Who wants Alabama

[irishog77]

If/when we beat SC I want a vbook for the number of y'alls we will hear over the next 6 weeks. I am betting the over and I don't care what you set the line at.

I eternally hope the number of "y'alls" far surpass the number of "you guys"

Oh, it's on GITF!!!!!

 

[Irish Houstonian]

No, we were awarded a national championship by the UPI. You probably know it as the Coaches poll. It's not a People's National Championship; it's legit....

Not totally correct...back then, by rule, the Coaches never voted after the end of the regular season. Had the coaches been able to vote after the Cotton Bowl they surely wouldn't have chosen the loser #1.

And if this mythical "National Championship" was legit, Alabama should have just packed up their season and not even played in any bowl. After all, after the last season game they won the National Championship! Funny how they waited until they lost their bowl to celebrate their national dominance.

It's like saying the 94' Expos won the World Series.

 

[WaveDomer]

Don't be too harsh on the 'Bama fans. I for one welcome them and hope to hear the inside scoop on things I don't know much about, like oversigning, greyshirting, keeping your players focused before playing high school teams, and never playing in cold weather.

 

[ickythump1225]

1977: The Irish went into New Year's Day ranked No. 5 and Alabama was ranked No. 3. Both won their bowls by significant margins - Notre Dame 38-10 over No. 1 Texas and Alabama 35-6 over No. 9 Ohio State - but the Irish leaped over the Tide.

Y'all maintain that ND deserved the crown because Texas was ranked No. 1. But Notre Dame lost that year to Ole Miss, which went 5-6 and lost 34-13 to Alabama. The Tide's loss came to 9-3 Nebraska on the same day Notre Dame lost to Mississippi.

That would never happen today. The championship belonged to Alabama, just like the '66 one did. That's two three-peats for the Tide if things were as they should be.

 

[ickythump1225]

Seriously, how f*cking stupid are you? Do they teach rational thinking in the South?

The reason was because of Notre Dame's body of work being more impressive... that's the same thing that would happen today if people were still voting on stuff... hence why Alabama is ranked ahead of Florida this year despite Florida playing a MUCH tougher SOS and having many better wins and also having a better loss. But Florida has struggled on offense recently and not had style points and Alabama has looked more impressive... so Alabama sits #2.

In 1977, Notre Dame beat USC 49-19... Alabama beat USC 21-20. In 1977, Notre Dame wouped the #1 undefeated team with the Heisman trophy winner Earl Campbell to close out the year... Alabama beat a 2 loss team... and they both won with comparable margin of victory. Nore Dame also owned wins over #7 Pittsburgh, #15 Clemson... Alabama had NO OTHER WINS OVER ANY RANKED TEAMS.

To point out one data point... a singular loss to Ole Miss... and ignore everything else is beyond ridiculous. It's certifiably stupid... or just really biased. Notre Dame was handily voted #1 and earned it by their far superior body of work over the course of the year.

And yet this year all we hear about is the Pitt game. People have a laser like focus on the Pitt game and ignore everything else we've done all year.

 

[wakeuptheechoes]

Well I just got back to work offshore. I have a boat captain and a company man both from Alabama. So guess what BS I have had to listen to. Don't get me wrong I give it right back. But I have heard how we would only be the 5th or 6th best team in the SEC and how we don't have a qb that would make a pimple on Manziel *** and he was the reason Alabama lost. Guys, I want us to beat USC and i don't care if we only win by 1 point, and if we do and get an SEC team in the NC game, I want to see a good old fashioned beat down. I want to beat the dog sh**!!! out of an SEC team.

 

[WaveDomer]

Well I just got back to work offshore. I have a boat captain and a company man both from Alabama. So guess what BS I have had to listen to. Don't get me wrong I give it right back. But I have heard how we would only be the 5th or 6th best team in the SEC and how we don't have a qb that would make a pimple on Manziel *** and he was the reason Alabama lost. Guys, I want us to beat USC and i don't care if we only win by 1 point, and if we do and get an SEC team in the NC game, I want to see a good old fashioned beat down. I want to beat the dog sh**!!! out of an SEC team.

Well, TAMU is ranked behind 4 other SEC teams. So theoretically they are the 5th best team in the SEC and they beat the theoretical best team in the SEC at that team's home field. So if ND is the 5th best SEC team, it's all good.

 

[wakeuptheechoes]

1977: The Irish went into New Year's Day ranked No. 5 and Alabama was ranked No. 3. Both won their bowls by significant margins - Notre Dame 38-10 over No. 1 Texas and Alabama 35-6 over No. 9 Ohio State - but the Irish leaped over the Tide.

Y'all maintain that ND deserved the crown because Texas was ranked No. 1. But Notre Dame lost that year to Ole Miss, which went 5-6 and lost 34-13 to Alabama. The Tide's loss came to 9-3 Nebraska on the same day Notre Dame lost to Mississippi.

That would never happen today. The championship belonged to Alabama, just like the '66 one did. That's two three-peats for the Tide if things were as they should be.

I always here that crap from you Bama guys. Here is the bottom line in 77 we would have beat the crap out of you. True we did lose to Ole Miss fair and square. We also did not start the qb that finished our season and beat Texas. Montana did not start in the Ole Miss game. But hey, that's not the fault of Ole Miss. But beating the #9 team in the Sugar Bowl is not the same as beating the #1 Team. and shutting down Earl Campbell. Also if I remember correctly, the game ended with the Irish inside the Texas 10 they could have scored again they ran out the clock they down the ball to keep from running up the score to 45-10. Remember y'all own the Sugar Bowl that's your bowl (Except when you play us) Texas was the home team in the Cotton Bowl and we took it to them. There was another time in 1980, when y'all were the home team at Legion Field in Birmingham when we shut you out 7-0. Blanked at home OMG! How many times has Alabama been shut out at Legion Field? You guys claim the SEC is filled with tough teams and if you play tough teams that should count more. Well, Sir I submit to you that usually a #1 team is considered a tougher team than a #9 team, shouldn't it have counted for more. You can't have it both ways.

 

[BeauBenken]

Seriously, how f*cking stupid are you? Do they teach rational thinking in the South?

The reason was because of Notre Dame's body of work being more impressive... that's the same thing that would happen today if people were still voting on stuff... hence why Alabama is ranked ahead of Florida this year despite Florida playing a MUCH tougher SOS and having many better wins and also having a better loss. But Florida has struggled on offense recently and not had style points and Alabama has looked more impressive... so Alabama sits #2.

In 1977, Notre Dame beat USC 49-19... Alabama beat USC 21-20. In 1977, Notre Dame wouped the #1 undefeated team with the Heisman trophy winner Earl Campbell to close out the year... Alabama beat a 2 loss team... and they both won with comparable margin of victory. Nore Dame also owned wins over #7 Pittsburgh, #15 Clemson... Alabama had NO OTHER WINS OVER ANY RANKED TEAMS.

To point out one data point... a singular loss to Ole Miss... and ignore everything else is beyond ridiculous. It's certifiably stupid... or just really biased. Notre Dame was handily voted #1 and earned it by their far superior body of work over the course of the year.

 

[yankeeND]

This is actually perfect if everything goes to plan. There would be no possible way that winning the NC could be more rewarding than to play and beat Alabama. Like it or not they are the class of college football the last few years. I'm on the or not side of that and for my Golden Domers to have the opportunity to take that from them is amazing! This is 100% the only way I would want it to happen. Bama is a great team but they can be beaten, now the question is can we do it and will we afford ourselves the opportunity to get there to do it?

 

[NDFANnSouthWest]

Seriously, how f*cking stupid are you? Do they teach rational thinking in the South?

The reason was because of Notre Dame's body of work being more impressive... that's the same thing that would happen today if people were still voting on stuff... hence why Alabama is ranked ahead of Florida this year despite Florida playing a MUCH tougher SOS and having many better wins and also having a better loss. But Florida has struggled on offense recently and not had style points and Alabama has looked more impressive... so Alabama sits #2.

In 1977, Notre Dame beat USC 49-19... Alabama beat USC 21-20. In 1977, Notre Dame wouped the #1 undefeated team with the Heisman trophy winner Earl Campbell to close out the year... Alabama beat a 2 loss team... and they both won with comparable margin of victory. Nore Dame also owned wins over #7 Pittsburgh, #15 Clemson... Alabama had NO OTHER WINS OVER ANY RANKED TEAMS.


To point out one data point... a singular loss to Ole Miss... and ignore everything else is beyond ridiculous. It's certifiably stupid... or just really biased. Notre Dame was handily voted #1 and earned it by their far superior body of work over the course of the year.

There is a reason why i wrote your name in when voting for President! Damn....great...post!!!!

 

[PraetorianND]

No, we were awarded a national championship by the UPI. You probably know it as the Coaches poll. It's not a People's National Championship; it's legit.

In 1973, who was a humble Alabama team to decline to accept one of the most prestigious NC trophies in the history of the sport? That would have been rude of us and quite arrogant.

I realize many believe that Alabama should have dictated to the UPI how they should have operated their poll and chastised them for even dare approach us with their beautiful trophy.

If Alabama were honest, they would have told the UPI presenters that one day, almost 5 decades later, there would be posters on the Internet who didn't agree with their methods and thought that football began in the year 2000 or so and they just couldn't accept it.

They should have told the UPI that one day in the future, there would be this conglomeration of colleges who joined something called the BCS and the BCS rules wouldn't be the same as they were in 1973 so, they could not in good spirit accept their award.

Y'all are funny.

Ok we get it Bama is better than ND, cool. You sounds like an OU fan.

 

[CtrlAltDel]

Please just stop. We could argue about this for a while. But its just not worth it.

I didn't realize I was being rude or disrespectful. Of course, I don't know the rules of the board. Are potential opponents not allowed on this board? Is there a board where fans of other teams are shuttered off to where they aren't allowed to talk to an Irish fans?

 

[PerthDomer]

I understand split title and the like, I just wish you guys would stick to claiming ones made after all the games were played. I really don't think I could claim that '73 one with a straight face if the tables were turned.

 

[woolybug25]

I want these smug bastards. They will probably claim the title after we beat them, but we will know the truth. But besides that, they truly have been a great team as of late. I don't want to back into a title by getting a favorable matchup. I want to beat the best. That is Bama.

 

[CtrlAltDel]

Not totally correct...back then, by rule, the Coaches never voted after the end of the regular season. Had the coaches been able to vote after the Cotton Bowl they surely wouldn't have chosen the loser #1.

And if this mythical "National Championship" was legit, Alabama should have just packed up their season and not even played in any bowl. After all, after the last season game they won the National Championship! Funny how they waited until they lost their bowl to celebrate their national dominance.

It's like saying the 94' Expos won the World Series.

So many people know so very little about college football. Sometimes I think it would be nice if we could wipe their slates clean and reprogram them with more knowledge than they currently possess.

Allow me to fill you in on the truth of Alabama's championships, untainted by derision and falsehoods. Keep in mind that a shared NC, in times past, was a NC. Also, keep in mind that we can't apply BCS rules of present times to times past because that is just not how things work.

Also, if Alabama won a UPI trophy one season and another team won an AP trophy the same season, Alabama were still NC's. Of course, the other team was also. Alabama was never so powerful to be able to tell the AP or UPI when or how to award their beautiful trophies. It would have been quite rude of Alabama to simply refuse to accept an AP trophy or a UPI trophy because we didn't agree with whether or not they awarded trophies before or after bowl games. That was their business, not Alabama's.

Pre-WW-II, the Rose Bowl was, in fact, considered a de-facto NC game as it was the only post season game with any prominence whatsoever. Any pre-war title claim based on the Rose Bowl is as solid as it gets.

But by the 1940's there were so many bowls popping up that they came to be seen as little more than exhibition games (esp after the Rose began its Pac-10/Big-10 tie in). SO, by the 1950's, Polls are really all that should count - but remember that AP was NOT a respected selector by ANY stretch of the imagination until they changed their voting rules in 1958. UPI was the only respected poll until that time.

The fact is that Polls chose to name champions before the bowls simply reflects the opinion of the country. Bowls were not considered particularly meaningful until the late '60's to early '70's - basically when TV became a huge part of the game. That's why AP didn't permanently switch to post-bowl polls until around '68 and UPI didn't until '74.

Every argument about out 1973 title being bogus only "proves" that we should have been named champion in '77. Any argument about our 1964 Title only "proves" that we were robbed in 1966.
If you think 1941 sucks, then explain 1945?

 

[woolybug25]

So many people know so very little about college football. Sometimes I think it would be nice if we could wipe their slates clean and reprogram them with more knowledge than they currently possess.

Allow me to fill you in on the truth of Alabama's championships, untainted by derision and falsehoods. Keep in mind that a shared NC, in times past, was a NC. Also, keep in mind that we can't apply BCS rules of present times to times past because that is just not how things work.

Also, if Alabama won a UPI trophy one season and another team won an AP trophy the same season, Alabama were still NC's. Of course, the other team was also. Alabama was never so powerful to be able to tell the AP or UPI when or how to award their beautiful trophies. It would have been quite rude of Alabama to simply refuse to accept an AP trophy or a UPI trophy because we didn't agree with whether or not they awarded trophies before or after bowl games. That was their business, not Alabama's.

Pre-WW-II, the Rose Bowl was, in fact, considered a de-facto NC game as it was the only post season game with any prominence whatsoever. Any pre-war title claim based on the Rose Bowl is as solid as it gets.

But by the 1940's there were so many bowls popping up that they came to be seen as little more than exhibition games (esp after the Rose began its Pac-10/Big-10 tie in). SO, by the 1950's, Polls are really all that should count - but remember that AP was NOT a respected selector by ANY stretch of the imagination until they changed their voting rules in 1958. UPI was the only respected poll until that time.

The fact is that Polls chose to name champions before the bowls simply reflects the opinion of the country. Bowls were not considered particularly meaningful until the late '60's to early '70's - basically when TV became a huge part of the game. That's why AP didn't permanently switch to post-bowl polls until around '68 and UPI didn't until '74.

Every argument about out 1973 title being bogus only "proves" that we should have been named champion in '77. Any argument about our 1964 Title only "proves" that we were robbed in 1966.
If you think 1941 sucks, then explain 1945?

Bottom line... Notre Dame would have 23 championships if we claimed championships in the manner of your school. You can go around and act like you have the most championships, but you don't. Claiming championships that weren't won unanimously is farging weak. But that is the culture of the SEC. Cheat at all costs. So tell yourself that you have won as many as you like. We all know the truth, we claim UNANIMOUS CHAMPIONSHIPS and Bama picks and chooses.

In your response, you tell us yourself that you claim championships based off different rational. That really doesn't strike you as stupid? Seriously...

 

[CtrlAltDel]

I want these smug bastards. They will probably claim the title after we beat them, but we will know the truth. But besides that, they truly have been a great team as of late. I don't want to back into a title by getting a favorable matchup. I want to beat the best. That is Bama.

I've never associated with or known any ND fans, even online. I can say that, as a new poster to this board who really had no preconceptions one way or the other about ND fans, many of you seem angry and kind of arrogant.

I come here as a fan of a team who will potentionally be facing a team that all of you support. So far, I've been cursed at about 3 or 4 times, read every stereotype in the book about 'dem dumb Southerners in various threads, etc...

It's bizarre. Football fans are supposed to enjoy football and have fun supporting a team, not be bitter and angry and snide to anyone that may just try to talk to you.

I haven't read anything about the Civil War yet but, I'm sure that will be next. I went to a Michigan Scout board at the beginning of the season and, I'm not joking, it seems like every other poster on their board would bring up the Civil War when talking to a Bama fan. It was so weird. I mean, they really live in the past.

 

[CtrlAltDel]

Bottom line... Notre Dame would have 23 championships if we claimed championships in the manner of your school. You can go around and act like you have the most championships, but you don't. Claiming championships that weren't won unanimously is farging weak. But that is the culture of the SEC. Cheat at all costs. So tell yourself that you have won as many as you like. We all know the truth.

Really? Why is claiming championships that weren't won unamiously weak? Are you a teenager or in your early 20's? That is how just about all of that age range thinks.

They also believe that football started with the creation of the BCS.

Alabama claims 4 titles from before the AP poll was created in 1936. Prior to the establishment of the AP and UPI/Coaches Polls, there was no "gold standard" in regard to football polls.

Since the inception of the AP and UPI polls, each of Alabama's national titles but one were awarded by either the AP or UPI/Coaches poll. 1941 is completely bogus.

You can argue the merits or procedures used by the AP and UPI polls, but the bottom line is that many other teams claim titles from these polls in their official records (Notre Dame, OU, etc.)

People argue that Alabama claims titles that were awarded before bowl losses. Many people fail to realize two things.

1) Prior to the late 60s/early 70s, bowls were not widely used as evaluating tools for final rankings. They were exhibition games to reward teams and fans for a successful season, but there wasn't a whole lot of value placed in the outcome of the games. It wasn't like today when anyone with a pulse at the end of the season can go play in the Chuck E. Cheese Bowl. Some time ago, bowls were a legitimate reward for the best teams, but most voters placed more value on the body of work during the regular season.

2) Some teams elected to not participate in bowl games. Notre Dame is a prime example. The Irish, as an independent school, declined bowl invitations for almost 40 years. Many of their national titles were won during seasons when they did not participate in a post-season bowl. From the 30's or 40's until the early 70s they did this. Notre Dame claims about 15 national titles now, but had the luxury of not playing in a game they'd have likely lost on the post-season during many of those "championship runs."

Now tell me...how is it fair on one hand to say that a team like Alabama, Texas, Oklahoma, etc. that stepped up and played real competition in a bowl game should not have won a title because they lost said bowl game, but on the other hand, saying it's okay for ND to claim umpteen national titles while they played a weak schedule and declined the challenge of a bowl game?

How many of their elite teams in the 40s-60s would have had their records tarnished because of a bowl loss, as you're claiming Alabama did?

Finally, Alabama went undefeated and untied in 1945 and 1966. To honor Army during the 1945 season, they were awarded the national title in '45. I won't argue the legitimacy of that title because they deserved it and it was a gesture of patriotism and solidarity to do that. But still, Alabama had a very good team and could lay claim to that title. We do not.

In 1966, Alabama had claimed a share of the title in 64 and 65, but the national media wanted to send a message to Southern football teams because many Southern schools had not integrated their athletic programs yet. ND an MSU played to a tie in East Lansing, and both teams basically sat on the ball the entire second half playing for a tie.

Meanwhile, Alabama went undefeated and outscored opponents by an average of 20+ points and obliterated their opponent in the bowl game. ND and MSU claim a split national title, and Alabama finished third in voting despite starting the season ranked #1. We do not claim this title.

 

[woolybug25]

I've never associated with or known any ND fans, even online. I can say that, as a new poster to this board who really had no preconceptions one way or the other about ND fans, many of you seem angry and kind of arrogant.

I come here as a fan of a team who will potentionally be facing a team that all of you support. So far, I've been cursed at about 3 or 4 times, read every stereotype in the book about 'dem dumb Southerners in various threads, etc...

It's bizarre. Football fans are supposed to enjoy football and have fun supporting a team, not be bitter and angry and snide to anyone that may just try to talk to you.

I haven't read anything about the Civil War yet but, I'm sure that will be next. I went to a Michigan Scout board at the beginning of the season and, I'm not joking, it seems like every other poster on their board would bring up the Civil War when talking to a Bama fan. It was so weird. I mean, they really live in the past.

So you don't dispute what I said?... figures, since its the truth. I simply don't care about your experience with Michigan fans. I frankly don't see the relevance.

The reason we may seem arrogant to you is probably because you came onto our board and instantly tried touting you "National Titles" and downgrading our team. Look back over the weeks and you will see that we have welcomed respectful posters from our opponents every single week including Bama fans. Sooner fans still post here despite losing to us, wishing us luck. We do the same for them. But you, homeboy... I could give 2 chits if you stay or if you go.

 

[Irish YJ]

Back to the original question.....
Bama, UGA, doesn't matter. Just want the SEC's best. I live in ATL now, so basking in the glow of a win over either will be sweet. God forbid we lose, it will be a rough next 20 years.....

 

[ickythump1225]

So you don't dispute what I said?... figures, since its the truth. I simply don't care about your experience with Michigan fans. I frankly don't see the relevance.

The reason we may seem arrogant to you is probably because you came onto our board and instantly tried touting you "National Titles" and downgrading our team. Look back over the weeks and you will see that we have welcomed respectful posters from our opponents every single week including Bama fans. Sooner fans still post here despite losing to us, wishing us luck. We do the same for them. But you, homeboy... I could give 2 chits if you stay or if you go.

Bingo.

 

[greyhammer90]

I've never associated with or known any ND fans, even online. I can say that, as a new poster to this board who really had no preconceptions one way or the other about ND fans, many of you seem angry and kind of arrogant.

I come here as a fan of a team who will potentionally be facing a team that all of you support. So far, I've been cursed at about 3 or 4 times, read every stereotype in the book about 'dem dumb Southerners in various threads, etc...

It's bizarre. Football fans are supposed to enjoy football and have fun supporting a team, not be bitter and angry and snide to anyone that may just try to talk to you.

I haven't read anything about the Civil War yet but, I'm sure that will be next. I went to a Michigan Scout board at the beginning of the season and, I'm not joking, it seems like every other poster on their board would bring up the Civil War when talking to a Bama fan. It was so weird. I mean, they really live in the past.

Do me a favor. Make a profile on an Alabama fan board and pretend to be a ND fan. Now. Tell them that one of Bama's titles shouldn't count. Let me know how that goes.

 

[ickythump1225]

Back to the original question.....
Bama, UGA, doesn't matter. Just want the SEC's best. I live in ATL now, so basking in the glow of a win over either will be sweet. God forbid we lose, it will be a rough next 20 years.....

I know the feeling. Playing UGA would be the ultimate high risk/high reward game for me. Winning would so sweet...I'm not going to lie, I would be insufferable. I wouldn't be gracious hell no not after enduring SEC homerism for the past 5 years.

 

[NDPhilly]

If you use y'all in a sentence on the internet I have permision to look down on you.

 

[CtrlAltDel]

Do me a favor. Make a profile on an Alabama fan board and pretend to be a ND fan. Now. Tell them that one of Bama's titles shouldn't count. Let me know how that goes.

Why would I do that? I haven't done that here. Could you point out where I have said anything about one of ND's NC's not being legitimate? I think you have it backwards. It's ND fans who have pro-actively came after me saying that Alabama's titles don't count. What are you talking about?

 

[nlroma1o]

Really? Why is claiming championships that weren't won unamiously weak? Are you a teenager or in your early 20's? That is how just about all of that age range thinks.

They also believe that football started with the creation of the BCS.

Alabama claims 4 titles from before the AP poll was created in 1936. Prior to the establishment of the AP and UPI/Coaches Polls, there was no "gold standard" in regard to football polls.

Since the inception of the AP and UPI polls, each of Alabama's national titles but one were awarded by either the AP or UPI/Coaches poll. 1941 is completely bogus.

You can argue the merits or procedures used by the AP and UPI polls, but the bottom line is that many other teams claim titles from these polls in their official records (Notre Dame, OU, etc.)

People argue that Alabama claims titles that were awarded before bowl losses. Many people fail to realize two things.

1) Prior to the late 60s/early 70s, bowls were not widely used as evaluating tools for final rankings. They were exhibition games to reward teams and fans for a successful season, but there wasn't a whole lot of value placed in the outcome of the games. It wasn't like today when anyone with a pulse at the end of the season can go play in the Chuck E. Cheese Bowl. Some time ago, bowls were a legitimate reward for the best teams, but most voters placed more value on the body of work during the regular season.

2) Some teams elected to not participate in bowl games. Notre Dame is a prime example. The Irish, as an independent school, declined bowl invitations for almost 40 years. Many of their national titles were won during seasons when they did not participate in a post-season bowl. From the 30's or 40's until the early 70s they did this. Notre Dame claims about 15 national titles now, but had the luxury of not playing in a game they'd have likely lost on the post-season during many of those "championship runs."

Now tell me...how is it fair on one hand to say that a team like Alabama, Texas, Oklahoma, etc. that stepped up and played real competition in a bowl game should not have won a title because they lost said bowl game, but on the other hand, saying it's okay for ND to claim umpteen national titles while they played a weak schedule and declined the challenge of a bowl game?

How many of their elite teams in the 40s-60s would have had their records tarnished because of a bowl loss, as you're claiming Alabama did?

Finally, Alabama went undefeated and untied in 1945 and 1966. To honor Army during the 1945 season, they were awarded the national title in '45. I won't argue the legitimacy of that title because they deserved it and it was a gesture of patriotism and solidarity to do that. But still, Alabama had a very good team and could lay claim to that title. We do not.

In 1966, Alabama had claimed a share of the title in 64 and 65, but the national media wanted to send a message to Southern football teams because many Southern schools had not integrated their athletic programs yet. ND an MSU played to a tie in East Lansing, and both teams basically sat on the ball the entire second half playing for a tie.

Meanwhile, Alabama went undefeated and outscored opponents by an average of 20+ points and obliterated their opponent in the bowl game. ND and MSU claim a split national title, and Alabama finished third in voting despite starting the season ranked #1. We do not claim this title.

Notre Dame doesn't claim 15 titles??? I have no idea where you are getting your information from.

 

[phork]

I love Neg bombing idiots. My one vote knocks them down like 5 red bars. Haha.

 

[WakeUpEchoes]

I love Neg bombing idiots. My one vote knocks them down like 5 red bars. Haha.

LOL. I wish I had your power.

 

[PraetorianND]

1977: The Irish went into New Year's Day ranked No. 5 and Alabama was ranked No. 3. Both won their bowls by significant margins - Notre Dame 38-10 over No. 1 Texas and Alabama 35-6 over No. 9 Ohio State - but the Irish leaped over the Tide.

Y'all maintain that ND deserved the crown because Texas was ranked No. 1. But Notre Dame lost that year to Ole Miss, which went 5-6 and lost 34-13 to Alabama. The Tide's loss came to 9-3 Nebraska on the same day Notre Dame lost to Mississippi.

That would never happen today. The championship belonged to Alabama, just like the '66 one did. That's two three-peats for the Tide if things were as they should be.

Why would I do that? I haven't done that here. Could you point out where I have said anything about one of ND's NC's not being legitimate? I think you have it backwards. It's ND fans who have pro-actively came after me saying that Alabama's titles don't count. What are you talking about?