«

»

Oct 16

Print this Post

The Great Crimson Lie…

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Originally posted by McallieDawg on Volquest Chat (click title for link)

If you read the NCAA records (online), you won’t be left with a sense that Bama can legitimately claim 12 NCs.

When you hear a Bammer fan say that Bammer has 12 NCs, you can immediately confront the LIE. Here are THE FACTS:

1925: There was no national champion (or championship) in 1925. Without exception, every poll mentioned in the NCAA record book was assigned retroactively no less than 1 year later, and as many as 55 years later. The two polling methods Bammer quotes are Helms (applied retroactively in 1941) and Football Annual/College Football Researchers Association (whose retroactive application of their method was no earlier than 1982, and is described in the NCAA Record Book as “conducted on a poll by Harry Carson Frye”). Who the hell is Harry Carson Frye? A Bammer? I just didn’t get a good feeling about this, so I did a little more research.

What I found was that Dartmouth appears to have the only legitimate claim to the 1925 championship, as the method used (Dickinson) came into being prior to 1925, although it was not marketed to newspapers until 1926. Dickinson’s method seems to be the first to employ strength-of-schedule and a trophy (the Rissman Trophy). There is a lengthy write-up about the Dickinson poll on the USC website ( http://usctrojans.collegesports.com/sports/
m-footbl/spec-rel/101504aah.html); if you read it, it’s pretty obvious that this was the prevailing method of the day.

Scratch the alleged 1925 championship. This Bammer lie has been exposed and repudiated.

1926: According to Dickinson (the poll in use in 1926), Stanford is the 1926 National Champion. But wait a minute, the Bammers say… Alabama tied Stanford in its final game of the season (the Rose Bowl), and both were otherwise undefeated. The question is – was Dickinson applied after the head-to-head matchup? The answer is YES – check the Stanford website – Stanford received the Rissman Trophy. If there’s any doubt – Notre Dame (believe it or not) has/had permanent possession of the Rissman Trophy; it may have an inscription indicating the 1926 National Champion. My guess is that it’s got “Stanford” next to “1926″, but if you want to be sure, call the Notre Dame Athletic Department; maybe they can tell you for sure. Without any better information….

Scratch the alleged 1926 championship. Another Bammer lie exposed and repudiated.

1930: Notre Dame is ranked #1 by 9 of the 13 polls recognized by the NCAA records for 1930. Of the 13 polls, only three were actually used in 1930: Dickinson, Boand, and Houlgate, and all three selected Notre Dame. The modern day NCAA consensus pick is also Notre Dame.

Scratch the alleged 1930 championship. Another Bammer lie exposed and repudiated.

1934: Here’s our first potential dilemma. Of the polls in use mentioned in the NCAA records, six are actually in existence in 1934, and they’re evenly split between Minnesota and Bammer. The edge would seem to be in Minnesota’s favor (Dickinson picked’em), but if we look further at the NCAA data, on p. 89, the modern-day NCAA consensus pick is Minnesota – who also at least shared the 1935 National Championship with SMU (who lost in their bowl game to Stanford). Minnesota also won the 1936 National Championship outright.

Scratch the alleged 1934 championship. Another Bammer lie exposed and repudiated.

1941: Woops…. it’s Minnesota again. Of the seven polls in existence at the time, Minnesota comes out on top in six (including Dickinson, and the Associated Press). Bammer comes out on top in only one (existing) poll, and no retroactive polls. But it gets better! During the season, Bammer lost to Vanderbilt (who ended the season unranked according to the AP) and Mississippi State (who ended the season ranked #16 according to the AP). AP puts Bammer at #20. No question here…

Scratch the alleged 1941 championship. Another Bammer lie exposed and repudiated.

1961: No doubt here – it’s Bammer’s first National Championship.

1964: Sorry Bammer! No cigar!: Bammer was undefeated until it lost to #5 Texas (who was the unanimous 1963 National Champion) in the Orange Bowl. And if you can’t beat #5, then you can’t be #1. Isn’t this obvious?

Scratch the alleged 1964 championship. Another Bammer lie exposed and repudiated.

1965: Not much doubt here – Michigan State loses its bowl game, and Bammer moves up to #1 from #4. Bear gets National Championship #2.

1973: Sorry Bammer, no cigar here! #1 ranked Bammer plays #4 Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl – and LOSES 24-23. Notre Dame moves up to #1, and is the consensus National Champion; to say Bammer is better than Notre Dame in 1973 is beyond delusional – it’s an outright lie. The only reason Bammers claim they were National Champions in 1973 is because, at that time, the UPI poll didn’t consider bowl games as the AP and other polls did. It would seem to most people that if you can’t beat #4, then you can’t be #1, but a deception based on an outdated poll is good enough for the Mullet Nation…

Scratch the alleged 1973 championship. Another Bammer lie exposed and repudiated.

1978: Looks like a winner… Bammer loses early in the season to USC, but not long after, USC loses to Arizona State. Both win their bowl games, and finish 10-1. Bammer wins the AP poll, USC the UPI poll. It’s Bammer’s third National Championship.

1979: No question here… Bammer’s 4th National Championship.

1992: No question here either – Bammer’s 5th National Championship.

————————————————-

SO….. in review: 12 – 7 = 5.

FIVE NCs. And five only.

Now that we know the correct number… what would have happened had the NCAA uncovered the corruption at Bammer back in 1958? I dare say there would be ZERO national championships, and perhaps several hundred FELONY CONVICTIONS…

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

10 comments

2 pings

Skip to comment form

  1. Anonymous

    why does nobody ever respond? This site is funny.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  2. LWS

    Respond to what? We fear we use to many words to hold peoples attention

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  3. Big Papi

    Maybe a sharticle on the Memphis-Bama slave trade would cause the Bammers to respond.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  4. Anonymous

    Good God you must must have a lot of time on your hands.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  5. irishjihad

    The 1941 one is the only one I don't claim.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  6. Your mom

    Nat Championships were given out before the Bowl games you fucking idiot. This discussion is so old little kid. We actually are listed 17 times for a National Championship and only claim 12 so STFU

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  7. BamaFan

    I just want to thank you for all of your interest in Alabama football. If only there was another school that had as much history of winning that you could do research on then maybe you wouldn't have to consume all of your time looking up the Tide. Roll Tide Roll

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  8. Jai Eugene

    Mike Price

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  9. SavageOrangeJug

    ". Your mom - May 9, 2007
    Nat Championships were given out before the Bowl games you fucking idiot. This discussion is so old little kid. We actually are listed 17 times for a National Championship and only claim 12 so STFU"

    WTF? Is there something in Alabama water that makes them delusional?

    It's getting close to football saeson. Shouldn't you Bammers be down there trying to dig up that dead drunk?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  10. Jai Eugene

    Savage

    I started to repost this with current date...It is a timeless classic

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  1. College Football News: Florida Preview - Page 3 - SEC Talk Forums

    [...] I s this the Bama Perry Board? Perry please stop posting those goofball (and awful mspaint) pics. Here is a little light reading: The Great Crimson Lie... « Loser with Socks [...]

  2. Bama's Championships (explained) - SEC Talk Forums

    [...] Bama's Championships (explained) The Great Crimson Lie… « Loser with Socks [...]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Recommended Articles