So I was looking for how many NC's OU has been rewarded

[Erie Warrior]

 

[4down20]

Come to think of it. I seem to remember another season where Alabama claims a title in a very similar fashion. What year was that? Let me see?

1978, I believe it was.

You lost to Arizona St and (#2)Alabama played (#1)Penn St in the bowl game and won in one of the few years when the top2 teams meet.

The only mystery to 1978 is why USC won the coaches poll while not deserving it as they needed the kind of bad calls Notre Dame got in 2012 to even win some of their final games. Otherwise, USC would have been 9-3 on that year. Funny enough, one of those games was against Notre Dame. But UCS vs Notre Dame has always been a bullshit game with refs deciding it.

 

[4down20]

Here's the end of the Penn St vs Alabama sugar bowl. Penn St was #1 and undefeated going into the game. Alabama wins on an exciting goal line stand - on the field in what was the equivilant of what college football has tried to make happen since the BCS era.

Basically, what was at the time a rare national championship game.


I guess USC not playing in the national championship game at all and then claiming a national championship after is tradition now given 2003?

 

[trojanfan12]

You lost to Arizona St and (#2)Alabama played (#1)Penn St in the bowl game and won in one of the few years when the top2 teams meet.

The only mystery to 1978 is why USC won the coaches poll while not deserving it as they needed the kind of bad calls Notre Dame got in 2012 to even win some of their final games. Otherwise, USC would have been 9-3 on that year. Funny enough, one of those games was against Notre Dame. But UCS vs Notre Dame has always been a bullshit game with refs deciding it.

Uh, USC's loss was on the road. USC beat Alabama head to head at Alabama.

How does Alabama deserve the AP championship over a team they lost to? You can blame refs all that you want, but the fact is, USC beat Alabama head to head at Alabama. There's just no way around that.

 

[trojanfan12]

Here's the end of the Penn St vs Alabama sugar bowl. Penn St was #1 and undefeated going into the game. Alabama wins on an exciting goal line stand - on the field in what was the equivilant of what college football has tried to make happen since the BCS era.

Basically, what was at the time a rare national championship game.


I guess USC not playing in the national championship game at all and then claiming a national championship after is tradition now given 2003?

I guess losing to a team and still claiming a national championship over a team that they lost to has been an Alabama tradition since at least 1978.

 

[4down20]

Uh, USC's loss was on the road. USC beat Alabama head to head at Alabama.

So what?

How does Alabama deserve the AP championship over a team they lost to? You can blame refs all that you want, but the fact is, USC beat Alabama head to head at Alabama. There's just no way around that.

Because they won the defacto national championship game against the undefeated #1 team in the country. You know, that whole settling it on the field thing everyone talks about so much?

Claiming USC deserves the national championship because they beat Alabama at one point in the season would be like claiming VT should be crowned National Champion last year because they beat Ohio St. Provided they had only lost to Florida St thus being a 1 loss team left out of the national championship.

Maybe if the Pac12 and Big10 hadn't been so greedy at the time and locked up the rose bowl every year, you could have invited Penn St to the Rose Bowl instead of Michigan?

Bottom line is #1 and #2 played in the Sugar Bowl and neither of them were USC.

 

[trojanfan12]

So what?



Because they won the defacto national championship game against the undefeated #1 team in the country. You know, that whole settling it on the field thing everyone talks about so much?

Claiming USC deserves the national championship because they beat Alabama at one point in the season would be like claiming VT should be crowned National Champion last year because they beat Ohio St. Provided they had only lost to Florida St thus being a 1 loss team left out of the national championship.

Maybe if the Pac12 and Big10 hadn't been so greedy at the time and locked up the rose bowl every year, you could have invited Penn St to the Rose Bowl instead of Michigan?

Bottom line is #1 and #2 played in the Sugar Bowl and neither of them were USC.

They might have been better than Penn St. But you know who they weren't better than?



You only need 3 letters.




























C'mon, say it with me.

























They weren't better than USC.


























Know how I know that?





































USC 24 Alabama 14 and the game was played at Legion Field.





































So, @you.

 

[4down20]

I guess losing to a team and still claiming a national championship over a team that they lost to has been an Alabama tradition since at least 1978.

It's not being claimed over USC in 1978. You weren't even in the game.

Hell, the only reason you even beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl that year was because a ref blew a horrible call.

Which btw, made #10 on ESPN's worst calls in sports history list.

ESPN.com - Page2 - The List: Worst calls<br>in sports history

 

[trojanfan12]

It's not being claimed over USC in 1978. You weren't even in the game.

Hell, the only reason you even beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl that year was because a ref blew a horrible call.

Which btw, made #10 on ESPN's worst calls in sports history list.

ESPN.com - Page2 - The List: Worst calls<br>in sports history

USC 24 Alabama 14 at Legion Field.

 

[4down20]

They might have been better than Penn St. But you know who they weren't better than?



You only need 3 letters.




























C'mon, say it with me.

























They weren't better than USC.


























Know how I know that?





































USC 24 Alabama 14 and the game was played at Legion Field.





































So, @you.

You weren't even better than Michigan, the refs were.

 

[4down20]

USC 24 Alabama 14 at Legion Field.

Well let's just give it to Arizona St then.

And the refs for the 3 other losses they prevented for USC that year.

 

[trojanfan12]

You weren't even better than Michigan, the refs were.

We were better than Alabama.

 

[4down20]

We were better than Alabama.

Arizona St was better than USC by this logic.

 

[trojanfan12]

Arizona St was better than USC by this logic.

So, both USC and ASU were better than Alabama.

 

[4down20]

So, both USC and ASU were better than Alabama.

You forgot the refs.

 

[trojanfan12]

You forgot the refs.

Blaming refs is ghey. Must be a Bammer thing.

 

[4down20]

Blaming refs is ghey. Must be a Bammer thing.

Better than relying on them for national championship claims.

 

[trojanfan12]

Better than relying on them for national championship claims.

Yep, much easier to claim NC's over teams that beat you in your own house.

 

[TROJAN-MAN]

Here's the end of the Penn St vs Alabama sugar bowl. Penn St was #1 and undefeated going into the game. Alabama wins on an exciting goal line stand - on the field in what was the equivilant of what college football has tried to make happen since the BCS era.

Basically, what was at the time a rare national championship game.


I guess USC not playing in the national championship game at all and then claiming a national championship after is tradition now given 2003?

LOL on hanging your hat on a victory over an undefeated PSU team, who only played 6 teams with a winning record, not counting Alabama (LOL). Meanwhile, not counting USC bowl game. USC played 10 teams with a winning record.

Next to Alabama, only PSU has played the most " NON-BCS, or non top 5 Conf. teams " in their existences...

 

[4down20]

Yep, much easier to claim NC's over teams that beat you in your own house.

Probably much cheaper too.