Has WVU ever been number 1 in either BB or FB
- Thread starter buckshot
- Start date
Correct, I believe FB has only been as high as #2; 2007 the last time for like a week.
I believe we were also #1 in football in the coaches poll leading up to the 2007 Pitt game. ( but not BCS or AP)
Beat OU and we probably jump into the Top 5.
I don't see number 1 coming unless we keep knocking off B12 teams at home AND on the road.
I don't see number 1 coming unless we keep knocking off B12 teams at home AND on the road.
Yeah, I think we would need 2 more weeks of wins and a little help to be #1. If we are 20-1 following the Florida game, maybe.
I'm not asking this as a smartass remark but if WVU beats Oklahoma who would have a better resume right now than WVU? Crazy thing is if WVU beat Virginia, Kansas and Oklahoma they would be #1.
The only teams ahead of WVU that havent lost this week are Oklahoma, UNC, Villanova, Xavier and SMU... I think. We beat Oklahoma, I think we jump all but UNC for sure.
Provided we beat OU, I believe we will get enough votes to make the leap to #1. Rankings may mean little in the grand scheme But, I sure would like to see WVU at the top.
If we win, we deserve it. As a Motown born and raised guy, I would love it!
It still irritates me that WVU doesn't claim 1942 as a nat'l championship year when they won the NIT. Weren't there polls back then for BB? It was the first year the NCAA had their tourney but how much credibility could they have over a well established NIT tourney back then?
Plus, just because a school doesn't, or didn't win an NCAA championship, doesn't mean they're not a nat'l champ.
The NIT tournament actually started just a year earlier than the NCAA tournament (1938 v. 1939), Pap, so it's not really accurate to call it "well established."
The AP poll did not start until the 1948-9 season and the coaches' poll after that, so they're not useful in this case.
None of the retroactive championship selectors, such as the one in ESPN's college basketball encyclopedia, have ever named our 1942 squad as champions to the best of my knowledge. Looking at our 19-4 mark compared to NCAA champ Stanford's 28-4 record, I can't say I blame them.
There's nothing stopping the school from claiming it, as you say, but with no empirical support it would ring more hollow than Pitt's leather-helmet football titles that everyone here is so fond of deriding.
No, I think we're better off standing proudly on the 1959 runner-up status as our basketball apex for the time being. For perhaps the first time in ages, it's not so ridiculous to suggest WVU hoops has at least a viable chance of surpassing that previous height in the near future.
I'll be darned. So you had to come in and bring facts. Seriously, I never knew the NIT was that young. For some reason when people would talk of those times they always made it out to be THE established tourney compared to the young NCAA. That's disappointing to hear.
But the fact is, the NCAA should come out and acknowledge that both could share the title at least. There's no reason for WVU not to claim it because there's nothing that says Stanford is it either.
First, they would have to look at strength of schedule like has been done for the 1922 FB team. I don't think their schedule was as tough as the others with similar records back then.
Anyway, if we could find just one poll that has WVU #1 then the school should jump on it. That's what pitt lays claim to. They're not just claiming those championships out of nothing. They do have polls to back it up I believe.
Thanks for the input but here's another tidbit that is a fact. From the early 40s to the early 60s WVU was actually a blue blood at one time. They were neck and neck with Kentucky for the most wins in that era. It makes you wonder how WVU didn't manage to pull off at least one nat'l title. It's a shame for such a great program that maintained that height for so long.
1922 football team should also claim a title. They had as good or better year than the NCAA retroactive selection for that year.
I remember when the NIT was still the top tournament even somewhat into the early 1960's.
UCLA teams really gave the NCAA tourney the bump.
I remember when the NIT was still the top tournament even somewhat into the early 1960's.
UCLA teams really gave the NCAA tourney the bump.
