Crowning one legitimate champion throughout the history of college football is one hell of an endeavor. While you can find cases of disputed championships in the early days of most professional and amateur sports leagues, the vast majority of these groups wound up fixing these problems really early on via some type of playoff. Given that the highest level of college football didn't even bother making a half-assed attempt at this before the introduction of the BCS in 1998, it’s understandable that there is well over a century of disputed claims.

From the first year of organized college football (which again, is debatable) to 1935, there was no national champion crowned. Schools that claim titles during those years are usually doing so because an organization like the National Championship Foundation awarded it to them retroactively. This practice is pretty questionable. For instance, declaring the 1876 Yale Bulldogs national champions puts them, rhetorically, on the same level as teams from the 21st century that played 13 or 14 games. The 1876 Yale squad played three. Also, literally no one who voted for teams like the 1876 Yale Bulldogs saw them play a single game. Relying purely on records to put together history books is one thing, but definitively saying that teams like that were better than every other school that fielded a football team in 1876 seems both like a stretch and pointless. The list could go on and on. Essentially, this era of college football will always be one of debate.

From 1936 to 1997, the AP Poll was considered the be-all, know-all determiner, but there are more than a few schools that make their claims based on other sources. Occasionally, you can look at these alternative sources as actually having a solid argument – in 1946, 9-0-1 Army finished second in the AP Poll behind Notre Dame, a team they played to a scoreless tie earlier that season in Yankee Stadium. Given the circumstances of the season, it’s pretty reasonable to say that the Helms Athletic Foundation, the Houlgate System, and the other organizations that crowned Army as the champions have a point. But in most cases, the AP Poll reigns supreme.

The BCS and impending College Football Playoff make things much easier from 1998 on, but there are well over 100 years when there was nothing coming even close to a playoff. This leads to the bizarre case of many major schools having two different lists of national championships: the number that they claim vs. the number that they could potentially claim, based on any potential source awarding it to them. Oklahoma is one of the most significant examples. The Sooners claim seven national titles – six from first place finishes during AP era, one in a year when they won the BCS National Championship game. When you include the titles that the school doesn’t claim, that number jumps to a staggering seventeen.

LSU has a similar situation. The Tigers claim three national championships – 1958, 2003, and 2007. Various sources have awarded the team a total of five other national championships. While LSU acknowledges four of these awards in one section of their media guide, it’s pretty clear that they don’t take that to mean that they actually won titles in those years. There are no national championship banners or plaques outside Tiger Stadium for those seasons; it’s a low-key tip of the hat to the organizations that gave them those distinctions.

As we’ve just discussed, however, there are occasionally situations where teams that didn't in win the established method have a case. Take 1940, for example. Is it that much of a stretch to say that Stanford, who went 10-0, might deserve the national championship over AP champion Minnesota, who went 8-0? With these types of vague scenarios in mind, let’s take a look at all eight of LSU’s potential titles, and see how they stack up.

2007: 12-2 (6-2 SEC)

Crowned by: American Football Coaches Association, Associated Press, Football Writers Association of America, literally everyone who does this.

Other Champions: None

Case For: Won the BCS Title game, finished first in the AP poll, won the SEC Championship Game, made Tim Tebow cry.

Case Against: Two loss teams don’t usually do this! Kansas finished with only one loss! I just really like arguing, okay?!

'Nuff said.

Major Award Winners: Glenn Dorsey – Nagurski Award, Lombardi Award, Outland Trophy, Lott Award, SEC Defensive Player of the Year; 3 First Team All-Americans, 7 First Team All-SEC Players, 4 Second Team All-SEC Players.

More than any other team in LSU history, the 2007 squad’s case for the crown is air-tight. No one else was even awarded a title that season. The two-loss argument is the only factor that could even possibly be brought up against this team. This argument completely ignores the fact that every other BCS team had at least two losses except…Kansas, who lost their biggest game of the season by two scores to Missouri. The Jayhawks' only other game versus a ranked opponent that season was a 30-24 win over a Kansas State team (#24 at the time) that would finish 5-7.

Legitimacy: 10/10. Irony for everyone.

1958: 11-0 (6-0 SEC)

Crowned by: Associated Press, Coaches Poll

Other Champions: Iowa (Football Writers Association of America)

Case For: Undefeated, won the Sugar Bowl, won the SEC.

Case Against: Played fewer ranked teams (3, won all) than Iowa (6, went 4-1-1).

Billy Cannon pictured here being pretty good at football I guess.

Major Award Winners: Billy Cannon, Halfback: Chic Harley Award, Sporting News Player of the Year. Paul Dietzel, Coach: AFCA Coach of the Year. 2 First Team All-Americans, 4 First Team All-SEC Players, 2 Second Team All-SEC Players.

Sixteen associations voted for a national champion in 1958. Fifteen of them voted for LSU. One voted for Iowa. Do with this information as you will. Yes, Iowa played a tougher schedule. But they only won nine of their eleven games.

Legitimacy: 10/10. Being the only undefeated team at the end of bowl season will do that.

2003: 13-1 (7-1 SEC)

Crowned by: American Football Coaches Association, Football Writers Association of America

Other Champions: USC (Associated Press), Oklahoma (Berryman, lol)

Case For: Won the Sugar Bowl (2003’s designated #1 vs #2 matchup), won the SEC Championship Game, higher strength of schedule than both USC and Oklahoma

Case Against: Finished second in the AP Poll, who awarded their title to USC. Only loss came in regulation by multiple scores, while USC’s one loss came in triple overtime.

NOT PICTURED: The University of Southern California.

Major Award Winners: Chad Lavalais - SEC Defensive Player of the Year, Sporting News Defensive Player of the Year; Nick Saban – National and SEC Coach of the Year; 4 First Team All-Americans, 5 First Team All-SEC Players, 6 Second Team All-SEC Players.

From the perspective of SEC fans (who are correct), there isn’t a lot of doubt that LSU were the champions of the 2003 season. The devil’s advocate position isn’t that insane, though. Both USC and LSU lost one game. In both cases, their opponent was a team from a major conference that would go on to win eight games. Where USC has the edge, however, is that their loss to Cal came on the road in triple overtime, while LSU’s loss to Florida wasn’t nearly as close; the Tigers lost at home by two scores. The edge in strength of schedule, however, lies with LSU. The Tigers beat a top 5 Georgia team twice, finished with a win over the #3/#1 ranked Sooners, and unlike the Trojans, played in a conference championship game. It’s unfortunate that the computers saw an Oklahoma squad that had just gotten blown out in the Big XII Championship Game as being more deserving than either. Anyone with half a brain could tell that LSU and USC were the two best teams in the country.

Legitimacy: 10/10. The questions about the 2003 season belong to the system, not to LSU.

1908: 10-0 (3-0 in conference play)

Crowned by: National Championship Foundation

Other Champions: Penn (Helms Athletic Foundation), Harvard (Billingsley Report)

Case For: Undefeated, untied, outscored opponents 442-11

Case Against: It was 1908 and national champions weren’t being crowned yet. Oh, and this happened so long ago that the Chicago Cubs were the reigning World Series champions.

Google Images tells me that this is a picture of Doc Fenton, and I am compelled to believe this is true.

Major Award Winners: N/A, but Doc Fenton would go on to be inducted into the College Football Hall of Fame.

Now we get to the first unclaimed title. We’re going to have to suspend disbelief for a second here: let’s pretend that ANY team has a legitimate claim to a title before the Associated Press started voting in 1936. Let’s pretend that some guy looking over old records and deciding that the 1881 Yale Bulldogs who went 5-0-1 were probably the best team that year is a good way to crown a champion. How do the 1908 Tigers stack up?

Short answer: Eh. They beat everyone they played, sure. They allowed one touchdown all season. But one of the teams they played was a group of powerlifters called the Young Men’s Gymnastic Club. Yes, they demolished Baylor 89-0 in Baton Rouge, but that Baylor team went 3-5 in 1908 and had just played at Tulane three days prior. Their signature win was a 10-2 victory at Auburn, who would finished 6-1 and didn’t allow a point in any of their other games. You can’t help but be blown away that they only gave up 11 points in 10 games, but Harvard only gave up 8 against (allegedly) much tougher competition. Penn gave up 28 points in 12 games, but also played (allegedly) a much harder schedule than the Tigers, highlighted by a 29-0 beatdown of Fielding Yost’s Michigan Wolverines. The 1908 Tigers were clearly a fantastic team, but whether or not they would have stacked up to the Ivy League’s elite will always be a point of contention.

Legitimacy: 6/10. Clearly the best team in the south. If you’re into retroactive titles, this is your year. One interesting point: the 1907 Tigers played an exhibition game against Havana University to end their season, winning 56-0. If that game had been played in 1908 instead, maybe we’d be looking at that season differently. Or maybe we’d just consider it another blowout against garbage competition. Who knows?

1936: 9-1-1 (6-0 SEC)

Crowned by: Williamson System, Sagarin Ratings, Soren Sorensen

Other Champions: Minnesota (Associated Press), Pittsburgh (Boand System, various others)

Case For: Won the SEC, undefeated prior to bowl season

Case Against: Finished 2nd in AP poll to Minnesota, lost Sugar Bowl.

Gus Tinsley, who will be putting on his real helmet any minute n…wait, seriously?

Major Award Winners: Bill May – Jacobs Award; 2 First Team All-Americans, 2 First Team All-SEC Players, 2 Second Team All-SEC Players.

Of the two Williamson titles LSU was awarded in the 1930s, the ’36 title is pretty obviously more legitimate. Unlike the year prior, they were at least within striking distance of being #1 before bowl season. In the first AP poll ever, Minnesota finished with 332 points and 25 first place votes, while LSU finished with 309 points and 9 first place votes. A shot at making their case for being better than the Gophers fell through in the Sugar Bowl, as the Tigers lost 21-14 to Santa Clara. But even if they had won, Minnesota was prohibited from participating in a bowl due to Big Ten rules, so there wouldn’t have been a comparison point anyway. In my opinion, only being able to play a 2-6-1 Texas team to a tie is a bigger damper on the 1936 squad’s legacy than their Sugar Bowl loss.

Legitimacy: 3/10. Aside from not winning the AP poll, losing your bowl game is never good for a title claim.

1935: 9-2 (5-0 SEC)

Crowned by: Williamson

Other Champions: Minnesota (United Press), SMU (Dickinson System), Princeton (Dunkel Index)

Case For: Won the SEC, finished the regular season with one loss.

Case Against: AP Poll didn’t exist yet, only finished first in one poll, lost the Sugar Bowl.

1935 football coach Bernie Moore also coached the basketball team, while you’re too busy to call your Dad for ten minutes. No, I understand.

Major Award Winners: 2 First Team All-Americans, 3 First Team All-SEC Players, 2 Second Team All-SEC Players.

Aside from the obvious factor that they lost more games than Minnesota, SMU, Stanford, Princeton, UCLA, Cal, Ohio State, North Carolina and TCU, the Tigers’ 1935 resume isn’t all that impressive. They beat a 7-3 Vanderbilt team on the road and an 8-2 Auburn at home, both by one score. They sneaked past a 5-5 Arkansas team by six points. Texas seems like it could be a marquee win, until you realize that the Longhorns finished 4-6 that year. They finished up their season with a 3-2 loss to TCU in New Orleans. The Rice team that beat them to open the season finished with three losses. None of this is to say that the 1935 Tigers weren’t a good team, but nothing about them seems to suggest they have a real claim for a national championship. The biggest argument you can make in their favor is that they had only lost one game when the final polls were voted on, which at the time were inexplicably before the bowl games were played.

Legitimacy: 2/10. Pretty big stretch here.

2011: 13-1 (8-0 SEC)

Crowned by: Anderson & Hester Rankings, Congrove Computer Rankings

Other Champions: I don't want to talk about it.

Case For: Won the SEC Championship, defeated a whole buncha good teams in the regular season, participated in the BCS National Championship game.

Case Against: Didn’t win the BCS National Championship game.

Major Award Winners: Tyrann Mathieu – Bednarik Award, SEC Defensive Player of the Year (AP); Morris Claiborne – Thorpe Award, SEC Defensive Player of the Year (coaches); Les Miles – National and SEC Coach of the Year. 5 First Team All-Americans, 7 First Team All-SEC Players, 9 Second Team All-SEC Players.

The 2011 Tigers celebrate their SEC championship before bowl season was cancelled by a strike or meteors or whatever.

Whoever added the 2011 title to the LSU Football Wikipedia page was nice enough to cite their sources. If you follow the link that they used as a reference for this title, this is what you get.

Yeah, exactly. The most legitimate argument you can make is that the 2011 Tigers finished first in the postseason Anderson & Hester rankings, which is one of the computers that the BCS used. That, however, is a stupid argument. Twelve great regular season wins and a conference title do not a national championship make.

Legitimacy: 0/10. Please don’t argue in favor of this being a real title. Celebrate the 2011 squad for their actual accomplishments, of which there are no shortage.

1962: 9-1-1 (5-1-0 SEC)

Crowned by: Berryman, lol

Other Champions: USC (Associated Press, Coaches Poll), Ole Miss (Billingsley Report, Sagarin Ratings)

Case For: Statistical analysis shows that based on strength of schedule and typical margin of victory, they were good at playing football games.

Case Against: Finished third in their conference behind Ole Miss and Alabama, finished seventh in the AP Poll, no nope no.

Jerry Stovall, seen here definitely not winning a national championship.

Major Award Winners: 2 First Team All-Americans, 2 First Team All-SEC Players, 2 Second Team All-SEC Players.

Here is some background on the Berryman system, which was the only source to award LSU the national championship this year.

-It is run by a guy named Clyde P. Berryman. If you type "Clyde P. Berryman" into google, the first three results you’ll get are all book reviews on Amazon.

-It is an analytical approach that takes strength of schedule and margin of victory/defeat into heavy consideration.

-Unlike Hester & Anderson, it was not used in the BCS formula, giving it no real ties to organized college football.

-It was the only source to award 12-2 Oklahoma a national championship in 2003.

Berryman’s system is an interesting way to look at college football. But that’s all it is. I can’t find any evidence that suggests Clyde P. Berryman is anything more than a passionate fan of the sport. If arguing in favor of Berryman national titles involves the claim that one guy with a calculator and some spreadsheets is just as legitimate as the AP Poll or the BCS title game, then I reject that argument entirely.

As for the 1962 squad themselves, they did not receive a single first place vote in the AP Poll. They tied a Rice team that would finish 2-6-2. Berryman’s case rests largely on the Tigers’ spectacular defensive performance. They allowed 34 points over 11 games, and shut out six teams – Texas A&M, Kentucky, Florida, TCU, Mississippi State, and fourth ranked Texas. Unfortunately, they still only won 9 of the 11 games they played, and when there are multiple undefeated teams from major conferences, it’s hard to argue that your 9-1-1 team was the best in the country.

Legitimacy: 0/10. No, no no no, no. Nope. No. If you really feel like it's that important though, I made you the national championship banner that 1962 deserves, complete with Toonces and comic sans.

As far as I can tell, 1908 is the only unclaimed title that LSU could suddenly fly a flag for without it looking completely ridiculous. The other seasons have their own reasons to be celebrated – SEC championships in 1935, 1936 and 2011, and outstanding performances from the defense and Jerry Stovall in 1962. But even if the LSU Athletic Department decided tomorrow that they wanted to suddenly recognize 1908 as a National Championship season, what would be the point? Is a five star recruit suddenly going to commit to LSU over a different school because they won a national championship 106 years ago? Unlikely. At the end of the day, whether or not a school claims a questionable championship matters to one group and one group only – the fans. And if your school’s title count means that much to you, there is an ample amount of ways to make your voice heard. I’d say the school’s official count is just fine where it is.