PDA

View Full Version : Aggies Win a Couple Nat'l Championships in Football


eriadoc
09-09-2012, 01:05 AM
Since no one else has posted the story (http://deadspin.com/5941380/), I may as well.

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17ye3fgjni3xtjpg/xlarge.jpg

You're looking at two photos of Texas A&M's Kyle Field, both via Rant Sports. The top was taken last season, the bottom snapped just this week. Pretend this is one of those "spot the differences" bar games, and see if you can tell what's new. Yep, the Aggies' history managed to get a lot more storied over the offseason.

In other words: enjoy those fake titles, Aggies. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Hervoyel
09-09-2012, 02:09 AM
What? No World Series titles?

Say Watt
09-09-2012, 03:12 AM
I tend to agree with the decision to put the 1927 and 1919 National Championships on there, but the extra conference championships are just ridiculous. Since there was no official system put in place and A&M was undefeated in 1919, I have no problem with them claiming that title. 27 is up for some debate, but we are talking almost 100 years ago. They have a legitimate claim. The 97 conference championship though is ridiculous! Ha!

eriadoc
09-09-2012, 03:23 AM
I tend to agree with the decision to put the 1927 and 1919 National Championships on there, but the extra conference championships are just ridiculous. Since there was no official system put in place and A&M was undefeated in 1919, I have no problem with them claiming that title. 27 is up for some debate, but we are talking almost 100 years ago. They have a legitimate claim. The 97 conference championship though is ridiculous! Ha!

You would think that they would have come to that conclusion at some point in the last 85-90 years though, right? I mean, the move to the SEC couldn't have anything to do with this, huh?

LOL

HJam72
09-09-2012, 09:01 AM
Texans were undefeated in 2001!!! :hurrah:

Say Watt
09-09-2012, 12:54 PM
You would think that they would have come to that conclusion at some point in the last 85-90 years though, right? I mean, the move to the SEC couldn't have anything to do with this, huh?

LOL

Good point. I agree with you there that is for sure. They should have just left it alone.

Dutchrudder
09-09-2012, 04:10 PM
Uhhhhhh....

no comment.

pbat488
09-09-2012, 04:21 PM
claiming the conference championships is absolutely retarded.

I don't have a problem so much with the national championships. the 1919 team was unscored upon and undefeated. 1927 was undefeated except for a tie at tcu, so not as strong a claim as 1919 but eh.

the 97 and 2010 claims are total crap though.

Dutchrudder
09-09-2012, 05:39 PM
Holy ****! The 1997 Big 12 championship game was Nebraska over A&M 54-15!!! Why would anyone want to even think about claiming that??? Jesus christ...

Say Watt
09-09-2012, 06:58 PM
Holy ****! The 1997 Big 12 championship game was Nebraska over A&M 54-15!!! Why would anyone want to even think about claiming that??? Jesus christ...

That was what I was thinking. It is stupid to add any of them to begin with, but that 1919 team was without a doubt the best team in the country. I mean ****, they were unscored upon! It doesn't get much better than that.

Dan B.
09-09-2012, 09:12 PM
That was what I was thinking. It is stupid to add any of them to begin with, but that 1919 team was without a doubt the best team in the country. I mean ****, they were unscored upon! It doesn't get much better than that.

Actually 36 teams did just that between 1900 and 1943 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_undefeated_NCAA_Division_I_football_teams) . Hell, A&M didn't allow anyone to score in 1917 either. They went undefeated, yet don't claim to be the national champs that year. The thing is, they only played 8-10 game seasons back then, and no one played each other.

Was Colgate without a doubt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1932_Colgate_Red_Raiders_football_team) the National Champion in 1932?

Dutchrudder
09-09-2012, 09:34 PM
Actually 36 teams did just that between 1900 and 1943 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_undefeated_NCAA_Division_I_football_teams) . Hell, A&M didn't allow anyone to score in 1917 either. They went undefeated, yet don't claim to be the national champs that year. The thing is, they only played 8-10 game seasons back then, and no one played each other.

Was Colgate without a doubt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1932_Colgate_Red_Raiders_football_team) the National Champion in 1932?

By my count, 21 of those 36 played 5 games or less in those seasons. I can't really give much credit to those, but it's all pretty arbitrary at this point anyways. Hell we have had championship controversies in the last decade. what makes anyone think we are able to accurately award these a hundred years later?