VFL-82-JP
Bleedin' Orange...
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2015
- Messages
- 20,391
- Likes
- 55,893
Let's talk about undisputed national champions.
But let's start with post-war reconstruction.
A little more than 50 years passed between the end of the American Civil War (1865) and the end of the First World War (1918). It was a rough time in America. The people needed a diversion, something other than toil to focus on. And because we were a rough people coming through a rough period, we needed perhaps a rough-and-tumble sport. So it may be no coincidence that the period from the Civil War to WW I, those 50 years, are also roughly the first 50 years of American football (1869-1918).
During those first 50 years, there was a "unanimous national champion" about a third of the time. Yale was the undisputed champion ten years, Princeton had the crown another five, while Harvard and Georgia Tech each stood atop the pile once.
But here's the thing: throughout those first 50 years, there were only a handful of significant ranking systems. This was long before the AP poll or the UPI/Coaches poll. Not more than four nationally-recognized ranking systems existed in those years, often only two or three published in any given year. All of those original polls/systems have fallen by the wayside over the century and a half since.
Central point of all this: when there are only a few systems ranking a limited number of teams, it is relatively easy to reach agreement on who's the champ.
Then a curious thing happened in 1919, the 51st year of the game: the number of ranking polls and mathematical systems published in nationally-read papers and wire services BALLOONED. From five the year prior, to FOURTEEN (14) in 1919. WWI was over; Black Jack Pershing and the lads were back home. At the same time, more and more colleges were fielding football teams. Between the increased number of choices of top teams, and the increased number of polls/systems choosing them, the chances of finding a single, unanimous national champion took a nose-dive.
As already mentioned, the first 50 years of college football saw 17 undisputed national champions. The next 50 years (1919-1968) would see only three: Notre Dame in 1943, Michigan in 1948, and Texas in 1963. Every other claimed championship during that period of our history is disputed between two or more (usually more) teams.
Now we've arrived at the most recent half-century of American college football, the period 1969 to present. And guess what? The number of undisputed national champions has climbed back up to levels not seen since the first fifty. Over these most recent 47 years, we've seen eleven different unanimous champs...and eight of those eleven have come since the introduction of the Bowl Championship System (BCS). This makes sense, given that all the momentum that built up to adoption of the BCS came from frustration at more than one (or two, or even three) teams all trying to claim the title each year. It was a mess back then, and folks just wanted it to be settled...not in the newspapers, but on the gridiron. So the BCS was born.
But you know what? The BCS didn't solve that problem. Sure, it usually (not always) got the AP poll and the Coaches poll to agree at year's end. But it couldn't bring all of the score or so of different ranking and polling systems in line. Fact is, only six times in the 16 years of the BCS were all the polls and ranking systems in complete agreement. In other words, most of the time, they weren't. For a system designed to "decide it on the field," the BCS turned out not to reach deep enough into the pool of contenders to satisfy all the various systems.
But it appears based on early returns that the CFP format may have broken that code. Thus far, in both years that the 4-team playoff has run, the winner of that playoff has been undisputed as the national champion. Across all of the score or so of different services and polls. That is a pretty strong argument in favor of the new format...and perhaps an argument that no expansion to 8 or 16 teams is needed.
So what teams can truly claim to be "undisputed national champion" throughout the almost 150-year history of college football? Surprisingly few: just 31 different squads from only 13 different universities:
First 50 Years -- limited # of teams, limited # of polls/ranking systems:
So why is any of this important? It's not, really, just something football-related to do while waiting for tonight's game (it can't get here fast enough!). Just thought a few folks might share with me a bit of curiousity as to who can TRULY claim a title as "undisputed national champion" in college football.
Go Vols! Here's hoping we add ourselves to this very selective list in the near future!
(next post is the stats page; feel free to skip it)
But let's start with post-war reconstruction.
A little more than 50 years passed between the end of the American Civil War (1865) and the end of the First World War (1918). It was a rough time in America. The people needed a diversion, something other than toil to focus on. And because we were a rough people coming through a rough period, we needed perhaps a rough-and-tumble sport. So it may be no coincidence that the period from the Civil War to WW I, those 50 years, are also roughly the first 50 years of American football (1869-1918).
During those first 50 years, there was a "unanimous national champion" about a third of the time. Yale was the undisputed champion ten years, Princeton had the crown another five, while Harvard and Georgia Tech each stood atop the pile once.
But here's the thing: throughout those first 50 years, there were only a handful of significant ranking systems. This was long before the AP poll or the UPI/Coaches poll. Not more than four nationally-recognized ranking systems existed in those years, often only two or three published in any given year. All of those original polls/systems have fallen by the wayside over the century and a half since.
Central point of all this: when there are only a few systems ranking a limited number of teams, it is relatively easy to reach agreement on who's the champ.
Then a curious thing happened in 1919, the 51st year of the game: the number of ranking polls and mathematical systems published in nationally-read papers and wire services BALLOONED. From five the year prior, to FOURTEEN (14) in 1919. WWI was over; Black Jack Pershing and the lads were back home. At the same time, more and more colleges were fielding football teams. Between the increased number of choices of top teams, and the increased number of polls/systems choosing them, the chances of finding a single, unanimous national champion took a nose-dive.
As already mentioned, the first 50 years of college football saw 17 undisputed national champions. The next 50 years (1919-1968) would see only three: Notre Dame in 1943, Michigan in 1948, and Texas in 1963. Every other claimed championship during that period of our history is disputed between two or more (usually more) teams.
Now we've arrived at the most recent half-century of American college football, the period 1969 to present. And guess what? The number of undisputed national champions has climbed back up to levels not seen since the first fifty. Over these most recent 47 years, we've seen eleven different unanimous champs...and eight of those eleven have come since the introduction of the Bowl Championship System (BCS). This makes sense, given that all the momentum that built up to adoption of the BCS came from frustration at more than one (or two, or even three) teams all trying to claim the title each year. It was a mess back then, and folks just wanted it to be settled...not in the newspapers, but on the gridiron. So the BCS was born.
But you know what? The BCS didn't solve that problem. Sure, it usually (not always) got the AP poll and the Coaches poll to agree at year's end. But it couldn't bring all of the score or so of different ranking and polling systems in line. Fact is, only six times in the 16 years of the BCS were all the polls and ranking systems in complete agreement. In other words, most of the time, they weren't. For a system designed to "decide it on the field," the BCS turned out not to reach deep enough into the pool of contenders to satisfy all the various systems.
But it appears based on early returns that the CFP format may have broken that code. Thus far, in both years that the 4-team playoff has run, the winner of that playoff has been undisputed as the national champion. Across all of the score or so of different services and polls. That is a pretty strong argument in favor of the new format...and perhaps an argument that no expansion to 8 or 16 teams is needed.
So what teams can truly claim to be "undisputed national champion" throughout the almost 150-year history of college football? Surprisingly few: just 31 different squads from only 13 different universities:
First 50 Years -- limited # of teams, limited # of polls/ranking systems:
- Yale - 10 times
- Princeton - 5 times
- Harvard - 1
- Georgia Tech - 1
- Texas - 2 (1963, 2005)
- Nebraska - 2 times (1971, 1995)
- USC - 2 (1972, 2004)
- FSU - 2 (1999, 2013)
- Alabama - 2 (2009, 2015)
- Notre Dame - 1 (1943)
- Michigan - 1 (1948)
- Miami - 1 (2001)
- Ohio State - 1 (2014)
~ ~ ~
So why is any of this important? It's not, really, just something football-related to do while waiting for tonight's game (it can't get here fast enough!). Just thought a few folks might share with me a bit of curiousity as to who can TRULY claim a title as "undisputed national champion" in college football.
Go Vols! Here's hoping we add ourselves to this very selective list in the near future!
(next post is the stats page; feel free to skip it)
Last edited:
