Why do we claim 1967 as a national title in football?

[BeattieFeathers]

We make fun of Bama fans a lot for claiming questionable titles, but I know we weren't better than USC and ou beat us in the orange bowl. Claiming 1967 has always been a mystery to me. Anybody know why?:hi:

 

[WallyBalls]

Make it stop.

Please.

Just make it stop.

 

[ManningBerry#1]

That's how we act like a boss, that's why.

 

[volroadwarrior]

Go back to Tuscalooser troll.

 

[BeattieFeathers]

Go back to Tuscalooser troll.

Troll for asking a fair question?

 

[GAVol]

It's not complicated. It was awarded by Litkenhaus. Litkenhaus was recognized by the NCAA. Hence the national title claim.

 

[KBVol]

Troll for asking a fair question?

No. You clearly have the interwebs like the rest of us and can therefore look it up in a matter of seconds just like I did. You're trolling again BF.

 

[KnoxRealtorVOL]

It's no complicated. It was awarded by Litkenhaus. Litkenhaus was recognized by the NCAA. Hence the national title claim.

This. This was the way national titles were decided at that time. End of story.

 

[GAVol]

This. This was the way national titles were decided at that time. End of story.

Yep. Various organizations had polls for a mythical championship that did t even factor in bowl games.

 

[Souce]

We make fun of Bama fans a lot for claiming questionable titles, but I know we weren't better than USC and ou beat us in the orange bowl. Claiming 1967 has always been a mystery to me. Anybody know why?:hi:

Just accept it and move on.

 

[fade route]

Make it stop.

Please.

Just make it stop.

I can make it stop for you. Here's how: When you see a thread titled "why do we claim 1967 as a national title in football", don't click on it.

Hope that helps.

 

[huskyvol]

These threads are starting to get comical. I only click on Beattie threads to watch the epic flaming that goes on.

 

[99gator]

It's not complicated. It was awarded by Litkenhaus. Litkenhaus was recognized by the NCAA. Hence the national title claim.

what?

I thought the whole problem with all of this is that nothing is recognized by the NCAA.

If we all want to get technical, there has never been a national champion in division 1 football.

 

[GAVol]

what?

I thought the whole problem with all of this is that nothing is recognized by the NCAA.

If we all want to get technical, there has never been a national champion in division 1 football.

It was always mythical until the Bowl Coalition and later the BCS got 1 vs 2 at the end of the year. But . . . the official NCAA record book recognizes "championships" that were awarded from several different polls. When more than half the polls agreed, it was considered a consensus championship. That's the reason there's always a difference between claimed championships and consensus championships. [/dissertationcomplete]

 

[k-town_king]

Why do you keep making threads is a better question.

 

[GBO97]

We make fun of Bama fans a lot for claiming questionable titles, but I know we weren't better than USC and ou beat us in the orange bowl. Claiming 1967 has always been a mystery to me. Anybody know why?:hi:

How can you claim you aren't a troll when just about every post/thread you make suggests that you would want us to be mediocre? "8-4 and 7-5 are ok" "we can never recreate the fulmer days" "we should claim less titles" This attitude is one that makes no sense for any true VFL to have.

 

[WallyBalls]

I can make it stop for you. Here's how: When you see a thread titled "why do we claim 1967 as a national title in football", don't click on it.

Hope that helps.

I was speaking more to the OPs threads. I'm on mobile and didn't see who started it.

Glad I could help you get your smart a$$ fix for the day.

 

[bamawriter]

This. This was the way national titles were decided at that time. End of story.

The consensus selectors were already acknowledged by that point. Litkenhous has never been a consensus selector.

Yep. Various organizations had polls for a mythical championship that did t even factor in bowl games.

Litkenhous was not a poll. It was a mathematical system, kinda like Sagarin.

 

[CountVolcula]

We decided to use the same math as Alabama

 

[bamawriter]

It was always mythical until the Bowl Coalition and later the BCS got 1 vs 2 at the end of the year. But . . . the official NCAA record book recognizes "championships" that were awarded from several different polls. When more than half the polls agreed, it was considered a consensus championship. That's the reason there's always a difference between claimed championships and consensus championships. [/dissertationcomplete]

That's not what "consensus" means in this case. There have been four consensus selectors: AP, Coaches (UP, USA Today, BCS), FWAA, and NCF. Being selected by any one of the four qualifies as a consensus championship. Ohio State was a consensus champion in 1961 even though they only won the FWAA while Alabama won the other three.

 

[orangeluvr]

It's not complicated. It was awarded by Litkenhaus. Litkenhaus was recognized by the NCAA. Hence the national title claim.

Well that does it for me ! :thumbsup: :salute:

 

[ajvol01]

We decided to use the same math as Alabama

This^^^

 

[fade route]

I was speaking more to the OPs threads. I'm on mobile and didn't see who started it.

Glad I could help you get your smart a$$ fix for the day.

BS - you can see thread titles and the poster who started it from mobile.

 

[GLDunlap]

We make fun of Bama fans a lot for claiming questionable titles, but I know we weren't better than USC and ou beat us in the orange bowl. Claiming 1967 has always been a mystery to me. Anybody know why?:hi:

If you knew that much history regarding the 1967 season I'm pretty sure you already know why the University claims a title in 67? It's a bogus claim but everybody seems to do it these days. AP and UPI had us at like 8 or 9 at the end of the season.

 

[GAVol]

Litkenhous was not a poll. It was a mathematical system, kinda like Sagarin.

I know. Just didn't feel like spending time differentiating.