He and Darrell Royal both had our number, but they were both great coaches. His record at ND and winning percentage are one of the best ever.
Ara Parseghian Dead At 94
- Thread starter selmaborntidefan
- Start date
I didn't read thru the whole thread so someone else may have pointed this out:
Who was the only HC to beat Notre Dame and lose his job in the same season? Ken Cooper. Now this is all according to my memory and I could be wrong. It was the only HC I knew of up 'till 1977.
As much as the losses to ND really hurt -- especially 1973 -- I can now see that Ara was a class act. He only stood up for his team and what he wanted for them -- much as Coach Bryant did for UA. We need to get beyond the idea that all football foes are classless rogues. He was a good guy and ND is a class place...I hope to go there to a game before I die! (Not any time soon, Lord!)
Notre Dame is a gorgeous campus, get on up there!
Ara seemed like a good person, in retro, and went out on his own terms. As much as 1966 stings, I blame the media and general national perception as much as anything for 1966. UA Football paid the price for the segregation issue and racial strife - no WAY was the snooty national media folks gonna put up with UA winning 3 in a row, if there was ANY other option.
I'm fortunate to have attended two games at Notre Dame. The pre-game experience is unique, and the fans in the stands are generally well-mannered, knowledgeable, and passionate. The Grotto post-game, after dark, hundreds of candles aglow in silence, is inspiring. I can't recommend the trip highly enough, especially if you have Domer friends to host you...
Not to be a jerk but you have several things wrong here.....
Alabama beat Ole Miss, 34-13, and #1 USC, 21-20, in Los Angeles, and killed Miami, 36-0
Notre Dame lost to Ole Miss in Jackson, MS, 20-13, blasted USC in South Bend, 49-19, and mauled Miami, 48-10
AP Poll for 11/28/77
1) Texas - unbeaten
2) Oklahoma - only loss to Texas
3) Alabama - only loss to Nebraska
4) Michigan - a 16-0 stunning loss to Minnesota
5) Notre Dame - loss to Ole Miss
6) Arkansas - only loss to Texas
7) Kentucky - only loss to Baylor
8) Penn St - only loss to Kentucky
Note that Kentucky was ineligible for the SEC title because they were on probation.
The 1977 argument is actually a tad more complicated than that. Notre Dame blasted Ga Tech, 69-14.....and Tech routed three different teams that Alabama beat:
Tennessee (Tech by 16, Alabama by 14)
Georgia (Tech by 9, Alabama by 8)
Auburn (Tech by 17, Alabama by 27)
Notre Dame beat 7 winning teams to our 4 and four top 20 teams to our two. They also beat two top ten opponents to our none (I'm referring to the end off the season rankings).
Oklahoma was justifiably ahead of us, too - after all, they had smoked Nebraska, 38-7, the same team that beat us, 31-24. OU lost to Arky in a rout in the Orange Bowl, but it's hard to say we should have been number two going into the bowl games.
I'm not arguing in favor of Notre Dame for the 1977 title, I'm simply objectively evaluating the data. And unfortunately, there's no doubt in my mind that our narrow losses to the Irish in 1973-75-76 had greased the public vote in Notre Dame's favor. It certainly is fair to ask whether we should have been ranked ahead of Notre Dame going into the bowls - and I think that's the heartburn so many Tide fans have over it. If we had been ranked fifth and Notre Dame had been ranked 2nd or 3rd then while it would have aroused a lot of anger, I think it would have been easier for our fans to accept. Had there been a BCS, it is VERY PROBABLE that Notre Dame would have played Texas in the BCS title game.
Here's a listing of the toughest SOS via winning percentage per "The USA Today College Football Encyclopedia" for 1977:
1) Penn St
2) Miss St
3) Pitt
4) Notre Dame
5) Miami
6) USC
7) Oregon
8) Nebraska
9) K State
10) Auburn
In fact, Alabama's schedule in 1977 would have been the second easiest schedule of any national champion in the post-segregation era with the exception of BYU.
Now having said all of that - Sip is unquestionably right on his last point. If one went by the number that we COULD legitimately claim then it would be higher anyway.
RTR
Actually, they had THREE common opponents.
Alabama beat Ole Miss, 34-13, and #1 USC, 21-20, in Los Angeles, and killed Miami, 36-0
Notre Dame lost to Ole Miss in Jackson, MS, 20-13, blasted USC in South Bend, 49-19, and mauled Miami, 48-10
True, the games were in back to back weeks.
Actually, Alabama was number three.
AP Poll for 11/28/77
1) Texas - unbeaten
2) Oklahoma - only loss to Texas
3) Alabama - only loss to Nebraska
4) Michigan - a 16-0 stunning loss to Minnesota
5) Notre Dame - loss to Ole Miss
6) Arkansas - only loss to Texas
7) Kentucky - only loss to Baylor
8) Penn St - only loss to Kentucky
Note that Kentucky was ineligible for the SEC title because they were on probation.
Correct
Technically, they moved up FOUR places, and they routed Texas in the Cotton Bowl.
The 1977 argument is actually a tad more complicated than that. Notre Dame blasted Ga Tech, 69-14.....and Tech routed three different teams that Alabama beat:
Tennessee (Tech by 16, Alabama by 14)
Georgia (Tech by 9, Alabama by 8)
Auburn (Tech by 17, Alabama by 27)
Notre Dame beat 7 winning teams to our 4 and four top 20 teams to our two. They also beat two top ten opponents to our none (I'm referring to the end off the season rankings).
Oklahoma was justifiably ahead of us, too - after all, they had smoked Nebraska, 38-7, the same team that beat us, 31-24. OU lost to Arky in a rout in the Orange Bowl, but it's hard to say we should have been number two going into the bowl games.
I'm not arguing in favor of Notre Dame for the 1977 title, I'm simply objectively evaluating the data. And unfortunately, there's no doubt in my mind that our narrow losses to the Irish in 1973-75-76 had greased the public vote in Notre Dame's favor. It certainly is fair to ask whether we should have been ranked ahead of Notre Dame going into the bowls - and I think that's the heartburn so many Tide fans have over it. If we had been ranked fifth and Notre Dame had been ranked 2nd or 3rd then while it would have aroused a lot of anger, I think it would have been easier for our fans to accept. Had there been a BCS, it is VERY PROBABLE that Notre Dame would have played Texas in the BCS title game.
Here's a listing of the toughest SOS via winning percentage per "The USA Today College Football Encyclopedia" for 1977:
1) Penn St
2) Miss St
3) Pitt
4) Notre Dame
5) Miami
6) USC
7) Oregon
8) Nebraska
9) K State
10) Auburn
In fact, Alabama's schedule in 1977 would have been the second easiest schedule of any national champion in the post-segregation era with the exception of BYU.
Now having said all of that - Sip is unquestionably right on his last point. If one went by the number that we COULD legitimately claim then it would be higher anyway.
RTR
My point-We beat Ole Miss, Ole Miss beat them, and we both had the same record after the season was over.
We were rated higher going into the bowl games and we beat Ohio State 35 - 6.
They beat number one Texas. Who would you have voted for number one?
Had Oklahoma taken care of business in the orange bowl that night, Switzer would have had his 3 NC in 4 yrs. Instead Saban and Bama accomplish it 40 yrs later 2009-2012.
Last edited:
Agreed, and yet the voters knew all of that (except for parts about 1984 BYU, and final 1977 rankings, of course) before the bowls, and still ranked us two spots higher than Notre Dame. Why? Most likely because until January 2, 1978, no one thought it mattered. The voters didn't expected undefeated Texas to lose the Cotton Bowl, much less by four touchdowns, to a team four spots below them in the polls (or else they'd have ranked them differently). They also didn't expect OU to lose the Orange Bowl by 25, also to a team ranked four spots below them; but both of those results happened.
How to explain the leapfrog? Two options I can see: (1) Anti-Alabama (and/or pro Notre Dame) bias; (2) Once voting became a two player game - Alabama or Notre Dame - voting patterns changed, as they do in any sequential game when the players are reduced from many to fewer.
The simpler argument is the latter, and there are many examples elsewhere to see the principle in action, most recently from French politics (for those unfortunate few still reading). In the first round of 2017's French presidential election, Emmanuel Macron won 24% of the vote, just 1 point more than Marine Le Pen. When the two proceeded to the second round run off, Macron won by 66% to 34%. So, is that anti-Le Pen bias? To a degree perhaps, but the fact is that when faced with a simple choice, most non Le Pen voters from the first round chose Macron in the second because they thought he'd be the better president.
I've heard Alabama fans claim that Notre Dame won the 1977 title because some Chicago AP voters left Alabama off the ballot entirely, accounting for final vote difference. If true, which I doubt, how then to explain the same result in the coaches poll?
As much as I might dislike or disagree with the 1977 final polls, I do not believe they were primarily driven by bias. Rather, they were the result of voters comparing the teams directly to each other for the first time, and finding one, by a slim margin, better than the other.
This is spot on. It was the same in 1983, the only time since I've been watching that #5 pole vaulted a team ahead of it to #1.....because literally nobody thought it was possible Nebraska could lose that game.
There's another thing: "Notre Dame beat #1 Texas IN Texas, therefore they're number one."
My problem with that is that all things aren't created equal. Numbers 1-2-3 were all obligated to specific bowl games and since #2 was OU, we could argue that Texas had already settled that issue. But we were obligated contractually to the Sugar and Notre Dame had no bowl tie-in. And then #4 Arkansas had ALSO already lost to Texas, so why would the Cotton Bowl want - in essence - an SWC rematch when Notre Dame was out there with all those TV viewers?
It should be noted that in the final regular season poll, both Alabama and Notre Dame EACH had ONE 1st place AP vote despite both having a loss. Oklahoma actually had five.....how in the hell do you pick OU for #1 over Texas when the Longhorns had won, 13-6?
here's where objectivity suffers - how can ANY Alabama fan with a straight face say that the transitive property (Ole Miss) should be the determining factor in 1977 but we should somehow overlook head-to-head in 1978? We WON in 1978 for the same reason we LOST in 1977 - we beat the #1 team in the country in the final game. In fact, that's pretty much how AP determined all their titles with one conspicuous exception: in 1989, Notre Dame beat #1 Colorado head-to-head but Miami was voted number one, using the logic that Miami had beaten N Dame. That's defensible, but it makes you wonder why that logic didn't apply in 1978.
And dare I point out USC played an extra game than we did in 1978?
The thing is that PART of it - I'm convinced - had to do with our 0-3 record against the Irish in the previous five years. I dare say that had Alabama thumped Notre Dame (or even won all three of the games), we probably would have gotten the benefit of the doubt. It shouldn't be that way, but it is. That's the same reason we played LSU rather than Okie St in 2011 - we carried the perception that we were a legit threat every year/every game and they weren't. We get the benefit of the doubt every time now because of the dynasty - we had it go against us in 1977.
You win some and you lose some. I think we've won our share, and while 1977 does bother me a bit, it's not as bad as that 1973 game as I mentioned. I wasn't even alive, and yet that's a game that upsets even me. I would imagine it's probably even worse than the loss to Clemson, for those who witnessed both. At least we are in the midst of a great run right now. Back in 1973, Coach Bryant was rebuilding after the slump of the late 1960s. We were close in 1971 and 1972, and then did win the UPI after the close of the regular season in 1973. But you know that there wasn't a sense of fulfillment yet, with the AP still hanging out there, and with undefeated Notre Dame coming up in the Sugar Bowl. And the game turned out to be every bit as great as it was predicted to be, and we came up a point short.
To me nothing compares with the 1966 "Missing Ring" team not winning the national title.
We were two time defending champions, start the season ranked number one, shut out our last five regular season opponents, give up just 37 points all regular season, beat Nebraska 34-7 in the Sugar Bowl and end up third behind 9-0-1 Notre Dame and Michigan State. Bama that year would have destroyed either of those teams.
Not disagreeing with your conclusion, but the Nebraska score is irrelevant to your argument, as BOTH polls that year crowned a champion after the regular season...
Well that even makes it more of an injustice. We beat Nebraska in a bowl game. Notre Dame didn't even play in a bowl game.
Let's just say it this way. I know we benefited in 73 from the Coaches Poll being decided before the Sugar Bowl thus allowing us to split the national title.
But in 1966 we were 11-0 and Notre Dame was 9-0-1 and they were voted champs after intentionally running the clock out to preserve a tie against Michigan State. If they did the same thing today they'd drop at least ten places in the polls.
The rules were the rules and I'm not arguing your point, but Bama 1966 was the best Bama team for it's era that I've ever seen. That team was beyond ridiculously good.
I'll always believe 1966 was politics, (obviously most all years were in the poll era and even now it is to some extent, but 1966 was politics, and only politics).
Football is just a game, but he coached it the way it was supposed to be done!
He was an Honorable and just MAN, which is what we all should strive to be!
RIP Coach Parseghian, say hello to 'BEAR' for us mere mortals...!
He was an Honorable and just MAN, which is what we all should strive to be!
RIP Coach Parseghian, say hello to 'BEAR' for us mere mortals...!
Latest threads
-
SEC West Showdown Sends Alabama to Oxford to Meet with Ole Miss- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Davis II Named to Stopper of the Year Midseason Watch List
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Eleven-Run Third Powers Alabama to 14-5 Win over Samford
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Maybe aTm's Pockets Aren't So Bottomless After All -- Layoffs In The Athletic Department
- Started by 4Q Basket Case
- Replies: 6
-
Time to un-vacate 2005-2007 on field victories and un-forfeit the 1993 season?
- Started by CmdrThor
- Replies: 24
-