. Also if I was a Bama fan I would be ashamed to claim the 1978 NC over a USC team that finished with the same record as Bama and beat the Tide on their home field.
Just to add a few facts to the ones you already know, let me show some reasoning why we are not ashamed of our 78 NC. First of all you are right, we did lose to USC at B'ham 24-14 and finish with the same record, but let's look at the rest of the story. USC lost to Arizona St. 20-7 who finished 9-3 that year losing to an 8-4 Stanford team, a 4-6-1 Washington St. Team and OMG the same 7-4 Washington team that Bama beat 20-17 in Seattle. To top the season off, Alabama defeated #1 ranked and undefeated Penn State in the Sugar Bowl winning the NC. Other than that, the two teams had some similar stats with USC outscoring their opponents by a total of318-153 and Alabama beating their opponents by a total of 345-168 Sorry dude, I just can't be ashamed of that.
Let me get this straight - You are saying that Bama was better than USC because Bama beat a team who beat a team who beat a team who beat USC? And by applying that convoluted logic you can negate the fact that USC beat Bama? So if this year Vanderbilt were to beat Kentucky, Kentucky were to beat South Carolina, South Carolina pulls off an upset against Tennessee and Tennessee beats Miami then Vanderbilt is better than Miami?
The final reason was that Alabama beat the #1 ranked team in the nation in the Sugar Bowl. It was #1 Penn St. vs #2 Alabama. I was simply showing the full circle of USC beat Bama but was beaten by Arizona St. Who was beaten by Washington who was in turn beat by Bama. Not that hard to understand it happens all the time. My post was facts yours is fiction. But if it makes you feel better trying to drag us down go for it. 6, 10, 12, 15, 20 doesn't matter. It's still more than anyone else in the SEC has and in the top few in Div 1 football.
OK, what you posted was facts but they don't support the fact that the poll voters voted Bama #1 over a team with the same record who beat them. My post of would Vandy be better than Miami was a fictional scenario. Here is a factual scenario. A few years ago I read a story where the author had traced who had beaten who during that year. I don't remember all of the teams involved but it turns out that during that year Notre Dame lost one game. The team that beat Notre Dame had lost to somebody who had lost to somebody who had lost to somebody on down the line where it showed that Slippery Rock State would beat Notre Dame based on all the teams that beat teams who beat teams on up to Notre Dame. I am not trying to drag Alabama down. I have the greatest respect for Bear Bryant and Gene Stallings who was one of the Bears Junction Boys at A&M. In 1978 Alabama and USC were the 2 best teams. Since they weren't matched in a bowl game and there was no playoff system we will never know if the Tide would have won a rematch. I just don't see how the polls could vote a team over another team with the same record when the team voted higher lost to the team with the same record is voted lower. The same thing happened 3 or 4 years ago when Miami beat Florida State. Miami had lost their opening game to Washington and both Miami and Florida State finished the season with identical records but the BCS rated Florida State higher than Miami so FS played for the NC while Miami was left out.
I guess it is beyond the voters simple understanding that Alabama beat undefeated Penn St for the title. Your origional comment is we should be ashamed of that title. My reply supports why we are not ashamed of it. BTW the 1978 Bama vs USC game is on ESPN Classics tonight at 8 pm if you care to see how bad we were.
