Clearing Up Alabama's National Championship Debate...

Never in my life have I seen such a hubbub created by overly envious fans of rival teams. The envy is so strong, it's almost deadly. And of course, it all started when a goathumper (*ubarn, AL) fan discovered one of Alabama's titles was questionable. Then he began spreading misinformation and fabricated facts all across the internet, making it appear as if almost every Alabama championship is illegitimate.

There's been so much misinformation and baseless lies posted all across the internet regarding Alabama's 14 national championships, it's a crying shame so many people believe it, without bothering to do any research on their own.

Luckily, I'm here to pick up your slack...

Pre-AP/UPI Era (25, 26, 30 and 34)

Many claim these titles are illegitimate because during this era, there was "no such thing as a national champion". That, however, is false. Don't ask me where they get that idea from. They only assume there wasn't one because no polls existed during this time period.

If said people bothered to research their facts, they'd learn the Rose Bowl was the de facto national championship game (because it was the first and only bowl game to be played during this era, and the whoever was deemed the two best teams were invited to play in the annual game). Unlike them, I have done a little research myself and what I found, may surprise the envious liars.

So national champions didn't exist during this era of college football? Here are the screenshots from a few of my findings:

(click on each photo to see its full resolution)

The above photo shows O. Elmer Anderson presenting the 1935 national championship trophy to UA President George Denny; Coach Frank Thomas; team captain Captain Bill Lee.

As you can see, clearly one existed in during these years, and that was The University of Alabama.

Now there is an argument to be made about polls retroactively selecting champions in later years, but that doesn't change the fact Alabama won said titles fair and square. I have read where once the AP and UPI were implemented, college football basically "started over" (which explains why later polls retroactively selected champions during this period), meaning all past records were erased. But if this is the case, then to be fair to all the men who won titles during the 20s and 30s, then once the 2014 playoff system is implemented, college football should once again "start over", thus erasing all past accomplishments of every D1A team during the AP, UPI and BCS eras, right?

1941

Truly the only Alabama championship worth questioning the validity of. By now, the AP title had been established as the dominant selector, but Alabama did not finish first in its annual poll in this particular season. No one knows why Alabama claims this title, but in Alabama's defense, around the same time period there were numerous teams who claimed titles, despite not finishing first in the AP poll.

There was Kentucky in 1950, who finished 7th in the AP; Illinois who finished 5th in 1951; USC who finished 3rd in 1939; Tennessee who finished 4th in 1940 and 2nd in 1938; Georgia who finished 2nd in 1942; Pitt who finished 3rd in 1936; etc. etc. etc.

So as you can see, obviously this was the norm for the late 30s to early 50s. It was theorized that the AP remained irrelevant in the eyes of many until the UPI debuted in 1950, which was why so many teams claimed titles from that era, despite not finishing first in the major poll.

1964

People claim because Alabama lost their bowl game, they should give this title up. What kind of sense does that make when they were awarded the title BEFORE the bowl game was played?

During this time period, bowl games were considered "exhibition games". The AP would award their national champions at the end of the regular season, before the bowl games were played. Bowl games were basically a game that served as a reward for teams who elected to play in one (yes, they were optional as well). Saying post-season exhibition games counted during this era would be the equivalent to saying pre-season NFL games count today. Again, what kind of sense does that make?

Don't believe me?  Alabama isn't the only team to win a national title, despite not playing in or losing a bowl game. National Champion Oklahoma won the title in 1950, yet lost to Kentucky in the Sugar Bowl; National Champion Alabama Polytechnic Institute (now known as *ubarn, AL) won the title in 1957, despite not even playing in a bowl game due to NCAA sanctions; National Champion Tennessee lost to Maryland in the 1951 Sugar Bowl; National Champion Maryland lost the 1953 Sugar Bowl to Oklahoma; National Champions Minnesota lost the 1960 Rose Bowl to Washington; National Champions Michigan State lost the 1965 Rose Bowl to UCLA; National Champions Texas lost the 1970 Cotton Bowl to Notre Dame...

Either way, Alabama finished the regular season number 1 in both the AP and UPI thus winning the title. That can't be taken away from them. Period.

(By the way, do you guys have a problem with 8-0-1 Ohio State claiming a share of the 1961 title, not from the AP or UPI, because they were awarded to Alabama, but from the Football Writer's Association?)

1965

For some reason, people like to claim Alabama did not deserve this title because two other teams finished with a better record than 'Bama did.....

Then in fairness to Alabama by applying the same logic, in 1937, Alabama finished 8-0-1 while national champion, Minnesota finished 7-1; in 1945, Alabama finished 10-0 (with a Rose Bowl win) while National Champion, Army, finished 9-0, skipping out on the bowl season; In 1966, Alabama finished 11-0, while National Champion(s) Notre Dame and Michigan State (co-champs) both finished 9-0-1; In 1974, Alabama finished 11-1, while National Champion USC finished 10-1-1.

1973

See 1964.

1978

People claim because Alabama lost to USC in the regular season, and they both ultimately finished with the same record, then this title is not legit. Well, I guess since Alabama lost to LSU in the 2011 regular season, who also finished the season with an overall better record than Alabama, then the 2011 national title is illegitimate, correct?

Alabama did lose to USC at the beginning of the season, but Alabama jumped USC midway through the season after USC lost to mediocre Arizona State, while Alabama never lost another game. 

To complete the season, number 2 Alabama defeated number 1 Penn State in the Sugar Bowl, winning the AP title. I must also note USC was awarded the UPI title at the season's end.

Let's not forget about '37, '45 unclaimed years and the '66 and '77 screwjobs

That's right, if Alabama claimed outright bogus national championships, then why don't they make a claim for ANY of the aforementioned years in which they rightfully deserved the national championship?

In 1937, they finished 8-0-1 while the national champs, Minnesota finished 7-1. If Alabama claimed bogus titles, why don't they make a claim for 1937? Not to mention UA found itself screwed out of a Rose Bowl bid because Washington refused to play another powerful southern team in Alabama (the team who upset them in a previous Rose Bowl match-up) and instead tapped Pitt as their opponent.

In 1945, Alabama finished 10-0, while also winning the prestigious Rose Bowl. National Champion Army finished 9-0, but skipped out on the bowl season. Again, if Alabama claimed bogus championships, why aren't they claiming 1945? Many Alabama football historians have argued this is the greatest team in Alabama's storied history!

Since people like to talk about Alabama screwing teams out of national championships, what about the years Alabama was screwed out of a title as well?

In 1966, Alabama was working on a three-peat, the first in AP poll era history. After winning the AP title in 1964 and 1965, Alabama started the season number 3 behind Notre Dame and Michigan State. Everyone questioned why, considering they were arguably better than both teams. Alabama blew through their schedule shutting out six of its 11 opponents, while not giving up more than 14 points the whole season (and they only gave up 14 points ONCE)! But 9-0-1 Notre Dame intentionally played 9-0-1 Michigan State to a tie in their bowl game, totally screwing Alabama out of any championship chances.

After winning the Super Bowl that year, Vince Lombardi was asked if there was "any doubt the Packers were the best team in all of football", to which he replied, "I don't know... we haven't played Alabama yet!"

In 1977, it happened once again. Entering the bowl season, Alabama was number 3. However, number 1 and number 2 lost their respected bowl games, while Alabama destroyed Ohio State 35-6. But instead of Alabama jumping to number 1, guess who did? Number 5 Notre Dame. But here's the kicker: both Notre Dame and Alabama finished the season 11-1. Only problem is, Notre Dame's only loss came against Ole Miss, a team Alabama shellacked that year.

Even Woody Hayes said in the aftermath of the Sugar Bowl beatdown, "We were just whipped by the national champions. No doubt about it."

So to those of you who say "If we claim titles like Alabama, we could claim 5 more!" Well, you DO claim titles in the same method as Alabama, just as Alabama claims titles in the same method as everyone else. Only difference is, they have more and if they wanted to, they could claim a few more - that is IF UA claimed flat out bogus national championships.

Not only that, Alabama also leads the nation in bowl victories and bowl appearances, while also leading the SEC in conference titles as well. I can't help but wonder if our envious rivals will begin spreading lies and misinformation about those accomplishments soon. Either way, it's not going to change the fact that Alabama has the most!

Deal with it!

sources:

http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/sec/alabama/all_national_champs.php

http://www.appollarchive.com/index.cfm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_football_national_championships_in_NCAA_Division_I_FBS



http://www.ncaa.org/wps/ncaa?key=/ncaa/NCAA/Sports%20and%20Championship/General%20Information/ia_football_past_champs.html

http://www.remembertherosebowl.com/

Alabama wins a national championship... in cheerleading!

Way to go, girls!

The "Truth" Behind Aubarn's National Championships...

I've noticed, here of late, the "what if" or "why not" concerning the history of Aubarn's national championships are growing louder and louder by the second. Several members of the incestuous Aubarn family are even claiming "by bammer logic we could claim 7 or 8 or 9". Well, my Aubarn enemies, I have an entire shipment of devastatingly breaking news for you: You have TWO tainted titles and that's it.

You think otherwise? Well stay tuned, because I'm about to fill you in on "the facts", which is something you guys never allow to stand between you and the truth.



1913

Aubarn finished the season 8-0 also winning the SIAA conference championship. Notice how they claim there was no such thing as a "national champion" during the Rose Bowl era, despite going against the facts that there was? In 1913, a Rose Bowl championship game did not exist. In 1913, there truly was no national champion. As seen in the links I provided you with (and I have more images upon request), during the era of which Alabama was recognized as champions, you can see Alabama was the consensus champion for winning the Rose Bowl, which was the only bowl game that existed during this era, making it the defacto national championship game.

The vast majority of Aubarn fans claim Alabama fans only claim (despite the facts) those titles because of the undefeated seasons posted from 1924-1936, but that's hardly the case. If Alabama claimed a title for every undefeated season posted, they could easily claim 4 more.



1957*

If we were to apply logic they use against two of our titles, then 1957 could be deemed "illegitimate" as well. During the first half of the AP/UPI eras, bowl games were considered "exhibition" games and the AP/UPI selected their champion at the season's end, prior to the bowl games being played. Even though Slug Jordan whined his way into having this title awarded to his cheating team, they DID NOT play in a bowl game that year, therefore, if Aubarn fans say other teams cannot claim titles from seasons they lost their bowl game, the same logic can be used against this title considering they did not play in a bowl game due to NCAA violations.



1958

This is yet another popular title Aubarn fans flirt with the idea of claiming. A year after their cheating program practically bought the 1957 title (or should I say whined until they received it), the same cheaters posted a 9-0-1 record. Because they finished with no losses and 1 tie (despite not being recognized by the AP or UPI polls), they still believe they should be recognized as champions of the 1958 season.

If that's the case, then Alabama should be recognized as champions of the 1936 season... even though the AP/UPI did not recognize Alabama as champions, Alabama still finished with no losses and 1 tie!



1983**

Even despite the fact that Pat Dye was the biggest cheater in college football (or should I say Aubarn University's athletic department, knowing Barkley admitted to being paid as well as knowing other players in various Aubarn sports were paid as well) and everything he accomplished at Aubarn should be vacated - especially in the eyes of Alabama fans, I'll play along as if he actually won without the luxury of having a team with a salary cap.

So Aubarn fans claim they deserve this title because they finished 11-1 with a Sugar Bowl victory, even though they WERE NOT recognized as champions by the AP or UPI. Do you know how many 11-1, Sugar Bowl winning seasons Alabama has had? Four -- all occurring during the 1970s. If Aubarn claimed this title, should Alabama be able to claim the similar four?



1993***

Once again, Aubarn was on probation and the '93 roster should have been considered an NFL roster since it was all on payroll at Aubarn University.

In 1993, Aubarn finished undefeated in the regular season, yet they were banned from postseason play. By this logic, Alabama could claim titles for 1971, 1974, 1994, and 2008. Hey... Alabama finished undefeated in the regular season in each of the aforementioned seasons, so why not?



2004****

The biggest crock of cow manure EVER, and yet, Aubarn was prepared to claim this title had USC been forced to vacate it. Besides the fact that they cheated to finish the season undefeated, they did not win the BCS National Championship game NOR DID THEY EVEN PLAY IN IT!

By this logic, Alabama could claim a national championship for EVERY undefeated season they've posted! If Aubarn fans can, then why can't we?


In conclusion, to any and everyone with more than half a brain who doesn't live within a 25 mile radius of Lee County can see why it's obvious Aubarn shouldn't claim the aforementioned titles, especially when the logic they use against other teams backfires.

*Aubarn's 1957 squad was on probation for paying two players.

**Pat Dye was the biggest cheater in college football, therefore all of Pat Dye's accomplishments are tainted.

***Aubarn was on probation for paying players in 1993.

****Aubarn's 2004 roster was filled with players who never attended classes or turned in any work, yet miraculously passed said classes and played football.

Aubarn will forever remain Alabama's little stepsister...

In response to Ronnie Sanders' latest column over at the Aubarn Eagle, "Nobody's little brother", I feel it's necessary to contradict every word of nonsense he typed. I know it's your job to feed the incestuous Aubarn family the exact thing they crave, but you're merely contradicting yourself, thus making it harder for the readers with more than half a brain to take you seriously.

For starters, if you weren't Alabama's little brother, you would be basking in the glory of winning your second tainted national championship in school history (and first under the name of Aubarn University), rather than comparing your accomplishments to Alabama. That's a given.

And with that being said.......


The Records...

As far as your accomplishments are concerned, on paper, they are somewhat impressive, especially compared to Alabama's, despite the fact that the last decade was by far, Alabama's worst period in the history of their storied program. However, it appears those "accomplishments" are more misleading than they are factual.

Exhibit A:

Undefeated Seasons
Auburn: 3 (1993, 2004, 2010)
Alabama: 2 (1992, 2009)

Three undefeated seasons over the course of 21 years is pretty impressive, but here's what Ronnie doesn't want you to know: in 1993, Aubarn finished the REGULAR SEASON 11-0. They were banned from postseason play due to -- you guessed it -- paying players, which I'll get to that in a minute. Aubarn did not play in the postseason, therefore this season should be deemed irrelevant for two reasons: the postseason ban and fielding a franchise team (if you know what I mean). By this dizzy logic, Alabama could claim 1964, 1971, 1973, 1974, 1994, and 2008 as undefeated seasons since 'Bama finished the regular season undefeated in each of the aforementioned years, but lost in postseason play.

And I'll expose the illegitimacy of 2004 in the next few paragraphs.

NCAA Probations since 1981
Auburn: 1
Alabama: 3

Thankfully Eric Ramsey was more of an "Aubarn Man" than the rest of the trash infesting that program, or else we would've never been made aware of the fact that Pat Dye was the biggest cheater in Aubarn history and Aubarn would've named the field in his honor and still welcome him, around the program, with open arms Aubarn would have zero NCAA probations since 1981. With that being said, when Pat Dye took over the Aubarn program, unless I just absolutely know nothing about corrupt people in general, I'm certain his cheating ways didn't begin in the 1990s, therefore everything he ever accomplished at Aubarn should be dismissed by Alabama fans, especially when it's thrown back into their faces. To further prove that, star basketball player Charles Barkley, went against the Aubarn mantra of "keeping it down home, cuz" by admitting he was paid while playing basketball for Aubarn, and even saying, "Most of the players I know borrowed money from agents." which was during the Pat Dye era in football, as well.

Simply put: All Alabama fans should vacate EVERY accomplishment (trophy, Iron Bowl win, etc) Pat Dye's Aubarn teams achieved.

When Pat Dye took over the Aubarn program, he knew that just coaching, alone, would not gain success for the Aubarn Tigers, so he had to do a little thinking outside the box and ever since then, the Aubarn football program, despite it's "probation record" has had more controversy surround it than Roberty Downey Jr. and OJ Simpson combined.

Even former coaches such as Terry Bowden and Tony Franklin have either admitted this or implied it. I don't want to hear a single Aubarn fan say, "It's because they're disgruntled, ex-coaches". If that's the case, Aubarn University's "Powers That Be" wouldn't have their ex-coaches sign non-disclosure agreements and pay them millions of dollars just because "it's the right thing to do".

Keep in mind if you factor in all the scandals that have surrounded the Aubarn program, such as being placed on academic probation, jetgate, and the 2004 Sociology scandal (which half of their players had no business suiting up to begin with) which was strangely swept under the rug, Aubarn would hold a slight edge in this category.

But don't think for a second the corruption is no longer present as it's as bad now as it's ever been. You don't fire your most successful coach in modern history and replace him with a 5-19 loser, who'd only been a head coach for 2 years and was on the verge of being fired at his previous job, no matter what drivel your AD feeds you. Gene Chizik was a hired puppet and the corrupt Aubarn BOTs accomplished exactly what they invested in doing...

And how does a 5-19, three year head coach, at a second-rate program located in the third-worst SEC town (and a backwoods hellhole at that, certainly not the ideal place for an 18-22 year old), manage to out-recruit all of the SEC coaching veterans -- especially when his cross-state superior is coming off an NC season? It's simple:






And as far as the textbook vs. Sociology scandal is concerned, The University itself took no part in the illegal distribution of textbooks and when they uncovered the violation, they self-reported it immediately and forced the players to repay the debt, which they did. In Aubarn's case, players were receiving FREE CLASS CREDITS, despite not showing up for class, taking any tests, or turning in any work. It took the head of the Sociology department to uncover this and report it, yet Aubarn University took no action and the ineligible players continued to play and nothing ever came out of this. But why are we surprised? Aubarn University is the only University in America to graduate players who can't read, players who are illiterate, and players who don't even know how to write a check!



Selective Memory...


This is a typical Aubarn fan's favorite card to play: From 1980 - this very day, even considering the biggest cheater in the history of college football was 6-6 vs. 'Bama. But since you guys like to play the selective memory card (beginning with the year your cheating coach inflicted the corruption upon your program), I'll play along as well...

Alabama has won 2 out of the last 3 Iron Bowls. In addition, Alabama's record over the last 3 years is 36-5, while Aubarn's record is 27-12. Alabama has appeared in 3 bowls, while Aubarn has only appeared in 2.

Also, if you factor in the vast majority of the 2000s was the worst period in Alabama history (scholarship restrictions, 5 coaches in seven years) and knowing Alabama lost to UCF, Northern Illinois, Louisiana-Monroe, Mississippi State, Ole Miss, etc. and posted an embarrassing record against its three main rivals, by factoring those years out, since 1990 (excluding 2002-2007), Alabama is 10-5 against Aubarn. Had it not been for scholarship restrictions and nearly half a dozen coaches in half a decade, the odds of Aubarn winning 6 straight over the Tide would've been slim to none, much like the odds of Aubarn winning an untainted title.


2010

It's a shame Alabama fans found themselves cheering for these cheaters against Oregon, without even considering the consequences of what they'll have to deal with afterwards (starting with Ronnie's article).

So much smoke, yet Aubarn fans claim there's no fire, despite the fact that an investigation is ongoing. A father solicits money from one school, yet fails to solicit money from the second-most penalized school in the country who's still being ran and operated by the most corrupt group of people in the state, even though his son didn't consider them until late in the recruiting process... "The money was too much". Then there's allegations surfacing regarding sure LSU locks that suddenly became Aubarn Men after "getting this I-Phone from visiting Aubarn". But it's far from over, you've also got Dakota Mosley, a sure Arkansas lock, but strangely enough, he becomes an Aubarn lock and around signing day, he's posting pictures of himself on Facebook holding $100k worth of cash. Lastly (that we know of), after signing day, Corey Lemonier posts a pic of his brand new Corvette which he said, "New car I got for signing with Aubarn". I should also note a player Aubarn recruited, Lache Seastrunk's mom, boldly stated Aubarn is a dirty school, just a few weeks ago.

And to top it all off, you've got bingo-gate, all involving Aubarn boosters and the fall of Colonial Bank. You have former feds, now serving as lawyers, leaking information from their sources claiming pay for play schemes will be revealed and everything Aubarn accomplished this season will evaporate in a split second, yet Aubarn fans deny it, just as they denied Eric Ramsey's case and the Sociology case. They denied Cecil solicited money from MSU, despite the fact that he admitted it weeks later...

So these guys are willing to funnel money to state legislatures, yet they're not willing to pay players, despite having done so in the past? You can't be anymore delusional than an Aubarn fan!



That, in a nutshell, sums up this entire counter-response. When Alabama hired Saban, Aubarn's inferiority complex level skyrocketed. Saban began thumping them in recruiting and destroyed them to the point of no return on the field. They fired their most successful coach in modern history and replaced him with a puppet. They resorted back to their old tactics, went "All In" and began buying every player they possibly could. In 2010, their mission was accomplished, even if it affected their program on down the road, they don't care because they finally won a national championship. And why did they do this you ask? Because they are Alabama's little brother.