This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
There is an ongoing debate on the college football talk page that will impact this page. Please participate there if you have any viewpoints you wish to be considered.-- Tlmclain | Talk 15:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
This table has no headings at the top of the columns.
Retroactive/research polls | |||
---|---|---|---|
1869-2001 |
National Championship Foundation | NCF |
Table below reflects selections from 1869-1882 and from 1924-1953 |
1919-1992 |
College Football Researchers Association | CFRA |
Table below reflects selections from 1924-1953 |
1883-1982 |
Helms Athletic Foundation | H |
Retroactive 1883-1941, Contemporaneous 1942-1982; Table below reflects selections from 1883-1953 |
Statistical analysis | |||
1924-1940 |
Dickinson System | D |
Contemporaneous 1926-1940 |
Media/opinion polls | |||
1935 |
United Press | UP |
Before Bowls |
1936-Current |
Associated Press | AP |
After Bowls 1965 and 1968-current |
1952-1957 |
International News Service | INS |
Before Bowls |
1954-Current |
Football Writers Association of America | FWAA |
After Bowls 1955-current |
2005-Current}} | Harris Interactive Poll | HI |
Used only for BCS Rankings |
The Coaches poll, published by: | |||
1950-1957 |
United Press | UP |
Before Bowls |
1958-1990 |
United Press International | UPI |
After Bowls 1974-1990 |
1991-1996 |
USA Today/ CNN | CNN |
After Bowls |
1997 |
USA Today/ ESPN | ESPN |
After Bowls |
1998-2004 |
USA Today/ ESPN | BCS |
Required to vote for BCS title game winner |
2005-Current |
USA Today | BCS |
Required to vote for BCS title game winner |
Presidential Proclamation | |||
1969 |
Richard Nixon | RMN |
Declaration of championship awarded to winner of Texas vs. Arkansas (a number one vs. number two game at the time) |
Without them, what are to make of the columns? Yeah, yeah, I know it's obvious that one column is the year, the next the name of the "poll" (or whatever) and the third is the abbreviation. But what is the point of the fourth column? If it's explanatory, it fails, because I find it confusing. Tables are supposed to organize information to make the infor easier to understand. This yields confusion. And what is the reason for having the third column (abbreviation) at all? This table looks like someone put in a lot of work, but not a lot of thought. An "A" for effort, a "C-" for result. Unschool 23:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Bama has 12 recognized titles. You have left out 1941. Feel free to check with the university or your own article on Frank Thomas. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.59.202.209 ( talk) 17:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC).
Alabama has 12 recognized titles. The dates that I found for them are: 1925, 1926, 1930, 1934, 1941, 1961, 1964, 1965, 1973, 1978, 1979, and 1992. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kisea ( talk • contribs)
The University of Alabama has 12 national titles. This is widely recognized not only by Alabama fans but many others as well. For example, the university website and others (i.e. RedElephant.com) report this. Also, in the 1992 national championship broadcast by ABC, the network recognized that Alabama had 11 national championships (before the game was over and the 12th was won.) This information needs to be corrected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeypowell ( talk • contribs)
A new discussion about the direction of this article is now on WP:CFB at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#National Titles. Your input would be appreciated.-- Tlmclain | Talk 22:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
I fixed someone's "correction" for this year. If you want to include Bama fine but please list what group/organization has stated they were the national champions. Also even if some group considered them the national champions it does not change the fact that other groups (National Championship Foundation NCF, College Football Researchers Association CFRA, Helms Athletic Foundation H and Dickinson System D) listed Minnesota as the national champs. So please tell us who considers Alabama as champs for 1934 and please do not delete Minnesota's information Smith03 02:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
should this be kept? it one year (1969) Smith03 03:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
"Table below reflects selections from 1883-1953" I reverted the addition of 1960 Washington based on what is stated on the article about Helms being used from 1883-53. It seems a bit silly just to add one addtional year (1960) without adding 1954-59 Helms selections. Also why should Helms be extend out to 1960? Smith03 19:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I have updated the list of National Champions using the following sources:
1869-1882 - I have used the National Championship Foundation picks ("NCF"). There are few other sources available for this period, and this is the only one "recognized" by College Football Data Warehouse as reputable.
1883-1923 - I have used Helms Athletic Foundation picks. Although other reputable sources are available, this one, to my understanding, is the most widely recognized list for this period.
1924-1934 - I have included Helms, NCF, College Football Research Associates ("CFRA"), and the Dickinson System. Dickinson was a statistical evaluation conducted beginning in 1926, with retroactive analysis for 1924 and 1925. Helms, NCF and CFRA are all recognized as reputable by College Football Data Warehouse. Helms selections are listed first as the most widely recognized source. Indeed, it would be entirely reasonable to omit CFRA, NCF and Dickinson for this period and to list any particularly strong candidate as based on "other" sources.
1935 - I add the United Press poll for this year, the end of season press poll.
1936 - I add the Associated Press poll. The United Press poll was discontinued. AP selections are now listed first as the most widely recognized source. I continue Helms, CFRA, NCF and Dickinson, although these are far less relevant beyond 1935. Again, it would be entirely reasonable to omit Helms, CFRA, NCF and Dickinson for this period and to list any particularly strong candidates as based on "other" sources.
1941 - Dickinson results are no longer produced.
1950 - I add the United Press coaches poll. This becomes the 2nd priority selection. Helms, NCF and CFRA assist in sorting out post-bowl champions.
1952 - I add International News Service, another press poll.
1954 - I add the Football Writers Association of America (FWAA), which offers the Grantland Rice Trophy to the national champion. I drop Helms, NCF and CFRA since four contemporaneous sources are now available. In 1955, the FWAA begins deciding its championship after the bowls, the first to do so, likely in response to the 1950, '51 and '53 losses by the regular season champs.
1958 - UP and INS merge and continue the UP coaches poll as the UPI.
1991 - UPI coaches poll is taken over by USA-Today/CNN.
1997 - USA-Today/CNN coaches poll is taken over by USA-Today/ESPN.
1998 - Coaches poll agrees to be bound by winner of BCS National Championship Game, so champion is now referred to as "BCS". Since the major conferences have agreed to be part of the BCS and its championship game system, the BCS replaces the AP as the first listed national championship.
In several cases I have included champions selected by "other" sources. I believe that there are strong cases for each of these. A similar case could be made for several schools during the 1876-1923 period that I have not included here. There are many references included below, however, that can be followed to learn more about these.
One championship that I did not include is the National Football Foundation and Hall of Fame's MacArthur trophy. It is now linked to the BCS like the coaches poll. It would add only a couple of champions from 1959-1990, none of which, I believe, were widely recognized.
I have changed Ohio State's redirects to redirect to Ohio State Buckeyes instead of the Ohio State University, since that seems to be the standard for most of the list.-- Majorpayne27 18:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
It seems that my changes have been deleted without any explanation, does anyone disagree that the schools; link should go to their respective athletic's website? -- Majorpayne27 03:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
For the years prior to the 1936 AP Poll, may schools claim the national championships given by alternate sources since there was no one ranking system that was a consensis standard. For example, TCU and LSU claim a 1935 NC through the Williamson System. I found an intersting commentary on the Williamson System at Hickocksports.com. If we include a statistical system like Dickinson System, we should include the Williamson System. My bottom line is there was not necesserally a consensis NC prior to 1936 and the creation of the AP poll. We should use Wikipedia as a source of information not an arbitor of who won what NC in an era where there wasn't a widely accepted method for determining a national champion. Today we wouldn't include the Sarigan ratings because the AP Poll and the BCS system are widely accepted and those are the NC that schools claim. I appologise for my poor spelling General125 21:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
How about a chart including a breakdown of championships won by conference? The chart would have to include the conference the school was a member of when playing (e.g. Miami's titles count for the Big East not the ACC). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.229.162.185 ( talk • contribs) 03:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC).
According to news sources, Washington has recently recognized themselves as the 1960 champions. In 1960, the championship designation was given prior to the bowl games. So Minnesota was given that honor, despite already having one loss. They then went on to lose the Rose Bowl to Washington. Washington ended the season with one loss while Minnesota finished with two. This should probably be reflected in the chart so Washington can get their due. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.245.75.2 ( talk • contribs) 15:11, 19 July 2007 (UTC).
The the Helms foundation recongized Washington as the National champs in 1960. That is what the school is baseing this on. They are not just "recongnizing themselves". Currently no Helms champs are listed from 1954 to 1982 if you want to added Washington as the Helms 1960 champs than please added the the other Helms champions (1954-59) and (61-82) to the list and update the information in the various tables to reflect all the changes not just Washington's 1960 championship. Smith03 16:49, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
I like the list of most national championships since 1901, but have reformatted it to put those who have won the most recent championship first, followed by the second most recent, etc. This convention is used within each "tally" of wins (e.g., those with 11 national championships, four, etc.). This seems fair to me and is not meant to offend Tide fans or Wolverines, (or Harvard fans, for that matter). Also wondering what the rationale is for stopping at four. Maybe have this list multiple winners (i.e., extend the list to those teams that have won at least two national championships, as defined)? Newguy34 15:06, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I highly disagree with that statement. Before the games were actually played you could say Michigan was unfailrly left out, but Florida DID win more games against more 'quality' opponents than Michigan did. Now, after the games were played, how can you say it's controversial? Michigan couldn't even win the Rose Bowl against USC, so it's fair to say they didn't deserve to be there, and OSU being in the championship IS justified because they were undefeated. Bio2590 01:06, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
I think the Dickinson system can only be included with caution. As pointed out a couple of times below, it produced a champion that essentially none of the other selectors chose. Another example of this is the 1939 championship that USC claims. Dickinson chose USC, but everyone else, including the AP poll, chose Texas A&M. USC didn't even finish second in the AP poll, but finished #3. Recognizing this Dickinson selection doesn't hold water. I also agree in general that the Dickinson system is no different than, say, Sagarin's system now, and that's not generally regarded as anything to be taken officially.
As far as the Dickinson system being highly regarded at the time, I don't see it. I'm looking in the New York Times, and I see one column mentioning it, and the language that the column uses, "Southern California was rated the No. 1 football team by Frank Dickinson...originator of the point system which bears his name," sounds like the language most people today would use to describe a statistical system. I.e., interesting but nothing to pay the bills with. While the language used to describe the AP Poll, "[Texas A&M] has been voted the nation's outstanding football team by the final ballot of sports writers and gridiron experts in every section of the country," connotes a lot more prestige and confidence in the poll. Mcrawford620 05:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, from the Wikipedia Dickinson System page:
Seems legitimate enough for me. 76.187.17.173 22:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Someone deleted USC's 2003 AP national championship. While I agree that the BCS national champ should be listed first since the major conferences have agreed to the BCS system, the AP championship is widely recognized as legitimate even in the BCS era. My revision of the list is intended to reflect most widely recognized champions, including co-champions. USC's claim is better than many included for earlier years and I have restored it to the list. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Drewinmaine ( talk • contribs) 11:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
And, now some clown is up to it again. Deleting USC's 2003 AP national championship in the desperate and pathetic attempt to rewrite history. 76.187.17.173 22:10, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Sometime soon this article will need to be moved to NCAA Division I FBS national football championship. The public has been informed of the name change and is becoming more familiar with it, and, more importantly, Division I-A is no longer the official name of the subdivision. Wikipedia should always have the best and most recent information, and the name change is no longer too recent to ignore. Several minutes ago I had to undo an anonymous edit which changed the bold text at the beginning on the article, as well as a couple of other references to Division I-A, to Division I Football Bowl Subdivision. The name of this article is outdated, and people are noticing. I suggest we move the article to the forementioned page in the near future, especially as the college football season is nearly underway. Iowa13 14:21, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Some have taken offense to the correct punctuation when referring to USA Today's Coaches' Poll. The plain and simple fact is that USA Today, who owns the poll, refers to it as the "Coaches' Poll", complete with a possessive apostrophe. I suspect it's because there is more than one coach that votes in it. If there are other articles that have the same error of omission, shouldn't they be fixed? 76.187.17.173 22:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
The NFF national champions have been added to the By Year list. Those champions are listed as consensus champions in the official NCAA record book, but do they really deserve mention here? I doubt, for example, that anyone would recognize a national championship for Notre Dame in '64. Iowa13 03:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Can someone fix LSU's most national championships? Iowa13 03:25, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
This is the “official” NCAA page. I don’t believe that the Wikipedia page (section with championship by year) is complete or accurately reflects the NCAA summary of prior selectors’ selections of national champion for football.
http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_football_past_champs.html
Past Division I-A Football National Champions
The NCAA does not conduct a national championship in Division I-A football and is not involved in the selection process. Since 1998, the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) has conducted a contest between it's two top-ranked teams to determine a national champion. More information on the BCS is available at their Web site.
A number of polling organizations also provide a final ranking of Division I-A football teams at the end of each season. Below is a year-by-year history of Division I-A football national champions as determined by the BCS championship game and these polling organizations. More information on national poll rankings is available in the Division I-A section of the NCAA Divison I-A/I-AA Football Records Book.
<snip>Long copy and paste of teams and their championship years was removed to save space and to avoid copyright concerns - please follow the above link.</snip>
COMMENT: If you're going to use this list, you'll have a ton of championships that aren't recognized(like OSU's 1998 Sagarin championship....since I'm an OSU fan). CFBDatawarehouse's "Recognized" list is much better, and so I've edited it to reflect that
Mlebowski313 07:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
The official national championship reference is the NCAA Division I-A and I-AA Football Records Book. All of the information is correct. The above page [1], despite being part of the official NCAA website, has errors. Several of Richard Billingsley's championships are credited incorrectly (i.e., Iowa in 1922). I am not sure if there are other discrepancies, but the errors I have found suggest that said page was poorly compiled. The record book should always be used as the official source. Please note that the National Poll Champions section of the book is not a list of NCAA-recognized championships — there are no such things (yet). Iowa13 00:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I say we delete all poll era championships that aren't AP, UPI, or FWAA. I also say we only recognize the champions of Helms and Dickinson polls from 1883-1935. And yes, we should recongnize USC's 2003 AP title. Finally, for most national titles, we put, in parentheses, next to each team, the number of post-1901 titles each team recognizes. Anthony Del Fiacco 17:40, 9 September 2007
Also. UGA's 1943 rose bowl championship is not listed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.103.186 ( talk) 03:31, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
"We can DISCUSS THE DEFINITION OF CONTROVERSIAL" The BCS was put in place to crown ONE national title champion. In 2003 LSU won the BCS Nation Title Game, making them the national champions 2003. Yes, the AP polls did decided of a "split" champion. But the win was not earned, and was given by modern and flawed ranking systems. That why AP writers write, and players play. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.234.195.162 ( talk) 08:44, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Here are a few national champions frequently added to the By Year list which are not normally recognized:
Boston College (1940) Alabama (1941) Washington (1960)
Just to name a few. We continue to have problems with disgruntled fans adding their "championships" to the list. I know many fans feel that BC and Wash deserve recognition for their accomplishments in '41 and '60, respectively, and Bama fans hate seeing their illegitimate 1941 title left out, owing to the endlessly brainwashing "12 National Championships" recital. This list, however, is supposed to reflect as accurately as possible the true champions of each year, chosen only by major selectors. Also, I beg LSU fans to please stop removed USC's '03 championship from the list. Don't hate the AP - they gave you the '58 title nod. If you don't like "sharing" the championship, deal with it your own way. This article should be informative, not an outlet for fan frustration. Continuously reverting edits is getting very old. Please respect the integrity of this list. Iowa13 21:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Finally, I see a reference for the creation of the NCs table (at least its not original research unless this is self referencing--and we can't check for that)--the CFDW (whatever that is). However, I have no idea why we should take the judgment of what appears to be 2 individuals who are not recognized experts over the NCAA, the governing association.
I propose one of 3 solutions (which also should fix the LSU issue for directly). 1) Remove the current table and reproduce the NCAA tables and create a new list of total championships based on that source--it is the least controversial source. I also suggest that a second column be added to the total championships list that shows what the individual schools claim (probably most consistent with the NCAA list, not the CFDW list.)
2) Add the NCAA table, and add a third column with the CFDW championships total
3) Eliminate the year by year tables and just simply reference them individually.
The current solution will not stand, and I will come back and remove the current table in a few weeks, essentially instituting solution 3 on a continuing basis unless solutions 1 or 2 are instituted. The current solution is not a consensus and is controversial. I will put a POV of warning on this. Gvharrier 03:29, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Iowa13--this is not YOUR list or criteria of national championships. Your protection of this entry appears to reflect ORIGINAL research, which is verboten in Wikipedia. The entry is intended to reflect a range of opinions and citable authority. This list reflects your opinion, and perhaps the two folks at CFDW. However, Wikipedia prefers that it reflect a broad consensus. I still haven't seen a proposed resolution of the issue that I have raised. How do you propose to fix this entry so that is reflects the historic lack of consensus over the selection of a national champion, particularly earlier in the 20th century? I've put forward three proposals--which one do you prefer, or do you have another? Gvharrier 06:58, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Burden of evidence Policy shortcut: WP:PROVEIT
This article needs additional citations for
verification. (October 2007) |
Please give API credit for winning the 1957 NC. API was re-named Auburn in 1960. 'Auburn' has never won a NC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomli004 ( talk • contribs) 19:32, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
I think Georgia should be recognized for 1942. They were consensus champions picked by at least half of the recognized polls. (Recognition by the National College Football Hall of Fame and the Official NCAA Record Book.)
http://www.georgiadogs.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=46724&SPID=3571&DB_OEM_ID=8800&ATCLID=526158 http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/sec/georgia/national_champs.php http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/sec/georgia/all_national_champs.php Failureofafriend 06:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I've considered a solution similar to separate tables in the past. It is slightly different than what I believe you are suggesting. Possibly there could be a table of one of the more liberal lists, probably the one from the NCAA record book, and within that table a more conservative selection method could be documented, possibly by noting (by bolding, for example) the champion(s) each year that would be recognized by the latter method. This would document both sides of the issue while keeping the article from exceeding a realistic length. Example:
Year | Team | Record | Coach | Selector |
---|---|---|---|---|
1960 | Iowa | 8-1 | Forest Evashevski | B, BS, L, SR |
Minnesota | 8-2 | Murray Warmath | AP, FN, NFF, UPI | |
Mississippi | 10-0-1 | Johnny Vaught | BR, CFRA, DeS, DuS, FWAA, NCF, WS | |
Missouri | 10-1 | Dan Devine | PS | |
Washington | 10-1 | Jim Owens | HAF |
Obviously, the final draft would be slightly different, but that should give you an idea of how it would look. Iowa13 03:41, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Year | Team | Record | Coach | Selector |
---|---|---|---|---|
1869 | Princeton | BR, NCF, PD | ||
Rutgers | PD | |||
1870 | Princeton | BR, NCF, PD | ||
1871 | ||||
1872 | Princeton | BR, NCF, PD | ||
Yale | PD | |||
1873 | Princeton | BR, NCF, PD | ||
1874 | Harvard | PD | ||
Princeton | BR, PD | |||
Yale | NCF, PD | |||
1875 | Colgate | PD | ||
Harvard | NCF, PD | |||
Princeton | BR, PD | |||
1876 | Yale | BR, NCF, PD | ||
1877 | Princeton | BR, PD | ||
Yale | NCF, PD | |||
1878 | Princeton | BR, NCF, PD | ||
1879 | Princeton | BR, NCF, PD | ||
Yale | PD |
Looks good so far. Gvharrier 18:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to propose a slight change in the original plan. We had loosely agreed to use CFBDW consensus national champions. Rather than using a third-party source, I suggest we use the list on NCAAsports.com, one of two official NCAA sites (the other being NCAA.org, which is the source for the "non-consensus" champions, through the official record book). While CFBDW is inconsistent in what selectors they recognize as consensus, NCAAsports.com is 100% consistent. The National Championship Foundation is used from its earliest selection in 1869 to 1935, the Helms Athletic Foundation from its earliest selection in 1883 to 1935, and the College Football Researchers Association from its earliest selection in 1919 to 1935. The Associated Press poll is used from its inception in 1936 to the present, the coaches poll (published by various organizations) from its inception in 1950 to the present, the Football Writers Association of America championship from its inception in 1954 to the present, and the National Football Foundation championship from its inception in 1959 to the present. The post-1949 selectors are synonymous with the Consensus National Champions list in the official record book, which goes from 1950 to the present. The NCAAsports.com list is the closest thing out there to an official list of NCAA-recognized consensus national champions, and is the most consistent of any of the credible lists in existence. What do you think? Iowa13 ( talk) 20:40, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Also, I've posted the new list through 1959 (with years, teams, and selectors) on my user page. Once through 2006, I will add records and coaches (along with any information we later decide is necessary) and do any necessary cleanup work. Iowa13 ( talk) 19:43, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
The champions and selectors are finished. I'm going to start the records and coaches on Thursday. Iowa13 ( talk) 00:13, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Finished! Check it out. I will begin work on the acronym list and the new Most National Championships table(s) on Wednesday. Iowa13 ( talk) 18:58, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
As an outline of the new article, we might use the following topics:
A) What is the current "championship" and how it's unique
B) General history of the selection process with subheadings on 1) when these started with contemporaneous selections 2) development of retrospective selections 3) evolution of polls 4) push toward a "consensus" selection and the BCS
C) Description of the different selection methods in general terms (and maybe invite specific sections on the most interesting and historic selectors)
D) A brief run down on past championships and interesting streaks and trends and 1) controversial NCs prior to the BCS and 2) reference to the BCS (we can probably recycle from the current article on these).
E) A description of the NC table and the criteria used for the consensus picks, and 1) a comparison to what various schools claim versus what's in the table. (A comparison table would be interesting, and I can start researching that.)
This is just one idea of a format just to start the discussion. Gvharrier ( talk) 17:26, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
On
Some want to use "Louisiana State" but I see in the NCAA "Official Division Football Records Book" that it uses "LSU". Note that the University of Southern California is denoted "USC" despite South Carolina using the same abbreviation. At least LSU is unique. We are rebuilding the championship tables which rely heavily on the NCAA sources and uses "LSU". Gvharrier ( talk) 19:35, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
We have Michigan's 1947 extra poll tallied both in the overall champioships and in the poll era, but not in the AP subtotal. As the Associated Press itself does not recognize the validity of this unofficial poll run by the Detroit Free Press, I am correcting the two entries and moving the reference to it's proper spot. Note that the total championships is remaining the same as well as the AP championships. -- KelleyCook 20:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Michigan lists 4 more championships (11 total) based on the NCF results. Also, the NCAA history page also lists these championships: http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_football_past_champs.html (Note that the other NCAA page http://www.ncaafootballchampions.com/ fails to mention ANY national co-champions, which most certainly is incorrect!) It seems that the list presented here relies overly so on the Helms results for this period to the total exclusion of the NCF, yet relies on the NCF for an earlier period AND for a later period. This is simply inconsistent. The list should either include the NCF throughout, or exclude ALL NCF results. The current decision appears arbitrary.
1903: Michigan and Princeton recognized as National Champions UM recognized by: Billingsley, National Championship Foundation (tie with Princeton) Princeton recognized by: Helms, Houlgate, Parke Davis, National Championship Foundation ]
1904: Michigan and Penn recognized as National Champions UM recognized by: Billingsley, National Championship Foundation (tie with Penn) Penn recognized by: Helms, Houlgate, Parke Davis, National Championship Foundation (tie)
1918: Michigan and Pittsburgh recognized as National Champions UM recognized by: Billingsley, National Championship Foundation (tie with Pittsburgh) Pittsburgh recognized by: Helms, Houlgate, National Championship Foundation (tie)
1923: Michigan and Illinois recognized as National Champions UM recognized by: Billingsley, National Championship Foundation (tie with Illinois) California recognized by: Houlgate Illinois recognized by: Boand, Football Research, Helms, Parke Davis, National Championship Foundation (tie) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gvharrier ( talk • contribs) 20:26, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
One thought, I don't know how to or can't change the page, but at the end of the section Most National Championships, there is a comment "Several universities claim more championships than are listed above (e.g., Michigan claims 11 national championships, Alabama claims 12), and some claim fewer championships than are listed above (e.g., Notre Dame claims 11 national championships, Oklahoma claims 7). No one knows why they are listed as such here." I would delete that last comment, No one knows why they are listed as such here, since the preceding paragraph describes why they are listed as such. Madpole33 ( talk) 03:25, 21 December 2007 (UTC)pete
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
There is an ongoing debate on the college football talk page that will impact this page. Please participate there if you have any viewpoints you wish to be considered.-- Tlmclain | Talk 15:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
This table has no headings at the top of the columns.
Retroactive/research polls | |||
---|---|---|---|
1869-2001 |
National Championship Foundation | NCF |
Table below reflects selections from 1869-1882 and from 1924-1953 |
1919-1992 |
College Football Researchers Association | CFRA |
Table below reflects selections from 1924-1953 |
1883-1982 |
Helms Athletic Foundation | H |
Retroactive 1883-1941, Contemporaneous 1942-1982; Table below reflects selections from 1883-1953 |
Statistical analysis | |||
1924-1940 |
Dickinson System | D |
Contemporaneous 1926-1940 |
Media/opinion polls | |||
1935 |
United Press | UP |
Before Bowls |
1936-Current |
Associated Press | AP |
After Bowls 1965 and 1968-current |
1952-1957 |
International News Service | INS |
Before Bowls |
1954-Current |
Football Writers Association of America | FWAA |
After Bowls 1955-current |
2005-Current}} | Harris Interactive Poll | HI |
Used only for BCS Rankings |
The Coaches poll, published by: | |||
1950-1957 |
United Press | UP |
Before Bowls |
1958-1990 |
United Press International | UPI |
After Bowls 1974-1990 |
1991-1996 |
USA Today/ CNN | CNN |
After Bowls |
1997 |
USA Today/ ESPN | ESPN |
After Bowls |
1998-2004 |
USA Today/ ESPN | BCS |
Required to vote for BCS title game winner |
2005-Current |
USA Today | BCS |
Required to vote for BCS title game winner |
Presidential Proclamation | |||
1969 |
Richard Nixon | RMN |
Declaration of championship awarded to winner of Texas vs. Arkansas (a number one vs. number two game at the time) |
Without them, what are to make of the columns? Yeah, yeah, I know it's obvious that one column is the year, the next the name of the "poll" (or whatever) and the third is the abbreviation. But what is the point of the fourth column? If it's explanatory, it fails, because I find it confusing. Tables are supposed to organize information to make the infor easier to understand. This yields confusion. And what is the reason for having the third column (abbreviation) at all? This table looks like someone put in a lot of work, but not a lot of thought. An "A" for effort, a "C-" for result. Unschool 23:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Bama has 12 recognized titles. You have left out 1941. Feel free to check with the university or your own article on Frank Thomas. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.59.202.209 ( talk) 17:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC).
Alabama has 12 recognized titles. The dates that I found for them are: 1925, 1926, 1930, 1934, 1941, 1961, 1964, 1965, 1973, 1978, 1979, and 1992. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kisea ( talk • contribs)
The University of Alabama has 12 national titles. This is widely recognized not only by Alabama fans but many others as well. For example, the university website and others (i.e. RedElephant.com) report this. Also, in the 1992 national championship broadcast by ABC, the network recognized that Alabama had 11 national championships (before the game was over and the 12th was won.) This information needs to be corrected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeypowell ( talk • contribs)
A new discussion about the direction of this article is now on WP:CFB at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#National Titles. Your input would be appreciated.-- Tlmclain | Talk 22:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
I fixed someone's "correction" for this year. If you want to include Bama fine but please list what group/organization has stated they were the national champions. Also even if some group considered them the national champions it does not change the fact that other groups (National Championship Foundation NCF, College Football Researchers Association CFRA, Helms Athletic Foundation H and Dickinson System D) listed Minnesota as the national champs. So please tell us who considers Alabama as champs for 1934 and please do not delete Minnesota's information Smith03 02:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
should this be kept? it one year (1969) Smith03 03:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
"Table below reflects selections from 1883-1953" I reverted the addition of 1960 Washington based on what is stated on the article about Helms being used from 1883-53. It seems a bit silly just to add one addtional year (1960) without adding 1954-59 Helms selections. Also why should Helms be extend out to 1960? Smith03 19:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I have updated the list of National Champions using the following sources:
1869-1882 - I have used the National Championship Foundation picks ("NCF"). There are few other sources available for this period, and this is the only one "recognized" by College Football Data Warehouse as reputable.
1883-1923 - I have used Helms Athletic Foundation picks. Although other reputable sources are available, this one, to my understanding, is the most widely recognized list for this period.
1924-1934 - I have included Helms, NCF, College Football Research Associates ("CFRA"), and the Dickinson System. Dickinson was a statistical evaluation conducted beginning in 1926, with retroactive analysis for 1924 and 1925. Helms, NCF and CFRA are all recognized as reputable by College Football Data Warehouse. Helms selections are listed first as the most widely recognized source. Indeed, it would be entirely reasonable to omit CFRA, NCF and Dickinson for this period and to list any particularly strong candidate as based on "other" sources.
1935 - I add the United Press poll for this year, the end of season press poll.
1936 - I add the Associated Press poll. The United Press poll was discontinued. AP selections are now listed first as the most widely recognized source. I continue Helms, CFRA, NCF and Dickinson, although these are far less relevant beyond 1935. Again, it would be entirely reasonable to omit Helms, CFRA, NCF and Dickinson for this period and to list any particularly strong candidates as based on "other" sources.
1941 - Dickinson results are no longer produced.
1950 - I add the United Press coaches poll. This becomes the 2nd priority selection. Helms, NCF and CFRA assist in sorting out post-bowl champions.
1952 - I add International News Service, another press poll.
1954 - I add the Football Writers Association of America (FWAA), which offers the Grantland Rice Trophy to the national champion. I drop Helms, NCF and CFRA since four contemporaneous sources are now available. In 1955, the FWAA begins deciding its championship after the bowls, the first to do so, likely in response to the 1950, '51 and '53 losses by the regular season champs.
1958 - UP and INS merge and continue the UP coaches poll as the UPI.
1991 - UPI coaches poll is taken over by USA-Today/CNN.
1997 - USA-Today/CNN coaches poll is taken over by USA-Today/ESPN.
1998 - Coaches poll agrees to be bound by winner of BCS National Championship Game, so champion is now referred to as "BCS". Since the major conferences have agreed to be part of the BCS and its championship game system, the BCS replaces the AP as the first listed national championship.
In several cases I have included champions selected by "other" sources. I believe that there are strong cases for each of these. A similar case could be made for several schools during the 1876-1923 period that I have not included here. There are many references included below, however, that can be followed to learn more about these.
One championship that I did not include is the National Football Foundation and Hall of Fame's MacArthur trophy. It is now linked to the BCS like the coaches poll. It would add only a couple of champions from 1959-1990, none of which, I believe, were widely recognized.
I have changed Ohio State's redirects to redirect to Ohio State Buckeyes instead of the Ohio State University, since that seems to be the standard for most of the list.-- Majorpayne27 18:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
It seems that my changes have been deleted without any explanation, does anyone disagree that the schools; link should go to their respective athletic's website? -- Majorpayne27 03:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
For the years prior to the 1936 AP Poll, may schools claim the national championships given by alternate sources since there was no one ranking system that was a consensis standard. For example, TCU and LSU claim a 1935 NC through the Williamson System. I found an intersting commentary on the Williamson System at Hickocksports.com. If we include a statistical system like Dickinson System, we should include the Williamson System. My bottom line is there was not necesserally a consensis NC prior to 1936 and the creation of the AP poll. We should use Wikipedia as a source of information not an arbitor of who won what NC in an era where there wasn't a widely accepted method for determining a national champion. Today we wouldn't include the Sarigan ratings because the AP Poll and the BCS system are widely accepted and those are the NC that schools claim. I appologise for my poor spelling General125 21:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
How about a chart including a breakdown of championships won by conference? The chart would have to include the conference the school was a member of when playing (e.g. Miami's titles count for the Big East not the ACC). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.229.162.185 ( talk • contribs) 03:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC).
According to news sources, Washington has recently recognized themselves as the 1960 champions. In 1960, the championship designation was given prior to the bowl games. So Minnesota was given that honor, despite already having one loss. They then went on to lose the Rose Bowl to Washington. Washington ended the season with one loss while Minnesota finished with two. This should probably be reflected in the chart so Washington can get their due. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.245.75.2 ( talk • contribs) 15:11, 19 July 2007 (UTC).
The the Helms foundation recongized Washington as the National champs in 1960. That is what the school is baseing this on. They are not just "recongnizing themselves". Currently no Helms champs are listed from 1954 to 1982 if you want to added Washington as the Helms 1960 champs than please added the the other Helms champions (1954-59) and (61-82) to the list and update the information in the various tables to reflect all the changes not just Washington's 1960 championship. Smith03 16:49, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
I like the list of most national championships since 1901, but have reformatted it to put those who have won the most recent championship first, followed by the second most recent, etc. This convention is used within each "tally" of wins (e.g., those with 11 national championships, four, etc.). This seems fair to me and is not meant to offend Tide fans or Wolverines, (or Harvard fans, for that matter). Also wondering what the rationale is for stopping at four. Maybe have this list multiple winners (i.e., extend the list to those teams that have won at least two national championships, as defined)? Newguy34 15:06, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I highly disagree with that statement. Before the games were actually played you could say Michigan was unfailrly left out, but Florida DID win more games against more 'quality' opponents than Michigan did. Now, after the games were played, how can you say it's controversial? Michigan couldn't even win the Rose Bowl against USC, so it's fair to say they didn't deserve to be there, and OSU being in the championship IS justified because they were undefeated. Bio2590 01:06, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
I think the Dickinson system can only be included with caution. As pointed out a couple of times below, it produced a champion that essentially none of the other selectors chose. Another example of this is the 1939 championship that USC claims. Dickinson chose USC, but everyone else, including the AP poll, chose Texas A&M. USC didn't even finish second in the AP poll, but finished #3. Recognizing this Dickinson selection doesn't hold water. I also agree in general that the Dickinson system is no different than, say, Sagarin's system now, and that's not generally regarded as anything to be taken officially.
As far as the Dickinson system being highly regarded at the time, I don't see it. I'm looking in the New York Times, and I see one column mentioning it, and the language that the column uses, "Southern California was rated the No. 1 football team by Frank Dickinson...originator of the point system which bears his name," sounds like the language most people today would use to describe a statistical system. I.e., interesting but nothing to pay the bills with. While the language used to describe the AP Poll, "[Texas A&M] has been voted the nation's outstanding football team by the final ballot of sports writers and gridiron experts in every section of the country," connotes a lot more prestige and confidence in the poll. Mcrawford620 05:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, from the Wikipedia Dickinson System page:
Seems legitimate enough for me. 76.187.17.173 22:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Someone deleted USC's 2003 AP national championship. While I agree that the BCS national champ should be listed first since the major conferences have agreed to the BCS system, the AP championship is widely recognized as legitimate even in the BCS era. My revision of the list is intended to reflect most widely recognized champions, including co-champions. USC's claim is better than many included for earlier years and I have restored it to the list. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Drewinmaine ( talk • contribs) 11:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
And, now some clown is up to it again. Deleting USC's 2003 AP national championship in the desperate and pathetic attempt to rewrite history. 76.187.17.173 22:10, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Sometime soon this article will need to be moved to NCAA Division I FBS national football championship. The public has been informed of the name change and is becoming more familiar with it, and, more importantly, Division I-A is no longer the official name of the subdivision. Wikipedia should always have the best and most recent information, and the name change is no longer too recent to ignore. Several minutes ago I had to undo an anonymous edit which changed the bold text at the beginning on the article, as well as a couple of other references to Division I-A, to Division I Football Bowl Subdivision. The name of this article is outdated, and people are noticing. I suggest we move the article to the forementioned page in the near future, especially as the college football season is nearly underway. Iowa13 14:21, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Some have taken offense to the correct punctuation when referring to USA Today's Coaches' Poll. The plain and simple fact is that USA Today, who owns the poll, refers to it as the "Coaches' Poll", complete with a possessive apostrophe. I suspect it's because there is more than one coach that votes in it. If there are other articles that have the same error of omission, shouldn't they be fixed? 76.187.17.173 22:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
The NFF national champions have been added to the By Year list. Those champions are listed as consensus champions in the official NCAA record book, but do they really deserve mention here? I doubt, for example, that anyone would recognize a national championship for Notre Dame in '64. Iowa13 03:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Can someone fix LSU's most national championships? Iowa13 03:25, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
This is the “official” NCAA page. I don’t believe that the Wikipedia page (section with championship by year) is complete or accurately reflects the NCAA summary of prior selectors’ selections of national champion for football.
http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_football_past_champs.html
Past Division I-A Football National Champions
The NCAA does not conduct a national championship in Division I-A football and is not involved in the selection process. Since 1998, the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) has conducted a contest between it's two top-ranked teams to determine a national champion. More information on the BCS is available at their Web site.
A number of polling organizations also provide a final ranking of Division I-A football teams at the end of each season. Below is a year-by-year history of Division I-A football national champions as determined by the BCS championship game and these polling organizations. More information on national poll rankings is available in the Division I-A section of the NCAA Divison I-A/I-AA Football Records Book.
<snip>Long copy and paste of teams and their championship years was removed to save space and to avoid copyright concerns - please follow the above link.</snip>
COMMENT: If you're going to use this list, you'll have a ton of championships that aren't recognized(like OSU's 1998 Sagarin championship....since I'm an OSU fan). CFBDatawarehouse's "Recognized" list is much better, and so I've edited it to reflect that
Mlebowski313 07:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
The official national championship reference is the NCAA Division I-A and I-AA Football Records Book. All of the information is correct. The above page [1], despite being part of the official NCAA website, has errors. Several of Richard Billingsley's championships are credited incorrectly (i.e., Iowa in 1922). I am not sure if there are other discrepancies, but the errors I have found suggest that said page was poorly compiled. The record book should always be used as the official source. Please note that the National Poll Champions section of the book is not a list of NCAA-recognized championships — there are no such things (yet). Iowa13 00:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I say we delete all poll era championships that aren't AP, UPI, or FWAA. I also say we only recognize the champions of Helms and Dickinson polls from 1883-1935. And yes, we should recongnize USC's 2003 AP title. Finally, for most national titles, we put, in parentheses, next to each team, the number of post-1901 titles each team recognizes. Anthony Del Fiacco 17:40, 9 September 2007
Also. UGA's 1943 rose bowl championship is not listed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.103.186 ( talk) 03:31, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
"We can DISCUSS THE DEFINITION OF CONTROVERSIAL" The BCS was put in place to crown ONE national title champion. In 2003 LSU won the BCS Nation Title Game, making them the national champions 2003. Yes, the AP polls did decided of a "split" champion. But the win was not earned, and was given by modern and flawed ranking systems. That why AP writers write, and players play. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.234.195.162 ( talk) 08:44, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Here are a few national champions frequently added to the By Year list which are not normally recognized:
Boston College (1940) Alabama (1941) Washington (1960)
Just to name a few. We continue to have problems with disgruntled fans adding their "championships" to the list. I know many fans feel that BC and Wash deserve recognition for their accomplishments in '41 and '60, respectively, and Bama fans hate seeing their illegitimate 1941 title left out, owing to the endlessly brainwashing "12 National Championships" recital. This list, however, is supposed to reflect as accurately as possible the true champions of each year, chosen only by major selectors. Also, I beg LSU fans to please stop removed USC's '03 championship from the list. Don't hate the AP - they gave you the '58 title nod. If you don't like "sharing" the championship, deal with it your own way. This article should be informative, not an outlet for fan frustration. Continuously reverting edits is getting very old. Please respect the integrity of this list. Iowa13 21:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Finally, I see a reference for the creation of the NCs table (at least its not original research unless this is self referencing--and we can't check for that)--the CFDW (whatever that is). However, I have no idea why we should take the judgment of what appears to be 2 individuals who are not recognized experts over the NCAA, the governing association.
I propose one of 3 solutions (which also should fix the LSU issue for directly). 1) Remove the current table and reproduce the NCAA tables and create a new list of total championships based on that source--it is the least controversial source. I also suggest that a second column be added to the total championships list that shows what the individual schools claim (probably most consistent with the NCAA list, not the CFDW list.)
2) Add the NCAA table, and add a third column with the CFDW championships total
3) Eliminate the year by year tables and just simply reference them individually.
The current solution will not stand, and I will come back and remove the current table in a few weeks, essentially instituting solution 3 on a continuing basis unless solutions 1 or 2 are instituted. The current solution is not a consensus and is controversial. I will put a POV of warning on this. Gvharrier 03:29, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Iowa13--this is not YOUR list or criteria of national championships. Your protection of this entry appears to reflect ORIGINAL research, which is verboten in Wikipedia. The entry is intended to reflect a range of opinions and citable authority. This list reflects your opinion, and perhaps the two folks at CFDW. However, Wikipedia prefers that it reflect a broad consensus. I still haven't seen a proposed resolution of the issue that I have raised. How do you propose to fix this entry so that is reflects the historic lack of consensus over the selection of a national champion, particularly earlier in the 20th century? I've put forward three proposals--which one do you prefer, or do you have another? Gvharrier 06:58, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Burden of evidence Policy shortcut: WP:PROVEIT
This article needs additional citations for
verification. (October 2007) |
Please give API credit for winning the 1957 NC. API was re-named Auburn in 1960. 'Auburn' has never won a NC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomli004 ( talk • contribs) 19:32, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
I think Georgia should be recognized for 1942. They were consensus champions picked by at least half of the recognized polls. (Recognition by the National College Football Hall of Fame and the Official NCAA Record Book.)
http://www.georgiadogs.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=46724&SPID=3571&DB_OEM_ID=8800&ATCLID=526158 http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/sec/georgia/national_champs.php http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/sec/georgia/all_national_champs.php Failureofafriend 06:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I've considered a solution similar to separate tables in the past. It is slightly different than what I believe you are suggesting. Possibly there could be a table of one of the more liberal lists, probably the one from the NCAA record book, and within that table a more conservative selection method could be documented, possibly by noting (by bolding, for example) the champion(s) each year that would be recognized by the latter method. This would document both sides of the issue while keeping the article from exceeding a realistic length. Example:
Year | Team | Record | Coach | Selector |
---|---|---|---|---|
1960 | Iowa | 8-1 | Forest Evashevski | B, BS, L, SR |
Minnesota | 8-2 | Murray Warmath | AP, FN, NFF, UPI | |
Mississippi | 10-0-1 | Johnny Vaught | BR, CFRA, DeS, DuS, FWAA, NCF, WS | |
Missouri | 10-1 | Dan Devine | PS | |
Washington | 10-1 | Jim Owens | HAF |
Obviously, the final draft would be slightly different, but that should give you an idea of how it would look. Iowa13 03:41, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Year | Team | Record | Coach | Selector |
---|---|---|---|---|
1869 | Princeton | BR, NCF, PD | ||
Rutgers | PD | |||
1870 | Princeton | BR, NCF, PD | ||
1871 | ||||
1872 | Princeton | BR, NCF, PD | ||
Yale | PD | |||
1873 | Princeton | BR, NCF, PD | ||
1874 | Harvard | PD | ||
Princeton | BR, PD | |||
Yale | NCF, PD | |||
1875 | Colgate | PD | ||
Harvard | NCF, PD | |||
Princeton | BR, PD | |||
1876 | Yale | BR, NCF, PD | ||
1877 | Princeton | BR, PD | ||
Yale | NCF, PD | |||
1878 | Princeton | BR, NCF, PD | ||
1879 | Princeton | BR, NCF, PD | ||
Yale | PD |
Looks good so far. Gvharrier 18:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to propose a slight change in the original plan. We had loosely agreed to use CFBDW consensus national champions. Rather than using a third-party source, I suggest we use the list on NCAAsports.com, one of two official NCAA sites (the other being NCAA.org, which is the source for the "non-consensus" champions, through the official record book). While CFBDW is inconsistent in what selectors they recognize as consensus, NCAAsports.com is 100% consistent. The National Championship Foundation is used from its earliest selection in 1869 to 1935, the Helms Athletic Foundation from its earliest selection in 1883 to 1935, and the College Football Researchers Association from its earliest selection in 1919 to 1935. The Associated Press poll is used from its inception in 1936 to the present, the coaches poll (published by various organizations) from its inception in 1950 to the present, the Football Writers Association of America championship from its inception in 1954 to the present, and the National Football Foundation championship from its inception in 1959 to the present. The post-1949 selectors are synonymous with the Consensus National Champions list in the official record book, which goes from 1950 to the present. The NCAAsports.com list is the closest thing out there to an official list of NCAA-recognized consensus national champions, and is the most consistent of any of the credible lists in existence. What do you think? Iowa13 ( talk) 20:40, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Also, I've posted the new list through 1959 (with years, teams, and selectors) on my user page. Once through 2006, I will add records and coaches (along with any information we later decide is necessary) and do any necessary cleanup work. Iowa13 ( talk) 19:43, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
The champions and selectors are finished. I'm going to start the records and coaches on Thursday. Iowa13 ( talk) 00:13, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Finished! Check it out. I will begin work on the acronym list and the new Most National Championships table(s) on Wednesday. Iowa13 ( talk) 18:58, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
As an outline of the new article, we might use the following topics:
A) What is the current "championship" and how it's unique
B) General history of the selection process with subheadings on 1) when these started with contemporaneous selections 2) development of retrospective selections 3) evolution of polls 4) push toward a "consensus" selection and the BCS
C) Description of the different selection methods in general terms (and maybe invite specific sections on the most interesting and historic selectors)
D) A brief run down on past championships and interesting streaks and trends and 1) controversial NCs prior to the BCS and 2) reference to the BCS (we can probably recycle from the current article on these).
E) A description of the NC table and the criteria used for the consensus picks, and 1) a comparison to what various schools claim versus what's in the table. (A comparison table would be interesting, and I can start researching that.)
This is just one idea of a format just to start the discussion. Gvharrier ( talk) 17:26, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
On
Some want to use "Louisiana State" but I see in the NCAA "Official Division Football Records Book" that it uses "LSU". Note that the University of Southern California is denoted "USC" despite South Carolina using the same abbreviation. At least LSU is unique. We are rebuilding the championship tables which rely heavily on the NCAA sources and uses "LSU". Gvharrier ( talk) 19:35, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
We have Michigan's 1947 extra poll tallied both in the overall champioships and in the poll era, but not in the AP subtotal. As the Associated Press itself does not recognize the validity of this unofficial poll run by the Detroit Free Press, I am correcting the two entries and moving the reference to it's proper spot. Note that the total championships is remaining the same as well as the AP championships. -- KelleyCook 20:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Michigan lists 4 more championships (11 total) based on the NCF results. Also, the NCAA history page also lists these championships: http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_football_past_champs.html (Note that the other NCAA page http://www.ncaafootballchampions.com/ fails to mention ANY national co-champions, which most certainly is incorrect!) It seems that the list presented here relies overly so on the Helms results for this period to the total exclusion of the NCF, yet relies on the NCF for an earlier period AND for a later period. This is simply inconsistent. The list should either include the NCF throughout, or exclude ALL NCF results. The current decision appears arbitrary.
1903: Michigan and Princeton recognized as National Champions UM recognized by: Billingsley, National Championship Foundation (tie with Princeton) Princeton recognized by: Helms, Houlgate, Parke Davis, National Championship Foundation ]
1904: Michigan and Penn recognized as National Champions UM recognized by: Billingsley, National Championship Foundation (tie with Penn) Penn recognized by: Helms, Houlgate, Parke Davis, National Championship Foundation (tie)
1918: Michigan and Pittsburgh recognized as National Champions UM recognized by: Billingsley, National Championship Foundation (tie with Pittsburgh) Pittsburgh recognized by: Helms, Houlgate, National Championship Foundation (tie)
1923: Michigan and Illinois recognized as National Champions UM recognized by: Billingsley, National Championship Foundation (tie with Illinois) California recognized by: Houlgate Illinois recognized by: Boand, Football Research, Helms, Parke Davis, National Championship Foundation (tie) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gvharrier ( talk • contribs) 20:26, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
One thought, I don't know how to or can't change the page, but at the end of the section Most National Championships, there is a comment "Several universities claim more championships than are listed above (e.g., Michigan claims 11 national championships, Alabama claims 12), and some claim fewer championships than are listed above (e.g., Notre Dame claims 11 national championships, Oklahoma claims 7). No one knows why they are listed as such here." I would delete that last comment, No one knows why they are listed as such here, since the preceding paragraph describes why they are listed as such. Madpole33 ( talk) 03:25, 21 December 2007 (UTC)pete