Because you asked about how Kim Jong Il's golfing, Alabama's 13 MNCs, & eleventy billion dollars can be the same thing

Submitted by CarrIsMyHomeboy on

 

This isn't especially well written (but tolerable). And I agree--no--that was not the most scintillating opening sentence for this thread. However the following content is worthwhile. And M-relevant. Without further ado, then, I give you a cliff's notes history on Alabama's National title claims: http://outkickthecoverage.com/...oles-in-one.php  The best [moan: single-line paragraph] section follows:

But how many people will blindly acquiesce to Alabama's claimed 13 titles?


Most of the nation.


Which is a shame because many of the Bama titles are completely illegitimate.


Indeed, the NCAA recognizes eight titles for the Crimson Tide. The SEC agrees with that number.


So where do the extra five titles come from? The ones that make Bama fans walk around in those stupid "Got 13" t-shirts?


They're made up.


In 1983 Alabama's sports information director simply added five unrecognized national titles to the media guide.


Seriously, he did that.


That year five addtional titles appeared out of thin air, all from pre-1941.


And now Alabama fans believe these titles are all legit. Even though these titles aren't recognized by the SEC or the NCAA.


My favorite is the claimed title from 1941 when Alabama finished third in the SEC with losses to Mississippi State and Vanderbilt. (The sports information director, and I'm not making this up, cited the loss to Mississippi State as coming in the rain and the loss to Vandy as "close.")

 

 

 

#introspective-pot-meet-kettle-query: This encuriouses me. Which of Michigan's claimed MNC's are most controversial? I don't believe any are "actually finished #20 nationally" controversial. Am I wrong?

MGoBoard

Baldbill

December 20th, 2011 at 6:21 AM ^

This is standard journalist practice in these days of new yellow journalism. Make up anything you want, it is true until proven wrong and even then stick with what you wrote...it is what most will remember.

Joined: 04/09/2009

MGoPoints: 7988

Moleskyn

December 20th, 2011 at 9:01 AM ^

No, it wasn't Al Gore who created the internet. It was one of his hookers. She was quickly (and allegedly) killed by Craig James though (#RememberTheFive), which allowed Al Gore to take credit for the creation of the internet. 

Boom, history'd.

Joined: 06/28/2010

MGoPoints: 10287

bouje13

December 20th, 2011 at 12:36 AM ^

The worst record is either 5-0 or there are two seasons with a tie each. So no we don't have anything stupid (at least that I could find quickly using Wikipedia)

Joined: 11/27/2010

MGoPoints: 658

Jon06

December 20th, 2011 at 1:00 AM ^

on winning Michigan's 13th national championship. Most of us know about 11 of them, but it's really 13.

Number 7: 1925. Though polls didn't choose champions at the time, they retroactively split between Dartmouth, Alabama, and Michigan. Alabama claims this title, and now so do we.

Number 13: 2011. Like Alabama's 1941 national championship, following a 3rd place SEC finish, Michigan lost to one opponent in bad weather (a trash tornado) and the other game was close. I have examined my opinion for bias, and finding none I hereby declare Michigan national champions.

Joined: 09/19/2009

MGoPoints: 15414

LSAClassOf2000

December 20th, 2011 at 6:34 AM ^

I actually wasn't aware of the history behind the claimed titles of Alabama. I suppose this is what happens when you let all your locally awarded "participant ribbons" go to your head, eh?  

Even the science fairs that I did win had distinctly  cheaper prizes than the Nobel. I tried very hard to keep my perspective on this one. 

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 130666

StephenRKass

December 20th, 2011 at 8:08 AM ^

The MNC is often just a Beauty Pageant. Having said that, it appears there are at least three categories:

  • Unanimous National Championships. When all major polls, the AP, the UPI, the older offbeat ones, the current BCS formula, are agreed in their analysis. 2009 Alabama falls in this category. So does 1992. So does 1948 Michigan.
  • Consensus (disputed) National Championships. There is significant debate. 1965 Alabama and Michigan State fall in this category.
  • Spurious National Championships. There is one outlier calling someone a national champion. 1941 Alabama falls here. Ahem, 1925 & 1926 Michigan falls here. The one caveat is that not all ranking systems are equal. I suppose this is a little bit like "expert witnesses" in legal proceedings. If you look hard enough and pay enough money, you can typically find someone out there who will testify as an expert on your behalf. This decidedly appears to be the case with 1941 Alabama.

It'd be interesting to run through the stats to see how many of Alabama's titles are unanimous, how many are consensus, and how many are spurious. Being this is a Michigan blog, it'd be more interesting to see the same analysis done for Michigan. Obviously, the further back you go, the less meaning you can ascribe to a national title.

As said above, this whole thing is largely a beauty contest, largely subjective. Some like blondes and some like brunettes.

Joined: 07/15/2008

MGoPoints: 23099

polometer

December 20th, 2011 at 9:29 AM ^

Is Alabama allowed to go around and tell this to recruits? Although I doubt it has much effect anyway.  I consider myself a pretty well-read CFB fan, but I didn't know this.  Are coaches/Universities allowed to just go around and lie to people?  (Especially if it manipulates people to their advantage)

Joined: 10/08/2011

MGoPoints: 97

Seth

December 20th, 2011 at 10:14 AM ^

It depends on what you call controversy. Any team that's won multiple NCs probably has some sort of "controversy" attached, whether it's another undefeated team, or a split poll, or an unsportsmanlike deployment of professionals (or Catholics) that at the time had some other fans saying "yeah, but..."

Here's ours (the 11 claimed NCs are in bold):

  • Prior to 1890: National Championships were not regularly determined. The winner of the Ivy League each year awarded themselves the NC. Michigan, the Boise State of the period, went undefeated in 1879, 1880, 1884, 1885, 1886 and 1887
  • 1898: Michigan won the Western Conference and went undefeated (10-0-0), including a huge 12-11 win over Amos Alonzo Stagg's University of Chicago, a victory so grand it inspired Louis Elbel to pen a certain song hailing these victors. M also beat Michigan Agricultural 39-0 and Notre Dame 23-0. Harvard, who was 11-0-0, claimed the NC that year.
  • 1901: Michigan went 11-0 and won the first Rose Bowl, outscoring the opposition 550-0 in the process. Attention mid-majors, this is how you BCS bust!
  • 1902: 11-0 but Yost's second point-a-minute team let opponents score 12 whole points against us (total)
  • 1903: This is the first of Michigan's "controversial" NCs of the ones we claim. The 11-0-1 Wolverines shut out and murdered everybody but Minnesota. Only 6 points were scored on Michigan all season, and immediately after those points were scored to tie the game at 6-6 the Gopher fans rushed the field, taking away the last two minutes from the Point-a-Minute Wolverines. 11-0-0 Princeton claims this national title. The '03 team was also "tainted" by an extra benefits allegation which claimed Ralph Rose, a recruit from California, was set up with a job in the library and membership in his chosen fraternity.
  • 1904: Another "controversial" NC claim as 14-0-0 Minnesota, and 12-0-0 Pennsylvania claim this one too. Yost's fourth team went 10-0 and outscored opponents 567-22. The Billingsley Report Wins include the 130-0 destruction of West Virginia, and 72-0 defeat of the University of Chicago...College of Physicians and Surgeons. We beat the real Chicago (our Ohio State of the period) 22-12, but didn't play Minnesota.
  • 1910: "Undefeated" meant 3-0-3 with ties to Case Western, Ohio State, and Penn.
  • 1918: Michigan only got to play five games this year because of WWI travel restrictions. We won them all but Illinois won the Big Ten since we only got to play 2 conference games. Pitt, which was 4-1-0, thinks they're the winners since they beat defending National Champion Georgia Tech. Like it's a belt.
  • 1922: Michigan was 6-0-1, that tie a 0-0 affair at Vanderbilt. Opponents didn't register a point until the penultimate game of the season. Iowa won the conference at 7-0-0, and isn't mentioned with 9-0 Cal, 8-0 Princeton, and 8-0 Cornell for the '22 NC.
  • 1923: More controversy. Cornell, Michigan and Illinois were 8-0-0, and Cal was 9-0-1. The Illini got most of the polls of the time but the retroactive ones like Michigan.
  • 1930: Harry Newman (the Denard Robinson of his day) and Michigan finished the season ranked #5 and undefeated at 8-0-1, but behind 1-loss Northwestern because of our 0-0 tie with Michigan State. 10-0 Bama and Notre Dame split this one.
  • 1932: Michigan was 8-0-0 and gave up just 13 points all season. USC (10-0) and Colgate (9-0) are also claimants, with the Trojans the strongest case of the three if we're being honest.
  • 1933: Michigan was 7-0-1, the tie to Minnesota, who had 4 ties and two wins that year but claims a share of the Big Ten title. In this case Michigan is the consensus National Champion but 10-1-1 USC, Frtiz Crisler's 9-0 Princeton, and, hilariously, the 7-1 Buckeyes who lost to Michigan 13-0, at one time claimed this one under the Dunkel System.
  • 1947: This one, strangely, is the championship most debated. The Mad Magicians were 10-0-0 and won the Rose Bowl (49-0 over USC), but Notre Dame fans even today will troll Wikipedia pages to make sure Michigan is listed No. 2. Their reasoning: until '47 they never had polls after the bowls, but the depantsing of USC (9-0 ND only beat them 38-7 at home) led the Associated Press to re-vote Michigan on top. Irish cried scandal. Not as scandal to ND fans: Johnny Lujack winning the Heisman despite being just a decent quarterback with pedestrian numbers.
  • 1948: Nobody questions Oosterbaan's first team, which went 9-0, beat then No. 3 Northwestern 28-0, and destroyed Navy 35-0.
  • 1973: Perhaps the greatest Bo team had only that 10-10 tie with No. 1Ohio State (M missed two field goals late in the 4th quarter). The Big Ten ludicrously chose to send the Buckeyes to the Rose Bowl, presumably because M's QB Dennis Franklin broke his collarbone at the end of the game and would have been out for the Rose Bowl. Since the Big Ten back then only let one team go bowling, Michigan stayed home for New Years. 11-1 Bama and 11-0 ND claimed that NC, though retroactive polls have rewarded both M, OSU, and Oklahoma. Note: Bama's claim in this comes from winning the Coaches Poll (then called UPI) but that came out before they lost to Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl. By rights this one belongs tot the Irish.
  • 1992: This was the 9-0-3 year with Corwin Brown and Elvis Grbac. Michigan rode a spectacular offense to a number of blowouts but tied Notre Dame, Illinois and Ohio State, then finally beat Washington in the Rose Bowl. 13-0 Alabama won the consensus NC.
  • 1997: Lloyd Carr's best defensive team, led by Heisman winner Charles Woodson, kept winning against a brutal schedule (7 games vs. teams in the top 15), most notably knocking off No. 2 Penn State 34-8 in Happy Valley the week the media called "Judgement Day" (undefeated FSU played No. 5 North Carolina, and Nebraska beat unranked Missouri in OT on a "flea kicker"). FSU would lose to Florida but #2 Nebraska tore up the #3 Tennessee Mannings in the last Bowl Coalition game, allowing the Huskers, Osborne's coaching friends, and bitter Tennessee Manning fans to claim a share of the NC for Nebraska.

All told Michigan claims 11, but those where some poll or another called Michigan tops gets that up to a plausible 22 (behind only Princeton and Yale). 

Joined: 10/14/2008

MGoPoints: 149450