TENNESSEE VOLS - 1939!

#26
#26
Robert Neyland won more championships than rewarded. I get everyone saying stop being alabama and Auburn. But we didn’t live when this man dominated Bear Bryant and others. He was amazing. And back in The day the bowls didn’t matter. We should claim these championships. The south back In the day got over looked a lot for football talent. Neyland was the best of his time. Deserves more credit and a huge documentary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PetrosBoy and VOLINVONORE
#27
#27
LivinginthePast said:
Robert Neyland won more championships than rewarded. I get everyone saying stop being alabama and Auburn. But we didn’t live when this man dominated Bear Bryant and others. He was amazing. And back in The day the bowls didn’t matter. We should claim these championships. The south back In the day got over looked a lot for football talent. Neyland was the best of his time. Deserves more credit and a huge documentary.
Click to expand...
You’re correct about Neyland, but the Bear Bryant he coached against was at UK, not Bama. Bear was basically the next gen Neyland which came along with the advent of tv.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jsc1973
#28
#28
Hulavol said:
Because Texas aTm went 11-0 and won the sugar bowl for the national title.

USC started claiming 1939 recently -they went 8-0 and beat us 14-0.

To claim this NC would be bammerish.
Click to expand...
Bowls didn’t count or mean anything. No other team won all of their regular season games and held every opponent scoreless. Game set match. I’m counting 1939 as another Natty with or without you!
 
#29
#29
LivinginthePast said:
Robert Neyland won more championships than rewarded. I get everyone saying stop being alabama and Auburn. But we didn’t live when this man dominated Bear Bryant and others. He was amazing. And back in The day the bowls didn’t matter. We should claim these championships. The south back In the day got over looked a lot for football talent. Neyland was the best of his time. Deserves more credit and a huge documentary.
Click to expand...
I have always read your comment / question next to your Avi and wanted to know “why?” Are you asking “why?” Or do you know “why?” If you DO know why, please share? Is it the southern school disrespect thing?
 
#30
#30
Boca Vol said:
Who? UT didn’t claim that NC until the 90’s. I went back and looked at the ‘68 media guide and game day programs and there was no mention of a national championship.

When did he get the ring?
Click to expand...
Dick Williams…. They actually didn’t get rings until years later. I can’t remember which year, but one of the years that we won the SEC East, the players got rings and some members of the 67 team were like “Wait a minute. We’ve actually got an officially recognized national title.” Not sure who paid the freight, but they got rings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boca Vol
#31
#31
GAVol said:
Dick Williams…. They actually didn’t get rings until years later. I can’t remember which year, but one of the years that we won the SEC East, the players got rings and some members of the 67 teams were like “Wait a minute. We’ve actually got an officially recognized national title.” Not sure who paid the freight, but they got rings.
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing. It had to be odd when the ‘67 team was acknowledged in Neyland many, many years later.
 
#32
#32
Part of UT's issue in '39 was poor scheduling, not that they could have known that in advance. UT split the SEC title with Georgia Tech and Tulane because the three didn't play one another. UT also didn't play the teams that finished 4th and 5th in the league. Of UT's 10 wins, only two came against top level teams that finished with winning records.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dansky and TrueOrange
#33
#33
#34
#34
LivinginthePast said:
Robert Neyland won more championships than rewarded. I get everyone saying stop being alabama and Auburn. But we didn’t live when this man dominated Bear Bryant and others. He was amazing. And back in The day the bowls didn’t matter. We should claim these championships. The south back In the day got over looked a lot for football talent. Neyland was the best of his time. Deserves more credit and a huge documentary.
Click to expand...
Agree
 
#35
#35
EverythingOrange said:
I’m not stuck on the past - but it deserves to be Recognized. — You want to talk about Re-Claiming a National Championship?!!!!!

TENNESSEE - 1939!!!!!

In 1938 Tennessee was the reigning football National Champion.

In 1939 The VOLS (in a 10 game season) went undefeated, un-tied and UN-SCORED upon!!!

Yes, they lost a bowl game to USC (14-0) after traveling across the country- by train, to California - But, back then a bowl game was just a “local festival” anyway.

WHY-O-WHY has TENNESSEE never claimed 1939 as a NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP????!!!!

They accomplished a feat that will NEVER be repeated!!!!!
Click to expand...
November 18 No. 1 Tennessee extended its shutout streak, beating Vanderbilt 13–0. Having outscored its opposition, 186–0, Tennessee had a record of 8–0–0, but fell to second in the poll that followed. Their replacement in the top spot was No. 2 Texas A&M, which won at Rice 19–0. No. 3 USC was idle. No. 4 Cornell won at No. 20 Dartmouth, 35–6, to stay unbeaten, and they swapped spots with USC in the next poll. No. 5 Oklahoma lost at No. 12 Missouri, 7–6. No. 6 Tulane beat Columbia 25–0 to move into fifth place.

In the next poll, Texas A&M—which had gotten none of the first place votes the week before—was first, with 38 votes. Tennessee, which had had 66 of the 85 No. 1 votes the week before, had 33 on the new round of ballots, and finished second. There were 20 for Cornell, and 11 for USC.
 
#39
#39
Volizona said:
Bowls didn’t count or mean anything. No other team won all of their regular season games and held every opponent scoreless. Game set match. I’m counting 1939 as another Natty with or without you!
Click to expand...

Based on what criteria? Your own personal poll for a time period you weren't even alive and which means nothing?

The only poll that mattered in 1939 was the AP. And Texas A&M who also went undefeated jumped us after beating Texas on Thanksgiving that year.
 
#40
#40
zeppelin128 said:
After doing some reading and poking around, I'm starting to think the 31 claim is the strongest. Bill Libby and Cliff Morgan selected the Vols for NC for that season. The 39 claim could be made using the same poll Auburn used over the summer to claim some new NCs.
Click to expand...

Not sure that has any validity. The '31 season pre-dated the AP becoming the primary recognized authority for determining the college football champion in that era. In almost all of the polls of the time USC was awarded #1 ranking including the Dickinson System, which was generally viewed how the AP would become for many years thereafter. Again, the ranking was before the bowls. USC was #1. Tulane was undefeated and #2. Much like they did to us in '39, USC defeated Tulane in the bowl game.

There's not a meaningful ranking that puts Tennessee #1 in '31 or '39 except for the fact that Tennessee was #1 for a few weeks in the middle of the '39 season. Unfortunately, much like the SEC is now perceived as better than the Big Ten and Pac 12 were before it flopped, the perception at that time was southern teams were not as strong. The pollsters of that time would have viewed our record kind of like how we all viewed Indiana last year. When the AP started in 1934 until 1950, only twice was a team not from one of the northern or western leagues awarded the national title. That was TCU in '38 and A&M in '39.
 
#41
#41
UT97Vol said:
Based on what criteria? Your own personal poll for a time period you weren't even alive and which means nothing?

The only poll that mattered in 1939 was the AP. And Texas A&M who also went undefeated jumped us after beating Texas on Thanksgiving that year.
Click to expand...
To be fair, there were others that mattered at the time, but that’s also beside the point. The main thing at the end of the day’s a school not being able to just declare itself a given year’s national champions: someone has to award it to them first.
 
#42
#42
Volizona said:
Bowls didn’t count or mean anything. No other team won all of their regular season games and held every opponent scoreless. Game set match. I’m counting 1939 as another Natty with or without you!
Click to expand...

And out of all the polls and organizations that are recognized now by collegiate athletics or that were recognized back then, none of them awarded Tennessee a national championship that season.

The AP, The Billingsley Report, The Blue Ribbon Commision (this was the Coaches’ Poll from 1922-1949), The Boand System, The College Football Researchers Association, The DeVold System, The Dunkel System, The Helms Athletic Foundation, The Houlgate System, The National Championship Foundation, The Poling System, The Sagarin Rankings, The Williamson System, and the Berryman (QPRS) all awarded the national championship to 11-0 Texas A&M

The Billingsley Report (it was a split title year for them), The Litkenhous Ratings, and The Sagarin Rankings (it was a split title year for them also) awarded the national championship to 8-0 Cornell.

And The Dickinson System awarded the national championship to 8-0-2 USC.


The main thing is a school can’t just declare itself a given year’s national champions: someone has to award it to them first.

UT doesn’t claim a 1939 championship because someone would have at least had to actually award it to them first…
 
Last edited:
#43
#43
unfrozencvmanvol said:
And the national championship was not awarded to us. No one here is talking about giving up 1951 (when we also lost our bowl) just not claiming imaginary titles which were not recognized at the time.
Click to expand...

If we give up 1951, then much of the same logic applies to claiming 1950. TN was 4th behind #1 Oklahoma, #2 Army, and #3 Texas in the final AP poll. TN beat Texas in the Cotton Bowl, TN beat Kentucky and UK beat OU in the Sugar Bowl, and Army didn’t go to a bowl after losing to Navy.
 
#44
#44
WiseOlVol said:
November 18 No. 1 Tennessee extended its shutout streak, beating Vanderbilt 13–0. Having outscored its opposition, 186–0, Tennessee had a record of 8–0–0, but fell to second in the poll that followed. Their replacement in the top spot was No. 2 Texas A&M, which won at Rice 19–0. No. 3 USC was idle. No. 4 Cornell won at No. 20 Dartmouth, 35–6, to stay unbeaten, and they swapped spots with USC in the next poll. No. 5 Oklahoma lost at No. 12 Missouri, 7–6. No. 6 Tulane beat Columbia 25–0 to move into fifth place.

In the next poll, Texas A&M—which had gotten none of the first place votes the week before—was first, with 38 votes. Tennessee, which had had 66 of the 85 No. 1 votes the week before, had 33 on the new round of ballots, and finished second. There were 20 for Cornell, and 11 for USC.
Click to expand...
A&M beating Rice was that impressive?
 
#45
#45
Hulavol said:
Because Texas aTm went 11-0 and won the sugar bowl for the national title.

USC started claiming 1939 recently -they went 8-0 and beat us 14-0.

To claim this NC would be bammerish.
Click to expand...
True that they won their Bowl Game. But the Championship was decided after the season ended and before the Bowls started back then. With the schedule we played and going undefeated without being scored upon, we should've won the National Championship that season after winning it the year before. We would come back and win a National Championship the following season. Anyway, that would be impressive if we did win the Title in 1939 and had three National Championships in a row.
 
#46
#46
1939 was such an important team that Brian May from Queen wrote a song about them!

In the year of '39, assembled here the volunteers
In the days when lands were few
Here the ship sailed out into the blue and sunny morn
The sweetest sight ever seen
Click to expand...
 
#49
#49
Thunder Good-Oil said:
If we give up 1951, then much of the same logic applies to claiming 1950. TN was 4th behind #1 Oklahoma, #2 Army, and #3 Texas in the final AP poll. TN beat Texas in the Cotton Bowl, TN beat Kentucky and UK beat OU in the Sugar Bowl, and Army didn’t go to a bowl after losing to Navy.
Click to expand...
We do claim 1950 already though. To my knowledge no one is arguing we shouldn't claim 1951.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top