Rebuttal =

The truth of Alabama's championships, untainted by derision and falsehoods, are these:

Keep in mind that a shared NC, in times past, was a NC. Also, keep in mind that we can't apply BCS rules of sent times to times past because that is just not how things work.

Also, if Alabama won a UPI trophy one season and another team won an AP trophy the same season, Alabama were still NC's. Of course, the other team was also. Alabama was never so powerful to be able to tell the AP or UPI when or how to award their beautiful trophies. It would have been quite rude of Alabama to simply refuse to accept an AP trophy or a UPI trophy because we didn't agree with whether or not they awarded trophies before or after bowl games. That was their business, not Alabama's.

Pre-WW-II, the Rose Bowl was, in fact, considered a de facto NC game as it was the only post season game with any prominence whatsoever. Any pre-war title claim based on the Rose Bowl is as solid as it gets.

But by the 1940's there were so many bowls popping up that they came to be seen as little more than exhibition games (esp after the Rose began its Pac-10/Big-10 tie in). So, by the 1950's, polls are really all that should count. Remember that the AP was not a respected selector by any stretch of the imagination until they changed their voting rules in 1958. UPI was the only respected poll until that time.

The fact that polls chose to name champions before the bowls simply reflects the opinion of the country. Bowls were not considered particularly meaningful until the late '60's to early '70's - basically when TV became a huge part of the game. That's why the AP didn't permanently switch to post-bowl polls until around '68 and the UPI didn't until '74.

Every argument about out 1973 title being bogus only "proves" that we should have been named champion in '77. Any argument about our 1964 title only "proves" that we were robbed in 1966. If you think 1941 sucks, then explain 1945?

Alabama claims 4 titles from before the AP poll was created in 1936. Prior to the establishment of the AP and UPI/Coaches Polls, there was no "gold standard" in regard to football polls.

Since the inception of the AP and UPI polls, each of Alabama's national titles but one were awarded by either the AP or UPI/Coaches poll. 1941 is completely bogus.

You can argue the merits or procedures used by the AP and UPI polls, but the bottom line is that many other teams claim titles from these polls in their official records (Notre Dame, OU, etc.)

People argue that Alabama claims titles that were awarded before bowl losses. Many people fail to realize two things.

1) Prior to the late 60s/early 70s, bowls were not widely used as evaluating tools for final rankings. They were exhibition games to reward teams and fans for a successful season, but there wasn't a whole lot of value placed in the outcome of the games. It wasn't like today when anyone with a pulse at the end of the season can go play in the Chuck E. Cheese Bowl. Some time ago, bowls were a legitimate reward for the best teams, but most voters placed more value on the body of work during the regular season.

2) Some teams elected to not participate in bowl games. Notre Dame is a prime example. The Irish, as an independent school, declined bowl invitations for almost 40 years. Many of their national titles were won during seasons when they did not participate in a post-season bowl. From the 30's or 40's until the early 70s they did this. Notre Dame claims about 11 national titles now, but had the luxury of not playing in a game they'd have likely lost in the post-season during many of those championship runs.

Tell me how is it fair, on one hand, to say that a team like Alabama, Texas, Oklahoma, etc..., that stepped up and played real competition in a bowl game, should not have won a title because they lost said bowl game. And then, on the other hand, say it's okay for ND to claim umpteen national titles while they played a weak schedule and declined the challenge of a bowl game?

How many of their elite teams, during the 40s-60's, would have had their records tarnished because of a bowl loss, as many claim about some of Alabama's titles?

Finally, Alabama went undefeated and untied in 1945 and 1966. To honor Army during the 1945 season, they were awarded the national title that season. I won't argue the legitimacy of that title because they deserved it and it was a gesture of patriotism and solidarity to do that. But still, Alabama had a very good team and could lay claim to that title. We do not.

In 1966, Alabama had claimed a share of the title in 64 and 65, but the national media wanted to send a message to Southern football teams because many Southern schools had not integrated their athletic programs yet. ND and MSU played to a tie in East Lansing, and ND and Parshegian sat on the ball the last couple of minutes of the game to preserve the tie and the high ranking.

Meanwhile, Alabama went undefeated and outscored opponents by an average of 20+ points and obliterated their opponent in the bowl game. ND and MSU claim a split national title, and Alabama finished third in voting despite starting the season ranked #1. We do not claim this title.