Copy pasta:
The Alabama Case
Alabama is “well known” for having won 12 “National Championships” during their storied past. Just Google “Alabama” and “12 National Championships”, and see how many hits you get. The 12 National Championships of Alabama are an established point of Crimson Tide lore.
But how accurate are those 12 titles? More correctly, how solid is Alabama’s claim to 12 titles?
Not very solid as it turns out.
Let us examine each claimed “National Championship” at Alabama (according to the school’s own media guide), the basis for the claims, and whether they are solid claims or not. Below is each of the claimed titles, the Tide’s record, the basis of the claim, and commentary.
Commentary – Alabama was one of two prominent undefeated teams this year (the other was Dartmouth at 8-0). It appears that all of the “selectors” for both schools are backdated, as no one was picking “National Champions” at this point. Helms, in particular, began retroactively picking “National Champions” beginning in 1941. I submit that any pre-1936 claims are dubious.
Conclusion: Iffy – claim was backdated.
Commentary – Four teams claim “National Titles” this year – Alabama, Stanford (10-0-1), Lafayette (9-0) and Navy (9-0-1). Once again, we are dealing with pre-1936 claims. We also know as a Helm’s claim it is backdated.
Conclusion: Dubious at best. 3 other schools have equally valid claims.
Commentary – Once again, a pre-1936 claim. Plus, since Davis didn’t start publishing until 1934, the claim is backdated. Add in the fact that Davis also choose 10-0 Notre Dame (as a so-called tie), and that the vast majority of selectors that have backdated this year also choose Notre Dame, Alabama’s claim of one half of a selector is unconvincing.
Conclusion: Very dubious.
Commentary – Minnesota (8-0) and Pittsburgh (8-1) also claim titles this year. Dunkel, which choose Alabama, actually was in existence by 1934. Dunkel was using a mathematical power rating to rank teams. The other two team’s titles appear backdated.
Conclusion: Reasonably solid for pre-1936.
Commentary – 2 loss Alabama should be ashamed to claim 1941 as a “National Title”. Both Minnesota (8-0) and Texas (8-1-1) had better records. The vast majority of selectors, both of the past and the back daters, have chosen Minnesota this year. In fact, in the present for the multitude of selectors ranking 1941, only the long defunct Football Thesaurus (also known as the Houlgate system) chose Alabama. What 2 loss team has ever been "National Champion"?
Conclusion: Ridiculous – ‘Bama should be ashamed.
Commentary – The vast majority of selectors chose Alabama, but the Football Writers chose an 8-0-1 Ohio State.
Conclusion: Very solid.
Commentary – Arkansas ended 1964 at 11-0, winning their bowl game, while Alabama lost the Orange Bowl. This was one of the last years of the AP choosing before the bowl games. Arkansas should be recognized as the 1964 “National Champion”. (Interestingly, the Alabama media guide has incorrect information for 1964, and does not mention Arkansas at all, when they mention claimants from other years. The vast majority of modern selectors choose Arkansas.)
Conclusion: Highly dubious – the Tide lost their last game.
Commentary – Michigan State went 10-1 in 1965, but lost the Rose Bowl. The majority of selectors still choose Michigan State.
Conclusion: Somewhat solid – 1965 should probably have no “National Title” claimant.
Commentary – Notre Dame was 11-0 in 1973, and every selector (including the AP) but the UPI chose the Irish. Why the Irish? Because Notre Dame BEAT Alabama in the Sugar Bowl that year 24-23. However, the UPI poll had been taken BEFORE the Sugar Bowl was played. Once again, Alabama should be ashamed beyond belief to claim 1973 as a “National Championship”. Notre Dame also claims 1973, and they deserve to.
Conclusion: Ridiculous – they lost the Sugar Bowl to Notre Dame.
Commentary – USC went 11-1 in 1978, and was chosen by the UPI and Sporting News. Alabama’s one loss? To USC, in Birmingham, on September 23! USC, however, lost to less highly regarded Arizona State. This is a difficult year to sort out, as Alabama had “the better loss”, but they lost to the other claimant.
Conclusion: Somewhat solid, or as solid as any modern “split” title ever is.
Commentary – The undefeated Crimson Tide of 1979 were probably the nation’s best team.
Conclusion: Very solid.
Commentary – Stallings undefeated team routed Miami 34-13 in the Sugar Bowl.
Conclusion: Very solid – the best claim Alabama has.
Summary – As you can see, Alabama has been very aggressive in claiming, and marketing, “National Titles”. By this analysis, Alabama’s “National Title” claims break down as follows –
Solid, reasonably solid or somewhat solid – 5 Titles Solid, as far as “split titles” are solid – 1 Title Dubious or Iffy – 4 Titles Ridiculous, they ought to be ashamed – 2 Titles
Alabama, were they being honest, would claim no more than 6 national titles. If Alabama doesn’t mind counting backdated or dubious titles, they could claim perhaps 9 or 10. Two of their so called titles are patently ridiculous.
Now, before all the Tide fans of the world start moaning, consider if Florida was using the same claiming system for “National Titles” as Alabama. Florida would have not one title, or not even two – Florida would have 3.
Under the “Alabama system”, Florida’s resume would read as –
1984 – Record 9-1-1: Selectors – The majority of selectors, including Dunkel, Sagarin, The Sporting News and The New York Times.
1996 – Record 12-1: Selectors – Virtually All.
AND
Who the hell is Steve Eck, you ask? Well, Eck created a rating system in the 1980’s, and chose Florida as his 1985 “National Champions”.
I don’t know much about Eck. Heck, I don’t even care to know much. But if one selector is all it takes, Alabama has shown us (in 1930, 1941and 1973) that it is good enough.