This article was nominated for deletion on 5 July 2018. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Here is some information on the football-related content of this article for new editors who may not be familiar with what is a reasonably controversial topic.
A primary point is that there is not now, nor has there ever been, an "official" NCAA national champion in FBS/D1A football. Therefore, there is no "official" source beyond those of the individual independent selectors (of which the current AP and Coaches' polls are only two) listing yearly national championships. The closest the sport has ever come to a true championship was the modern BCS Championship game, which began with the 1998 football season. However, the BCS Championship Game was a BCS Championship, not an NCAA one, and the winner of the BCS was contractually awarded the title of National Champion only for the Coaches' Poll and the National Football Foundation.
Throughout college football history, each national championship selection in actuality has represented only individual opinions (or the tabulation of opinions). Because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that depends on the major tenets of No Original Research and Neutral Point of View, it is not appropriate for a Wikipedia article to include comments on the validity of one selection over another.
Wikipedia relies on expert reliable sources. The column of "Recognized National Titles" in the first table has information reproduced from College Football Data Warehouse, which is arguably the most heavily trafficked, popularly utilized, and widely cited historical college football resource on the internet. The content of CFDW is in part contributed by well-respected college football historian Tex Noel. The column included in the table reproduces College Football Data Warehouse's singular opinion on the most legitimate national championship selections for each season and provides a more selective all-time opinion/list than other more expansive lists.
Whether you or your school's official count agrees with the listings, the totals in this table are duplicated from reliable sourced material. The numbers do not in any way reflect the opinions of the editors of this article, but rather of the college football historians that have compiled this information.
It is recognized that the football titles column in this table represents only one opinion on this topic. The CFDW information was included because it is a widely cited "selection of yearly selections" with a seemingly neutral "expert" opinion. It is also beneficial that it is available on-line, which permits the easy verification of edits to this article.
Again, the information on football in this Wikipedia article represents no statement as to the legitimacy or authoritativeness of the CFDW list. As opinions will differ with this resource, the reader is directed to the articles on individual football teams for alternative national championship claims and counts. This article rightfully contains no comment as to which totals are more legitimate. Any such respectful discussion or comments may, however, be appropriate for this "Talk" page. (Adapted from a contribution by CrazyPaco ( talk) )
Jeff in CA ( talk) 02:33, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
College Football Data Warehouse included Princeton's teams of 1874, 1875, 1881, 1898, 1899, 1920, 1933 and 1935 on its "recognized" list of national champions in football ( http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/national_championships/nchamps_team.php). This is troubling. According to the pre-1935 criterion established by CFDW ( http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/national_championships/national_champs_assessment.php), the selection of a team by just one of three major selectors (HAF, NCF, CFRA – all retroactive) is needed for recognition. However, for these 8 years, none of the major selectors, upon which CFDW based its list, selected Princeton. Yet Princeton appears on CFDW's "recognized" list for those 8 seasons.
In addition, the retroactive selections by HAF, NCF and CFRA also did not include Princeton for 1877, 1884 and 1886. Thus, under the CFDW criteria, those three Princeton teams should also not be recognized, and yet they are on its list. However, I do not begrudge the CDFW listing for those years, because a contemporary source circa 1894 ( http://www.secsportsfan.com/support-files/special_edition.pdf, IFRA, "The College Football Historian," Special Edition, November 2008, p. 14.) lists Princeton as national champion or co-champion in those years. It should be without controversy for us in the present time to concur with such a decision made by the pioneers of football regarding the champions of their day. Despite the CFDW criteria, those 1877, 1884 and 1886 Princeton teams belong on a list of national champions. (For the sake of completeness, note also that CFDW properly excluded the titles claimed by Princeton for 1894 and 1950, under its own criteria.)
Therefore, according to its own criteria, a more appropriate number for CFDW's "recognized" Princeton national champions in football would be no more than 18. Note: Only when and if CFDW revises its reported number on its website should the number in this article be changed (see discussion above).
Jeff in CA ( talk) 03:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
According to a contemporary source circa 1894 ( http://www.secsportsfan.com/support-files/special_edition.pdf, IFRA, "The College Football Historian," Special Edition, November 2008, p. 14.), Yale won the 1890 national football championship and was recognized as such in its own time. However, Yale's 1890 title does not appear on the CFDW list. For the same reason as stated above for recognizing Princeton's titles for 1877, 1884 and 1886, Yale should also be recognized for its 1890 national championship. Thus, a more appropriate number for recognized Yale national champions in football would arguably be 19 (one more than the number given by CFDW). Note: Only when and if CFDW revises its reported number on its website should the number in this article be changed (see discussion above).
Jeff in CA ( talk) 03:39, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
The inclusion of the 1907 Penn team in the CFDW list of recognized national champions is questionable. There were no major selectors who chose Penn ( http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/national_championships/yearly_results.php?year=1907). Penn erroneously claims Billingsley for 1907 in its media guide, but Billingsley selected Harvard in 1907. Furthermore, CFDW did not utilize Billingsley's selections in its criteria. This is at odds with CFDW’s stated recognition criteria.
The inclusion of the 1894 Penn team as co-champion with Yale in the CFDW list of recognized national champions does not satisfy the CFDW criteria ( http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/national_championships/yearly_results.php?year=1894). Although Penn had an excellent undefeated record, Yale also was undefeated with more wins, and was selected by HAF and NCF. Yale alone met the CFDW retroactive criteria. (Personally I am in favor of co-champions for 1894.)
Thus, a more appropriate number for CFDW's "recognized" University of Pennsylvania national champions in football would be 4 (two less than the number given by CFDW). Note: Only when and if CFDW revises its reported number on its website should the number in this article be changed (see discussion above).
Jeff in CA ( talk) 03:37, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
I am uneasy about the listing of the Ten Ecyk winners (overall points trophy) in the IRA regatta from 1952 on as national champions in men's rowing.
Rowing is unlike most sports in that the winner of just one of the contested series of races, rather than an overall winner, is considered to be the national champion team. Typical of statements that one sees around the web is this one at http://www.gwsports.com/m/sports/m-rowing/spec-rel/052913aab.html :
For example, the California Golden Bears athletic article shows Cal as having won 16 national championships (not seven), corresponding to its varsity 8s wins at the IRA regatta. In fact, I don't think I've seen a rowing-related website state or imply that the Ten Ecyk winners were anything other than the Ten Ecyk winners.
In addition, the article at College rowing says the following with regard to the National Collegiate Rowing Championships that were held from 1982 to 1996:
That the NCRC was "quasi-official" was actually an upgrade from all the men's racing up until that time, as nothing was considered to be an "official" national championship event; rather, the IRA Grand 8s winner was considered the de facto champion. That the IRA race was not "official" I think stemmed largely from the fact that the Harvard and Yale varsity 8s, two of the perennially best crews in the nation, did not participate in the IRAs from 1898 through 2002. In fact some historians point to the Henley Regatta in England in certain years when Harvard, Yale and Washington were all present as being a more important US college race.
The fact that the Harvard/Yale winner and the Pac 10 winner (usually Washington) and whichever team won the IRA (often another Ivy) raced head-to-head made the NCRC important as a championship event.
I would favor listing the IRA heavyweight 8s winner as the national champion for each year, except for 1982-96, for which I would list the NCRC winners. What do others think?
Jeff in CA ( talk) 16:51, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Effect of this on the number of men's rowing titles as currently listed:
minus gain net-change Cornell 1 2 1 Navy 9 1 -8 Penn 5 1 -4 Princeton 1 1 0 Washington 4 2 -2 Wisconsin 12 4 -8 Brown 0 4 4 California 0 9 9 Harvard 0 6 6 Syracuse 0 1 1 Yale 0 1 1
Jeff in CA ( talk) 02:45, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Why is cheer not included in this list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryantheravensfan1 ( talk • contribs) 02:12, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
West Virginia University has 15 national titles for that sport alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.123.223.156 ( talk) 14:30, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of NCAA schools with the most Division I national championships. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 14:56, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
The NCAA team championships on this list are not consistent with the NCAA's own published numbers. The NCAA's published championship count includes pre-1939 men's golf titles. This list, on the other hand, puts those pre-1939 golf titles in the "other team titles" column, and excludes those titles from the NCAA titles column. This results in the number of NCAA titles on this list being inconsistent with the NCAA's own numbers. This is a needless source of confusion. The NCAA titles numbers on this list should be consistent with the numbers that the rest of the world is using. I would move the pre-1939 golf titles into the NCAA team titles column.
Elmo McGee ( talk) 23:59, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Unofficial NCAA Championship Years | NCAA Division I Team Titles (as of May 29, 2015) | ||||||
School | Swimming | Boxing | Wrestling | Track & Field | # Unofficial | # Official | Total titles credited |
Catholic | 1938 | 1 | 0 | 1 | |||
Idaho | 1940, 1941 | 2 | 1 | 3 | |||
Illinois | 1927 | 1 | 17 | 18 | |||
Indiana | 1932 | 1 | 23 | 24 | |||
Iowa State | 1933 | 1 | 12 | 13 | |||
Michigan | 1927, 1928, 1931, 1932, 1934, 1935, 1936 | 7 | 36 | 36 | |||
Navy | 1925, 1926 | 2 | 5 | 5 | |||
Northwestern | 1924, 1929, 1930, 1933 | 4 | 8 | 8 | |||
Oklahoma State | 1928, 1931, 1933 | 3 | 48 | 51 | |||
Penn State | 1932 | 1 | 45 | 46 | |||
Stanford | 1925 | 1 | 106 | 107 | |||
Syracuse | 1936 | 1 | 12 | 13 | |||
USC | 1926 | 1 | 99 | 100 | |||
Virginia | 1938 | 1 | 21 | 22 | |||
Washington State | 1937 | 1 | 1 | 2 | |||
West Virginia | 1938 | 1 | 17 | 18 | |||
Wisconsin | 1939, 1942, 1943, 1947 | 4 | 24 | 28 | |||
Number | 13 | 12 | 5 | 3 | 33 | 475 | 495 |
My question is if we can add the Team Handball titles to the other Sports column like Rowing or Equestrian. Handball was once a NCAA sanctioned sport it had his own conference (Southeast Team Handball Conference).-- Malo95 ( talk) 14:08, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
First in NCAA History
The establishment of the Southeast Team Handball Conference (SETHC) was established in 1997 through a grant from the United States Olympic Committee and the NCAA. The USOC/NCAA grant program was created to assist endangered and emerging Olympic sports at the college level, increase the number of athletes, intercollegiate programs and conference championships, as well as assist NCAA member institutions reach gender-equity goals.
Why is women's lightweight rowing not included in this list? See /info/en/?search=Intercollegiate_sports_team_champions#Varsity_Lightweight_Eights.
Elsewhere on this page, I find: "Generally speaking, unless it can be definitively shown that another sport has been bestowing college championships from a time pre-dating the NCAA, it is only for sports that are or were NCAA or AIAW sports." But men's rowing championships, women's equestrian championships, and women's rugby championships are included, even though these never were NCAA or AIAW sports. Thiesen ( talk) 16:09, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
I think everyone reading this discussion should be knowledgable about the difficulty/intricacy of defining and enumerating college football national championships. If not, please read the linked article as well as the "Information about football-related content in this article" section of this page.
One of the defining features of this list (vs. the similar list at List of NCAA schools with the most NCAA Division I championships) is the addition of football national championships to the total. The way this article has filled the football column is by including only the football championships "recognized" by College Football Data Warehouse (CFDW), a football statistics website published/updated between roughly 2000–2015.
I see two major problems with the CFDW approach as it relates to Wikipedia policies:
1. The first relates to WP:NPOV. The usage of the CFDW table gives major WP:UNDUE weight to the opinions of a single person/website. "Neutrality requires that mainspace articles and pages fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources." The particular views of the person/people behind CFDW are clearly a "minority view" held only by the website who published the table and are not particularly prominent. No evidence is given that their exclusive "recognized" national championships are an accepted view by anyone else. "Generally, the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all, except perhaps in a "see also" to an article about those specific views."
This issue is raised without prejudice to the relative merits of the CFDW selections or to the credentials or WP:RELIABILITY of the website or its authors.
As one example, CFDW does not recognize the 1939 USC national championship. Thus USC is not credited with that national championship on Wikipedia. This is despite the fact that USC was awarded the Knute Rockne Memorial Trophy in December 1939, the single major contemporary trophy emblematic of the national championship. CFDW recognizes only Texas A&M for 1939, No. 1 in the AP Poll, which did not award a trophy. (The AP Poll was only in its 4th year; it eventually did become one of the most important selectors, but I'd argue it's WP:RECENTISM to suggest that the AP Poll was the only top-tier selector in 1939). USC themselves claim the 1939 title. The words "1939 University of Southern California" are even engraved on the AP Trophies used in 1941–1947 and 1948–1956, as the AP Trophy inherited the legacy of the Rissman and Rockne trophies and not the 1936-1940 AP Poll winners. It's clearly a "significant view" published by many reliable sources that USC was a national champion in 1939.
I'm of course not comparing the relative merits of either team's season, win-loss record, or national championship claim, just recognizing that USC won the single major national championship trophy for 1939 while Texas A&M was No. 1 in the AP Poll. Yet USC's national championship is not included in this general Wikipedia list of national champions due to the exclusive WP:WEIGHT given to the opinions of a single self-published college football stats website that has been offline since 2017. This exclusive deferment to CFDW's opinion is WP:UNDUE.
2. An issue of WP:SYNTHESIS. As mentioned, CFDW has been offline since 2017. Their recognized national championship table was last updated to award Alabama for 2015.
Editors continued to update the CFDW football column post-2015, adding the College Football Playoff champions, despite those champions not being recognized by CFDW (or indeed CFDW ever even writing that the CFP would be a recognized selector). I mentioned this problem in a reply above as a "synthesis" concern, but I should have said simple misappropriation.
In light of my concerns the table heading was changed in December 2022 to read "Recognized Football Titles / CFP". It's this combined column that is now WP:SYNTHESIS. It's WP:ORIGINAL RESEARCH for editors here to decide that CFDW should be used for 1869–2015, and for the CFP champion to be used for 2016–present.
This original research and determination would become extremely obvious if UFC were to win enough other team championships to make this list's cutoff, as they claim the 2017 national championship. Who are we to say that their well-documented claim to the national championship (as the nation's only undefeated team, who additionally beat the team that beat both participants in the CFP's title game), awarded by an an NCAA-designated "major selector", is invalid? Why should only the CFP winner be included post-2015? This determination is original research, as is the synthesis of the CFDW and CFP selections in the single column.
In light of the two above issues, the CFDW "recognized" football national championships should be removed from this list. As should the exclusive CFP selector for 2016–present.
A replacement for the football column is not easy to determine, as the many various tables at college football national championships make clear. Sums of national championship selections by of all selectors, "major" selectors, or top-tier selectors all have the issue of either undercounting or overcounting national championships.
The best solution I see is changing the football column to represent the national championships CLAIMED by each school. University "claims" are a very well-established facet of the football national championship conversation and represent the notable, cited position of each major institution. (Point of reference: 2012 AP story titled "National titles: Who decides? Mostly, the schools" [1])
Please see this article's recent edit history for the differences between the current CFDW-sourced column and the proposed claims-by-school column. Discussion appreciated.
PK-WIKI ( talk) 07:37, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
References
No wonder "mythical" is the word that often precedes national title. "There is no official standard because there is no official national champion," said Kent Stephens, historian at the College Football Hall of Fame in South Bend. "It all depends on the standard the school wishes to utilize. The national champion is in the eye of the beholder."
Today the Seattle Times ran the headline:
the university's own Washington Huskies rowing post about the win repeats this claim of 20:
These totals differ from those listed at this article, which currently overcounts Cornell and Washington and undercounts Cal:
This article's Table of sports > Rowing (M) -> Titles included in "Other" column
currently states:
With no citation or note about why "overall points since 1952" has been chosen on Wikipedia.
Unclear where these differences are coming from; the men's rowing titles should be audited and their differences here vs. their treatment in reliable sources corrected and/or explained.
PK-WIKI ( talk) 22:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on 5 July 2018. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Here is some information on the football-related content of this article for new editors who may not be familiar with what is a reasonably controversial topic.
A primary point is that there is not now, nor has there ever been, an "official" NCAA national champion in FBS/D1A football. Therefore, there is no "official" source beyond those of the individual independent selectors (of which the current AP and Coaches' polls are only two) listing yearly national championships. The closest the sport has ever come to a true championship was the modern BCS Championship game, which began with the 1998 football season. However, the BCS Championship Game was a BCS Championship, not an NCAA one, and the winner of the BCS was contractually awarded the title of National Champion only for the Coaches' Poll and the National Football Foundation.
Throughout college football history, each national championship selection in actuality has represented only individual opinions (or the tabulation of opinions). Because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that depends on the major tenets of No Original Research and Neutral Point of View, it is not appropriate for a Wikipedia article to include comments on the validity of one selection over another.
Wikipedia relies on expert reliable sources. The column of "Recognized National Titles" in the first table has information reproduced from College Football Data Warehouse, which is arguably the most heavily trafficked, popularly utilized, and widely cited historical college football resource on the internet. The content of CFDW is in part contributed by well-respected college football historian Tex Noel. The column included in the table reproduces College Football Data Warehouse's singular opinion on the most legitimate national championship selections for each season and provides a more selective all-time opinion/list than other more expansive lists.
Whether you or your school's official count agrees with the listings, the totals in this table are duplicated from reliable sourced material. The numbers do not in any way reflect the opinions of the editors of this article, but rather of the college football historians that have compiled this information.
It is recognized that the football titles column in this table represents only one opinion on this topic. The CFDW information was included because it is a widely cited "selection of yearly selections" with a seemingly neutral "expert" opinion. It is also beneficial that it is available on-line, which permits the easy verification of edits to this article.
Again, the information on football in this Wikipedia article represents no statement as to the legitimacy or authoritativeness of the CFDW list. As opinions will differ with this resource, the reader is directed to the articles on individual football teams for alternative national championship claims and counts. This article rightfully contains no comment as to which totals are more legitimate. Any such respectful discussion or comments may, however, be appropriate for this "Talk" page. (Adapted from a contribution by CrazyPaco ( talk) )
Jeff in CA ( talk) 02:33, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
College Football Data Warehouse included Princeton's teams of 1874, 1875, 1881, 1898, 1899, 1920, 1933 and 1935 on its "recognized" list of national champions in football ( http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/national_championships/nchamps_team.php). This is troubling. According to the pre-1935 criterion established by CFDW ( http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/national_championships/national_champs_assessment.php), the selection of a team by just one of three major selectors (HAF, NCF, CFRA – all retroactive) is needed for recognition. However, for these 8 years, none of the major selectors, upon which CFDW based its list, selected Princeton. Yet Princeton appears on CFDW's "recognized" list for those 8 seasons.
In addition, the retroactive selections by HAF, NCF and CFRA also did not include Princeton for 1877, 1884 and 1886. Thus, under the CFDW criteria, those three Princeton teams should also not be recognized, and yet they are on its list. However, I do not begrudge the CDFW listing for those years, because a contemporary source circa 1894 ( http://www.secsportsfan.com/support-files/special_edition.pdf, IFRA, "The College Football Historian," Special Edition, November 2008, p. 14.) lists Princeton as national champion or co-champion in those years. It should be without controversy for us in the present time to concur with such a decision made by the pioneers of football regarding the champions of their day. Despite the CFDW criteria, those 1877, 1884 and 1886 Princeton teams belong on a list of national champions. (For the sake of completeness, note also that CFDW properly excluded the titles claimed by Princeton for 1894 and 1950, under its own criteria.)
Therefore, according to its own criteria, a more appropriate number for CFDW's "recognized" Princeton national champions in football would be no more than 18. Note: Only when and if CFDW revises its reported number on its website should the number in this article be changed (see discussion above).
Jeff in CA ( talk) 03:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
According to a contemporary source circa 1894 ( http://www.secsportsfan.com/support-files/special_edition.pdf, IFRA, "The College Football Historian," Special Edition, November 2008, p. 14.), Yale won the 1890 national football championship and was recognized as such in its own time. However, Yale's 1890 title does not appear on the CFDW list. For the same reason as stated above for recognizing Princeton's titles for 1877, 1884 and 1886, Yale should also be recognized for its 1890 national championship. Thus, a more appropriate number for recognized Yale national champions in football would arguably be 19 (one more than the number given by CFDW). Note: Only when and if CFDW revises its reported number on its website should the number in this article be changed (see discussion above).
Jeff in CA ( talk) 03:39, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
The inclusion of the 1907 Penn team in the CFDW list of recognized national champions is questionable. There were no major selectors who chose Penn ( http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/national_championships/yearly_results.php?year=1907). Penn erroneously claims Billingsley for 1907 in its media guide, but Billingsley selected Harvard in 1907. Furthermore, CFDW did not utilize Billingsley's selections in its criteria. This is at odds with CFDW’s stated recognition criteria.
The inclusion of the 1894 Penn team as co-champion with Yale in the CFDW list of recognized national champions does not satisfy the CFDW criteria ( http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/national_championships/yearly_results.php?year=1894). Although Penn had an excellent undefeated record, Yale also was undefeated with more wins, and was selected by HAF and NCF. Yale alone met the CFDW retroactive criteria. (Personally I am in favor of co-champions for 1894.)
Thus, a more appropriate number for CFDW's "recognized" University of Pennsylvania national champions in football would be 4 (two less than the number given by CFDW). Note: Only when and if CFDW revises its reported number on its website should the number in this article be changed (see discussion above).
Jeff in CA ( talk) 03:37, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
I am uneasy about the listing of the Ten Ecyk winners (overall points trophy) in the IRA regatta from 1952 on as national champions in men's rowing.
Rowing is unlike most sports in that the winner of just one of the contested series of races, rather than an overall winner, is considered to be the national champion team. Typical of statements that one sees around the web is this one at http://www.gwsports.com/m/sports/m-rowing/spec-rel/052913aab.html :
For example, the California Golden Bears athletic article shows Cal as having won 16 national championships (not seven), corresponding to its varsity 8s wins at the IRA regatta. In fact, I don't think I've seen a rowing-related website state or imply that the Ten Ecyk winners were anything other than the Ten Ecyk winners.
In addition, the article at College rowing says the following with regard to the National Collegiate Rowing Championships that were held from 1982 to 1996:
That the NCRC was "quasi-official" was actually an upgrade from all the men's racing up until that time, as nothing was considered to be an "official" national championship event; rather, the IRA Grand 8s winner was considered the de facto champion. That the IRA race was not "official" I think stemmed largely from the fact that the Harvard and Yale varsity 8s, two of the perennially best crews in the nation, did not participate in the IRAs from 1898 through 2002. In fact some historians point to the Henley Regatta in England in certain years when Harvard, Yale and Washington were all present as being a more important US college race.
The fact that the Harvard/Yale winner and the Pac 10 winner (usually Washington) and whichever team won the IRA (often another Ivy) raced head-to-head made the NCRC important as a championship event.
I would favor listing the IRA heavyweight 8s winner as the national champion for each year, except for 1982-96, for which I would list the NCRC winners. What do others think?
Jeff in CA ( talk) 16:51, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Effect of this on the number of men's rowing titles as currently listed:
minus gain net-change Cornell 1 2 1 Navy 9 1 -8 Penn 5 1 -4 Princeton 1 1 0 Washington 4 2 -2 Wisconsin 12 4 -8 Brown 0 4 4 California 0 9 9 Harvard 0 6 6 Syracuse 0 1 1 Yale 0 1 1
Jeff in CA ( talk) 02:45, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Why is cheer not included in this list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryantheravensfan1 ( talk • contribs) 02:12, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
West Virginia University has 15 national titles for that sport alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.123.223.156 ( talk) 14:30, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of NCAA schools with the most Division I national championships. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 14:56, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
The NCAA team championships on this list are not consistent with the NCAA's own published numbers. The NCAA's published championship count includes pre-1939 men's golf titles. This list, on the other hand, puts those pre-1939 golf titles in the "other team titles" column, and excludes those titles from the NCAA titles column. This results in the number of NCAA titles on this list being inconsistent with the NCAA's own numbers. This is a needless source of confusion. The NCAA titles numbers on this list should be consistent with the numbers that the rest of the world is using. I would move the pre-1939 golf titles into the NCAA team titles column.
Elmo McGee ( talk) 23:59, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Unofficial NCAA Championship Years | NCAA Division I Team Titles (as of May 29, 2015) | ||||||
School | Swimming | Boxing | Wrestling | Track & Field | # Unofficial | # Official | Total titles credited |
Catholic | 1938 | 1 | 0 | 1 | |||
Idaho | 1940, 1941 | 2 | 1 | 3 | |||
Illinois | 1927 | 1 | 17 | 18 | |||
Indiana | 1932 | 1 | 23 | 24 | |||
Iowa State | 1933 | 1 | 12 | 13 | |||
Michigan | 1927, 1928, 1931, 1932, 1934, 1935, 1936 | 7 | 36 | 36 | |||
Navy | 1925, 1926 | 2 | 5 | 5 | |||
Northwestern | 1924, 1929, 1930, 1933 | 4 | 8 | 8 | |||
Oklahoma State | 1928, 1931, 1933 | 3 | 48 | 51 | |||
Penn State | 1932 | 1 | 45 | 46 | |||
Stanford | 1925 | 1 | 106 | 107 | |||
Syracuse | 1936 | 1 | 12 | 13 | |||
USC | 1926 | 1 | 99 | 100 | |||
Virginia | 1938 | 1 | 21 | 22 | |||
Washington State | 1937 | 1 | 1 | 2 | |||
West Virginia | 1938 | 1 | 17 | 18 | |||
Wisconsin | 1939, 1942, 1943, 1947 | 4 | 24 | 28 | |||
Number | 13 | 12 | 5 | 3 | 33 | 475 | 495 |
My question is if we can add the Team Handball titles to the other Sports column like Rowing or Equestrian. Handball was once a NCAA sanctioned sport it had his own conference (Southeast Team Handball Conference).-- Malo95 ( talk) 14:08, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
First in NCAA History
The establishment of the Southeast Team Handball Conference (SETHC) was established in 1997 through a grant from the United States Olympic Committee and the NCAA. The USOC/NCAA grant program was created to assist endangered and emerging Olympic sports at the college level, increase the number of athletes, intercollegiate programs and conference championships, as well as assist NCAA member institutions reach gender-equity goals.
Why is women's lightweight rowing not included in this list? See /info/en/?search=Intercollegiate_sports_team_champions#Varsity_Lightweight_Eights.
Elsewhere on this page, I find: "Generally speaking, unless it can be definitively shown that another sport has been bestowing college championships from a time pre-dating the NCAA, it is only for sports that are or were NCAA or AIAW sports." But men's rowing championships, women's equestrian championships, and women's rugby championships are included, even though these never were NCAA or AIAW sports. Thiesen ( talk) 16:09, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
I think everyone reading this discussion should be knowledgable about the difficulty/intricacy of defining and enumerating college football national championships. If not, please read the linked article as well as the "Information about football-related content in this article" section of this page.
One of the defining features of this list (vs. the similar list at List of NCAA schools with the most NCAA Division I championships) is the addition of football national championships to the total. The way this article has filled the football column is by including only the football championships "recognized" by College Football Data Warehouse (CFDW), a football statistics website published/updated between roughly 2000–2015.
I see two major problems with the CFDW approach as it relates to Wikipedia policies:
1. The first relates to WP:NPOV. The usage of the CFDW table gives major WP:UNDUE weight to the opinions of a single person/website. "Neutrality requires that mainspace articles and pages fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources." The particular views of the person/people behind CFDW are clearly a "minority view" held only by the website who published the table and are not particularly prominent. No evidence is given that their exclusive "recognized" national championships are an accepted view by anyone else. "Generally, the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all, except perhaps in a "see also" to an article about those specific views."
This issue is raised without prejudice to the relative merits of the CFDW selections or to the credentials or WP:RELIABILITY of the website or its authors.
As one example, CFDW does not recognize the 1939 USC national championship. Thus USC is not credited with that national championship on Wikipedia. This is despite the fact that USC was awarded the Knute Rockne Memorial Trophy in December 1939, the single major contemporary trophy emblematic of the national championship. CFDW recognizes only Texas A&M for 1939, No. 1 in the AP Poll, which did not award a trophy. (The AP Poll was only in its 4th year; it eventually did become one of the most important selectors, but I'd argue it's WP:RECENTISM to suggest that the AP Poll was the only top-tier selector in 1939). USC themselves claim the 1939 title. The words "1939 University of Southern California" are even engraved on the AP Trophies used in 1941–1947 and 1948–1956, as the AP Trophy inherited the legacy of the Rissman and Rockne trophies and not the 1936-1940 AP Poll winners. It's clearly a "significant view" published by many reliable sources that USC was a national champion in 1939.
I'm of course not comparing the relative merits of either team's season, win-loss record, or national championship claim, just recognizing that USC won the single major national championship trophy for 1939 while Texas A&M was No. 1 in the AP Poll. Yet USC's national championship is not included in this general Wikipedia list of national champions due to the exclusive WP:WEIGHT given to the opinions of a single self-published college football stats website that has been offline since 2017. This exclusive deferment to CFDW's opinion is WP:UNDUE.
2. An issue of WP:SYNTHESIS. As mentioned, CFDW has been offline since 2017. Their recognized national championship table was last updated to award Alabama for 2015.
Editors continued to update the CFDW football column post-2015, adding the College Football Playoff champions, despite those champions not being recognized by CFDW (or indeed CFDW ever even writing that the CFP would be a recognized selector). I mentioned this problem in a reply above as a "synthesis" concern, but I should have said simple misappropriation.
In light of my concerns the table heading was changed in December 2022 to read "Recognized Football Titles / CFP". It's this combined column that is now WP:SYNTHESIS. It's WP:ORIGINAL RESEARCH for editors here to decide that CFDW should be used for 1869–2015, and for the CFP champion to be used for 2016–present.
This original research and determination would become extremely obvious if UFC were to win enough other team championships to make this list's cutoff, as they claim the 2017 national championship. Who are we to say that their well-documented claim to the national championship (as the nation's only undefeated team, who additionally beat the team that beat both participants in the CFP's title game), awarded by an an NCAA-designated "major selector", is invalid? Why should only the CFP winner be included post-2015? This determination is original research, as is the synthesis of the CFDW and CFP selections in the single column.
In light of the two above issues, the CFDW "recognized" football national championships should be removed from this list. As should the exclusive CFP selector for 2016–present.
A replacement for the football column is not easy to determine, as the many various tables at college football national championships make clear. Sums of national championship selections by of all selectors, "major" selectors, or top-tier selectors all have the issue of either undercounting or overcounting national championships.
The best solution I see is changing the football column to represent the national championships CLAIMED by each school. University "claims" are a very well-established facet of the football national championship conversation and represent the notable, cited position of each major institution. (Point of reference: 2012 AP story titled "National titles: Who decides? Mostly, the schools" [1])
Please see this article's recent edit history for the differences between the current CFDW-sourced column and the proposed claims-by-school column. Discussion appreciated.
PK-WIKI ( talk) 07:37, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
References
No wonder "mythical" is the word that often precedes national title. "There is no official standard because there is no official national champion," said Kent Stephens, historian at the College Football Hall of Fame in South Bend. "It all depends on the standard the school wishes to utilize. The national champion is in the eye of the beholder."
Today the Seattle Times ran the headline:
the university's own Washington Huskies rowing post about the win repeats this claim of 20:
These totals differ from those listed at this article, which currently overcounts Cornell and Washington and undercounts Cal:
This article's Table of sports > Rowing (M) -> Titles included in "Other" column
currently states:
With no citation or note about why "overall points since 1952" has been chosen on Wikipedia.
Unclear where these differences are coming from; the men's rowing titles should be audited and their differences here vs. their treatment in reliable sources corrected and/or explained.
PK-WIKI ( talk) 22:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)