BOL Round Table

The No. 1 'Bama fan community on the Internet

Boards ▾

BOL Round Table

The No. 1 'Bama fan community on the Internet

The Water Cooler

BOL message board for off-topic posts

The Tailgate

Tailgating, recipes, cooking, food & drink

Ticket Exchange

Buy, sell or swap tickets

Reply

#14

  • It's a shaky claim at best but whatever. If we stopped claiming it that would be fine with me, if not that's fine too. Best thing to do would be to just emphasize the AP and BCS titles without specifically de-claiming 41.

    But get ready because the haters will claim this one isnt legit either. Didn't win the conference, had our chance, title should be split, blah blah blah. It's coming.

  • fanview said... (original post)

    Claiming '41 as a NC is Auburnesque - pure fabrication. Shut out twice, #20 AP. The national champion for 1941 was Minnesota (AP, et al), make no mistake. Persistence in claiming '41 hurts our integrity, our credibility, and makes us the object of mockery and ridicule. There simply is no compelling reason for perpetuating the lie.

    Claiming 1945 (Harry Gilmer) as NC would be more justified: Declared NC by THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP FOUNDATION and Undefeated Rose Bowl Champ - in fact the only one of our five undefeated Rose Bowl Champs we don't claim as NC. Number 2 to Army in AP.

    And FWIW, Army never missed a football beat during WWII, when most college football teams were decimated by players going off to war. Heisman Trophy laureates Glenn Davis and Doc Blanchard didn't go to war - they stayed at the Point and played football, against inferior and disorganized competition. UA couldn't even field a team in 1943. And Army used mercenaries (MSU's Shorty McWilliams, for one).

    Here's the plan: discretely substitute '45 for '41 - same Coach (Thomas).

    Many on the 1941 team served valiantly in WWII. They're not football champions, but better than that - they're NATIONAL HEROES, and I salute them.

    Disclaimer: I'm a retired Army Colonel.

    More 1945 Accolades: In terms of points, offensive TDs, and yardage, the 1945 team had the most prolific offense in the history of Alabama Football.

    And yet, we fly the '41 flag. Is it because we are ignorant of history? or indifferent? or deceitful? How to explain?

    UA Records by the 1945 team:

    Most Offensive TDs (58)
    Most Points per Game (43)
    Fewest Fumbles (9)
    Fewest Turnovers (fumbles, interceptions) lost (6)

    422 yards per game - ranked 5th in UA history.

    '46 Rose Bowl: '45 team humiliated Southern Cal 34-14.

    Ben Parson, LA Daily News: "The boys from Tuscaloosa made Troy's men look like guys from Arthritis Academy."

    Russ Newland, AP: USC was out played, out-powered, and out-dazzled - never before in the memory of its oldest inhabitants was a Trojan team
    so humiliated."

  • Landshark22 said... (original post)

    It's a shaky claim at best but whatever. If we stopped claiming it that would be fine with me, if not that's fine too. Best thing to do would be to just emphasize the AP and BCS titles without specifically de-claiming 41.

    But get ready because the haters will claim this one isnt legit either. Didn't win the conference, had our chance, title should be split, blah blah blah. It's coming.

    Just a thought here, but I think we would be wise to take on a tone of indifference should a split title come to fruition. We have been the beneficiary of several split titles among the 13 that we claim, each earned / awarded based upon the system that was in place at the time. Right now, the AP voters have no obligation to name the BCSNCG winner as #1. If they believe that a very close BCSNCG won by UA is enough to warrant LSU a "split" title, I have no problem with that. It would serve to legitimize the "split" titles we claim (most notably, 1973). Don't misunderstand me here. I have no problem claiming any of the titles we claim (other than '41) . . . it would just be fun to see the UA haters squirm when they realize they can't have it both ways (award LSU a split title this year based on their regular season performance and NOT afford the same courtesy to our perfect regular season in 1973). Just my $.02 worth.

  • I think the point still remains - we do claim an absurd title - but an undefeated, untied season with a domination in the Rose Bowl of USC in 1945 should be retro-claimed, along with the 1966 (segregation) Trophy where we dismantled Nebraska in the Orange bowl. Of course there are a few other years that we couldve made a strong argument - but in the end we have settled on a pretty fair number. Maybe we should put an *** or cross reference 1945/1966 when we claim 1941...

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine only. Join now! Start Free Trial
  • I dont defend any. I simply say we have 8 in the major poll era which is tied with notre dame for 1st all time. I then ask how many their school has in the major poll era because if you aren't notre dame you need to STFU. after this year even ND fans will have to STFU.

    signature image
  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine only. Join now! Start Free Trial
    signature image signature image signature image
  • wlu4tide said... (original post)

    The point is that while we were #20 in the AP poll, Minnesota was undefeated and in the middle of their very impressive run, and we lost to Miss State in game 2 and Vandy in game 9 (our second to last game), and were shut out in both losses... it's just stupid to claim it or acknowledge it even if it was "awarded" to us.

    it's equally ridiculous that the civil rights movement took away our 1966 national championship. the fact is we were better than both michigan state and notre dame that year. however, we got screwed b/c of a backlash to our racial policies.

    i've always wished that politics and sports would be separated. But i'd gladly drop 1941 for 1966. Either way the NCAA recognized 17 NCs for us. I'll take that number too.

    1977 is nearly as appalling. Notre Dame jumped from #5 to #1 by beating the #1 Texas team in the Cotton Bowl. It was clearly unfair because we DESTROYED Ole Miss 34-13 who turned around the very next week and beat Notre Dame.

    So, no, I don't apologize for any national championships. We've certainly been screwed out of our share.

    This post was edited by tiderise 3 years ago

    signature image signature image signature image
  • I'll just accept what the University accepts. Right now that is at 13.

  • A few thoughts on the early titles...

    25 - No existing selectors at the time. Majority of retroactive selectors pick Bama. This boils down to whether or not you accept retroactive titles at all, but if you don't there simply are no NCs pre 1926

    26 - First year that there is a current selector (Dickinson). They pick Stanford, but it is the first year, and i really dont know what kind of reputation Dickinson had at the time.

    30 - this one is a bit shaky imo. By this time there are 4 selectors running, and they all picked ND.

    34 - 6 current selectors at the time. 3 selected Bama, and 3 selected Minnesota.

    41 - I understand there are questions about relative strengths of schedule, and Bama may have played a lot more good teams than the other teams in question, but to me this is in the AP era, and that is just all there is. AP/UPI/BCS or nothing post '36for me.

    wonder what some of you older guys think about NFF titles. Was this poll widely known by the average fan in the 60's and 70's?

    I used to think it was definitely not, but i have heard a lot of arguments from Ohio St fans and they (not surprisingly) swear by it. I believe they have the only NFF only title, but maybe there are a few more.

  • Also, never let a UT fan talk trash to you about claiming titles.

    2/3 of theirs are very tenuous and '67 may be the most ridiculous title any school claims

  • Jbstraiton said... (original post)

    I'm with you, even as big of an Alabama fan as I am, we've all go to have some sense about things. I really wish the university would rethink that decision, because honestly, I don't think we deserve to claim that one. Everytime I see that 1941 "national championship" written on something relating to Alabama, I cringe just a little bit.

    Everytime I see the 1966 team not rated #1 I cringe

  • JoeRio said... (original post)

    Well, you also forget that in 1966, we had the greatest TIDE team of all our history and they got cheated out of the NC because we had no black players then. So no, I will NOT deny the 1941 NC, because we got the royal slip in 1966. I am looking forward to the next one, which will be #14. RTR!

    Also 1977.

    signature image signature image signature image