top five disputed titles

[huskernumerouno]

There may be dissenting opinions in Georgia and California, but after a convincing victory over Ohio State, there was little doubt LSU deserved the national championship.

But skeptics, detractors and just plain ol' haters might point to LSU's two losses - including a home defeat at the hands of Arkansas in the final regular-season game - and question the legitimacy of the Tigers' crown. After all, LSU is the first national champion with two losses since Minnesota in 1960, when champions were crowned before bowls were played.

 

 

 

Not everybody agrees that Bobby Bowden's Seminoles were the nation's best team in 1993.

Though some teams could make a strong case for supremacy, no team this season could make stronger case than LSU. But over the years there have been numerous disputed national champions. Perhaps a team won without playing a difficult schedule or was the beneficiary of controversial calls.

 

And in some seasons, there might have been teams with superior records that didn't pull enough votes. All that is fodder for debate that can - and has - spanned decades.

 

With all that in mind, here's one person's top five of the most disputed national champions. And, please, try to refrain from profanity and other vulgarities in your ensuing hate mail.

 

1. BYU in 1984: Yeah, the Cougars were the only undefeated team in '84, but consider the company they kept. BYU's regular-season opponents were a combined 55-79-3. The Cougars then had to come from behind - yeah, yeah quarterback Robbie Bosco was hurt - for a 24-17 Holiday Bowl victory over 6-6 Michigan, which had tied for sixth place in the Big Ten. By comparison, No. 2 Washington finished 11-1 and defeated 9-2-1 Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl. The Huskies' only loss was on the road to 9-3 USC, which defeated Big Ten champion Ohio State in the Rose Bowl.

 

2. Colorado in 1990: Before LSU this season, Colorado was the most recent champion with two blemishes on its record - a loss to Illinois and a season-opening tie with Tennessee. So that's one - or, really, two - strikes against them. Furthermore, the Buffaloes avoided a second loss only because of one of the greatest officiating gaffes in history when they scored a "fifth down" touchdown to defeat Missouri 31-27. Later, their 10-9 Orange Bowl victory was secured only after a potential game-winning punt return by Notre Dame's Rocket Ismail was called back on a questionable penalty.

 

3. Notre Dame in 1966: Ever wonder why Alabama fans hate Notre Dame? Here's your answer. Not only did the Irish finish in a 10-10 tie with Michigan State on Nov. 19 1966, but Notre Dame coach Ara Parseghian didn't even try to win when the Irish took possession at their 30 with just over a minute remaining. He chose to run out the clock. Alabama finished 10-0 that season and destroyed 9-2 Nebraska 34-7 in the Sugar Bowl. How could an unbeaten Alabama team that Bear Bryant once called his best ever finish third, also behind Michigan State?

 

4. Notre Dame in 1977: Admittedly, it's hard to include a team quarterbacked by Joe Montana, but hear me out on this. The Irish went into New Year's Day ranked No. 5 and Alabama was ranked No. 3. Both won their bowls by significant margins - Notre Dame 38-10 over No. 1 Texas and Alabama 35-6 over No. 9 Ohio State - but the Irish leaped over the Tide. Notre Dame's supporters will maintain they deserved the crown because Texas was ranked No. 1. But Notre Dame lost that year to Ole Miss, which went 5-6 and lost 34-13 to Alabama. The Tide's loss came to 9-3 Nebraska on the same day Notre Dame lost to Mississippi.

 

5. Florida State in 1993: Sometimes Notre Dame gets hosed, too. Florida State coach Bobby Bowden is a super guy, and his amiable personality may have been a bigger factor in Florida State's '93 championship than was the Seminoles' performance. Yes, Florida State finished the season with just one loss, but so did Notre Dame. And Notre Dame beat Florida State 31-24 late in the regular season. If teams finish with the same record and played each other, shouldn't the team that actually won on the field be considered better? Instead, the AP vote seemed to come down to a popularity contest between Bowden and Irish coach Lou Holtz, which of course was no contest at all.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

Imagine my surprise!

[walksalone]

There may be dissenting opinions in Georgia and California, but after a convincing victory over Ohio State, there was little doubt LSU deserved the national championship.

But skeptics, detractors and just plain ol' haters might point to LSU's two losses - including a home defeat at the hands of Arkansas in the final regular-season game - and question the legitimacy of the Tigers' crown. After all, LSU is the first national champion with two losses since Minnesota in 1960, when champions were crowned before bowls were played.

 

 

 

Not everybody agrees that Bobby Bowden's Seminoles were the nation's best team in 1993.

Though some teams could make a strong case for supremacy, no team this season could make stronger case than LSU. But over the years there have been numerous disputed national champions. Perhaps a team won without playing a difficult schedule or was the beneficiary of controversial calls.

 

And in some seasons, there might have been teams with superior records that didn't pull enough votes. All that is fodder for debate that can - and has - spanned decades.

 

With all that in mind, here's one person's top five of the most disputed national champions. And, please, try to refrain from profanity and other vulgarities in your ensuing hate mail.

 

1. BYU in 1984: Yeah, the Cougars were the only undefeated team in '84, but consider the company they kept. BYU's regular-season opponents were a combined 55-79-3. The Cougars then had to come from behind - yeah, yeah quarterback Robbie Bosco was hurt - for a 24-17 Holiday Bowl victory over 6-6 Michigan, which had tied for sixth place in the Big Ten. By comparison, No. 2 Washington finished 11-1 and defeated 9-2-1 Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl. The Huskies' only loss was on the road to 9-3 USC, which defeated Big Ten champion Ohio State in the Rose Bowl.

 

2. Colorado in 1990: Before LSU this season, Colorado was the most recent champion with two blemishes on its record - a loss to Illinois and a season-opening tie with Tennessee. So that's one - or, really, two - strikes against them. Furthermore, the Buffaloes avoided a second loss only because of one of the greatest officiating gaffes in history when they scored a "fifth down" touchdown to defeat Missouri 31-27. Later, their 10-9 Orange Bowl victory was secured only after a potential game-winning punt return by Notre Dame's Rocket Ismail was called back on a questionable penalty.

 

3. Notre Dame in 1966: Ever wonder why Alabama fans hate Notre Dame? Here's your answer. Not only did the Irish finish in a 10-10 tie with Michigan State on Nov. 19 1966, but Notre Dame coach Ara Parseghian didn't even try to win when the Irish took possession at their 30 with just over a minute remaining. He chose to run out the clock. Alabama finished 10-0 that season and destroyed 9-2 Nebraska 34-7 in the Sugar Bowl. How could an unbeaten Alabama team that Bear Bryant once called his best ever finish third, also behind Michigan State?

 

4. Notre Dame in 1977: Admittedly, it's hard to include a team quarterbacked by Joe Montana, but hear me out on this. The Irish went into New Year's Day ranked No. 5 and Alabama was ranked No. 3. Both won their bowls by significant margins - Notre Dame 38-10 over No. 1 Texas and Alabama 35-6 over No. 9 Ohio State - but the Irish leaped over the Tide. Notre Dame's supporters will maintain they deserved the crown because Texas was ranked No. 1. But Notre Dame lost that year to Ole Miss, which went 5-6 and lost 34-13 to Alabama. The Tide's loss came to 9-3 Nebraska on the same day Notre Dame lost to Mississippi.

 

5. Florida State in 1993: Sometimes Notre Dame gets hosed, too. Florida State coach Bobby Bowden is a super guy, and his amiable personality may have been a bigger factor in Florida State's '93 championship than was the Seminoles' performance. Yes, Florida State finished the season with just one loss, but so did Notre Dame. And Notre Dame beat Florida State 31-24 late in the regular season. If teams finish with the same record and played each other, shouldn't the team that actually won on the field be considered better? Instead, the AP vote seemed to come down to a popularity contest between Bowden and Irish coach Lou Holtz, which of course was no contest at all.

 

Yesterday, 10:52 PM Post #1

 

Top 5 undeserving champs?

 

http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=767796

 

great minds...

[BIGREDFAN_in_OMAHA]

The 1984 BYU team was like the 1972 Miami Dolphins. Sure they went undefeated but both played horrid schedules full of teams that didn't finish with winning records.

[knapplc]

That Colorado "title" has to be the shakiest championship in any majorly contested sport, ever.

[Cy the Cyclone]

All wrong...THESE are the Top 5 Disputed Titles...

 

Disney princesses include Belle from “Beauty and the Beast,” Jasmine from “Aladdin,” Cinderella from “Cinderella,” Aurora from “Sleeping Beauty,” Ariel from “The Little Mermaid,” and Snow White from “Snow White.” But are these princesses, in fact, legitimate? What is the strength of their claims to the royal title and right to rule? Under careful scrutiny it appears that only a few of these Disney characters can actually bear the lawful name of princess and only one is uncontested.

 

Belle, Cinderella, and Snow White hold what appear to be the weakest claims to their surreptitiously given titles. All are relatively economically disadvantaged women who, through the aid—magical or otherwise—of another, fall in love with a real prince with an established claim. In their respective stories, however, the three women do not hold claims to rule in virtue of themselves. Each woman is solely dependent on the status of her husband, the prince, for her role as princess.* Yet, while the conclusions of these Disney tales suggest a future marriage, it is not at all sure whether or not they are lawfully married, so their status as royal wives is clearly debatable. These “princesses” could be no more than concubines in the eyes of the law. It is also a misnomer to label these women as “princesses” when –if we accept that they are, in fact, legitimately married in a ceremony approved by the reigning government—they are only married at the conclusion to the tale and thus, only enjoy their princess status at the end of the movie. Can we truly call these characters, then, princesses, when we have only known them as such for a few minutes before the closing credits? And, in the absence of a royal son and heir (which each woman lacks in their respective films) their ability to hold their positions against challenges from other noble claimants in the event of the death of their prince is nearly certain, considering their economic backgrounds, slim political experience, and lack of familial support.

 

Jasmine, Aurora and Ariel present different problems: all three are daughters of a king and so can legitimately hold the title of princess from the start in virtue of their births. Since Jasmine, Aurora and Ariel are all also the sole heirs in each of their tales, they will, presumably, be the successors to their fathers’ kingdoms upon their deaths; indeed, no other male heir or claimants are even discussed as possible heirs in. Their positions as Disney princesses are improved by the fact that each has found true love with a prince in a recognized marriage. Yet only in the tales of Aurora and Ariel is this marriage with a real prince. In Jasmine’s case, Aladdin is not—despite the magical attempts of his blue genii friend—a real prince. While the sultan’s change of heart at the conclusion to the film permits their marriage, the fact remains that Aladdin is not of royal stock. Thus, Jasmine’s claims to royal status are not strengthened by her prince whereas those of Ariel and Aurora, by marrying, respectively, Princes Eric and Phillip, are. Ariel has occasionally been elevated in her princess status by bearing the title of “princess of both sea and land” because of her mermaid identity. When she was transformed, however, Ariel received a human body and, thus, lost her sea title along with her tail. It is not a stretch to assume that neither her merman father nor his kingdom would want a human (who could only be ruling in absentia) for a ruler. So, while Ariel gains love and title from Prince Eric, she remains solely dependent on her husband for her princess status, for she has forsaken her father’s identity and royal claims not once but twice: first through her willing transformation by Ursula and secondly through the her later, permanent transformation by the king.

[REDSTEEL]

5. Florida State in 1993: Sometimes Notre Dame gets hosed, too. Florida State coach Bobby Bowden is a super guy, and his amiable personality may have been a bigger factor in Florida State's '93 championship than was the Seminoles' performance. Yes, Florida State finished the season with just one loss, but so did Notre Dame. And Notre Dame beat Florida State 31-24 late in the regular season. If teams finish with the same record and played each other, shouldn't the team that actually won on the field be considered better? Instead, the AP vote seemed to come down to a popularity contest between Bowden and Irish coach Lou Holtz, which of course was no contest at all.

 

If I remember right there when Notre Dame played FSU right after the game the media was trying to get FSU and Notre Dame into the same bowl and call it PLAYING for the National championship even though they just played. While Nebraska and West Virginia were two other schools that had no losses. Nebraska was lucky that Boston college upset Notre Dame otherwise they would have been left in the cold while FSU and Notre Dame would have played for the NC. What should've happen if they used the same criteria they have today was Nebraska playing West Virginia both undefeated before the bowls playing for the National Championship.

 

By the way Nebraska was screwed by at least three questionable calls during the NC game and still only lost by a missed FG.

[saniflush]

I can name you 6 that one school claims that are wrong.

 

1941 National Championship- This is a complete joke. The AP ranked Alabama 20th in the nation with 14 teams with better records in the top 20. Alabama finished 3rd in the SEC that year.

 

1965 National Championship- The AP gave this to Bama. That year there were three teams with better records than Bama. Bama 9-1-1, Michigan St 10-1-0, Arkansas 10-1-0, Nebraska 10-1-0.

 

1973 National Championship- AP puts Bama 4th after their bowl game loss. Bama claims a NC from the UPI poll that was taken before they met Notre Dame in the bowl game and lost. There were 3 teams with better records than Bama that year. The embarrassment of naming Alabama number one caused the UPI to name champions after bowl games.

 

1978 National Championship- AP gives this to Alabama(11-1-0) even though USC (12-1-0) had the better record Guess who Alabama lost to that year? USC!!!!!!!!!. UPI gave the NC to USC.

 

1925 National Championship- Alabama claims they share this one with Dartmouth. Who awarded the NC? Houlgate and Helms. Houlgate started his system in 1927. So Bama won their 1925 NC using a formula that didn't exist until 1927? Helms Athletic Foundation started in 1941.

 

1930 National Championship- The Davis poll says that Bama tied Notre Dame for NC this year. This was the only one to award it to Bama. Notre Dame was named NC in 6 polls! Parke Davis is another retroactive system! He (an individual, not an organization) did his in 1933!

[BIGREDFAN_in_OMAHA]

All wrong...THESE are the Top 5 Disputed Titles...

 

Disney princesses include Belle from “Beauty and the Beast,” Jasmine from “Aladdin,” Cinderella from “Cinderella,” Aurora from “Sleeping Beauty,” Ariel from “The Little Mermaid,” and Snow White from “Snow White.” But are these princesses, in fact, legitimate? What is the strength of their claims to the royal title and right to rule? Under careful scrutiny it appears that only a few of these Disney characters can actually bear the lawful name of princess and only one is uncontested.

 

Belle, Cinderella, and Snow White hold what appear to be the weakest claims to their surreptitiously given titles. All are relatively economically disadvantaged women who, through the aid—magical or otherwise—of another, fall in love with a real prince with an established claim. In their respective stories, however, the three women do not hold claims to rule in virtue of themselves. Each woman is solely dependent on the status of her husband, the prince, for her role as princess.* Yet, while the conclusions of these Disney tales suggest a future marriage, it is not at all sure whether or not they are lawfully married, so their status as royal wives is clearly debatable. These “princesses” could be no more than concubines in the eyes of the law. It is also a misnomer to label these women as “princesses” when –if we accept that they are, in fact, legitimately married in a ceremony approved by the reigning government—they are only married at the conclusion to the tale and thus, only enjoy their princess status at the end of the movie. Can we truly call these characters, then, princesses, when we have only known them as such for a few minutes before the closing credits? And, in the absence of a royal son and heir (which each woman lacks in their respective films) their ability to hold their positions against challenges from other noble claimants in the event of the death of their prince is nearly certain, considering their economic backgrounds, slim political experience, and lack of familial support.

 

Jasmine, Aurora and Ariel present different problems: all three are daughters of a king and so can legitimately hold the title of princess from the start in virtue of their births. Since Jasmine, Aurora and Ariel are all also the sole heirs in each of their tales, they will, presumably, be the successors to their fathers’ kingdoms upon their deaths; indeed, no other male heir or claimants are even discussed as possible heirs in. Their positions as Disney princesses are improved by the fact that each has found true love with a prince in a recognized marriage. Yet only in the tales of Aurora and Ariel is this marriage with a real prince. In Jasmine’s case, Aladdin is not—despite the magical attempts of his blue genii friend—a real prince. While the sultan’s change of heart at the conclusion to the film permits their marriage, the fact remains that Aladdin is not of royal stock. Thus, Jasmine’s claims to royal status are not strengthened by her prince whereas those of Ariel and Aurora, by marrying, respectively, Princes Eric and Phillip, are. Ariel has occasionally been elevated in her princess status by bearing the title of “princess of both sea and land” because of her mermaid identity. When she was transformed, however, Ariel received a human body and, thus, lost her sea title along with her tail. It is not a stretch to assume that neither her merman father nor his kingdom would want a human (who could only be ruling in absentia) for a ruler. So, while Ariel gains love and title from Prince Eric, she remains solely dependent on her husband for her princess status, for she has forsaken her father’s identity and royal claims not once but twice: first through her willing transformation by Ursula and secondly through the her later, permanent transformation by the king.

Was this one of your class papers at Iowa State?