According to ESPN, Arkansas has never won a nat'l championship

[31to6]

before or after the bowls

after...

the whole reason why ESPN did not list us is because they are an AP-affiliated organization... we did not win the AP national championship in '64 (awarded before the bowls) and so as far as they are concerned it did not happen...

It's the same thing as how a recruit is called a 3* or a 4* depending on the media outlet. Yahoo sports is going to use rivals ratings. ESPN is going to use their own. Etc.

The world knows we were the better team. We were so obviously the national champs that it shamed AP into changing how they did rankings.

There are more years before the BCS with *multiple* champs than there are with one consensus champ. We claim it. Alabama claims it. We both have a good argument.

[cosmodrum]

after...

the whole reason why ESPN did not list us is because they are an AP-affiliated organization... we did not win the AP national championship in '64 (awarded before the bowls) and so as far as they are concerned it did not happen...

It's the same thing as how a recruit is called a 3* or a 4* depending on the media outlet. Yahoo sports is going to use rivals ratings. ESPN is going to use their own. Etc.

The world knows we were the better team. We were so obviously the national champs that it shamed AP into changing how they did rankings.

There are more years before the BCS with *multiple* champs than there are with one consensus champ. We claim it. Alabama claims it. We both have a good argument.

I absolutely agree that we deserve it. We were the last man standing without a loss, and had the victory over a mutual opponent in Texass.

[DLUXHOG]

well, ESPN is simply wrong.........

[King Kong]

before or after the bowls

They named us National Champs after the Bowl. Which was their standard

Arkansas isn't claiming a NC that a Publication didn't award.

Though we could with like 1909 and 1977

[cosmodrum]

They named us National Champs after the Bowl. Which was their standard

Arkansas isn't claiming a NC that a Publication didn't award.

Though we could with like 1909 and 1977

I always thought the bowls back then meant diddly-squat. Just exhibitions.

[DLUXHOG]

I always thought the bowls back then meant diddly-squat. Just exhibitions.

the 1977 game was not "exhibition"....   #2, OU had everything on the line and we beat them in a humiliating fashion.... #1 (Texas) was knocked off as well...  the final top 5 teams (Hogs were final ranked #3) were all 11-1 after their bowl games.........

[WizardofhOgZ]

In which polls were we ranked #1 prior to the bowl games?

First, you answer my question - did you read the threads I posted (earlier in this thread)?  If you do, you won't need to ask me that question.

If you don't, you're not a serious participant in this whole conversation.

[cosmodrum]

First, you answer my question - did you read the threads I posted (earlier in this thread)?  If you do, you won't need to ask me that question.

If you don't, you're not a serious participant in this whole conversation.

I did, but I may have missed it.

[cosmodrum]

the 1977 game was not "exhibition"....   #2, OU had everything on the line and we beat them in a humiliating fashion.... #1 (Texas) was knocked off as well...  the final top 5 teams (Hogs were final ranked #3) were all 11-1 after their bowl games.........

I meant back in 64

[Pig in the Pokey]

the 1977 game was not "exhibition"....   #2, OU had everything on the line and we beat them in a humiliating fashion.... #1 (Texas) was knocked off as well...  the final top 5 teams (Hogs were final ranked #3) were all 11-1 after their bowl games.........

We absolutely should claim 3 National Championships. 1909, 1964, 1977.

[WizardofhOgZ]

the 1977 game was not "exhibition"....   #2, OU had everything on the line and we beat them in a humiliating fashion.... #1 (Texas) was knocked off as well...  the final top 5 teams (Hogs were final ranked #3) were all 11-1 after their bowl games.........

While this thread is 95% about 1964, the ironic proof that what you say is true is given at the top of the 1978 Orange Bowl broadcast (link below), when Jim Simpson of NBC talks about what a great end of the College Football Season it has been (New Year's Day), as he discusses all of the scenarios for how various teams could end up number one (in a typical bit of media ignorance, the ONLY obvious team he doesn't mention as being in the mix for #1 is Arkansas, who then mutilates the OU team Simpson touts as one of the key players in that battle for #1). 

In the link below, listen to the 30 seconds that starts at the 1:40 mark when you click this link (you have to click Watch this video on YouTube since the Dill that posted it won't let it play on other websites; it should fire up right at the 1:40 mark):


https://youtu.be/sQ3Jg321pK0?t=97


Here's what I want younger (relative to me) people to note; what Simpson is saying in that clip is exactly the same kind of conversation that went on in advance of every New Year's day for 20-30 years prior to the 1977 season.  In particular, here was the narrative in 1964:

"If Alabama wins (unless they win by 1 point and Arkansas beats Nebraska by 30 or 40 points), Alabama will certainly maintain their position as #1, ranked ahead of #2 Arkansas, even if the Hogs win their Bowl (NOTE: in those days, it was almost unheard of for a top 5 team to drop in the polls if they won their game).  However, if Alabama loses, then 3 other teams are in the discussion.  Arkansas, if it wins and finishes as the only other undefeated team, would undoubtedly be voted #1, as Alabama would drop with a loss, but since Arkansas had already beaten Texas (in Austin, no less) to knock the defending National Champion Longhorns out of the top ranking, Arkansas would get the nod.  If both Arkansas and Alabama lost, then Texas would probably get the nod, having knocked up current #1 Alabama, although one-loss Notre Dame, who was Number 1 before losing to USC in their final game, was always a threat in a vote of sportswriters, as Notre Dame was a media darling."

That' what ALL college football fans were saying as soon as the season was over and Bowl pairings were known.  There was no discussion of AP or UPI.  It was of the "Mythical National Champions".  The one everyone in the barber shops, school yards, coffee shops, etc. agreed was the consensus National Champions. 

[Baconomics]

In 1964, everyone who followed college football recognized Arkansas as the national champion.  We celebrated the championship.  It was real, and that's all that really matters.  Alabama can claim it in retrospect and Germany can claim victory in WWII, but that doesn't change the truth of the events or the joy (or sorrow) for those who experienced it.

[WizardofhOgZ]

I did, but I may have missed it.

If you did, indeed, read those threads, then you know that whether or not we (or any other team) was ranked #1 by ANY poll prior to the Bowls is not relevant to who was crowned Mythical National Champion.  See and listen to what Jim Simpson has to say about that in 1977 (see my post above this one).  His "if A wins, but B and C lose, then X, but if A and B both win, Y, However, if A, B, and C all win, then  . . . " type discussion is exactly what made New Year's Day the most exciting day of the sporting year to college football fans.  It didn't just start in 1965, when the AP and UPI, which were dragging FAR behind the rest of the country, finally caught up.  It had been that way for at least 15 years already. 

And therein is where most of you honestly misguided folk err; you assume that the AP and UPI (Coaches Poll) were THE end all/be all like they have been the last 40+ years (in other words, since they started doing post-Bowl votes every season).  They were not, for CHAMPIONSHIP purposes.  During the season - yes.  But everyone knew they had a flaw in that they didn't vote after the Bowls, so they were largely ignored for that purpose.  Since a #1 team probably wins it's Bowl 70-75% of the time, those two were right about that percentage - and OBVIOUSLY wrong 25-30% of the time.  That's why the other trophies came into being, exactly to "get it right" all of the time (or, at least, to not be obviously wrong 25% of the time.

[King Kong]

 :razorback:

[King Kong]

I always thought the bowls back then meant diddly-squat. Just exhibitions.

They recorded the victory as a win in the win loss column. It is was more than an exhibition

[Uncle Remus]

There has been widespread agreement for 50 years that Arkansas was the NC in 1964.  For a major news source to claim otherwise is silly.

Who cares about ESPN...they are becoming less of a news source and more of a political and socioeconomic OP/ED.

[popcornhog]

we were  given a version of the NC just like Alabama was given a version in 1964

we were undefeated they were not.

We beat the team that beat them.

we beat two teams ranked higher than any team Alabama beat.

sounds like a NC team to me.

my guess is the espn person doesn't know any of that but that doesn't stop him/her from saying
we haven't won a NC, don't let the facts get in the way....

It's semantics. But if you're talking about taking the most accepted champion of the time, it was Bama in 1964.

If you go with the most reasonable, it was Arkansas. It was a split title, but ours wasn't as widely accepted.

The facts that you recite, above, did help push a change in the perception of bowl games and their impact on determining a title. But that didn't happen until 65.

[GuvHog]

Just google, "1964 national champions"

That satisfies me

Or, one can visit the Hall of Champions Museum in the Fred Smith Center at the U of A and get a very close up look at the 1964 Grantland Rice National Championship Trophy sitting in one of the showcases.

[Deep Shoat]

before or after the bowls

Doesn't matter.  The standard of the day was many different organizations awarding national championships based on the standard of the organization.  We were awarded several of them in '64. 

[HillBillyHogfan]

Homophobe ALERT!!!!!

lol... touche'