Best Alabama Teams Never To Win a Championship

[DaphneBamaBoy]

What would have happened? ND would have jumped us....the mid-west/West coast voters were looking to diminish Bama that year. Period.

What about 1977, ND was 5th and beat the Long Horns and jumped to #1, we were 11-1 with our only loss to the Cornhuskers at their cornfield by 7. ND leaped past us, what would happened if we played Texas? ND would have played the Buckeyes who we beat 35-6.

1966 there is a book about that one.

 

[theBIGyowski]

For everyone saying 1966...

Please go here and notice that we won an SEC Championship that season.

 

[DaleC76]

Yes - sorry for the confusion - I meant the best teams that didn't win a national or conference championship.

 

[laughinggravy]

The 1966 team recorded 6 shutouts and allowed only 37 points all year long...and completely dominated Nebraska in the Orange Bowl 34-7. They allowed a whopping 5 TD's all year long. One of the most..if not THE most blatant shaft jobs in college football history. For this reason alone, all Bama fans should wish Notre Dame to never win another football game. I'm serious...

What Bad Pony said!!!!

 

[laughinggravy]

Yep. I've longed for the irish to have Faust-like seasons every single year. I've hated them since 1966, & greatly appreciate them giving me the laughs in recent years of bad football.

What exiled said!!!!

 

[LCN]

What about 1977, ND was 5th and beat the Long Horns and jumped to #1, we were 11-1 with our only loss to the Cornhuskers at their cornfield by 7. ND leaped past us, what would happened if we played Texas? ND would have played the Buckeyes who we beat 35-6.

1966 there is a book about that one.

74 , 75 and 77 were each SO close .

 

[XenScott]

This is an extremely hard question to answer in the post-World War II era.

Championships include National Titles, SEC Titles *and* West Division Titles.

It's jaw-dropping to look at the years we won at least one of these titles ...

1945, 1953, 1961, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1981, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1996, 1999, 2002*, 2008, 2009.

*on the field

For sheer excitement, my answer would be 1985 ...
* Shula-to-Bell at UGA.
* The heart-breaking 54-yard-FG miss vs. UT .... I was there :-/
* Coming back to tie LSU 14-14.
* Van Tiffin's Kick.
* Pounding the stew out of Southern Cal

JMHO

~XS

 

[SimplyTide]

I have never counted SEC winners as championship teams unless they followed that up with a national championship. You guys and gals are free to do so, but that isn't the way it works in my mind. At the end of every season, there is only one championship team. The rest are just teams that tried and came up short.

 

[crimsonaudio]

I have never counted SEC winners as championship teams unless they followed that up with a national championship. You guys and gals are free to do so, but that isn't the way it works in my mind. At the end of every season, there is only one championship team. The rest are just teams that tried and came up short.

Nah, the SEC championship is what we shoot for every year, as that's the ONLY championship run in which we control our own destiny. SEC champions are champions, period.

 

[SimplyTide]

Nah, the SEC championship is what we shoot for every year, as that's the ONLY championship run in which we control our own destiny. SEC champions are champions, period.

Do you consider the winners of other conferences to be "champions"?

 

[crimsonaudio]

Do you consider the winners of other conferences to be "champions"?

Sure.

They aren't 'national champions' of course, but they call them 'conference championships' for a reason.

 

[SimplyTide]

Sure.

They aren't 'national champions' of course, but they call them 'conference championships' for a reason.

Cool - I just think that the use of the word "champions" overstates the accomplishment. That said, I can't think of a better term to use. Conference "winners" doesn't seem adequate.

 

[dayhiker]

Yes - sorry for the confusion - I meant the best teams that didn't win a national or conference championship.

And that's exactly what you said. No need for an apology. It's not your fault that reading comprehension isn't a strength for everyone

 

[BamaJama17]

Let's not forget how we were scrwed in 1977 either!!! Notre Lame jumping us after beating Texas.

 

[bamabryan]

Obviously, number one should be 1966 without question.

Without question.

 

[dayhiker]

Cool - I just think that the use of the word "champions" overstates the accomplishment. That said, I can't think of a better term to use. Conference "winners" doesn't seem adequate.

Does this mean we should change the name of the game from SEC Championship Game or maybe give back the SEC Championship rings?

 

[theBIGyowski]

I have never counted SEC winners as championship teams unless they followed that up with a national championship. You guys and gals are free to do so, but that isn't the way it works in my mind. At the end of every season, there is only one championship team. The rest are just teams that tried and came up short.

Like other's have said...the SEC Championship is the only one we actually have control over (especially before the BCS era) because the National Champion relies on voters...the SEC Championship is won on the field.

 

[SimplyTide]

Does this mean we should change the name of the game from SEC Championship Game or maybe give back the SEC Championship rings?

No, but I don't consider those teams to be championship teams unless they also won the national championship. I am not trying to say that those who feel differently are wrong - I respect your point of view. I just see it differently.

The 1966 team jumps to everyone's mind because, while they were SEC champs, they were hosed out of the real championship - the national championship. But I can see why you want to at least recognize their dominance with a conference championship.

 

[SimplyTide]

Like other's have said...the SEC Championship is the only one we actually have control over (especially before the BCS era) because the National Champion relies on voters...the SEC Championship is won on the field.

That is a very different way of looking at it, and one that I had not considered.

 

[dayhiker]

I am not the one recognizing them. They have a banner hanging at BDS. Have you ever seen athletic department letterhead? It lists all the SEC Championship teams. Go to the SEC site, they will be recognized as winning a championship. The OP didn't ask what was the best team to never win a national championship, he asked what was the best team to never win a championship.

I'm thinking out loud here, but I wonder if these two issues haven't started to blur since the SECC and the MNC have been one and the same for such a long time?

No, but I don't consider those teams to be championship teams unless they also won the national championship. I am not trying to say that those who feel differently are wrong - I respect your point of view. I just see it differently.

The 1966 team jumps to everyone's mind because, while they were SEC champs, they were hosed out of the real championship - the national championship. But I can see why you want to at least recognize their dominance with a conference championship.