Just a few points --
-- Doyle Nave was actually the third-team quarterback. The TD pass was caught by second-team end Al Kreuger ... who did go on to be an All-American the next year.
-- Duke's final No. 3 ranking had nothing to do with the loss -- the final polls were taken in that era BEFORE the bowls. When Maryland won the 1953 AP and UPI national title, the Terps lost their bowl game -- falling 7-0 to Oklahoma in the regular season. But just to show how things balance out, undefeated Maryland finished second to Tennessee in 1952 -- and stayed No. 2 even after the Vols lost their bowl game. I'm not sure exactly when the polls starting re-voting after the bowls, but it was not that long ago.
-- Davekay, you don't have to invent a bogus national title for Duke football. Duke actually won two national titles in that era -- in 1936, James Howell (a syndicated football writer) voted 9-1 Duke as his national title. In 1941, Ray Byrne, who ran another major football subscription service picked 9-0 (before the bowls) Duke as his national champ:
Are those valid national titles? I would argue that they are MORE valid than UNC's Helms title in basketball, which was awarded 18 years after the fact by the business manager of a bread company, who had zero basketball experience. These two national titles were awarded by acknowledged football experts and (more significantly) were awarded at the end of the season -- not 18 years later. I've seen both Alabama and Georgia Tech include the Byrne title in their list of championships. The Football Data Warehouse lists the Byrne and Howell awards in the same category as ther Herlms Foundation -- as "Discontinued national championship awards."
So if UNC is going to hang a banner for their phony-baloney national championship, I believe Duke should hang banners for its TWO equally valid football nation al championships.
Speaking of banners... Duke was the conference football champion more times than any other conference member until relatively recently. Banners for conference championships would certainly reflect actual achievements.
Since Duke had defeated South Carolina that year, the forfeits didn't benefit Duke. But South Carolina's on-field wins over NC State and Clemson became NC State and Clemson wins. So those two teams flipped from 4-3 in the ACC to 5-2, thus leap-frogging Duke.
The ACC recognizes NC State and Clemson as ACC co-champions for that season.
Clemson 14 (actually 13)
Duke 7 (actually eight)
N.C. State 7 (actually six)
South Carolina 1
The reason I dispute the official total in 1965. Duke finished that season at 4-2 ... tied with South Carolina. N.C. State and Clemson finished tied for third at 4-3. Six months later, long after the title was awarded, new South Carolina AD Paul Dietzel reported that his predecessor, Marvin Bass, had used two ineligible players. Although they were inconsequential players, ACC Commissioner Jim Weaver dictated that South Carolina forfeit its six ACC games. That didn't help Duke, which had beaten South Carolina on the field, but it did help N.C. State and Clemson, which had both lost to the Gamecocks. The decision made their ACC record 5-2 ... so Weaver awarded them the championship -- essentially, Duke was robbed because South Carolina cheated! I( should also point out that when North Carolina was penalized for two years of ineligible players, their games were vacated, not forfeited -- meaning nobody improved their record Had the ACC applied the same rules to the Tar Heels, several division champions in 2008 and 2009 would have been different.
Anyway, I count 1965 among Duke's eight ACC titles. Duke also won 10 Southern Conference titles -- 1933, 1935, 1936, 1938, 1939, 1941, 1943, 1944, 1945 and 1952.
That's 18 ... I don't know the number of SC titles for Clemson, but it's very possible that Duke still has more conference titles than any other current ACC school.