Hogville Info
• 9,225,095 Posts
• 380,986 Topics
• 21,240 Hogvillians
THE RULES (Read 'em!)
Quick Links
Pick'Ems:Football      Basketball      Baseball
Sister Sites:Gridiron HistoryFearless Friday
Listen NOW:Game ON 103.3 
  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles  (Read 2759 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

WizardofhOgZ

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8,029
SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« on: August 19, 2017, 11:59:41 am »

On the day that Coach Broyles passed, the SEC network had a nice 6+ minute package on his career and life.  Very well done, for the most part.

However, embedded in the tribute was a very carefully worded dissection of the 1964 season that went out of it's way to point out that the AP and UPI polls named Alabama the National Champions that year, and never once referenced the fact that Arkansas also received National Championship recognition by other well respected organizations.

We all know the story about the AP and UPI polls that year, and we know the reason why; because those polls were stuck in the past (with heavy Notre Dame influence, since ND didn't play in Bowls by their own choice), and had not caught up with the fans - who absolutely considered the Bowl part of the overall Championship picture by the mid-50's. 

But, the bigger question is WHY use Coach Broyles' video obituary as the forum to try and make that point?  When honoring the man, and listing his accomplishments, why not just reference that year as what it was - a (mythical, as ALL Championships were in that era) National Championship - and forego the detailed (but incomplete and misleading) "history lesson"?  Let Alabama tell their tale another day.  But to tell their side (weak) of the story, and then to not even mention that we, too, had a legit claim to the title is unconscionable. 

I hate to say this, and I don't know it for a fact.  But I can't help but think that some sorry-azz Alabama fan/grad either edited that piece, or forced them to used that language. Here's what's so pathetic. EVEN if that's the way you truly feel (and, as I've pointed out here in more than a dozen posts over the years, that Championship is ours first; Bama can claim a small share if they choose, but I would not if I were them), WHY would you choose that time and circumstances to stroke the Bama ego?

It really, really pisses me off.  I noticed it immediately, and have been seething about it since.  However, I didn't bring it to the board sooner, because I felt the focus should be solely on Coach Broyles for a few days.

http://www.arkansasrazorbacks.com/sec-network-coach-broyles-feature/
Logged

HamSammich

  • Hogvillian
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1,577
  • Sports huh?
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #1 on: August 19, 2017, 12:09:40 pm »

I noticed that too. Thought it was a poor piece. Ticked me off a little. I think it really ticked you off. Bama just has crazier fans I think, if they had said we won the championship 2000000 goobers would have been calling the SEC offices.
Logged

Sponsored Ad



Hogville encourages you to do business with the following...

WizardofhOgZ

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8,029
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #2 on: August 19, 2017, 12:18:33 pm »

I noticed that too. Thought it was a poor piece. Ticked me off a little. I think it really ticked you off. Bama just has crazier fans I think, if they had said we won the championship 2000000 goobers would have been calling the SEC offices.

I know that's true.  However, let's leave aside the fact that those goobers would still be wrong.  The MAIN point is that when you're giving a man's eulogy is not the time to quibble over those sorts of things.  It's petty and despicable. 
Logged

HognitiveDissonance

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,100
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #3 on: August 19, 2017, 12:23:34 pm »

It's not that simple.
That's the way it was done then.
Alabama WAS named the AP and UPI champion.
I saw the piece, too.
I thought they basically summarized the way champions were named back then and pointed out Arkansas's version, then explained the AP and UPI implemented an experimental change the following season, which was made permanent in 1968.

The fact is you can't name either Arkansas or Alabama the undisputed champion in 1964. It was a different era, rules hadn't changed yet.
You don't have to be a Hog fan to see that Arkansas had the best claim to it, at all. But you also can't erase the fact that AL was awarded a title by others.

Bottom line, if Arkansas says today they were the 1964 National Champions, I have no issue with it. They were all mythical champions back then, and Ark had a better claim than anyone. They're not ripping anybody off by claiming that. If Bama wants to print in their media guide they were 1964 champions, that doesn't bother me either. Blame the AP and UPI, not Bama.
Logged

Piggfoot

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2,570
  • Hog Table top cooker
Re: SEC diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #4 on: August 19, 2017, 12:27:34 pm »

It's a bitter pill to swallow but inspite of Arkansas' love for the Razorbacks they are not a national media darling and I suspect they never will be. No doubt the SEC piece was classless. That year even though we were undefeated we did not receive the traditional NC award. Alabama did. Also some gave Notre Dame the title.
Until we reach top ten status every year with frequent play off participation we will be looked at as a spoiler in the NC race.
If Arkansas is to reach they need 100 % support from Arkansas fans. The constant negative comments, the constant belittling of our coaches  certainly must have a negative impact on our recruiting. Why should kids come here when people have such unreasonable expectations. Why people continue to compare our team with teams loaded with 4 and 5 stars is crazy.
Over criticism by fans does nothing to improve the play of boys.
In my opinion people who constantly spew negatively are not fans and shouldn't call themselves such. They are only Razorback critics.
Logged

HognitiveDissonance

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,100
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #5 on: August 19, 2017, 12:32:10 pm »

I will also add that on the night of Broyles's death, ESPN did a short segment and said 'Broyles, who led the school to its only championship in 1964...'

ESPN's piece didn't mention Alabama.
Logged

HOGINTENNESSEE

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8,082
  • Ryan Mallett: "I don't get nervous"
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #6 on: August 19, 2017, 12:37:15 pm »

It's not that simple.
That's the way it was done then.
Alabama WAS named the AP and UPI champion.
I saw the piece, too.
I thought they basically summarized the way champions were named back then and pointed out Arkansas's version, then explained the AP and UPI implemented an experimental change the following season, which was made permanent in 1968.

The fact is you can't name either Arkansas or Alabama the undisputed champion in 1964. It was a different era, rules hadn't changed yet.
You don't have to be a Hog fan to see that Arkansas had the best claim to it, at all. But you also can't erase the fact that AL was awarded a title by others.

Bottom line, if Arkansas says today they were the 1964 National Champions, I have no issue with it. They were all mythical champions back then, and Ark had a better claim than anyone. They're not ripping anybody off by claiming that. If Bama wants to print in their media guide they were 1964 champions, that doesn't bother me either. Blame the AP and UPI, not Bama.

It's not mythical if it was awarded to a school. Arkansas was awarded a National Championship that year and so was Alabama
Logged

HognitiveDissonance

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,100
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #7 on: August 19, 2017, 12:42:40 pm »

They were called 'mythical' because there wasn't an official champion sanctioned by the NCAA.

Unlike say, March Madness, or the College World Series, or the Outdoor Track and Field meet. Those are all official, undisputed, NCAA Championship events. No one disputes who the champion is, and no one else 'names' a champion.

Football wasn't like that back then. You just had a hodge-podge of voting organizations all naming their version of a champion. Thus, the term 'mythical'.
Logged

HiggiePiggy

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 10,957
  • Hope...
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #8 on: August 19, 2017, 12:48:12 pm »

[quote author=Piggfoot link=topic=636058.msg10917005#msg10917005 date=1503163654
If Arkansas is to reach they need 100 % support from Arkansas fans. The constant negative comments, the constant belittling of our coaches  certainly must have a negative impact on our recruiting. Why should kids come here when people have such unreasonable expectations. Why people continue to compare our team with teams loaded with 4 and 5 stars is crazy.
Over criticism by fans does nothing to improve the play of boys.
In my opinion people who constantly spew negatively are not fans and shouldn't call themselves such. They are only Razorback critics.
[/quote]

Sorry, but message board talk isn't going to be a problem on recruiting. The problem Arkansas has in recruiting is location and size of state.  Nothing else comes close to it. We are a program that recruits the same as it has since joining the SEC. We will never out recruit the majority of the SEC because our location is in BFE to a lot of the top of the line recruits.
Logged

Hawghiggs

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,431
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #9 on: August 19, 2017, 12:54:30 pm »

 Old guard SEC. Arkansas has never mattered to the SEC.
Logged

WizardofhOgZ

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8,029
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #10 on: August 19, 2017, 12:55:22 pm »

It's not that simple.
That's the way it was done then.
Alabama WAS named the AP and UPI champion.
I saw the piece, too.
I thought they basically summarized the way champions were named back then and pointed out Arkansas's version, then explained the AP and UPI implemented an experimental change the following season, which was made permanent in 1968.

The fact is you can't name either Arkansas or Alabama the undisputed champion in 1964. It was a different era, rules hadn't changed yet.
You don't have to be a Hog fan to see that Arkansas had the best claim to it, at all. But you also can't erase the fact that AL was awarded a title by others.

Bottom line, if Arkansas says today they were the 1964 National Champions, I have no issue with it. They were all mythical champions back then, and Ark had a better claim than anyone. They're not ripping anybody off by claiming that. If Bama wants to print in their media guide they were 1964 champions, that doesn't bother me either. Blame the AP and UPI, not Bama.

Now is not the time and place for me to launch into a full bore explanation of why Arkansas has THE best claim to that National Championship.  I could post links to at least a dozen such explanations I have written here over the last decade.  You appear to understand most - but not all - of it. 

Leaving that aside, the MAIN point here is the context of the discussion in the SEC piece on Broyles.  When a man passes and you are listing all of his accomplishments (and Broyles had MANY), why not just mention that he coached his 1964 team to "a National Championship" (which is irrefutably true; the FWAA award sat in the Broyles Center and will again when that is rebuilt), and leave it at that.  There is NO value to going off into a carefully crafted description of that season that gives ONLY the Alabama spin on it, in a piece on Arkansas' Frank Broyles!

I will refute your claim about the SEC clip.  Go back and listen to it again; it does not "summarize the way champions were named back then and pointed out Arkansas's version".  THEY NEVER MENTION THAT ARKANSAS WAS "A" NATIONAL CHAMPION THAT YEAR.   They ONLY discuss why Alabama has "a" claim, based on a pre-Bowl vote by "some" polls.  Not one word saying we "also" claim the Championship.  They mention that we beat Texas, and we were the only team that finished undefeated, and that Texas beat Alabama in the Orange Bowl.  But they carefully avoid saying that we won several post-Bowl awards.  When listing Frank's accomplishments, they list Conference championships, Bowl games, etc. but do NOT mention winning a National Championship.  In fact, the words they use "Arkansas was denied the AP and UPI National Championships" imply that we were left out in the cold altogether, which is not true.

I agree with you comment that ALL National Championships priod to the BCS were, really, mythical.  So, I don't have a problem with Alabama saying they have a "share" of the National Championship for 1964, even though it is a minor one - given when the ones that list them were voted on.  But, let me use your own argument; if it is "wrong" for us to say that Alabama has "no claim" to the National title, how much worse is it for this piece to mention their claim but NOT mention ours?  ESPECIALLY in the context of what it was - a tribute to Broyles? 

That's what has me hot.  Not that Bammers claim a title they know they don't deserve; but that someone is trying to imply we don't even have a share of the title that we clearly have the PRIMARY claim to - and in a Broyles tribute.

Logged

factchecker

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,338
  • RAZORBACKS OR NOTHING!
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #11 on: August 19, 2017, 12:59:55 pm »

Sadly, I've heard plenty of our "fans" offer the same diss.  They discredit Broyles and the national championship we won anytime it's brought up.  Plenty of them on Hogville.

Alabama fans will go out of there way to claim championships even if they went 8-4.  Arkansas "fans" will take a dump on an undefeated season.  Too many wanna-be realists and sports fans and not enough Razorback fans.
Logged

HognitiveDissonance

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,100
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #12 on: August 19, 2017, 01:02:35 pm »

I agree that the best way to discuss that era would be to, as you say, use the generic words 'a national championship', or even better, specifically name the group that awarded you the trophy.

So the words should be 'Broyles, who led Arkansas to the Football Writers national championship in 1964...'

Or how about 1990, when I think BYU and Colorado split the trophies. They should say 'BYU, the UPI national champions of 1990...'   (or whatever version they won, I don't recall)

This way, you're accurate and no one can quibble since you specifically named the details.
Logged

HognitiveDissonance

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,100
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #13 on: August 19, 2017, 01:04:59 pm »

Sadly, I've heard plenty of our "fans" offer the same diss.  They discredit Broyles and the national championship we won anytime it's brought up.  Plenty of them on Hogville.

Alabama fans will go out of there way to claim championships even if they went 8-4.  Arkansas "fans" will take a dump on an undefeated season.  Too many wanna-be realists and sports fans and not enough Razorback fans.
I actually made the claim a few weeks ago that, since they were all 'mythical' anyway, why doesn't the school honor the 1977 team as NATIONAL CHAMPIONS on the field like they do the 1964 team? Someone voted the 1977 champions that year, although it was an obscure organization. But me, who cares who it was, and who says that group is inferior to the AP and UPI?
The fact is, someone voted the 1977 team #1 at the end of the year, and after waxing OU 31-6, who says they weren't the best team? I don't doubt it.

So, Arkansas, put up a banner for this team!
Logged

bigeasyhog

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 173
  • Hogville.net
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #14 on: August 19, 2017, 01:16:38 pm »

I actually made the claim a few weeks ago that, since they were all 'mythical' anyway, why doesn't the school honor the 1977 team as NATIONAL CHAMPIONS on the field like they do the 1964 team? Someone voted the 1977 champions that year, although it was an obscure organization. But me, who cares who it was, and who says that group is inferior to the AP and UPI?
The fact is, someone voted the 1977 team #1 at the end of the year, and after waxing OU 31-6, who says they weren't the best team? I don't doubt it.

So, Arkansas, put up a banner for this team!

Couldn't agree more; I'm certain Bama WOULD claim any title, from any organization. If they are comfortable claiming '64, with a loss to the same Texas we beat that season, I have no problem claiming '77.
Logged

Cinco de Hogo

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 4,090
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #15 on: August 19, 2017, 01:17:13 pm »

It's not that simple.
That's the way it was done then.
Alabama WAS named the AP and UPI champion.
I saw the piece, too.
I thought they basically summarized the way champions were named back then and pointed out Arkansas's version, then explained the AP and UPI implemented an experimental change the following season, which was made permanent in 1968.

The fact is you can't name either Arkansas or Alabama the undisputed champion in 1964. It was a different era, rules hadn't changed yet.
You don't have to be a Hog fan to see that Arkansas had the best claim to it, at all. But you also can't erase the fact that AL was awarded a title by others.

Bottom line, if Arkansas says today they were the 1964 National Champions, I have no issue with it. They were all mythical champions back then, and Ark had a better claim than anyone. They're not ripping anybody off by claiming that. If Bama wants to print in their media guide they were 1964 champions, that doesn't bother me either. Blame the AP and UPI, not Bama.

Boy did you miss the point of the OP or what?
Logged

OneLardAlmighty

  • Senior
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 895
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #16 on: August 19, 2017, 01:17:20 pm »

Now is not the time and place for me to launch into a full bore explanation of why Arkansas has THE best claim to that National Championship.  I could post links to at least a dozen such explanations I have written here over the last decade.  You appear to understand most - but not all - of it. 

Leaving that aside, the MAIN point here is the context of the discussion in the SEC piece on Broyles.  When a man passes and you are listing all of his accomplishments (and Broyles had MANY), why not just mention that he coached his 1964 team to "a National Championship" (which is irrefutably true; the FWAA award sat in the Broyles Center and will again when that is rebuilt), and leave it at that.  There is NO value to going off into a carefully crafted description of that season that gives ONLY the Alabama spin on it, in a piece on Arkansas' Frank Broyles!

I will refute your claim about the SEC clip.  Go back and listen to it again; it does not "summarize the way champions were named back then and pointed out Arkansas's version".  THEY NEVER MENTION THAT ARKANSAS WAS "A" NATIONAL CHAMPION THAT YEAR.   They ONLY discuss why Alabama has "a" claim, based on a pre-Bowl vote by "some" polls.  Not one word saying we "also" claim the Championship.  They mention that we beat Texas, and we were the only team that finished undefeated, and that Texas beat Alabama in the Orange Bowl.  But they carefully avoid saying that we won several post-Bowl awards.  When listing Frank's accomplishments, they list Conference championships, Bowl games, etc. but do NOT mention winning a National Championship.  In fact, the words they use "Arkansas was denied the AP and UPI National Championships" imply that we were left out in the cold altogether, which is not true.

I agree with you comment that ALL National Championships priod to the BCS were, really, mythical.  So, I don't have a problem with Alabama saying they have a "share" of the National Championship for 1964, even though it is a minor one - given when the ones that list them were voted on.  But, let me use your own argument; if it is "wrong" for us to say that Alabama has "no claim" to the National title, how much worse is it for this piece to mention their claim but NOT mention ours?  ESPECIALLY in the context of what it was - a tribute to Broyles? 

That's what has me hot.  Not that Bammers claim a title they know they don't deserve; but that someone is trying to imply we don't even have a share of the title that we clearly have the PRIMARY claim to - and in a Broyles tribute.



Well said and exactly right, Wiz.  My first thought the instant I saw that was that it shows how the SEC is really Alabama's conference and the SEC Network really Alabama's network.  They are going to do anything to upset the boss.

Otherwise, I thought it was a good and moving piece. 
Logged

GuvHog

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 45,041
  • Official Jeff Long Darksider!
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #17 on: August 19, 2017, 02:00:34 pm »

Sadly, I've heard plenty of our "fans" offer the same diss.  They discredit Broyles and the national championship we won anytime it's brought up.  Plenty of them on Hogville.

Alabama fans will go out of there way to claim championships even if they went 8-4.  Arkansas "fans" will take a dump on an undefeated season.  Too many wanna-be realists and sports fans and not enough Razorback fans.

They can make any claim they want to and all I have to say to those claims is this:

That big 1964 Grantland Rice National Championship Trophy sitting in the Trophy case in the Football Operations Center on the campus of the University of Arkansas is NOT a myth.
Logged

Hawghiggs

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,431
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #18 on: August 19, 2017, 03:43:47 pm »

Sadly, I've heard plenty of our "fans" offer the same diss.  They discredit Broyles and the national championship we won anytime it's brought up.  Plenty of them on Hogville.

Alabama fans will go out of there way to claim championships even if they went 8-4.  Arkansas "fans" will take a dump on an undefeated season.  Too many wanna-be realists and sports fans and not enough Razorback fans.

 To many SEC first fans.
Logged

Hogwild

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2,508
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #19 on: August 19, 2017, 03:59:42 pm »

I agree that the best way to discuss that era would be to, as you say, use the generic words 'a national championship', or even better, specifically name the group that awarded you the trophy.

So the words should be 'Broyles, who led Arkansas to the Football Writers national championship in 1964...'

Or how about 1990, when I think BYU and Colorado split the trophies. They should say 'BYU, the UPI national champions of 1990...'   (or whatever version they won, I don't recall)

This way, you're accurate and no one can quibble since you specifically named the details.

BYU won their title in '84.  In 1990, the split titles were Colorado and GA Tech.  When the media says split titles they are referring to when the Press (AP Poll) and Coaches (UPI/USAToday poll) name different champions.  The last time that occurred was when LSU and USC split the national championship.

We really got screwed with the '64 and '65 titles.  People will say that's how they awarded the national championship back then, and yes other schools had the same thing happen to them.  However the AP temporarily changed the rule the following season, and we lost  to LSU in the Cotton Bowl, Michigan State lost in the Rose Bowl and #4 Alabama beats #3 Nebraska. Alabama won the AP title, while the Coaches had named Michigan State the national champions, prior to Bowl Season.
Logged

AP85

  • Hogvillian
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1,950
  • SEC.....you'll float too......
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #20 on: August 19, 2017, 04:04:52 pm »

What a bunch of sensitive sally's.

Good grief.

Take it and run with the fact we had such a historic person to honor based off the hog program. A well respected one at that.

Just goes to prove, that some may cling to '64, most people out there including a lot of hog fans don't.
Logged

VBCHog

  • Bench Warmer
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 82
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #21 on: August 19, 2017, 05:00:16 pm »

It kind of reminds me of the story in the Bible where the rich man (alabama) had a whole flock of sheep (natty championships) but wanted to take the little poor old farmer's (arkansas) only sheep.
Logged

247Hog

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 151
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #22 on: August 19, 2017, 05:06:21 pm »

Screw Sec Network, Sec or anyone that claims we're not champions. In my eyes we won it in 64 now lets win another.
Logged

zeke_in_kc

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 431
  • Called it right from "jump."
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #23 on: August 19, 2017, 05:45:36 pm »

What a bunch of sensitive sally's.

Good grief.

Take it and run with the fact we had such a historic person to honor based off the hog program. A well respected one at that.

Just goes to prove, that some may cling to '64, most people out there including a lot of hog fans don't.

Precisely accurate in every respect.
Logged

hawgwash

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2,541
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #24 on: August 19, 2017, 05:59:03 pm »

FWIW I work with someone who's father played on the Bama 64 team.  He told me that even his father said Arkansas really deserves that championship.
Logged

coolhog

  • Senior
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 564
  • Hogville.net
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #25 on: August 19, 2017, 06:13:52 pm »

I'd rather have 3 polls selecting each of there own Champion.  In 64 you had two teams that were happy now you only have one. Polls were Beauty contests then and now the NCAA controls the judges in the contest and makes all the money. The NCAA wants fans to believe that since its there trophy that's awarded, that makes it all the more legit. Our Championship
( to me)  was just as much legit as any other won after 64.  Frank and the boys won it and there isn't anyone that can take it away.
Logged

gchamblee

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3,455
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #26 on: August 19, 2017, 06:24:46 pm »

On the day that Coach Broyles passed, the SEC network had a nice 6+ minute package on his career and life.  Very well done, for the most part.

However, embedded in the tribute was a very carefully worded dissection of the 1964 season that went out of it's way to point out that the AP and UPI polls named Alabama the National Champions that year, and never once referenced the fact that Arkansas also received National Championship recognition by other well respected organizations.

We all know the story about the AP and UPI polls that year, and we know the reason why; because those polls were stuck in the past (with heavy Notre Dame influence, since ND didn't play in Bowls by their own choice), and had not caught up with the fans - who absolutely considered the Bowl part of the overall Championship picture by the mid-50's. 

But, the bigger question is WHY use Coach Broyles' video obituary as the forum to try and make that point?  When honoring the man, and listing his accomplishments, why not just reference that year as what it was - a (mythical, as ALL Championships were in that era) National Championship - and forego the detailed (but incomplete and misleading) "history lesson"?  Let Alabama tell their tale another day.  But to tell their side (weak) of the story, and then to not even mention that we, too, had a legit claim to the title is unconscionable. 

I hate to say this, and I don't know it for a fact.  But I can't help but think that some sorry-azz Alabama fan/grad either edited that piece, or forced them to used that language. Here's what's so pathetic. EVEN if that's the way you truly feel (and, as I've pointed out here in more than a dozen posts over the years, that Championship is ours first; Bama can claim a small share if they choose, but I would not if I were them), WHY would you choose that time and circumstances to stroke the Bama ego?

It really, really pisses me off.  I noticed it immediately, and have been seething about it since.  However, I didn't bring it to the board sooner, because I felt the focus should be solely on Coach Broyles for a few days.

http://www.arkansasrazorbacks.com/sec-network-coach-broyles-feature/

You are quite sensitive.
Logged

davglo35

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 499
  • Hogville.net Rocks!
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #27 on: August 19, 2017, 07:35:58 pm »

In 1994 Arkansas won the Ncaa Basketball tournament. They went 6-0 and beat Duke in the championship game.
In 1964 Arkansas won the Ncaa football tornament. We went 11-0. We beat Nebraska in the final game. 10-7.
In 1964 we were the champions. That's  just the way it is.
Logged

Bugscuffle

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
  • “I can’t eat an iPad.”
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #28 on: August 19, 2017, 07:41:29 pm »

Feck Alabama.
Logged

WizardofhOgZ

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8,029
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #29 on: August 19, 2017, 11:14:31 pm »


What a bunch of sensitive sally's.

Good grief.

Take it and run with the fact we had such a historic person to honor based off the hog program. A well respected one at that.

Just goes to prove, that some may cling to '64, most people out there including a lot of hog fans don't.


Precisely accurate in every respect.

Do I "cling" to the 1964 Championship.  Hell yes - if that means I'm proud of it.  Just as I'm proud of Nolan's 1994 Championship.  But it's not as if I'm not still fired up for us to win more championships today, or tomorrow - so I'm not sure what your point is.

This is what incenses me.  Even our OWN FANS are ignorant of this program's history.  Just because YOU weren't there to witness and appreciate it for what it was, does not mean there aren't still thousands of us who were there and will always remember it fondly. 

You, sadly, are the dupe of revisionist historians who are ignorant of the reality of that accomplishment.  You and all younger folks who don't understand the context look up the AP and UPI champions and think "well, that's it; Alabama was #1 in the final poll of those two respected polls, so they have the primary "Championship" and Arkansas, though worthy, does not."

As I've explained dozens of times, the AP and UPI WERE, in fact, well respected - even back then.  But, that was for weekly rankings - because, they were the ONLY weekly rankings that were reported during the season.  But by the mid-50's - for sure - the Bowls, which were originally designed to be "what if" types of games way back in the 1920's and 1930's, had become key games in the mind of the public in terms of determining the National Champions.  And the phrase "in the minds of the public" is VERY important here, as ALL college football National Champions were MYTHICAL until the BCS started matching 1 vs. 2 twenty years ago.  So the AP and UPI were not considered "the" source for naming Champions, because of their failure to conduct a post-Bowl vote.

As can easily been seen if someone takes the time to truly research this subject, there were many different sources that named college football champions, simply because there was NO one or two that everybody agreed upon.  While that may sound silly today - and, I'm not going to defend it - it was the way it was.  So, ultimately, at the end of each season there was either ONE team that pretty much all fans recognized as the National Champions (and this happened probably two thirds of the time), or public sentiment was split between a couple of teams - on rare occasions, maybe even three!

There were a couple of key reasons for this confusion.  One was the fact that there were very few Bowls, and most of them had ties to what we would call today the "Power Conferences".  So, the Champions of those conferences - normally the top ranked teams - were tied to different Bowl games and, as a result, did not play each other except on very rare occasions.  At least, not the teams you'd want to see play each other to decide the Championship.  You might have Number one playing Number 6 in one Bowl, Number 2 playing #4 in another, #3 playing #8 and then #5 playing #7.  The Rose Bowl was rare, in that they always had the Champions of the Pac and Big 10 play each other, which allowed the potential for a #1 vs. #2 every now and then.  However, the Big 10 had a rule that if a team had been to the Rose Bowl the year before, they could NOT go again the next year.  So even if a team finished #1 and undefeated, they would not be in the Rose if they had played there the prior year.

The other huge player in this mish-mash was that Notre Dame had chosen, after initially playing in Bowl games in the 20's, to not play in them.  And they did not for 40 years.  Notre Dame feared that if they didn't participate, and a team behind them did and won impressively, the Irish might get leap-frogged in the final poll.  So, they lobbied heavily and successfully to repress a post-Bowl vote.  You cannot being to understand how powerful the Notre Dame lobby was in the 30's and 40's, when the wire services polls were controlled by the eastern press.  So, for that artificial reason, the AP and UPI named their Champions at the end of the regular season - before the Bowls.

Over time, that process proved to be inadequate.  The public demanded a change, but the AP and UPI polls stubbornly held off for years.  However, there were others who responded to the public's demand.  Among them, the Football Writers of America, The Helms Foundation, The National Championship Foundation, and others (including the mathematical models such as Sagarin, Poling, etc.).  The obvious failure of the 1964 polls (AP, UPI) to name the clear Champions - in the eyes of the college football world - was the final blow that forced both to look at polling after the Bowl games.  It is NOT coincidental that, a few years later, Notre Dame decided to start Bowling again.

A 20 or 40 year old today cannot be criticized for not knowing the mindset of the world decades before they remember anything.  It is like that for all of us.  And the college football Championship is particularly confusing, because it would seem so obvious just to look at the AP and UPI "champions" for any past year and agree that that team was "probably" the "consensus" team.  But it was not always so.  In those cases, it is better (if less than consistent) to consult people who were actually THERE and lived the moment.  Because I can witness that - in 1964 - ALL college football fans of any competence and knowledge freely and consistently acknowledged Arkansas as the Champion of 1964, after all was said and done.

Yes, we know that the inadequate and embarrassing AP and UPI polls that year - which were taken before even all of the regular season games were done! - are what most  uninformed people will look at.  But true researchers will understand that our claim is, by far, the most valid.  As all college football fans did in that moment.

Again, what has raised my ire about this particular ESPN piece is that it was carefully and obviously crafted by someone with an ax to grind, and an agenda to push.  That agenda - aside from being just plain wrong (not mentioning that we had even a "partial" claim the the Championship) - was mean spirited and vicious in the context of being included in a eulogy/tribute to a great man.   Wrong time, wrong place for such pettiness.

Shame on them - whoever "they" are.


Logged

AP85

  • Hogvillian
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1,950
  • SEC.....you'll float too......
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #30 on: August 19, 2017, 11:17:48 pm »

Much like Robert Shields stuff....

Did not read.
Logged

WizardofhOgZ

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8,029
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #31 on: August 19, 2017, 11:24:27 pm »

FWIW I work with someone who's father played on the Bama 64 team.  He told me that even his father said Arkansas really deserves that championship.

I once had a chance to speak - briefly - with Darrell Royal back in the 1980's.  It was after a public event in which he was present to draw attendance (from college football fans like myself), and he held a Q&A afterwards.  Some one asked him his thoughts on having a college football playoff, and he answered typically for that period (80's), saying that he didn't see one coming anytime soon because the coaches liked the Bowl system, where more teams got the chance to be rewarded, etc.

I followed that question up about times that the polls had been controversial, such as 1964, when undefeated Arkansas was #2 in the final AP poll.  Of course, this was a subject Royal knew about, since Arkansas had beaten HIS defending National Champions in Austin, and then his team won out before beating Alabama in the Orange Bowl.  He responded that the debate over #1 is one of the unique characteristics of College Football - that it was unusual for everyone to agree on who was number 1, and that debate was generally healthy in terms of generating interest in the sport.  He then said, and I quote, "with regard to 1964, even the Bear knows that Arkansas won that Championship".

Obviously, Darrell and Frank were great friends.  But, both of them were friends with and had great respect for Bear as well.  But Darrell confirmed what I already knew.  In the often chaotic and confusing world of naming college football's "mythical" National Champions in 1964, the result had been very clear.  Undefeated Arkansas - slayer of the defending Champions in their own back yard - had staked an undisputed claim (in the minds of all fans) when Texas took down the other major candidate for the Championship in the Orange Bowl. 
Logged

WizardofhOgZ

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8,029
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #32 on: August 19, 2017, 11:25:44 pm »

Much like Robert Shields stuff....

Did not read.

The battle cry of the ignorant . . . also a de facto waving of the white flag.

This subject is one that is out of your depth - better for you to go play in the kiddie box and stay out of it.
Logged

AP85

  • Hogvillian
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1,950
  • SEC.....you'll float too......
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #33 on: August 19, 2017, 11:28:35 pm »

The response of the ignorant . . . also a de facto waving of the white flag.

This subject is one that is out of your depth - better for you to go play in the kiddie box and stay out of it.

No need to read a short story about someone clamoring about a "national championship" that we didn't even outright win.

Hold on tight to '64. No one, including recruits could care less about katv voting the hogs as champions. 

I was 9 when we won it in '94. Doesn't mean I'm still gonna hold on to it for the rest of my life. It's old news.
Logged

WizardofhOgZ

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8,029
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #34 on: August 19, 2017, 11:35:03 pm »

No need to read a short story about someone clamoring about a "national championship" that we didn't even outright win.

God forbid you read it (with an open mind, if you're capable of that); you might actually LEARN something.  Nope - let's just stay with your poorly informed position.


I was 9 when we won it in '94. Doesn't mean I'm still gonna hold on to it for the rest of my life. It's old news.

So, if several years from now (hopefully), you read an obit when Nolan passes and not only was he not given credit for winning the 1994 title, but the article inferred that the NIT actually produced the true champion of that year . . . that wouldn't piss you off?

It's not exactly the same - because of the tournament format.  But the inference is about the same.  It's revisionist history.  Shame on those of us who know better, if we don't speak up and call them out on it.
Logged

Headhog32

  • Bench Warmer
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #35 on: August 19, 2017, 11:36:06 pm »

No need to read a short story about someone clamoring about a "national championship" that we didn't even outright win.

Hold on tight to '64. No one, including recruits could care less about katv voting the hogs as champions. 

I was 9 when we won it in '94. Doesn't mean I'm still gonna hold on to it for the rest of my life. It's old news.
AP85 "old news" happens to be history, fans take pride in history of the program.
Logged

factchecker

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,338
  • RAZORBACKS OR NOTHING!
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #36 on: August 20, 2017, 12:41:55 am »

AP85 "old news" happens to be history, fans take pride in history of the program.

You found the problem.  He is not a fan.
Logged

SamBuckhart

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2,255
  • STAY TRUE TO YOUR SCHOOL MY FRIENDS. ARKANSAS
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #37 on: August 20, 2017, 11:49:53 am »

In 1994 Arkansas won the Ncaa Basketball tournament. They went 6-0 and beat Duke in the championship game.
In 1964 Arkansas won the Ncaa football tornament. We went 11-0. We beat Nebraska in the final game. 10-7.
In 1964 we were the champions. That's  just the way it is.
In 1969, Arkansas beat Texas for three quarters. In my man cave, Arkansas won the championship. 3 to 1. ::hornsdown::
Logged

bigalphahawg

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 162
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #38 on: August 20, 2017, 01:14:43 pm »

The omission also  stood out to me when I watched it. My initial thought was that the SEC Network was purposely trying not to step on Bama's toes. As others have stated, not the ideal time for them to tiptoe.
Logged

Cinco de Hogo

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 4,090
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: SEC Network diss during "tribute" to Broyles
« Reply #39 on: August 20, 2017, 04:41:56 pm »

This kinda reminds me of the statue problem we are currently having in this country right now.  Speaking only of the responses in this thread it's obvious some don't respect history and had just as soon trample on it and others feelings for there own personal glory.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

KARK
KWNA
Fox 16 Arkansas