A thread about BIG, FAKE Titles

#26
#26
05_never_again said:
Yeah, pretty amazing when you think about it.

In terms of consistently good teams or teams that have won titles, it's been southeastern teams plus Ohio St for about 15 years now. Depending on whether or you consider Texas to be the "southeast," the last team outside of that category to win a national title was either Texas in 2005 or USC in 2004. "The midwest" hasn't won a title since 2000 (Oklahoma) and the upper midwest, excluding Ohio St, hasn't won one since 1997 (Michigan/Nebraska).
Click to expand...

I actually lumped Texas and Oklahoma in as "Southern" in that they were also late to integrate.
 
#27
#27
PEPPERJAX said:
Not an Auburn fan at all but USC’s 2004 stripped title needs to be awarded to the war eagle guys. This doesn’t exactly apply to this thread but oh well. I still struggle to this day trying to figure out why BYU has the 1984 natty.
Click to expand...

USC is still the AP champ.

As for BYU, there really wasn't anyone else to award in 1984. It was just a crazy year. BYU was as good a choice as anyone.
 
#28
#28
bamawriter said:
USC is still the AP champ.

As for BYU, there really wasn't anyone else to award in 1984. It was just a crazy year. BYU was as good a choice as anyone.
Click to expand...

I realize that about BYU but has there ever been a team of their caliber that played a 6-5 squad then awarded the title? They beat a horrible Michigan team by 7 points. A fourth quarter comeback to get the victory as well. I was 1 in 1984 so I am sure it would be completely different watching how the season unfolded from an adult or adolescent perspective. AP writers are still wrong about USC.
 
#29
#29
Lawrence Wright said:
1984 was a strange year.

UF was 9-1-1 and on probation, with an embarrassing tie against Rutgers.

Washington was the only other team with one loss at 11-1. Everyone else had at least two losses.

BYU was the only undefeated team left standing.
Click to expand...
Should have gone to Washington. BYU's strength of schedule that year was even worse than UCF's in 2017.
PEPPERJAX said:
Not an Auburn fan at all but USC’s 2004 stripped title needs to be awarded to the war eagle guys. This doesn’t exactly apply to this thread but oh well. I still struggle to this day trying to figure out why BYU has the 1984 natty.
Click to expand...
I think this shows how much the sport has changed in a relatively short period of time - can you imagine today an undefeated SEC champion being outside the top 2? Because Auburn was in 2004.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, mr.checkerboards and PEPPERJAX
#30
#30
PEPPERJAX said:
I realize that about BYU but has there ever been a team of their caliber that played a 6-5 squad then awarded the title? They beat a horrible Michigan team by 7 points. A fourth quarter comeback to get the victory as well. I was 1 in 1984 so I am sure it would be completely different watching how the season unfolded from an adult or adolescent perspective. AP writers are still wrong about USC.
Click to expand...

So, would you give Auburn '04 but take away their title in '57?
 
#32
#32
PEPPERJAX said:
What was their cheating scandal in 1957? Can you enlighten me? I haven’t researched that.
Click to expand...

They were sanctioned for paying players. Thus they weren't eligible for the Coaches' Poll title (which went to tOSU). But the AP doesn't consider sanctions, so Auburn got that title.
 
#33
#33
bamawriter said:
USC is still the AP champ.

As for BYU, there really wasn't anyone else to award in 1984. It was just a crazy year. BYU was as good a choice as anyone.
Click to expand...

Washington’s only loss that year was to a 9-3 USC team that won the PAC-10 and finished ranked #10.
 
#34
#34
Richt while at UGA claimed an SEC title when it was not awarded to them. I can't recall the year and a quick internet search doesn't reveal it, but it was where UGA had the same record as the actual champion, so he simply claimed it and put it in their locker room and football areas. Perhaps somebody with a media connection may be able to pull it out of one of them, Richt was very sneaky about it supposedly.
 
#35
#35
05_never_again said:
Should have gone to Washington. BYU's strength of schedule that year was even worse than UCF's in 2017.

I think this shows how much the sport has changed in a relatively short period of time - can you imagine today an undefeated SEC champion being outside the top 2? Because Auburn was in 2004.
Click to expand...

Responding to @Lawrence Wright ’s post with a put down of UCF is the key to his heart. Much like when he goes out of his way to slam Ole Roy for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 05_never_again
#36
#36
bamawriter said:
They were sanctioned for paying players. Thus they weren't eligible for the Coaches' Poll title (which went to tOSU). But the AP doesn't consider sanctions, so Auburn got that title.
Click to expand...

Cool man thanks. I Know cheating happens at every major program but you aren't technically guilty unless caught correct? Reggie Bush scandal is still fresh on the minds of most people.
 
#37
#37
PEPPERJAX said:
Cool man thanks. I Know cheating happens at every major program but you aren't technically guilty unless caught correct? Reggie Bush scandal is still fresh on the minds of most people.
Click to expand...

I get that. But on the subject of the thread, it's not really about who should have won X, Y, or Z national championship. It's about terrible claims. It's fine if someone wants to argue that Washington should have won it over BYU in '84. But no one of any consequence selected Washington. Both the AP and the Coaches picked BYU. That's certainly not a bad claim on BYU's part.

As for Auburn in '04, they don't claim USC's forfeited title and good for them. To me, it's hard to say that Auburn should get any stripped title, because Oklahoma went into the BCSNCG in 2nd place. It was Oklahoma that was screwed by USC playing an ineligible player. It's impossible to ignore the fact that Oklahoma got destroyed in that game, but they got destroyed by a team that never should have been there. That's why I think that, if you're not going to leave the title in the books for USC, you simply have to leave it vacant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 05_never_again
#38
#38
bamawriter said:
I get that. But on the subject of the thread, it's not really about who should have won X, Y, or Z national championship. It's about terrible claims. It's fine if someone wants to argue that Washington should have won it over BYU in '84. But no one of any consequence selected Washington. Both the AP and the Coaches picked BYU. That's certainly not a bad claim on BYU's part.

As for Auburn in '04, they don't claim USC's forfeited title and good for them. To me, it's hard to say that Auburn should get any stripped title, because Oklahoma went into the BCSNCG in 2nd place. It was Oklahoma that was screwed by USC playing an ineligible player. It's impossible to ignore the fact that Oklahoma got destroyed in that game, but they got destroyed by a team that never should have been there. That's why I think that, if you're not going to leave the title in the books for USC, you simply have to leave it vacant.
Click to expand...
Gotcha. I think the barn would have lost to USC as well but it would have been a closer game compared to what the sooners were able to do.
 
#39
#39
bamawriter said:
I get that. But on the subject of the thread, it's not really about who should have won X, Y, or Z national championship. It's about terrible claims. It's fine if someone wants to argue that Washington should have won it over BYU in '84. But no one of any consequence selected Washington. Both the AP and the Coaches picked BYU. That's certainly not a bad claim on BYU's part.

As for Auburn in '04, they don't claim USC's forfeited title and good for them. To me, it's hard to say that Auburn should get any stripped title, because Oklahoma went into the BCSNCG in 2nd place. It was Oklahoma that was screwed by USC playing an ineligible player. It's impossible to ignore the fact that Oklahoma got destroyed in that game, but they got destroyed by a team that never should have been there. That's why I think that, if you're not going to leave the title in the books for USC, you simply have to leave it vacant.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I should have specified when I brought up BYU that I think the fact both the AP and Coaches polls picking BYU should have been more controversial, not the fact that BYU claims it. Given that those respected polls declared them #1, BYU should claim it and don't critique them for doing so. I think it's controversial that those polls selected them #1 in the first place.

BYU's situation in 1984 is different that UCF's situation in 2017 in that I think UCF's claim of a title is controversial, in addition to the fact that a poll (even though it's a poll nobody cares about) ranked them #1.
 
#40
#40
05_never_again said:
Agreed. I should have specified when I brought up BYU that I think the fact both the AP and Coaches polls picking BYU should have been more controversial, not the fact that BYU claims it. Given that those respected polls declared them #1, BYU should claim it and don't critique them for doing so. I think it's controversial that those polls selected them #1 in the first place.

BYU's situation in 1984 is different that UCF's situation in 2017 in that I think UCF's claim of a title is controversial, in addition to the fact that a poll (even though it's a poll nobody cares about) ranked them #1.
Click to expand...

UCF's lone selector wasn't even a poll. The Colley Matrix is a math system.
 
#43
#43
UT 67 is really quite an embarrassment to me. I would never say anybody else had an ugly baby. That one is ugly enough for me.
 
#47
#47
Lawrence Wright said:
We will never know.

Both UT and Bama claim bogus national titles. It’s hypocritical to knock UCF for claiming their bogus national title.
Click to expand...
Maybe it's orange-colored glasses, but I don't think any of Tennessee's claimed national titles, even the one from 1967, I don't think is as bogus as UCF's.
 
#48
#48
05_never_again said:
Maybe it's orange-colored glasses, but I don't think any of Tennessee's claimed national titles, even the one from 1967, I don't think is as bogus as UCF's.
Click to expand...

It’s orange colored glasses...a bogus title is a bogus title. The last thing I’m about to do is break down UT’s 1967 strength of schedule and stack it up to UCF three seasons ago. 😂

I’d also argue UCF’s bogus national title is no more bogus than BYU’s 1984 bogus national title. BYU also went undefeated without playing anyone. At least UCF played a legit opponent in their bowl game.

Can’t throw shade at other schools doing what Bama and UT did decades ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Remy
#50
#50
Lawrence Wright said:
It’s orange colored glasses...a bogus title is a bogus title. The last thing I’m about to do is break down UT’s 1967 strength of schedule and stack it up to UCF three seasons ago. 😂

I’d also argue UCF’s bogus national title is no more bogus than BYU’s 1984 bogus national title. BYU also went undefeated without playing anyone. At least UCF played a legit opponent in their bowl game.

Can’t throw shade at other schools doing what Bama and UT did decades ago.
Click to expand...
Sure, but some are more bogus than others, would you agree?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top