Why doesn't Iowa claim 4 National Championships?

[hawkinn3]

Let me preface this by saying that no NCAA college football team as ever won a NC as the NCAA doesn't have a means of deciding it, they simply acknowledge the acknowledgement of outside entities (AP, etc.). But with that said, is there some reason we don't claim the 4 years we were tops in an established poll? (21,56,58,60)

Granted in 56 and 58 we don't have a great argument as we only had one poll to other undefeated team's many others. But, programs like Pittsburgh claim 9 titles under similar circumstances.

Don't expect anyone will have an answer but as long as its all fictional why not throw up a few more banners?

 

[okeefe4prez]

The SEC doesn't recognize them because we had integrated teams and football was intended to only be played by whites until Bear said it was okay to integrate in the '70's.

 

[thetrza]

We don't recognize them until Ferentz wants to do the "One For The Thumb" hand gesture.

 

[528646]

The SEC doesn't recognize them because we had integrated teams and football was intended to only be played by whites until Bear said it was okay to integrate in the '70's.

^ this poast is how to interwebs, people.

 

[ChosenChildren]

College Football Data Warehouse actually recognizes Iowa winning SIX national championships:

1899, 1921, 1922, 1956, 1958 and 1960.

The 1958 title is actually considered a "consensus" title since many different services elected Iowa number 1. College Football Data Warehouse considers 1958 a "recognized" national championship.

There were numerous services electing us #1 in 21, 22, 56, 58 and 60.

 

[ChosenChildren]

National championships are completely "subjective" since there was no playoff system in place for most of the history of college football.

 

[thejumper5]

I firmly believe that Iowa should claim the '21 and '58 titles. The 1921 season is disputed and any of about six teams can make a strong claim for the title. In 1958, the Football Writers Association of America voted Iowa as their #1 team in their final poll. At the time, the FWAA poll was the only poll to come out after the bowl games were played. LSU claims the '58 title, but Iowa played a significantly more difficult schedule than did LSU.

The '56 title is debatable, but I think Oklahoma deserves that one. The '60 title is also debatable, but the fact that Iowa lost the head-to-head matchup with Minnesota (the team generally recognized as the '60 champion despite the fact that they lost the Rose Bowl) is a pretty compelling argument against the Hawkeyes.

 

[uihawk82]

College Football Data Warehouse actually recognizes Iowa winning SIX national championships:

1899, 1921, 1922, 1956, 1958 and 1960.

The 1958 title is actually considered a "consensus" title since many different services elected Iowa number 1. College Football Data Warehouse considers 1958 a "recognized" national championship.

There were numerous services electing us #1 in 21, 22, 56, 58 and 60.

I like this and it means I saw a few of couple of those '58 and '60 games in person.

The Hawks, winners of at least 4 National Championships

 

[Hawknick]

The 1921 team was clearly the best team in the country. The Big 10 was completely wrong not to allow them to play in the Rose Bowl. California, another team listed as national champions that year played Washington & Jefferson to a scoreless tie. Iowa would have smashed California and would have then been the clear cut national champions having beat 2 other championship contenders in California and Notre Dame.

The 1900 team was also invited to the Rose Bowl to play California. That was planned to have been the inaugural Rose Bowl. That team had a rock solid 7-4 defense and could also have won the Rose Bowl. However the game never happened due to organization problems. If they had won they might have been co-champions with Yale. Also the team should not have trusted the hometown Northwestern chef who gave them food poisoning right before the game leading to a tie. That team also was right up there as the best team in the country.

http://www.brockwayfamily.com/1900 Football/rosy.htm

 

[MelroseHawkins]

The 1921 team was clearly the best team in the country. The Big 10 was completely wrong not to allow them to play in the Rose Bowl. California, another team listed as national champions that year played Washington & Jefferson to a scoreless tie. Iowa would have smashed California and would have then been the clear cut national champions having beat 2 other championship contenders in California and Notre Dame.

The 1900 team was also invited to the Rose Bowl to play California. That was planned to have been the inaugural Rose Bowl. That team had a rock solid 7-4 defense and could also have won the Rose Bowl. However the game never happened due to organization problems. If they had won they might have been co-champions with Yale. Also the team should not have trusted the hometown Northwestern chef who gave them food poisoning right before the game leading to a tie. That team also was right up there as the best team in the country.

http://www.brockwayfamily.com/1900 Football/rosy.htm

How old are you anyway?? Nice info Otto!!

 

[doclee]

We are too darn nice...claim every single one of the championships mentioned above...and, props to O'keefe for a great post!

 

[83Hawk]

Iowa can legitimately claim the 58 national title, for the reason jumper outlined.

 

[Jonrn]

The SEC doesn't recognize them because we had integrated teams and football was intended to only be played by whites until Bear said it was okay to integrate in the '70's.

OK4P...this is one of the all time great posts!

 

[championdrinker]

National championships are completely "subjective" since there was no playoff system in place for most of the history of college football.

To add to this, I don't consider this four team circus to be a legitimate playoff either.

I think you need at least sixteen teams.

I'll be happy when there no longer meaningless exhibition games a month after the regular season ends.

 

[okeefe4prez]

Iowa can legitimately claim the 58 national title, for the reason jumper outlined.

No, we'll never know because the southern teams refused to integrate and wouldn't face off against integrated teams unless they left the black players at home, so we have no idea how Iowa was relative to one of LSU's opponents because LSU was busy playing teams like Hardin-Simmons. If Hitler were a football fan, he would have loved the pre-1970's SEC.

This isn't ancient history, either. There's an old black guy in my building (late 70's) who is from Steubenville, Ohio. He knew Cal Jones' family growing up and every time I am rocking Iowa gear he goes on and on about Cal and Iowa (he's a Buckeye fan) and how he can't believe these kids will play in the SEC - "If those kids seen the stuff I seen they'd never even consider playing down there." He always ends with a superfluous mumbled racist term that describes white people that rhymes with slacker.

 

[Hawknick]

Speaking of the 1899 national champions, and 1900 team that should have been national champions. I want to see Iowa use "guards back play" again that Iowa used a lot of on those teams. One of the guards carried the ball that play. Off course on that team that was Morton Brockway and Ernest Little who would move back to take the hand off and run the ball. Now this would be an awesome short yardage play today that no one would expect since they have not seen it in their lifetime!

Edit: I found a good disruption of this play here:

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1900/11/3/the-pennsylvania-team-ppennsylvania-began-this/

"The guards back play consists of taking both guards out of the line and placing them, one behind the other, on either side of centre and about two yards back. The tackles go in next to centre and the ends into the tackle positions. The backs, in accordance with the rules, play five yards back of the rush line. Plays can then be run anywhere, and by any player except centre."

Alden Knipe played and was an assistant coach at Penn under George Washington Woodruff, learned this play and brought it to Iowa.

 

[Saginawbay]

Would agree, the 58 is for certain, and we should make a bigger deal of it!!

 

[FromFry2Ferentz]

1958 is recognized is it not? On the NCAA website it lists recognized NC's year by year and in 1958 it lists both LSU and Iowa.

 

[SteveGarvey]

The 1921 team was clearly the best team in the country. The Big 10 was completely wrong not to allow them to play in the Rose Bowl. California, another team listed as national champions that year played Washington & Jefferson to a scoreless tie. Iowa would have smashed California and would have then been the clear cut national champions having beat 2 other championship contenders in California and Notre Dame.

The 1900 team was also invited to the Rose Bowl to play California. That was planned to have been the inaugural Rose Bowl. That team had a rock solid 7-4 defense and could also have won the Rose Bowl. However the game never happened due to organization problems. If they had won they might have been co-champions with Yale. Also the team should not have trusted the hometown Northwestern chef who gave them food poisoning right before the game leading to a tie. That team also was right up there as the best team in the country.

http://www.brockwayfamily.com/1900 Football/rosy.htm

We got hosed in '21. The suits messed us over then just like they do nowadays.

 

[Hawknick]

The suits in the 1920s messed a lot of things up for Iowa athletics. This was the first of many administrative screw ups of the decade, and these hit the football program the hardest.