The 1944 national champions thread

[SoCalPat]

As we get deeper into the tournament and media analyzes and discusses our hoops history a little more in-depth, I want to add a little perspective about our 1944 national championship team.


It was a notable accomplishment, but in Ute lore, it's takes on much bigger significance than it should for the following reasons:


1. It was a war-time championship. Anything that happened in the 1942-44 seasons should be viewed with a skeptical eye, for obvious reasons. Freshmen were made eligible when they previously were ineligible. (On a side note, one war-time accomplishment that Utes can use in their favor was BYU's first outright win over Utah in football came in 1942 -- their first non-wartime win didn't come until 1958). To further get an idea of how skewed the competition was during WWII, take a look at the final 1943-44 final AP football polls.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1944_NCAA_football_rankings

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1943_NCAA_football_rankings

2. We beat Dartmouth in the championship game. Nuf sed ...

3. The NIT was rightly perceived as the true national championship. In fact, Utah was in the NCAA tournament that year only as a replacement for Arkansas, whose team was damaged by injury in a car accident days before the NCAA tournament began. After CCNY won both the NCAA and NIT titles in 1950, the NCAA prohibited teams from playing in both tournaments. The 1944 team got a second bite at the apple.

4. The 1947 team, comprised of a lot of the same players that played in 1944, won the NIT, still regarded as the premier postseason tournament. In fact, the Helms Foundation lists Utah as just one of a few teams from that era that can rightly claim a national championship based solely on winning an NIT title.

5. That 1947 team actually beat Kentucky in the NIT final. The 1944 NCAA title team? Bounced from the NIT by Kentucky.

I don't expect national media to go into great detail about the differences between the 1944 and 1947 teams, but I hope Ute fans are able to know the difference. When Utah basketball did its 100 Greatest Moments some years ago to mark the program's centennial, the 1944 championship team was ranked No. 1. (KVH's back-to-back buzzer beaters at the 1997 WAC tournament ranked 2-3, so you can see how badly flawed that list is), the 1947 team was rated No. 8. I don't think the 1947 team should be No. 1, but it should be higher than the 1944 team.

[LA Ute]

Here I am with one member of both the 1944 and 1947 teams. He befriended me when I was an undergrad and had quite an impact on my life. Arnie Ferrin, a great Ute whose jersey number hangs in the Huntsman rafters.

http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15/03/27/21ede7d839f0da836d3964b62924393e.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FountainOfUte]

To me, anything that can be said to sully the 1944 championship on one side of the ledger has equivalent amazing odds overcome in on the other side as well. Sure, it was wartime. Yes, many of the best players across the country were in the military. Many annual contenders didn't even field teams that year. But, our team was playing whomever would agree, including military teams with those same "missing" collegiate players (and even some pros, IIRC) playing for them. And in regard to point #3, while we did lose in the NIT, we went on to beat the NIT champion after winning the NCAA championship. So, yes, we sort of back-doored that deal, but we were the only team standing between the two tourney champions at the end of it all.

It's an amazing story.

Pat, while I know you're not necessarily throwing out our NC with the bathwater, it's an incredible story that has as many "Holy cow!" elements as asterisks - and I acknowledge them both (as do you, I'm sure). When it all comes out in the wash, I think it's as legit a NC as anyone can claim with a narrative perhaps more amazing than most.

[SeattleUte]

Which one is you, LA?

[LA Ute]

Which one is you, LA?

The one in the red shirt.

[SoCalPat]

To me, anything that can be said to sully the 1944 championship on one side of the ledger has equivalent amazing odds overcome in on the other side as well. Sure, it was wartime. Yes, many of the best players across the country were in the military. Many annual contenders didn't even field teams that year. But, our team was playing whomever would agree, including military teams with those same "missing" collegiate players (and even some pros, IIRC) playing for them. And in regard to point #3, while we did lose in the NIT, we went on to beat the NIT champion after winning the NCAA championship. So, yes, we sort of back-doored that deal, but we were the only team standing between the two tourney champions at the end of it all.

It's an amazing story.

Pat, while I know you're not necessarily throwing out our NC with the bathwater, it's an incredible story that has as many "Holy cow!" elements as asterisks - and I acknowledge them both (as do you, I'm sure). When it all comes out in the wash, I think it's as legit a NC as anyone can claim with a narrative perhaps more amazing than most.

Agreed on all points, save one small caveat: The 1947 team was clearly better, accomplished more, yet isn't held in the same vein as the 44 team. Again, this is largely a function of the national media. I would be more reluctant to compare the two if the rosters were entirely different rather than entirely similar.

If you're gonna explain how an NIT champion is better than an NCAA champion, you sometimes have to give the appearances of casting doubt on one side. I respect the hell outta all of the players on both teams. And yes, the 1944 team is a true national champion (the win you mentioned against NIT champ St. John's at MSG in a charity game after the fact underscores this). I'm also glad the Utah media guide lists the 1947 team side-by-side with the 44 team and the AAU national champs from 1918 (?).