Nike biting the proverbial hand

#26
#26
bamawriter said:
The bold is incredibly ironic.

And Bama has nowhere near nine questionable claims. Shoot, we have 9 wire service titles, which cannot be intelligently debated.
Click to expand...

:lol:

'26, '30, '34, '41, '64, '65, '73 and '78. Those are absolutely questionable. That is only 8, I guess that is nowhere near 9...

You guys claim '65. We claim '67. Typo. Both are questionable, so I guess it is a bit ironic.

Don't compare us to Alabama delusions.
 
Last edited:
#27
#27
Kurtastrophe said:
:lol:

'26, '30, '34, '41, '64, '65, '73 and '78. Those are absolutely questionable. That is only 8, I guess that is nowhere near 9...
Click to expand...

You should actually detail your reasons, because otherwise it's just noise. But I'm betting you won't, because the standards that you use will probably take Tennessee down to 1 title.

You guys claim '65. We claim '67. Typo. Both are questionable, so I guess it is a bit ironic.
Click to expand...

Alabama was awarded the '65 title by the AP after the bowls had been played. The UPI selected Michigan St before the bowls, but Michigan State lost their bowl while Bama won the Orange, thus moving Bama up over the Spartans in the AP.

Tennessee was awarded the '67 title by the Litkenhous mathematical system and by no one else. Every consensus selector picked USC.

The two aren't comparable in the least. You can try harder than that.

Considering that you guys lost the bowl game of most of your "titles" speaks volumes. Don't compare us to Alabama delusions.
Click to expand...

Bama only lost the bowl game following the awarded titles in '64 and '73. 2 out 14 is a strange definition of "most."

Coincidentally, Tennessee lost their bowl games following the '40, '51, and '67 seasons. That's half of Tennessee's titles ending in a loss. So Tennessee lost more bowl games during claimed title years than Alabama despite the fact that Bama claims more than twice as many.

You are making this too easy.
 
#28
#28
Definition of QUESTIONABLE

1
obsolete : inviting inquiry
2
obsolete : liable to judicial inquiry or action
3
: affording reason for being doubted, questioned, or challenged : not certain or exact : problematic <milk of questionable purity> <a questionable decision>

Explain how our 1938 title is questionable beyond simply being a mythical title like the majority of titles awarded prior to the modern era.

I claim that we have 2 legitimate titles. If you actually defend that Alabama has 14, you are a really objectionable, well-reasoned fellow.
 
Last edited:
#29
#29
Kurtastrophe said:
Explain how our 1938 title is questionable beyond simply being a mythical title like the majority of titles awarded prior to the modern era.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with UT's '38 claim. Never said I did. I think both Tennessee and TCU are champions for 1938.

I claim that we have 2 legitimate titles. If you actually defend that Alabama has 14, you are a really objectionable, well-reasoned fellow.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing those two are '38 and '98. You should also count '51. The bowl games were completely meaningless in '51, so the fact that Tennessee lost theirs is totally irrelevant. Both wire service polls picked Tennessee.

By any reasonable standard, Tennessee has 3 national championships, and Alabama has 13 (I don't defend '41).
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top