Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 58
  1. #1

    1924 Helms Banner Debunked

    http://www.fayobserver.com/Articles/2009/12/26/959868

    But wait a second. Hasn't UNC only won five NCAA championships? Yes.

    And yet the Tar Heels display six national championship banners? Indeed.

    What gives?

    The banners are all uniform in size and appearance, commemorating titles from 1924, 1957, 1982, 1993, 2005 and now 2009.

    But as the old Sesame Street jingle goes, "One of these things is not like the others." And so here in a college basketball crazed state where rivals nitpick each other's triumphs like Simon Cowell critiquing the pitch in Kelly Clarkson's voice, we have the topic for one of the more contentious and longest running debates on Tobacco Road.

    That banner to the far left: does it belong? North Carolina's 1924 national championship: legitimate or not?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Always good to see Featherston rip into that silly bit of hubris from the UOP.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Boca Grande Florida
    And this relates to Duke basketball how? Duke was 19-6 that year, the Heels were undefeated...

    Mods, please delete this thread


  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    We are deeply touched by your concern and thank you for your guidance.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North Carolina

    Dumbfounded...

    Bomani Jones comes across as a voice of reason in this article. Amazing!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    About 150 feet in front of the Duke Chapel doors.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wheat/"/"/" View Post
    And this relates to Duke basketball how? Duke was 19-6 that year, the Heels were undefeated...

    Mods, please delete this thread

    Our archrivals make fools of themselves, and someone in the North Carolina media actually calls them on it. Delete it? I'm thinking we need to make this thread a "sticky"...
    JBDuke

    Andre Dawkins: “People ask me if I can still shoot, and I ask them if they can still breathe. That’s kind of the same thing.”

  7. #7
    You guys let Wheat derail this thread pretty freakin easily. A perfect opportunity to laugh at the insecurity of Tar Heel Nation and you guys want to bicker about Wheat?

    Congrats, Wheat.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by airowe View Post
    You guys let Wheat derail this thread pretty freakin easily.
    Good call.


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO

    Smile Main Topic

    The 1924 Helms foundation banner and the recent ejection of a Presbyterian fan by Roy are gifts that keep on giving. I hope UNC keeps the banner up forever. What a laugh!

    Did you read the Weiderer article? Our man Featherstone pointed out that southern basketball was inferior to the East and Midwest back in that period. For example, UNC played 10 teams from north of the Mason-Dixon line during the 1920's and had a perfect record: 0-10. Therefore, trumpeting as "best in the nation" a team with a 26-0 record that played no one outside the South is a compete joke.

    Let the banner hang forever as a monument to overweening ambition and pomposity.

    sagegrouse
    'Darn. Now Wheat will never take me fishing'

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    About 150 feet in front of the Duke Chapel doors.
    I had to delete a number of posts in this thread, which was taking a nasty little turn.

    A couple of points:

    1. It is not the job of posters on this board to attempt to moderate it themselves - that what the mods are for. If you believe that a post does not comply with our posting guidelines or otherwise requires moderator action, please use the "Report Post" feature (the little red-bordered triangle with an exclamation point in the middle of it that you'll find at the top right corner of every post). When you report a post, all of the mods get an email with your text describing why you're reporting it, so we can act appropriately if needed.

    2. Friendly jabs from well-known Heel fans that post here, like Wheat, should be taken in the spirit with which they are intended. Wheat has been here many years and knows that this is a Duke fan site. If you didn't get that he was trying to be funny with his text, the multiple emoticons that he included should have been a clue.

    3. There is no justification for being uncivil. If you find Wheat's occasional little barbs to be a problem, then maybe you're the one with the problem. Have a thicker skin. If you grow tired of Wheat's posts (or any other poster's posts, for that matter), I suggest you not read them. (Wow, what a concept!) I believe I can speak for all the moderators here that there's nothing in violation of DBR's guidelines in Wheat's original post in this thread. Friendly banter should be tolerated, and even encouraged, as long as it stays friendly. Wheat and other Carolina fans that have established themselves here know they need to tread softly when being critical of Duke or Duke fans. Generally, they do a good job of this and therefore being good neighbors. The rest of us should give them the benefit of the doubt.
    JBDuke

    Andre Dawkins: “People ask me if I can still shoot, and I ask them if they can still breathe. That’s kind of the same thing.”

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Boca Grande Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by grounds0405 View Post
    ... I hope you can find your way back to a more topical and amiable tone of discussion.
    Me too. And everyone else.

    So back on topic then...here's how I understand it.

    For 1912 thru 1937, the Helms foundation named a national champion on opinion without a national tournament to decide things. From '38 thru '82 the Helms foundation continued to name a national champion, still on opinion, but with the benefit of a NIT, NCAA or both tourneys to guide their decision.

    The first true national tourney was the NIT Tournament held in 1938.

    Anyways, so there was no NCAA, NIT tournament prior to 1938 to definatively determine a national champion.

    Prior to 1938. much like polls over the years deciding football national champions which are still recognized, it was all opinion about who was national champion. It's just the way it was.

    In fact, UNC's recognition of the '24 title is challenged by Butler, a team also named the '24 Champion, but by the AAU, another respected foundation at the time. So the bottom line is nobody really knows who was the best team that year because there was no tournament to prove it.

    The Helms Foundation was very respected in the sports world, and they did not pass out titles haphazardly. The '24 title is what it is, a respected award but a title of opinion from a respected foundation. Similar to a football Heisman in my mind.

    Some teams do not recognize their Helms/AAU titles prior to 1939 and the NCAA tournament. Some do.

    I personally don't think it should carry the same weight as the NCAA titles, earned through a tournament, but I have no problem with it being used as recognition for a sustained history of basketball excellence, which is what I think UNC primarily does with it.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Wheat/"/"/" View Post
    I personally don't think it should carry the same weight as the NCAA titles, earned through a tournament, but I have no problem with it being used as recognition for a sustained history of basketball excellence, which is what I think UNC primarily does with it.
    Therein lies the problem. By redesigning the banner, changing the size and lettering to match the other National Championship Banners (just after Duke's title in 2001) UNC has used the banner to show another "championship" although it was awarded years after the fact and not won in the same tournament fashion as the others. I knew you agreed with the article and just wanted to change the subject.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Wheat/"/"/" View Post
    For 1912 thru 1937, the Helms foundation named a national champion on opinion without a national tournament to decide things.

    The Helms Foundation was very respected in the sports world, and they did not pass out titles haphazardly. The '24 title is what it is, a respected award but a title of opinion from a respected foundation. Similar to a football Heisman in my mind.
    A couple of major points. First, the Helms foundation wasn't founded until 1936 (per Wikipedia). So their "champions" weren't even selected based on how the experts felt they did on the year they played basketball. So, the 1924 Helms champion wasn't selected until 1936, at the earliest. That, in itself should question the validity of their champions prior to 1936.

    Second, since the Helms champions were selected retroactively it seems a rather poor analogy to the Heisman. The Heisman is the "best" player that year. The Helms champion in 1924 wasn't selected until after 1935. So, I don't see the similarity between the Heisman with the Helms.
    Last edited by hughgs; 12-27-2009 at 07:32 PM. Reason: Add correct reference paragraph

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Boca Grande Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by airowe View Post
    Therein lies the problem. By redesigning the banner, changing the size and lettering to match the other National Championship Banners (just after Duke's title in 2001) UNC has used the banner to show another "championship" although it was awarded years after the fact and not won in the same tournament fashion as the others. I knew you agreed with the article and just wanted to change the subject.
    Ah, but it was a national championship, none the less. One of two awarded for that year by the only system that was in place in that era.

    Featherston and everyone else,(including me), is free to have an opinion regarding the weight it should be given because there was no "play off", but the fact is it was a respected national championship award and the institution is not demeaned in any way by acknowledging it with the other national championship banners.

    IMO, This arguement is only good for rivalry discussion during the break, as I'm sure the writer and Featherstone intended. They always need content.

    I'd be curious to know whether Duke would have recognized a title during that era, but we'll never know since Duke teams were never in the hunt

    Note- Thanks Mods for continuing to keep the DBR board interesting, fair and entertaining. This board usually proves that rivalries can be fun, even spunky, without being mean spirited, and the best rivalry in sports needs a playground like this.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Boca Grande Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by hughgs View Post
    A couple of major points. First, the Helms foundation wasn't founded until 1936 (per Wikipedia). So their "champions" weren't even selected based on how the experts felt they did on the year they played basketball. So, the 1924 Helms champion wasn't selected until 1936, at the earliest. That, in itself should question the validity of their champions prior to 1936.

    Second, since the Helms champions were selected retroactively it seems a rather poor analogy to the Heisman. The Heisman is the "best" player that year. The Helms champion in 1924 wasn't selected until after 1935. So, I don't see the similarity between the Heisman with the Helms.
    The Heisman award is from a foundation based on opinion, just like the Helms recognition was. The Heisman has been a highly respected award in this era. So was the Helms award in its era. If the Heisman says a player is the best, then the Helms Foundation saying a team was the best...there is merit there.
    That was my analogy.

    Like Kirschner said, it's a national championship, and the team that earned it should be recognized.

    And yea, they went back and awarded the title retroactively. But, they still were choosing the team they felt was best for that year. I have to assume such a respected foundation did some serious consideration. UNC was undefeated after all, 26-0. It's not like they were 18-6. and some fly by night group crowned them.

    They,(Helms), were the only institution along with the AAU trying to establish national titles in hoops at the time.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Wheat/"/"/" View Post
    And yea, they went back and awarded the title retroactively. But, they still were choosing the team they felt was best for that year. I have to assume such a respected foundation did some serious consideration. UNC was undefeated after all, 26-0. It's not like they were 18-6. and some fly by night group crowned them.
    I agree that it's simply opinion, but your above statement is why I don't think you can equate the two. Anytime you have to go back in time and make "best of" awards you're bound to come to different conclusions than if you made the award during the same year.

    If I remember correctly at the turn of the century they did a poll of the best athletes of the century and Jim Thorpe came in somewhere around 5 or so, behind a number of athletes from his era. But, they did a similar poll around 1950 and Jim Thorpe was considered the best athlete of the first half century. Clearly, Thorpe's athletic performances didn't change in comparison to his contemporaries but somehow he got worse. Memory is a faulty mechanism, and to imply that "best of" awards that are based on recent performances (Heisman) are equivalent to "best of" awards that are based on memory (pre-35 Helms) does a disservice to the other teams.

    As to your contention that the Helms Foundation did some serious consideration I don't think you'll find many experts who agree with you. Here's Al Featherston's take on the subject (it's close to the end)

    http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/articles/?p=19923

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by Wheat/"/"/" View Post
    In fact, UNC's recognition of the '24 title is challenged by Butler, a team also named the '24 Champion, but by the AAU, another respected foundation at the time. So the bottom line is nobody really knows who was the best team that year because there was no tournament to prove it.
    This is, of course, not actually true. Butler was named the 1924 champion by the AAU, after winning the 1924 AAU tournament - a national tournament in which the Bulldogs played teams from all over the country. (Something the White Phantoms of NCU were, for whatever reason, loathe to do during this period.)

    The Helms Foundation was very respected in the sports world, and they did not pass out titles haphazardly.
    As Al Featherston has repeatedly explained, there's little evidence that this was actually the case. Indeed, the only evidence that the Helms titles were respected at all seems to come from the handful of recipients that are willing to claim the honor.

    I personally don't think it should carry the same weight as the NCAA titles, earned through a tournament, but I have no problem with it being used as recognition for a sustained history of basketball excellence, which is what I think UNC primarily does with it.
    I can only assume that this means that you agree that Butler has the stronger claim to a 1924 title. Consensus at last!
    Last edited by Duvall; 12-27-2009 at 10:00 PM.

  18. #18
    Wheat:

    I assume you did not read the article, or have chosen your words to carefully skew the jist of the article.

    It sure sounds good to say, ...the Helms foundation named a national champion...", but as the article points out, and other articles have pointed out, this was one guy, absent any recognized criteria, naming a champion decades after the fact. The article does note many reasons for doubting UNC was the best team in the nation in 1924, not playing a single team outside of the region.

    And the some-teams-recognize-the-Helms-and-some-don't argument also fails the sniff test. In fact, only ONE other team, Kansas, chooses to prominantly display the Helms banner with other Nat. Championships. Every other team that was chosen, decades later, by that one guy, chooses to appropriately downplay the point.

    It's certainly a nice recognition to have, but it's the epitomy of guilding the lilly for UNC.

    s.i.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wheat/"/"/" View Post
    Me too. And everyone else.

    So back on topic then...here's how I understand it.

    For 1912 thru 1937, the Helms foundation named a national champion on opinion without a national tournament to decide things. From '38 thru '82 the Helms foundation continued to name a national champion, still on opinion, but with the benefit of a NIT, NCAA or both tourneys to guide their decision.

    The first true national tourney was the NIT Tournament held in 1938.

    Anyways, so there was no NCAA, NIT tournament prior to 1938 to definatively determine a national champion.

    Prior to 1938. much like polls over the years deciding football national champions which are still recognized, it was all opinion about who was national champion. It's just the way it was.

    In fact, UNC's recognition of the '24 title is challenged by Butler, a team also named the '24 Champion, but by the AAU, another respected foundation at the time. So the bottom line is nobody really knows who was the best team that year because there was no tournament to prove it.

    The Helms Foundation was very respected in the sports world, and they did not pass out titles haphazardly. The '24 title is what it is, a respected award but a title of opinion from a respected foundation. Similar to a football Heisman in my mind.

    Some teams do not recognize their Helms/AAU titles prior to 1939 and the NCAA tournament. Some do.

    I personally don't think it should carry the same weight as the NCAA titles, earned through a tournament, but I have no problem with it being used as recognition for a sustained history of basketball excellence, which is what I think UNC primarily does with it.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by Wheat/"/"/" View Post
    They,(Helms), were the only institution along with the AAU trying to establish national titles in hoops at the time.
    Let's be clear. In 1924, the AAU was the only institution trying to determine the best basketball team in the country, and they did so through a tournament that was won by a college basketball team that was not North Carolina. Two decades later, when North Carolina was awarded its Helms honor, the NCAA and NIT had also gotten into the business of awarding national titles. Unlike the Helms people, those institutions wisely chose to limit themselves to giving trophies to teams that were actually playing at the time.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Walnut Creek, California

    There's a skit here!

    There's got to be a skit here for the Crazies. "Welcome White Phantoms!"

    First submission:

    The cheerleaders and the Blue Devil welcome "TylerJordanBluthWorthyBlahBlahHam" wearing a White Phantom uniform to accept the 1924 Helms award. It is wrapped in a Helms Bakery bread wrapper. And when the recipient opens the wrapper, he finds a large blue loaf of bread which says National Champion NCU White Phantoms 1924. As he accepts it with a gracious smile, the loaf's end flops down and out pops a flag which reads "FAKE." (And the Devil gleefully and evilly laughs from his cloud of smoke.)

    It would burn about 6 or 7 minutes of a halftime if done properly.

    Please follow up with other skit ideas.

Similar Threads

  1. What if Duke had a fake 1924 title?
    By brevity in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 10-16-2008, 09:20 AM
  2. Banner ad
    By wilson in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-13-2008, 01:45 PM
  3. Chase Duke Visa Card (from banner)
    By HK Dukie in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-18-2007, 08:24 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •