Does anyone feel like we will proudly play it close with alabama most of the game?

[HogFanatic]

Their Secondary will probably be better than it was last season.

Derrick Henry is going to be very difficult to deal with.  OU found that out in the Sugar Bowl.  I wouldn't be surprised if both Henry and Georgia's Todd Gurley just flat-out run over/run through the SEC this upcoming season.

Henry and Gurley are not what you would call "normal/ordinary" collegiate RBs.

The same can be said for Jonathon Williams, Alex Collins, and Korliss Marshall.

[GoHogs1091]

The same can be said for Jonathon Williams, Alex Collins, and Korliss Marshall.

No one has really stopped Gurley.  Only an injury last season stopped Gurley.

Gurley rushed for 122 yards as a Freshman against Alabama's Defense in the SEC Championship Game in 2012.

Gurley will be the 2nd best RB to have ever played in War Memorial (2nd only to McFadden).

[BPsTheMan]

Gurley will be the 2nd best RB to have ever played in War Memorial (2nd only to McFadden).

prepare to be hammered old timer 

[Tejas_Pete]

Nope. We'll probably lose by 30 to 40.

[HogFanatic]

No one has really stopped Gurley.  Only an injury last season stopped Gurley.

Gurley rushed for 122 yards as a Freshman against Alabama's Defense in the SEC Championship Game in 2012.

Gurley will be the 2nd best RB to have ever played in War Memorial (2nd only to McFadden).

Yeah, he is like Alex Collins good.

ETA: And Alex Collins isn't necessarily the best back playing for the Hogs.

[GoHogs1091]

Yeah, he is like Alex Collins good.

ETA: And Alex Collins isn't necessarily the best back playing for the Hogs.

To put into perspective just how good is Gurley, last season against LSU Gurley had 73 yards (a 9.1 yards per carry average on just 8 carries) before he got an ankle injury in the 2nd Quarter and had to leave the Georgia/LSU game.  He didn't return for the rest of the game.  Had he not got injured in the 2nd Quarter, he could have had at least 100 yards rushing by Halftime.  LSU's Defense is not known for allowing much rushing by an opposing RB.

[GuvHog]

Wizard,

you and I have had this argument before, but, since you went there...

I don't know the first Bama fan, including me, who is trying hard to claim the 1964 national championships.  Bama was awarded the national championship by THE two major wire-services, and, very few of us even know that Arkansas claims a NC from that year.

Let me make this clear, there are two NC trophies in the Bryant Museum in Tuscaloosa, neither of which are from some local tabloid that was owned by  or made up by a Bama fan.  So, Bama nor its fandom have to try to claim a NC for 1964.  And as I have said numerous times, I have no problem with Arkansas claiming the FWAA trophy, but, it's a little hypocritical for an Arkansas fan to be taking shots at Bama for "trying to claim a trophy."

Bama is not going to give them back...just saying, and while there are other championships Bama claims that I can't justify (1941), 1964 is not the year.

And BTW, you were and are the reason for my avatar.

It's called the Grantland Rice National Championship Trophy and it sits in a case in the Hall of Champions so the National Championship isn't mythical, it's real.

How's all of the family doing??

[popcornhog]

Wizard,

you and I have had this argument before, but, since you went there...

I don't know the first Bama fan, including me, who is trying hard to claim the 1964 national championships.  Bama was awarded the national championship by THE two major wire-services, and, very few of us even know that Arkansas claims a NC from that year.

Let me make this clear, there are two NC trophies in the Bryant Museum in Tuscaloosa, neither of which are from some local tabloid that was owned by  or made up by a Bama fan.  So, Bama nor its fandom have to try to claim a NC for 1964.  And as I have said numerous times, I have no problem with Arkansas claiming the FWAA trophy, but, it's a little hypocritical for an Arkansas fan to be taking shots at Bama for "trying to claim a trophy."

Bama is not going to give them back...just saying, and while there are other championships Bama claims that I can't justify (1941), 1964 is not the year.

And BTW, you were and are the reason for my avatar.

Yeah, by Wizard's logic, every NC prior to 65 is not legit since they ignored the bowl games.

That said, we did go undefeated with a win over the team that beat y'all. Our claim is definitely legit but yours was claimed under the prevailing mainstream method for declaring champions at the time.

IMO it's a stupid argument to have -- both teams earned their recognition that year.

[HogFanatic]

To put into perspective just how good is Gurley, last season against LSU Gurley had 73 yards (a 9.1 yards per carry average on just 8 carries) before he got an ankle injury in the 2nd Quarter and had to leave the Georgia/LSU game.  He didn't return for the rest of the game.  Had he not got injured in the 2nd Quarter, he could have had at least 100 yards rushing by Halftime.  LSU's Defense is not known for allowing much rushing by an opposing RB.

He also sits on one of the most talent-rich teams in the entire country.
Arkansas ran well on those teams as well (Alabama and LSU). The difference was that Arkansas didn't have any passing threat to speak of and the opposing defenses were able to sell out against the run.

I'm just saying, Alex Collins is damn good. He would have torn the SEC up last season running the ball for Georgia.

Hell, he did just that running the ball for Arkansas.

Of course Gurley is going to be excellent again this year. In fact, he will probably be one of the top 2 or 3 producing backs in all of college football.

I also have Georgia playing in Atlanta...

[GuvHog]

To put into perspective just how good is Gurley, last season against LSU Gurley had 73 yards (a 9.1 yards per carry average on just 8 carries) before he got an ankle injury in the 2nd Quarter and had to leave the Georgia/LSU game.  He didn't return for the rest of the game.  Had he not got injured in the 2nd Quarter, he could have had at least 100 yards rushing by Halftime.  LSU's Defense is not known for allowing much rushing by an opposing RB.

LSU's defense was down quite a bit last season. It was said before the season started that for the first time in years, the Tiger offense would have to carry their defense and that was indeed the case.

[GoHogs1091]

He also sits on one of the most talent-rich teams in the entire country.
Arkansas ran well on those teams as well (Alabama and LSU). The difference was that Arkansas didn't have any passing threat to speak of and the opposing defenses were able to sell out against the run.

I'm just saying, Alex Collins is damn good. He would have torn the SEC up last season running the ball for Georgia.

Hell, he did just that running the ball for Arkansas.

Of course Gurley is going to be excellent again this year. In fact, he will probably be one of the top 2 or 3 producing backs in all of college football.

I also have Georgia playing in Atlanta...

We will know in Week 1 if Gurley can be slowed down/stopped any this season.  Athlon.com has Clemson's Defensive Line ranked as the #4 DL in the nation (though one of Clemson's starting DEs, Corey Crawford, is suspended for that Week 1 Clemson/Georgia game).   

[HogFanatic]

We will know in Week 1 if Gurley can be slowed down/stopped any this season.  Athlon.com has Clemson's Defensive Line ranked as the #4 DL in the nation (though one of Clemson's starting DEs, Corey Crawford, is suspended for that Week 1 Clemson/Georgia game).   

Eh. Your leading tacklers should be linebackers, not defensive linemen.

Georgia's O-line will be stout enough to create creases for him to run through. It will depend on the back three of Clemson's front seven as to whether or not Gurley gains 150 or not. I doubt he goes for that much, but 100+ is a near certainty.

[HiggiePiggy]

Alabama will be like 2010. They won't fall off the earth, but they aren't going to the playoffs or the SEC championship game either. 

[ToddW]

even if it is a down year at BAMA, i don't think we have the weapons to compete on their level this year.  we will be better than last year sure but not good enough to beat BAMA/LSU/USC-E/AUBURN/GA (top tier SEC teams)

[HogFanatic]

even if it is a down year at BAMA, i don't think we have the weapons to compete on their level this year.  we will be better than last year sure but not good enough to beat BAMA/LSU/USC-E/AUBURN/GA (top tier SEC teams)

Replace USC-E with Mississippi State and I agree.

There are only a couple of SEC games that Arkansas is incapable of winning this year, IMO.
Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi State, and PROBABLY LSU.
We may play LSU very close again, but I fully expect a loss.

[HiggiePiggy]

even if it is a down year at BAMA, i don't think we have the weapons to compete on their level this year.  we will be better than last year sure but not good enough to beat BAMA/LSU/USC-E/AUBURN/GA (top tier SEC teams)

We will always have a chance against LSU and honestly I think we will have a chance against Georgia also.   

Even when we had crap teams we almost beat LSU. 

[Biggus Piggus]

We must have our depth hold up unusually well. Bama would have to be unlucky. If their QB situation went bad, it would help.

Their defense is loaded with talent. They seem to be fixated on stopping passing teams. Might help us.

But their backs and receivers are awesome. Will be hard to deal with. We would need a bunch of takeaways. And great kick/punt coverage.

[Steef]

Frankly, let's just start with scoring....SOMETHING...against them.

No more blowouts.

I know we've got to be realistic that this season has some built-in losses. But....no more blowouts.

[GoHogs1091]

Replace USC-E with Mississippi State and I agree.

There are only a couple of SEC games that Arkansas is incapable of winning this year, IMO.
Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi State, and PROBABLY LSU.
We may play LSU very close again, but I fully expect a loss.

There is only a few aspects opposition wise that worry me.

Auburn's Wide Receivers, Coates, and Williams
Texas A&M's WR, Ricky Seals-Jones (who might be another Mike Evans)
Alabama's RB, Derrick Henry
Georgia's RB , Todd Gurley
LSU's RB, Leonard Fournette

I am not worried about Texas Tech, Ole Miss, and Mississippi State

[arkfan81]

Just a couple of facts here;

Arkansas ran for 165 yards versus Alabama.
Alabama put up 352 yards versus Arkansas.

Essentially the same number of carries for both teams (39 - 37).

Alabama's Oline has some serious replacements to make this year but I don't see them dropping off that far. 

For those interested, the 2013 box score can be found by clicking here.

Your talking about having a well rounded offense compared to Arkansas last year. The talent last seasons team isn't this seasons team.. If you can't pass and your sticking 8-9 guys in the box...165 is pretty good vs bama defense..

[WizardofhOgZ]

Man, talk about being a cry baby. Prior to 65 the bowl season wasn't considered to count in determining the champs by most publications.

Both teams have a legit claim on it. It makes either side look very childish to complain about the other claiming this title.

Popcorn, you are welcome to feel any way you want.  I will ask you this - how old are you?  No, the point of asking isn't to show that someone older (or younger) is inherently smarter or less smart than the other.  In fact, I absolutely do not feel that way.

However, there definitely IS something to comparing the subjective opinions of someone who was living at the time of an event, who witnessed it and was "there" to discuss it with others, both personal contacts and the media at large, in "real time" - to someone else who was not around at the time of said event, and knows everything he/she knows based on whatever reading they may have done, as well as projecting "the way things are now" backward to a time and place in which things were different.

This subject is a perfect example of a situation where age and experience makes a profound difference.

[WizardofhOgZ]

I really don't think Alabama fans get all up in arms about the '64 NC but I do know the feelings still linger over the universal wrong that was done in '66.  That fiasco should have ended polls deciding a national champion right then and there.

FWIW, 1966 was a year when the prevailing system failed and Bama was collateral damage.  There were 3 equally deserving teams, all undefeated, at the top of the polls.  Of course, fans of each team thought their team should be number one, but looking at it objectively there was not a lot to separate them.  Unfortunately for Alabama, they got pushed to the side in the feeding frenzy for the late November game involving the "other two" undefeated and top ranked teams, Notre Dame and Michigan State.  Someone had to be ranked 3rd, and it was Bama.  When the other two tied, it left no room for Bama to advance.  Or, depending on your perspective, both should have fallen and Bama should have taken the top spot.  But that's not how it fell.

Ironically, there was no post-Bowl vote in 1966, after not having one in 1964, there was one in 1965, but then not again in 1966 (It reversed again, for good, in 1968).  But, unlike 1964, the post-Bowl vote was not as important, as none of the top 3 teams lost in their Bowl games.  So, Alabama - rightly or wrongly - simply lost the vote.  Same as they and Arkansas did in 1977 when they both finished 10-1, which tied 4 other teams for the top record in the country and won their Bowl games (Notre Dame finished first that year, followed by Bama at #2, and Arkansas at #3).

[code red]

I am sorry.  I am a Razorback fanatic and a SEC realist.  It will not be close.  We may be better but we aren't 45 points better.  I would say it will be a safe bet the hogs lose by more than 21.  I think we just need to focus on what is on our plate.  Auburn awaits.

[Fatty McGee]

As an Arkansas fan, I deeply resent your avatar.  Everyone knows that Alabama was the AP champion at the end of the regular season.  Everyone also knows that Arkansas was the Champion at the end of the complete season, after the Texas team the unbeaten Hogs had beaten was victorious over Alabama in the Orange Bowl.

http://www.si.com/vault/1965/01/11/607262/arkansas-takes-over-at-the-top

Bama has a proud tradition and has absolutely earned several National Championships.  It's pitiful that they try so hard to claim one that anyone looking objectively knows they didn't earn.  They ought to be ashamed and never bring it up.  Instead, they arrogantly parade their narcissism and embarrass themselves.

Funny thing about that link - Arkansas took advantage of a rules change to do something innovative:

"But this was also a Broyles team that had, for the first time, something more than defense. It used the rules, oddly ignored by other potentially good teams, that permitted offensive and defensive units. Broyles wisely platooned early."

. . .

"Broyles had passing, too, in Freddy Marshall, an experienced fifth-year layover quarterback. He admitted: "It's not our nature, but it's now a necessity. Both the Texas and Nebraska games have convinced me of something. When you're a conservative team with a three-point lead, you're actually behind. And when you have a seven-point lead, you're tied. But we're learning down here. We're learning it's better to attack when you're ahead.""

[LZH]

Funny thing about that link - Arkansas took advantage of a rules change to do something innovative:

"But this was also a Broyles team that had, for the first time, something more than defense. It used the rules, oddly ignored by other potentially good teams, that permitted offensive and defensive units. Broyles wisely platooned early."

Kind of ironic now that so many Arkansas fans are throwing a fit over a few coaches (one in particular) who is taking advantage of the rules....and winning.

[The Galloping Ghost]

FWIW, 1966 was a year when the prevailing system failed and Bama was collateral damage.  There were 3 equally deserving teams, all undefeated, at the top of the polls.  Of course, fans of each team thought their team should be number one, but looking at it objectively there was not a lot to separate them.  Unfortunately for Alabama, they got pushed to the side in the feeding frenzy for the late November game involving the "other two" undefeated and top ranked teams, Notre Dame and Michigan State.  Someone had to be ranked 3rd, and it was Bama.  When the other two tied, it left no room for Bama to advance.  Or, depending on your perspective, both should have fallen and Bama should have taken the top spot.  But that's not how it fell.

Ironically, there was no post-Bowl vote in 1966, after not having one in 1964, there was one in 1965, but then not again in 1966 (It reversed again, for good, in 1968).  But, unlike 1964, the post-Bowl vote was not as important, as none of the top 3 teams lost in their Bowl games.  So, Alabama - rightly or wrongly - simply lost the vote.  Same as they and Arkansas did in 1977 when they both finished 10-1, which tied 4 other teams for the top record in the country and won their Bowl games (Notre Dame finished first that year, followed by Bama at #2, and Arkansas at #3).

Arkansas and Nebraska both finished the 1965 season with better records than bammer. That title is as tainted in my mind as their claim to the '64 title which is absurd.

Their claiming the '73 Title is a joke also...

[SemperFi]

Alabama made a mistake in hiring Lane Kiffin. I'm sorry, but I cannot, under any circumstances, see that as a positive for a team that was already about as good as it can possibly get in the collegiate ranks.

I know Saban made the move because he wants to "open up" his offense a little, but as is evidenced by every single other high flying offense in the country, potent offense reduces your ability to field an effective defense. I mean, sure, there is a balance that can be struck there at a point, but Alabama has made their most recent mark on college football by fielding a completely dominant defense. This style change Saban is trying to make is not going to last long, especially under the guidance of that ass-clown who has a sewage treatment plant named in his honor. Never mind the fact that I don't believe those two men will work together too awful long from a pure ego standpoint, I just don't think the change in philosophy will prove to be suited to what Alabama already has going for them.

At the end of the day Saban was just pissed because he lost to two high octane offenses last year. Well Auburn was as big a fluke as I have ever seen in football, and I have to suspect that his team just came out flat against Oklahoma DUE TO the Auburn loss.

ETA the point of me posting in the first place (haha): The game this year should prove much more competitive, but will almost certainly still fall as a loss in Arkansas's column. Alabama is simply more talented at every position group than Arkansas is right now and Saban is still the best coach in the country. Just too much to overcome in year 2.

I just can't envision the ego that is Saban getting along with the ego that is Kiffin. I think that Saban made a huge mistake as AS pointed out. If Alabama was ever vulnerable while Saban has been there now is that time. They might be better at most positions on the field, but if the Hogs find a way to keep it close or by the grace of God take the lead Saban will go back to what he knows and Kiffin will get sidelined.

I think the Hogs end up on the short end of the stick in this game, but do believe that we'll play Alabama tight. The days of getting blown out are gone and Alabama better keep watch as the Hogs are coming.

[WizardofhOgZ]

Arkansas and Nebraska both finished the 1965 season with better records than bammer. That title is as tainted in my mind as their claim to the '64 title which is absurd.

Their claiming the '73 Title is a joke also...

While I do agree that Alabama had a very large helping of luck in winning the 1965 Championship, I don't have a lot of heartburn about it.  After all, all we had to do was win our game and there is NO doubt we would have finished #1 in the post-Bowl polls, as we would have been the only one of the top 3 teams - all undefeated and untied going into the Bowls - to have won and stayed undefeated.  As it was, we (and the other two) both lost, opening the door for other teams.  Alabama was #4, and was the logical team to leap to the top, especially because it was the Tide that thumped #3 Nebraska in the Orange Bowl.  So, IMO, they earned that one - even if it was based more on timing than anything else.

[The Galloping Ghost]

While I do agree that Alabama had a very large helping of luck in winning the 1965 Championship, I don't have a lot of heartburn about it.  After all, all we had to do was win our game and there is NO doubt we would have finished #1 in the post-Bowl polls, as we were the only on of the top 3 teams - all undefeated and untied going into the Bowls - to have won and stayed undefeated.  As it was, we (and the other two) both lost, opening the door for other teams.  Alabama was #4, and was the logical team to leap to the top, especially because it was the Tide that thumped #3 Nebraska in the Orange Bowl.  So, IMO, they earned that one - even if it was based more on timing than anything else.

That's a reasonable rebuttal...

You didn't comment on the '73 Title...

[Sweet Feet]

Alabama was the more predominant national title based off how things were done BACK THEN. That still cant register in peoples head. Arkansas has a title share. Be happy with that. They didn win the two major polls like bama.

Its easy to slip up and lose a game when the national title is already given to you. I mean what was bama playing for in the bowl game vs texas? Nothing really.

[WizardofhOgZ]

Alabama was the more predominant national title based off how things were done BACK THEN. That still cant register in peoples head. Arkansas has a title share. Be happy with that. They didn win the two major polls like bama.

Its easy to slip up and lose a game when the national title is already given to you. I mean what was bama playing for in the bowl game vs texas? Nothing really.

No, No, No . . . you are WRONG.     That's one of the things I keep saying - please listen!  As someone who WAS THERE then and very aware of what was going on AT THE TIME, you are wrong.  In the weeks leading up to the Bowls. there was a lot of talk among fans of all teams about how the Bowls might play out, and what implications that would have on the National Championship.  Oh, we were aware that the antiquated idiots at the AP and UPI were not going to have a poll afterward, but the community of College Football fans had long since embraced the notion that the Bowls DID matter.  We were well also well aware that ANY National Championship - AP, UPI, Football Writers of America, etc. was only MYTHICAL and NOT officially recognized by the NCAA.  If there was one word that every college football fan had drilled into their head during the 50's, 60's right up to the BCS, it was "mythical".  The announcers talked about it all the time, every season.

So, the dialogue before the Bowl was in looking at scenarios.  If Alabama won their Bowl game, they would indeed ratify the AP vote and be the true Champions.  However, if they lost, it would be wide open . . . except if Arkansas won.  In that case, the Hogs - the only undefeated, untied team from a major conference, who came into the Bowls at #2 and had given defending National Champion Texas their only loss, would be the obvious and clear Champion - especially because in that scenario, Alabama's loss would have been inflicted by a team Arkansas had beaten - #3 Texas. 

If both Alabama lost (to Texas) and Arkansas lost in the Cotton (to 1 loss and 6th ranked Nebraska), then those two winning teams, along with one loss Notre Dame and one loss Michigan would battle for the vote, with Texas - off of their win over Alabama in that scenario - favored to move up from number 3 and win a second consecutive Championship.  It would have been very similar to 1977 with a logjam of 1 loss teams at the top, but some coming off of Bowl losses while others were coming off of Bowl wins.

The AP poll came into existence in 1934 and it's failure to name a true champion after the Bowls is why the Football Writers of America started awarding a post-Bowl championship after the Bowls in 1954.  It was an obvious failing of the AP and UPI polls, who Notre Dame had in their pocket (Notre Dame chose not to play in Bowl games from the late 20's until 1969.  Funny how they changed their tune once the post-Bowl vote came into play, isn't it?).

It's worth noting that there was another respected Championship that waited until after the Bowls to name their Champion - the Helms Foundation - and they, too, selected Arkansas that year. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helms_Athletic_Foundation

The important thing to remember is that ALL the championships were mythical - NONE of them were official, in 1964.  People today tend to do what people have always done - look at yesterday through the prism of today, and impose today's standards on those times.  For the last 40 years, the final AP poll has been taken after the Bowls and no one disputes their Championship selection.  But it WAS different in 1964, and there WERE other respected MYTHICAL champions. People respected the AP during the season, but also knew of it's shortcoming at the end of the year.  So, it was NOT respected as a selector of Champions as it is today.

[Biggus Piggus]

Nice, total smackdown Wiz. That was a foolish thing for him to claim.

[Sweet Feet]

No, No, No . . . you are WRONG.     That's one of the things I keep saying - please listen!  As someone who WAS THERE then and very aware of what was going on AT THE TIME, you are wrong.  In the weeks leading up to the Bowls. there was a lot of talk among fans of all teams about how the Bowls might play out, and what implications that would have on the National Championship.  Oh, we were aware that the antiquated idiots at the AP and UPI were not going to have a poll afterward, but the community of College Football fans had long since embraced the notion that the Bowls DID matter.  We were well also well aware that ANY National Championship - AP, UPI, Football Writers of America, etc. was only MYTHICAL and NOT officially recognized by the NCAA.  If there was one word that every college football fan had drilled into their head during the 50's, 60's right up to the BCS, it was "mythical".  The announcers talked about it all the time, every season.

So, the dialogue before the Bowl was in looking at scenarios.  If Alabama won their Bowl game, they would indeed ratify the AP vote and be the true Champions.  However, if they lost, it would be wide open . . . except if Arkansas won.  In that case, the Hogs - the only undefeated, untied team from a major conference, who came into the Bowls at #2 and had given defending National Champion Texas their only loss, would be the obvious and clear Champion - especially because in that scenario, Alabama's loss would have been inflicted by a team Arkansas had beaten - #3 Texas. 

If both Alabama lost (to Texas) and Arkansas lost in the Cotton (to 1 loss and 6th ranked Nebraska), then those two winning teams, along with one loss Notre Dame and one loss Michigan would battle for the vote, with Texas - off of their win over Alabama in that scenario - favored to move up from number 3 and win a second consecutive Championship.  It would have been very similar to 1977 with a logjam of 1 loss teams at the top, but some coming off of Bowl losses while others were coming off of Bowl wins.

The AP poll came into existence in 1934 and it's failure to name a true champion after the Bowls is why the Football Writers of America started awarding a post-Bowl championship after the Bowls in 1954.  It was an obvious failing of the AP and UPI polls, who Notre Dame had in their pocket (Notre Dame chose not to play in Bowl games from the late 20's until 1969.  Funny how they changed their tune once the post-Bowl vote came into play, isn't it?).

It's worth noting that there was another respected Championship that waited until after the Bowls to name their Champion - the Helms Foundation - and they, too, selected Arkansas that year. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helms_Athletic_Foundation

The important thing to remember is that ALL the championships were mythical - NONE of them were official, in 1964.  People today tend to do what people have always done - look at yesterday through the prism of today, and impose today's standards on those times.  For the last 40 years, the final AP poll has been taken after the Bowls and no one disputes their Championship selection.  But it WAS different in 1964, and there WERE other respected MYTHICAL champions. People respected the AP during the season, but also know of it's shortcoming at the end of the year.  So, it was NOT respected as a selector of Champions as it is today.

Man i understand wiz, but from your point, you are just stating what the fans thought and scenarios that could have lead to other outcomes. They dont determine the champions. The AP polls may have had flaws, hell i agree them choosin a champ after bowl season was stupid. But nonetheless, no matter how you put it, the AP polls was a major poll along with UPI and FWAA, where AP polls were used longer. It doesnt matter who as fans respect it. We didn respect the BCS when it was active. But it still was a major poll and you cant deny it was heralded and recognized. Im almost willing to say the AP trophy carries more weight slightly than the grantland rice trophy, though they signify champions. The NCAA selected their consensus champs based off the AP, UPI, FWAA, and NFF polls. One of these polls eihter selected Alabama, Arkansas, or Notre Dame for the 1964 national champion, which is why you will see the NCAA list them as national champions respectively for that year.  But with 2 of these polls choosing alabama (the most recognized out of the 4 at that), compared to just 1 from Arkansas and Notre Dame, its easy to say alabama was more of the real champion because they had more selectors and  again based off the way they ran things as you know. If we looked into todays realm like you said, arkansas without a doubt is the national champ because they went undefeated.

I think the whole bowl thing in 64 can be a bit skewed too. Like i said, if you were given the national title before bowl season by the two major polls, are you really going to play the same as you did in the season? You arent playing for a title, you already have one, whereas if arkansas wanted atleast a share of the national title, they needed to beat nebraska so they could have a national champion awarded by a poll who picks champs after the bowl games, hince FWAA

[Sweet Feet]

Nice, total smackdown Wiz. That was a foolish thing for him to claim.

Smackdown? Lol aw ok

[cosmodrum]

We will lose by at least 24, probably closer to 40.

[cosmodrum]

Nice, total smackdown Wiz. That was a foolish thing for him to claim.

The absolute truth was a foolish thing to claim? Who cares if fans thought it should go to Arkansas (except us, of course)? Bama won it.

[Sweet Feet]

The absolute truth was a foolish thing to claim? Who cares if fans thought it should go to Arkansas (except us, of course)? Bama won it.

you know thats how it works for hogville and hog fans in general most of the time.
Its that simple. If you have more major polls choosing you for a national title, then you probably were the predominant champion of that year. No matter how you try to rationalize it. Because if the roles were reversed and the hogs were in alabama's shoes that year, they would be using that same reasoning as i am now if a bama fan came up talking about how they were the true national champions.

[cosmodrum]

you know thats how it works for hogville and hog fans in general most of the time.
Its that simple. If you have more major polls choosing you for a national title, then you probably were the predominant champion of that year. No matter how you try to rationalize it. Because if the roles were reversed and the hogs were in alabama's shoes that year, they would be using that same reasoning as i am now if a bama fan came up talking about how they were the true national champions.

100%.

[Jek Tono Porkins]

you know thats how it works for hogville and hog fans in general most of the time.
Its that simple. If you have more major polls choosing you for a national title, then you probably were the predominant champion of that year. No matter how you try to rationalize it. Because if the roles were reversed and the hogs were in alabama's shoes that year, they would be using that same reasoning as i am now if a bama fan came up talking about how they were the true national champions.

Even if we had been selected by the polls, I don't think the majority of us would argue for that national championship as vociferously as we do now. Example, there are some organizations that give us the national title in 1977, but none of us claim it because we know it's BS. I can't say the same for Bama; if they were in that position, they would claim the '77 title in a heartbeat.

If we were number one in the polls at the end of the season (which never would have happened anyway seeing as how they were terribly biased, just look at the 1965 season, we were #1 for one week before getting dropped to #2 because we beat North Texas 55-20, explain that shiz), and then we lost the bowl game, and then another team who had beaten the team we lost to came out undefeated, I think the majority of us would admit that the other team was the "true" national champion and the poll methodology was flawed. Sure, some of us would hang our hats on the poll, but let's get real here.

In fact, the polls changed after the 1964 season because they realized their methodology was so screwed up.

Claiming every national championship you possibly can, even when it flies in the face of logic and reason, is a hobby performed almost exclusively by Bama fans. I'm serious, go look at the 12 national championships that they claim prior to the BCS era. Hell, they claim the 1941 national championship even though they had two losses and ended up #20 in the polls...they claim that title over Minnesota who was #1 the entire year and finished undefeated.

They'll claim the championship from the AP poll one year and then the next claim it even though the AP gave it to someone else. If a blind, deaf, mentally retarded man awarded Bama a national championship in any given year, they would claim it immediately.

[LZH]

The absolute truth was a foolish thing to claim? Who cares if fans thought it should go to Arkansas (except us, of course)? Bama won it.

I'm staying out of it this time around, but good luck with that.  Last time, I made an innocent little comment similar to "the only publications I can recall listing Arkansas as 1964 National Champions were Arkansas publications" and "we won a VERSION of the NC, the AP was top dog in those days and they say Alabama won it".  Yikes.  It was like fire ants with keyboards and I'd just plopped down right on top of the hill.

[PonderinHog]

I'm staying out of it this time around, but good luck with that.  Last time, I made an innocent little comment similar to "the only publications I can recall listing Arkansas as 1964 National Champions were Arkansas publications" and "we won a VERSION of the NC, the AP was top dog in those days and they say Alabama won it".  Yikes.  It was like fire ants with keyboards and I'd just plopped down right on top of the hill.

Serves you right...

[redleg]

No, we will not beat Alabama, and it won't even be close. I'm thinking something like Bama - 42 and the Hogs - 10...so at least we'll finally score some points after being held scoreless for the last 9 quarters versus the Tide.
Where do some of you Hog fans come up with this stuff?! 
I want Arkansas to win just as badly as the next Razorback fan, but come on people!!! Get real!
If the Hogs upset Bama I'll be the guy in the street celebrating the hardest, but I just don't see it happening. And what does the "64 team have to do with this year, other than it's the 50th Anniversary of that undefeated squad?!

[redleg]

As a Bama fan, I fully expect this year's game to be a lot closer.  I don't say that because I think Bama will be worse, but, I think the Hogs will be better.

Nice pic Bama fan. Too bad you guys couldn't beat Texas (a team the Hogs beat IN Austin) in the bowl game that year. Yall should feel lucky that the AP didn't change their national championship practice until after the "64 season, directly caused by having egg on their collective faces after Arkansas was the only undefeated team after the bowl games.
Besides, Arkansas has a 1964 Grantland Rice National Championship trophy which means just as much.
Read it and weep.....well, you probably won't...but you should. 

http://deadspin.com/5975168/the-definitive-list-of-actual-no-bull-college-football-national-champions-or-why-alabama-is-a-liar

[LZH]

Serves you right...

When they told me I needed to be proselytized, I thought that involved a rubber glove and some KY jelly.

What a letdown.

[Sweet Feet]

Even if we had been selected by the polls, I don't think the majority of us would argue for that national championship as vociferously as we do now. Example, there are some organizations that give us the national title in 1977, but none of us claim it because we know it's BS. I can't say the same for Bama; if they were in that position, they would claim the '77 title in a heartbeat.

If we were number one in the polls at the end of the season (which never would have happened anyway seeing as how they were terribly biased, just look at the 1965 season, we were #1 for one week before getting dropped to #2 because we beat North Texas 55-20, explain that shiz), and then we lost the bowl game, and then another team who had beaten the team we lost to came out undefeated, I think the majority of us would admit that the other team was the "true" national champion and the poll methodology was flawed. Sure, some of us would hang our hats on the poll, but let's get real here.

In fact, the polls changed after the 1964 season because they realized their methodology was so screwed up.

Claiming every national championship you possibly can, even when it flies in the face of logic and reason, is a hobby performed almost exclusively by Bama fans. I'm serious, go look at the 12 national championships that they claim prior to the BCS era. Hell, they claim the 1941 national championship even though they had two losses and ended up #20 in the polls...they claim that title over Minnesota who was #1 the entire year and finished undefeated.

They'll claim the championship from the AP poll one year and then the next claim it even though the AP gave it to someone else. If a blind, deaf, mentally retarded man awarded Bama a national championship in any given year, they would claim it immediately.

Theres always going to be petty polls that give different schools championships tho. However, i don't know that much about wheither or not bama fans claim every single title.

Arkansas played north texas, which was a mid major. Michigan State went to #6 purdue and beat them. Thats why they leaped Arkansas. But yes anybody would say arkansas would be the real national champion. I would too. But the problem is that we are looking at it from todays view and speaking on what we think should have been vs whats documented and in the books for factual reference.

I will say the 1941 title claim is a bit pathetic. Minnesota was the real champs and nothing less. Idk how alabama claims some of these titles that make no logical sense with unheard of polla though.

[Biggus Piggus]

Wiz, some people's brains must melt when faced with the notion that the end-of-season wire service ranking did not = mythical national champion when the wire service rankings were taken prior to the bowl games.

[Sweet Feet]

Nice pic Bama fan. Too bad you guys couldn't beat Texas (a team the Hogs beat IN Austin) in the bowl game that year. Yall should feel lucky that the AP didn't change their national championship practice until after the "64 season, directly caused by having egg on their collective faces after Arkansas was the only undefeated team after the bowl games.
Besides, Arkansas has a 1964 Grantland Rice National Championship trophy which means just as much.
Read it and weep.....well, you probably won't...but you should. 

http://deadspin.com/5975168/the-definitive-list-of-actual-no-bull-college-football-national-champions-or-why-alabama-is-a-liar

Again, if you already been awarded with championships from both major polls before bowl season, are you honestly going to play the same way you did in the season? Im not trying to defend bama but lets be logical here. Il take both the AP and UPI polls together before i take the FWAA poll by itself. AP poll was also the top poll in the day, so alabama wins. Thats why people should just be happy arkansas has a share.

[popcornhog]

Popcorn, you are welcome to feel any way you want.  I will ask you this - how old are you?  No, the point of asking isn't to show that someone older (or younger) is inherently smarter or less smart than the other.  In fact, I absolutely do not feel that way.

However, there definitely IS something to comparing the subjective opinions of someone who was living at the time of an event, who witnessed it and was "there" to discuss it with others, both personal contacts and the media at large, in "real time" - to someone else who was not around at the time of said event, and knows everything he/she knows based on whatever reading they may have done, as well as projecting "the way things are now" backward to a time and place in which things were different.

This subject is a perfect example of a situation where age and experience makes a profound difference.

I am 30 and wasn't around in 64 but you're ignoring my point, which is 100% true.

The champion was determined at the end of the regular season back then. It's simple.

Alabama's claim is 100% legit as is ours. Theirs was more mainstream then though.

And for the record, I think it was insane to crown a champ pre-bowl, but that's still how it was done back then.

Also, FYI, I totally respect you and sincerely appreciate what you bring to this board. You are one if the best posters we have, but you're just wrong on this issue.

Btw, I understand the "mythical" nature of the titles. But there were still mainstream titles and lesser recognized titles.

[WizardofhOgZ]

I am 30 and wasn't around in 64 but you're ignoring my point, which is 100% true.

The champion was determined at the end of the regular season back then. It's simple.

Alabama's claim is 100% legit as is ours. Theirs was more mainstream then though.

And for the record, I think it was insane to crown a champ pre-bowl, but that's still how it was done back then.

Also, FYI, I totally respect you and sincerely appreciate what you bring to this board. You are one if the best posters we have, but you're just wrong on this issue.

Btw, I understand the "mythical" nature of the titles. But there were still mainstream titles and lesser recognized titles.

I'm not ignoring your point, but I'm beginning to wonder if you and a couple of other posters are able to read.

When you say:

"The champion was determined at the end of the regular season back then. It's simple.  Alabama's claim is 100% legit as is ours. Theirs was more mainstream then though."

. . . what YOU keep ignoring (or not comprehending) is that "they" did NOTHING back then.  There was NO one National Championship that everyone followed.  Moreover, there was no "THEY"! The NCAA didn't even acknowledge or even mention the subject - ever.  We (fans) did follow the AP and UPI weekly because there was nothing else (well, there was the Dunkel Index, a prehistoric attempt at a computer rating), and it was respected.  But one of the great traditions of college football in that era was precisely that there was NO true, 100%, indisputable National Champion such as comes from either the NCAA Final Four in Basketball, or College World Series in Baseball.  It was part of the culture to debate it.

Just because the AP and USA Today (current day version of the UPI) polls are universally viewed as "the authority" today for ranking (which, by the way, may soon be replaced by the Championship Committee rankings), that DOES NOT mean those polls were the final word, or the "official" National Championships in the early 60's.  They were one of many.  Different people had different preferences for what source they viewed as most authoritative.  May sound screwy, but that IS the way it was.

And, for the record, I have NEVER failed to acknowledge that Alabama did win the vote and sit atop the final AP poll taken in the 1964 season.  It's just that that poll was so flawed by it's failure to be taken WHEN it should have been that it's virtually meaningless.  On a personal note, I've never understood a system wherein the Champion can LOSE it's last game of the season and still be named Champion UNLESS all other teams have a worse record.  That's my personal bias, I'll admit.  But beyond that, why anyone would chose a poll - any poll - that didn't have a vote that included ALL the games, when there were other respected polls that DO, is beyond me.  And if the AP didn't agree with me, it wouldn't have ultimately changed.

It was very, very common for people to debate who was the champion of the prior season for most of the off-season.  In years like 1963, when Texas finished a consensus number one and then beat #2 Navy in the Cotton Bowl, there was no such debate.  But in more years than you'd imagine, the multiple Champions crowned led to great debates all off-season.  That was at once one of the frustrations and one of the charms of college football.

Bottom line is I lived it, I remember it more than clearly, and I know what the truth is.  If you want to stick you nose in a book (virtual or otherwise), and deny the reality of what was, it is you who are missing out.

Then again, there are those who think that the Holocaust never happened, and that our landing on the moon was a hoax . . . so I don't know why I'm surprised about this.  Revisionist historians abound!

SMH . . .

Of course, I won't be around, and you won't remember this then . . . but I'd like to be a fly on the wall 30 years from now when you're trying to tell some 28 year old about something you witnessed as a teenager that made a deep impression on you and you remember as if it was yesterday, only to hear him/her tell you that you don't know what you're talking about - that it didn't happen that way.

And, it will happen.  Just wait and see.

[uams1989]

I'm not ignoring your point, but I'm beginning to wonder if you and a couple of other posters are able to read.

When you say:

"The champion was determined at the end of the regular season back then. It's simple.  Alabama's claim is 100% legit as is ours. Theirs was more mainstream then though."

. . . what YOU keep ignoring (or not comprehending) is that "they" did NOTHING back then.  There was NO one National Championship that everyone followed.  Moreover, there was no "THEY"! The NCAA didn't even acknowledge or even mention the subject - ever.  We (fans) did follow the AP and UPI weekly because there was nothing else (well, there was the Dunkel Index, a prehistoric attempt at a computer rating), and it was respected.  But one of the great traditions of college football in that era was precisely that there was NO true, 100%, indisputable National Champion such as comes from either the NCAA Final Four in Basketball, or College World Series in Baseball.  It was part of the culture to debate it.

Just because the AP and USA Today (current day version of the UPI) polls are universally viewed as "the authority" today for ranking (which, by the way, may soon be replaced by the Championship Committee rankings), that DOES NOT mean those polls were the final word, or the "official" National Championships in the early 60's.  They were one of many.  Different people had different preferences for what source they viewed as most authoritative.  May sound screwy, but that IS the way it was.

And, for the record, I have NEVER failed to acknowledge that Alabama did win the vote and sit atop the final AP poll taken in the 1964 season.  It's just that that poll was so flawed by it's failure to be taken WHEN it should have been that it's virtually meaningless.  On a personal note, I've never understood a system wherein the Champion can LOSE it's last game of the season and still be named Champion UNLESS all other teams have a worse record.  That's my personal bias, I'll admit.  But beyond that, why anyone would chose a poll - any poll - that didn't have a vote that included ALL the games, when there were other respected polls that DO, is beyond me.  And if the AP didn't agree with me, it wouldn't have ultimately changed.

It was very, very common for people to debate who was the champion of the prior season for most of the off-season.  In years like 1963, when Texas finished a consensus number one and then beat #2 Navy in the Cotton Bowl, there was no such debate.  But in more years than you'd imagine, the multiple Champions crowned led to great debates all off-season.  That was at once one of the frustrations and one of the charms of college football.

Bottom line is I lived it, I remember it more than clearly, and I know what the truth is.  If you want to stick you nose in a book (virtual or otherwise), and deny the reality of what was, it is you who are missing out.

Then again, there are those who think that the Holocaust never happened, and that our landing on the moon was a hoax . . . so I don't know why I'm surprised about this.  Revisionist historians abound!

SMH . . .

Of course, I won't be around, and you won't remember this then . . . but I'd like to be a fly on the wall 30 years from now when you're trying to tell some 28 year old about something you witnessed as a teenager that made a deep impression on you and you remember as if it was yesterday, only to hear him/her tell you that you don't know what you're talking about - that it didn't happen that way.

And, it will happen.  Just wait and see.

So, you're saying Arkansas' claim is just as mythical as Alabama's, correct?

I think we all knew that but thanks for the wisdom...

I wasn't born until the first day of 1966, but, I've been a Bama fan since day one. I can tell you that my mother says the doctor was mad at her for going into labor because Bama was destroying Nebraska in the Orange Bowl on New Years Night in 1966.  I didn't have to be there, consciously, to know it happened. I've been around plenty of older Bama fans who remember that Bama was named national champions by the two standards of the day (and the standards since the mid 1930's.)

I agree there were a lot of different services through the years that named their own championships, but, you're trying to write your own version of history to suit your argument by saying the AP and UPI weren't the recognized standards.  Wouldn't that be why EVERY school who has been named AP/UPI champions claims them?

And for the record, I've posted many times that Arkansas should claim it. I have no problem with that. I don't get upset like you that another school claims an awarded championship.

My point in response to your hijacking of this thread was that Bama fans have as legitimate a claim (and more so given the system at the time, but, I'll leave that alone) as any other school.

Isn't it ironic that other fans make fun of Bama for claiming non-AP and non-UPI championships, yet, you make the argument they shouldn't claim these.

It was what it was, and, it is what it is. We'll have this argument down the road, again. I give you credit, Wizard. Even some Hog fans disagree with you but you continue the fight...you'll never change the fact that those two trophies reside in Tuscaloosa or that "1964" is engraved in stone at the Walk of Champions under Coach Bryant's statue.

Thank goodness that we have evolved to a better system.

RTR and Go Hogs!