(10-22-2019 01:33 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  From https://americanrx.blogspot.com/2015/08/...hamps.html

there are three teams in the FBS with [recognized] national titles which are not in a P5 league; two of them are in the American Athletic Conference (AAC), the third is independent:

National Championships
SMU, 3 - 1935, 1981, 1982
Army, 3 - 1944, 1945, 1946
Navy, 1 - 1926

You missed one...BYU 1984

(10-22-2019 01:33 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  From https://americanrx.blogspot.com/2015/08/...hamps.html

there are three teams in the FBS with [recognized] national titles which are not in a P5 league; two of them are in the American Athletic Conference (AAC), the third is independent:

National Championships
SMU, 3 - 1935, 1981, 1982
Army, 3 - 1944, 1945, 1946
Navy, 1 - 1926

BYU dude, come on

(12-29-2020 10:26 AM)Shox Wrote:  If Cincinnati loses badly who is the mythical G5 champ? Has to be either Liberty or Louisiana???

I would be interested to hear what people think if that does happen.

Both teams finished 10-1 with their only losses being to Top 25 teams (prior to bowl season). Louisiana's overall schedule is stronger, but Liberty also played 3 P5s, beating 2 of 3, & beat Coastal. Louisiana also became ranked much sooner in both the AP & Coaches' Poll, & unlike Liberty, they were actually ranked in the CFP rankings (though I know that ranking has been pretty heavily scrutinized for its bias this year, so that could help it or not, depending on the person).

(10-22-2019 10:59 AM)Shox Wrote:  I am willing to bet that the P5/6 continue to seperate (sic) itself from the rest of the pack.

This part of the above statement is a non sequitur - - an error in logic:

"...the P5/6 (will) continue to separate itself from the rest of the pack."

It's a non sequitur because, in football at least, there has been no "separation process" whatsoever, and by the rules of logic, it is not possible to "continue" a process that never unfolded in the first place.

The greatest separation from the non-P5 teams existed during the 2013 season - - the first season after the P5/G5 split, which concluded with only one non-P5 team in the final AP Top 25.

Every season after that, the extent of "separation" between the P5s and non-P5s, as recorded in the top 25 lists, has either remained the same or has shrunk!

In 2014, there were 2 non-P5 teams in the final AP Top 25. By the end of the 2019 season, there were 7 P5 teams in the final AP 25, and there have been 7 P5 teams in the AP top 25 for much of the 2020 season.

It is thus somewhat baffling that anyone who has followed FBS football closely since 2013 can seriously expect anyone but a dyed-in-the-wool P5 fan to accept the notion that the P5 has been separating itself more and more from "the rest of the pack" over the past 7-8 years.

U. of Chicago 1905 and 1913 while they were in the Big 10.
Army 5 times 1914, 1916, 1944, 1945, and 1946
Centre 1919
Lafayette 1921 and 1926
Washington & Jefferson 1921
Detroit Mercy 1928
Colgate 1932
SMU 1935, 1981 and 1982
BYU 1984
Tulane 1998 (self claimed)
UCF 2017

I think a lot of people do claimed Boise State as co-champs when they were the top G5 schools especially when they beat Oklahoma.

(12-29-2020 12:22 PM)Keswick_Crusaders_Forever51 Wrote:  

(12-29-2020 10:26 AM)Shox Wrote:  If Cincinnati loses badly who is the mythical G5 champ? Has to be either Liberty or Louisiana???

I would be interested to hear what people think if that does happen.

Both teams finished 10-1 with their only losses being to Top 25 teams (prior to bowl season). Louisiana's overall schedule is stronger, but Liberty also played 3 P5s, beating 2 of 3, & beat Coastal. Louisiana also became ranked much sooner in both the AP & Coaches' Poll, & unlike Liberty, they were actually ranked in the CFP rankings (though I know that ranking has been pretty heavily scrutinized for its bias this year, so that could help it or not, depending on the person).

NOTE: Beating a P5 football team isn't as big of a deal as it used to be.

(12-29-2020 01:13 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(12-29-2020 12:22 PM)Keswick_Crusaders_Forever51 Wrote:  

(12-29-2020 10:26 AM)Shox Wrote:  If Cincinnati loses badly who is the mythical G5 champ? Has to be either Liberty or Louisiana???

I would be interested to hear what people think if that does happen.

Both teams finished 10-1 with their only losses being to Top 25 teams (prior to bowl season). Louisiana's overall schedule is stronger, but Liberty also played 3 P5s, beating 2 of 3, & beat Coastal. Louisiana also became ranked much sooner in both the AP & Coaches' Poll, & unlike Liberty, they were actually ranked in the CFP rankings (though I know that ranking has been pretty heavily scrutinized for its bias this year, so that could help it or not, depending on the person).

NOTE: Beating a P5 football team isn't as big of a deal as it used to be.

But, it would be a big deal if Liberty or Coastal Carolina beat Alabama.

(12-29-2020 01:11 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  U. of Chicago 1905 and 1913 while they were in the Big 10.
Army 5 times 1914, 1916, 1944, 1945, and 1946
Centre 1919
Lafayette 1921 and 1926
Washington & Jefferson 1921
Detroit Mercy 1928
Colgate 1932
SMU 1935, 1981 and 1982
BYU 1984
Tulane 1998 (self claimed)
UCF 2017

I think a lot of people do claimed Boise State as co-champs when they were the top G5 schools especially when they beat Oklahoma.

If this list includes basketball national championships, then Temple belongs on the list, since the 1937-38 Owls are generally considered to have been the 1938 national champions, by virtue of having won the inaugural NIT championship in 1938, the year before the inaugural NCAA tournament was played.

The NIT during that era was, and still is generally considered by well-informed historians to have been the preeminent national collegiate basketball tournament over most of the seasons played between 1938 and 1950.

"The 1937–38 Temple Owls men's basketball team represented Temple University during the 1937–38 NCAA men's basketball season in the United States. The team finished the season with a 23–2 record and was retroactively named the national champion by the Helms Athletic Foundation and the Premo-Porretta Power Poll."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937%E2%80...tball_team

"The Official NCAA Men's Basketball Records Book lists title selections of pre-tournament era teams by the Helms Athletic Foundation. The Helms Foundation's Bill Schroeder named a national champion from 1901 to 1982, with his selections from 1901 to 1941 being named retroactively in 1943 and 1957. The Helms champion, for the years in which the NIT and NCAA post-season tournaments were played, reflected the winners of the 1938 NIT and 1939 NIT..." Most recently, the retroactive end-of-year Premo-Porretta Power Poll has provided the first national rankings of college basketball teams for the 1895–96 through the 1947–48 seasons. (No regular, recognized national polling took place prior to the establishment of the Associated Press Poll and the Coaches Poll for college basketball prior to the 1948–49 and 1950–51 seasons, respectively.) The Premo-Porretta rankings were published in 2009 in the ESPN College Basketball Encyclopedia. As with the Helms selections, the Premo-Porretta poll recognized the 1938 and 1939 NIT Champions as national champions; in addition to 1939, the poll's national championship selections differed from the results of the NCAA Tournament in 1941, 1943, 1944, 1945, and 1947."

Temple defeated three national powerhouse teams in the 1938 NIT tournament: Bradley, Oklahoma St. (then known as Oklahoma A&M), and Colorado.

(12-29-2020 10:31 AM)whittx Wrote:  

(10-22-2019 01:33 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  From https://americanrx.blogspot.com/2015/08/...hamps.html

there are three teams in the FBS with [recognized] national titles which are not in a P5 league; two of them are in the American Athletic Conference (AAC), the third is independent:

National Championships
SMU, 3 - 1935, 1981, 1982
Army, 3 - 1944, 1945, 1946
Navy, 1 - 1926

You missed one...BYU 1984

Again, were talking mythical national championships. The kind Texas A&M, Oklahoma State, and Bama claimed recently from 80 years ago. The ones you posted above are legit historical claims (legit as this process allows I guess) but should also probably include UCF's claim in 2017 since the NCAA acknowledges the claim.

I think this is a fun concept. It would be interesting to take this back to 1978, when FBS was created for the top team from the:

WAC
Big West
MAC
C-USA
MWC
SBC
Independents who weren’t Big East founders/joined a BCS conference in the early 90s.

The AP poll out today has Cinci as the #8 team and highest ranked G5 so they are now the official (unofficial) G5 national champ.

(12-29-2020 01:09 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(10-22-2019 10:59 AM)Shox Wrote:  I am willing to bet that the P5/6 continue to seperate (sic) itself from the rest of the pack.

This part of the above statement is a non sequitur - - an error in logic:

"...the P5/6 (will) continue to separate itself from the rest of the pack."

It's a non sequitur because, in football at least, there has been no "separation process" whatsoever, and by the rules of logic, it is not possible to "continue" a process that never unfolded in the first place.

The greatest separation from the non-P5 teams existed during the 2013 season - - the first season after the P5/G5 split, which concluded with only one non-P5 team in the final AP Top 25.

Saying the other poster made an "error in logic" is only true if we accept your metric of teams in the Top 25 as the best measure of P5 vs G5 separation. And there's no logical reason to accept that metric, since it ignores what is happening outside the top 25.

Your 2008 entry should be Utah (#2 in final AP poll) rather than Boise State (#11). Utah was in the Mountain West that season; their first Pac-12 season was 2011.

Final 2008 AP poll: http://collegepollarchive.com/football/a...sonid=2008

(10-23-2019 08:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 08:27 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 08:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-22-2019 01:33 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  From https://americanrx.blogspot.com/2015/08/...hamps.html

there are three teams in the FBS with [recognized] national titles which are not in a P5 league; two of them are in the American Athletic Conference (AAC), the third is independent:

National Championships
SMU, 3 - 1935, 1981, 1982
Army, 3 - 1944, 1945, 1946
Navy, 1 - 1926

I remember 1982, and Penn State was the national champion that year.

I also remember 1981, and Clemson was the national champion that year.

SMU was the national champion neither of those years. The AP and UPI polls determined the national champions at that time, the only time anyone ever talked about a "split" championship was if they differed, e.g., in 1978, when the AP picked Alabama and the UPI picked USC.

Upon further review, the call is reversed - those SMU championship claims are pretty flimsy! I'd probably give more credence to UCF's recent claim - at least they were undefeated! (SMU was not)

Sorry if it seems I'm picking at you, but the notion of schools retroactively claiming titles, or doing so in the present day, based on flimsy nobody polls just because the NCAA has a list of 30 of them gets my goat, LOL.

But FWIW, SMU was undefeated in 1982. They had 11 wins and a tie, the only team that finished in the top 10 that didn't lose. They won the SWC and beat #6 Pitt, a loaded team with Dan Marino that was ranked #1 part of the year, in the Cotton Bowl. National champ Penn State did have a loss, they were 11-1. SMU was not an outsider-cinderella, they started the season ranked #6, never fell lower than #8, and finished at #2. They were a big-time contender all season long.

Given that they played a real "P5" schedule that year, whereas 2017 UCF did not, I would say that SMU 1982 had a much stronger argument for being voted national champ than did UCF in 2017, who has no claim at all.

Nevertheless, the culture of college football then was that whether you have an argument or not, it doesn't matter, who the polls picked decided it. Pointing at a single computer or lesser poll and claiming a national title on that basis was regarded as sheer nonsense.

I can assure you that the custom of the time was, if you were an SMU, to gnash your teeth and shout that your team was "robbed" by the pollsters, not to hang a banner and pretend that you were voted national champs when you weren't.

E.g., I will go to my grave thinking that 1993 Notre Dame and 1994 Penn State were totally deserving of being voted #1 by at least one of the two major polls, and that they were robbed that it didn't happen. But they weren't, so they weren't the national champs those years.

Interesting.

Seems like SMU got shafted by not at least having the polls split that season.

Was that one of the Pony Express teams? Forgive my ignorance, but I was born in the 80s...lol.

(01-12-2021 05:30 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 08:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 08:27 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 08:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-22-2019 01:33 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  From https://americanrx.blogspot.com/2015/08/...hamps.html

there are three teams in the FBS with [recognized] national titles which are not in a P5 league; two of them are in the American Athletic Conference (AAC), the third is independent:

National Championships
SMU, 3 - 1935, 1981, 1982
Army, 3 - 1944, 1945, 1946
Navy, 1 - 1926

I remember 1982, and Penn State was the national champion that year.

I also remember 1981, and Clemson was the national champion that year.

SMU was the national champion neither of those years. The AP and UPI polls determined the national champions at that time, the only time anyone ever talked about a "split" championship was if they differed, e.g., in 1978, when the AP picked Alabama and the UPI picked USC.

Upon further review, the call is reversed - those SMU championship claims are pretty flimsy! I'd probably give more credence to UCF's recent claim - at least they were undefeated! (SMU was not)

Sorry if it seems I'm picking at you, but the notion of schools retroactively claiming titles, or doing so in the present day, based on flimsy nobody polls just because the NCAA has a list of 30 of them gets my goat, LOL.

But FWIW, SMU was undefeated in 1982. They had 11 wins and a tie, the only team that finished in the top 10 that didn't lose. They won the SWC and beat #6 Pitt, a loaded team with Dan Marino that was ranked #1 part of the year, in the Cotton Bowl. National champ Penn State did have a loss, they were 11-1. SMU was not an outsider-cinderella, they started the season ranked #6, never fell lower than #8, and finished at #2. They were a big-time contender all season long.

Given that they played a real "P5" schedule that year, whereas 2017 UCF did not, I would say that SMU 1982 had a much stronger argument for being voted national champ than did UCF in 2017, who has no claim at all.

Nevertheless, the culture of college football then was that whether you have an argument or not, it doesn't matter, who the polls picked decided it. Pointing at a single computer or lesser poll and claiming a national title on that basis was regarded as sheer nonsense.

I can assure you that the custom of the time was, if you were an SMU, to gnash your teeth and shout that your team was "robbed" by the pollsters, not to hang a banner and pretend that you were voted national champs when you weren't.

E.g., I will go to my grave thinking that 1993 Notre Dame and 1994 Penn State were totally deserving of being voted #1 by at least one of the two major polls, and that they were robbed that it didn't happen. But they weren't, so they weren't the national champs those years.

Interesting.

Seems like SMU got shafted by not at least having the polls split that season.

Was that one of the Pony Express teams? Forgive my ignorance, but I was born in the 80s...lol.

Yep, that was a Pony Express team. Dickerson/James and Marino for Pitt played their last college games in that Cotton Bowl won by SMU.

One thing that hurt SMU was that they received harsh criticism for playing for a tie with #9 Arkansas in their last regular season game. SMU scored very late to cut Arkansas's lead from 10-3 to 10-9 [EDIT: 17-10 to 17-16], but opted to kick the XP and settle for a tie rather than going for two and the win. I remember thinking the criticism was harsh, but they did receive it and they dropped from #2 to #4 in the polls that week.

That same weekend, #3 Penn State was idle, but moved up to #2 thanks to SMU dropping. When Penn State then beat Pitt a week later to finish their regular season, that positioned now #2 Penn State to play #1 Georgia in the Sugar Bowl, effectively freezing SMU out of the national title situation.

That's the one thing those who say that in the famous 1983 Nebraska - Miami Orange Bowl game that Tom Osborne could have just settled for the tie with Miami and claimed the national title forget - just a year earlier, a major team had been heavily criticized and dropped in the polls for appearing to play for a tie.

Those SMU teams were at the heart of the reason SMU was given the death penalty shortly thereafter. Karma's a *****.

Getting back to the original post, it appears that what was intended to demonstrate why the AAC is more deserving than other G5 conferences of "P" status, or at least tweener status, is based on a claim of two claimed championships in the era before the AP poll was created - one in 1926 and one in 1935. That's pretty weak sauce, especially since few people disagree with the tweener label in the first place..

(01-12-2021 08:10 PM)ken d Wrote:  Those SMU teams were at the heart of the reason SMU was given the death penalty shortly thereafter. Karma's a *****.

Funny thing is, even though SMU got the DP some four years later, they were already in trouble - the 1981 SMU team went 10-1 and won the SWC title, but did not play in the Cotton Bowl because they were on bowl-ban probation for recruiting violations. They were on probation in 1982 as well, but the probation that year did not include a bowl ban.

That's another thing about SMU 1982: The reason their coach played for a tie was to guarantee going to the Cotton Bowl, which SMU had not been to since the late 1960s. As others have noted, back then, winning your conference and securing a berth in one of the four traditional NYD bowls was a huge deal to a fan base, and not to be risked, especially for a program that wasn't used to it. Going to the Cotton Bowl for the first time in 15 or so years was a massive prize for the SMU fan base of that time.

The final irony is that the "settling for a tie" charge wasn't even well-grounded, at least by today's standards. When SMU scored the tying TD, there were still about 3 minutes left. It wasn't like they scored with 10 seconds left, such that it was obvious that kicking the XP would result in a tie. These days, we know the last 3 minutes of a game can take a LONG time, and many things can still happen. In fact, SMU did get the ball back and their kicker missed a 50-yard FG at the buzzer that would have won it. But back then, with the slower run-oriented offenses, scoring with 3 minutes left and kicking the XP was viewed as settling for a tie.

I think every G5 team would rather hang a conference championship banner than any MMG5C banner.

(01-13-2021 08:53 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-12-2021 08:10 PM)ken d Wrote:  Those SMU teams were at the heart of the reason SMU was given the death penalty shortly thereafter. Karma's a *****.

Funny thing is, even though SMU got the DP some four years later, they were already in trouble - the 1981 SMU team went 10-1 and won the SWC title, but did not play in the Cotton Bowl because they were on bowl-ban probation for recruiting violations. They were on probation in 1982 as well, but the probation that year did not include a bowl ban.

That's another thing about SMU 1982: The reason their coach played for a tie was to guarantee going to the Cotton Bowl, which SMU had not been to since the late 1960s. As others have noted, back then, winning your conference and securing a berth in one of the four traditional NYD bowls was a huge deal to a fan base, and not to be risked, especially for a program that wasn't used to it. Going to the Cotton Bowl for the first time in 15 or so years was a massive prize for the SMU fan base of that time.

The final irony is that the "settling for a tie" charge wasn't even well-grounded, at least by today's standards. When SMU scored the tying TD, there were still about 3 minutes left. It wasn't like they scored with 10 seconds left, such that it was obvious that kicking the XP would result in a tie. These days, we know the last 3 minutes of a game can take a LONG time, and many things can still happen. In fact, SMU did get the ball back and their kicker missed a 50-yard FG at the buzzer that would have won it. But back then, with the slower run-oriented offenses, scoring with 3 minutes left and kicking the XP was viewed as settling for a tie.

At what point did it become obvious that 3 minutes is a lot of time? Just curious.

My high school team ended about half our practices with a 2 minute drill. Coach put the ball on the 20 & put 2 minutes on the clock, and we played it like the final 2 minutes of a regular game. That was in the late 90s. My coach was ahead of his time on a lot of things though, at least compared to other HS coaches.

(01-13-2021 10:10 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(01-13-2021 08:53 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-12-2021 08:10 PM)ken d Wrote:  Those SMU teams were at the heart of the reason SMU was given the death penalty shortly thereafter. Karma's a *****.

Funny thing is, even though SMU got the DP some four years later, they were already in trouble - the 1981 SMU team went 10-1 and won the SWC title, but did not play in the Cotton Bowl because they were on bowl-ban probation for recruiting violations. They were on probation in 1982 as well, but the probation that year did not include a bowl ban.

That's another thing about SMU 1982: The reason their coach played for a tie was to guarantee going to the Cotton Bowl, which SMU had not been to since the late 1960s. As others have noted, back then, winning your conference and securing a berth in one of the four traditional NYD bowls was a huge deal to a fan base, and not to be risked, especially for a program that wasn't used to it. Going to the Cotton Bowl for the first time in 15 or so years was a massive prize for the SMU fan base of that time.

The final irony is that the "settling for a tie" charge wasn't even well-grounded, at least by today's standards. When SMU scored the tying TD, there were still about 3 minutes left. It wasn't like they scored with 10 seconds left, such that it was obvious that kicking the XP would result in a tie. These days, we know the last 3 minutes of a game can take a LONG time, and many things can still happen. In fact, SMU did get the ball back and their kicker missed a 50-yard FG at the buzzer that would have won it. But back then, with the slower run-oriented offenses, scoring with 3 minutes left and kicking the XP was viewed as settling for a tie.

At what point did it become obvious that 3 minutes is a lot of time? Just curious.

I think it became that when when high-flying passing offenses took over college football. We all know passing slows down those last minutes.