Talk:Bear Bryant

Namesake

The opening graph has the idea of namesake reversed. If item A is named for item B then A is the namesake of B. The graph is worded as if Bryant was named for the stadium as opposed to the correct reversal of that.

From the wikipedia page on namesake: There has been some discrepancy as to whether the first-named or the second-named person, place or thing takes the term namesake. According to the American Heritage Dictionary, a namesake is a person or thing named after another. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, a namesake is a person or thing having the same name as another. This ambiguity may sometimes be resolved by the term namegiver, which clearly refers to the first-named person.

Thoughts on clarification? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.18.196.203 (talk) 04:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I think you have a point. Maybe just break that last sentence into two and say that the museum a and the stadium were both named in his honor. - JodyB _talk 12:27, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I have made the aforementioned edit, should you wish to clarify, please feel free. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.18.196.203 (talk) 04:22, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Honors & Awards

I added this section. These items were buried under the Legacy section and are easier to find in this format. --STS01 16:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Bear All-Americas

I assume this section is meant to include players coached by Bryant who received "All-American" honors. I think it would be more useful to further describe what "All-Americas" are (are these AP All-Americans? Kodak? Playboy? McDonald's? Parade?). And it's probably more useful for Wikipedia to list all of these in another article and link that one to here rather than just to put forth a small list as evidence of Bryant's accomplishments. Dystopos 16:29, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

• This might be the sloppiest Wikipedia page I've ever seen. References to "Bama" are inappropriate, there's lots of horrible English, and the formatting is quite poor. unsigned comment by User:69.109.164.234

All that sloppy stuff was written by a Bama fanboy. Expectations must be lowered accordingly. I've cleaned up the stuff that was worth keeping, and deleted the rest. Microtonal...(Put your head on my shoulder) 18:39, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Remember, no personal attacks. Keep up the good work. Dystopos 20:00, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Do you think It would be perinent to add the museum named in his honor? Csmedley 11:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.160.179.157 (talk)

"Bear"

This nickname has been reported so many times. Please cite your source for this information. -Scaife ^(Talk) Don't forget Hanlon's Razor 07:31, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

There are any number of sources that report the bear-wrestling story[1] (ignoring the Wikipedia back-citations, of course). The MSN Encarta article might be slightly more authoritative. Whether the story is actually true and not just an oft-repeated folk-legend, I can't say, at least not without doing further research. Microtonal 07:52, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Bryant himself recounted the story in his autobiography, Bear: The Life and Times of Alabama's Coach Paul Bryant 128.158.14.42 21:59, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Jesus Christ are you an Auburn Fan??? That everything keeps being removed and judged is amazing?

Bryant's military career

Someone needs to clarify exactly what the sequence was in respect to his military service in WWII - First the article says he enlisted in the Navy; then it says he served in the North African campaign which was early in the war; ok; then it says he was Honorably Discharged in order to train recruits in North Carlina; ok; and then it says he attained the rank of Lt. Commander. Someone please do a better job of explaining how an enlisted man who was discharged attained the rank of Lt. Commander.--Hokeman 16:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Number of Junction survivors

The number of Junction "survivors" was recently changed from 35 to 29. An (admittedly brief) web search turned up 35 as the most commonly cited number - this page, for example, lists 35 names. (I also saw the number 34 cited.) I put a {{fact}} label on it. Pawl 16:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

This page needs to be slimmed down

This page is starting to read like a book which not the purpose of this site. Excessive unsourced narration removed on 11/30/06

There is no length requirement for articles. He is an important subject for college football and needs to be discussed throughly and completely. If that takes a lot of space, then so be it. I resorted the ratings back to B and High as the WikiProject College football has set criteria for ratings and he is high priority. --MECU≈talk 03:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Link Removal

I have removed from the "External Links" section the links to "Bama Dog Home Page," "TideFans.com Home Page," and "Planet Tide Blog." These are not Bryant-related sites; these are Alabama football fan sites, and while Bryant is known mainly as the coach of Alabama, those sites deal with Alabama football, and not necessarily Bear Bryant. I have deleted these links before, only to find that they have been put back in the "External Links" section. I do not know if it is the operators of these sites trying to increase publicity for their sites, but either way those links do not belong here. They have been removed, and if re-posted, they will be removed again.

Fansite Template

I removed the fansite template. It looks like most of the offending material has been removed since the template was applied. Cogswobble 15:37, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Who is responsible for this??? It's a shame that we have such a wonderful man and his page is utterly embarrassing! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.191.248.164 (talk) 06:32, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Unnecessary Editing

I replaced the unnecessary editing done by editor STS01. There is no need to take a hatchet to an article of your rivals. Please discontinue your attempts to edit the Auburn POV into the article. Thanks!

Just noticed that this particular editor, STS01, has vandalized this page in the past. As a past vandal of this page, his attempts to edit this page should be looked upon warily. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.220.228.186 (talk • contribs)

• Allow me to suggest that it might be more productive to discuss the substance of the changes individually rather than to pass judgment on the editor(s) involved. --Dystopos 03:53, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

• I challenge IP user: 68.220.228.186 to explain why my edits did not improve the article. My intention was to improve the NPOV. --STS01 12:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

• I feel that the article was more factual and neutral after my recent edits and have reverted it. If you have a problem with any particular edit, please discuss it here. Thanks! --STS01 12:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

• I'll go on the record here as generally supportive of STS01 whose edits do not strike me as part of a conspiracy to introduce an "Auburn POV" but as honest attempts to strip out some Bear-worship POV. Perhaps some of the edits were not necessary, but they can be discussed here on their face and without reference to conspiracy theories. --Dystopos 14:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

• Bryants DOB(listed twice) and a few other redundant facts removed. --STS01 16:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I removed the mention of shared National Championships. That is one instence the 'Auburn' viewpoint I was speaking of. No other coaches page mentions such and there is no reason for it to be included here. This is also not the Bobby Bowden webpage and there is no reason to include his record. I have limited time to discuss my problems with the previous edit, but I will return to do that later. But, I do see that a lot of relevant information that has nothing to do with POV has been removed and that I have a problem with.

Facts are facts. I'm just adding a neutral point of view. --STS01 02:18, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I think you need to re-read the NPOV page, your edits have nothing to do with POV. There is not a precedence for calling National Championships 'shared'. They have not been called that by the mainstream media, sports commentators or anyone else. Neither the AP or UPI voters voted a tie, which would mean the titles were shared. Once again, it is not generally accepted to call National Titles shared or most until the BCS would be classified as such, including the 1957 National Championship, and I see no mention of it being shared on the Auburn or Shug Jordan pages. (Why did you put a warning on my page? Because I don't agree with your edits? Kind of classless, don't you think?)

Okay, STS01, I went through all of your edits and failed to see how they edited out a biased POV. Removing information is not editing for NPOV. I don't think the mention of Bryant's mother and father or of the Junction Boys displayed a biased point of view. As a matter of fact the only things you removed were bits of information, nothing to do with POV. If we are just going to cut info from the article, we might as well just say 'Paul Bryant was a football coach' and leave it at that, but the point is to provide information. I'm sure if you go to Michelangelo's page it doesn't just say 'He painted a ceiling in a church', it provides information about it. We are not using 3X5 cards so there is no reason to hack an article down to the barest of sentences. As for your view of POV, if the article said 'Bear Bryant is the greatest man to ever walk the face of the earth!', that's a biased POV. Writing a synopsis of something such as his stay at each University is not. I have a feeling you don't fully understand what POV or NPOV is and would appreciate it if you would think about exactly what you are removing before you edit. I do think you did a good job with rearranging and organizing some of the info, so all is not lost. Thanks!

• Let me restate the point I was trying to make. There's nothing to gain by trying to figure out the motivations of fellow editors. When I said to look at the edits individually and discuss them, I meant to discuss them individually, not to pull them together into a general deduction about where someone is coming from and whether their contributions have been good or bad overall. Just change the ones you feel are truly in need of change and if there's disagreement, we can discuss that issue instead of trying to discuss bigger, vaguer allegations of POV. --Dystopos 04:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

The point I was trying to make is that the edits have nothing to do with point of view. Even if we discuss each one individually, it still comes back to the same point -- they do not have a biased point of view. They are merely stating what happened, they don't shed a good or bad light on Bryant or convey a writer's feelings or emotions. That is NPOV. If you feel that a less informative article is a better article, well I don't understand your reasoning.68.17.170.241 04:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Dan762 05:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I now have a username, so I guess I am, as you said, more credible. I am going to try to explain it differently this time so that maybe my objections to your deletions will make more sense. The sections you removed were descriptive moreso than from a certain point of view. The adjectives described what happened and were not promoting or tearing down the person. Sort of like you describe a 'hot day' or 'shiny bracelet'. This has nothing to do with point of view. If you do not like the 'wordiness' then I feel it is better to rewrite the section instead of completely deleting it. For example, The Junction Boys were a huge part of Bryant's time at Texas A&M, but you chose to delete the entire section. I also can't understand the deletion of the information about his parents. If you look at other famous people on Wikipedia, this type of information is listed for them. The inclusion of all of this information is 'encyclopedic' and is intended to be included in articles of this type. Encyclopedias and websites such as Wikipedia are meant to provide information, and while I am aware that every miniscule bit of information cannot and should not be included, each section of this article provides a brief synopsis of certain times in Bryant's life and enough information that those who come here seeking to learn can walk away with a nice grasp of what took place.Dan762 05:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

1963 SEC Champion

The article indicates Alabama won the SEC championship in 1963 (highlighted). Mississippi was the actual champion at 5-0-1. Alabama defeated Mississippi later in the Sugar Bowl. Mountainman501 15:14, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Best guess is there was some confusion since Alabama eventually defeated an SEC opponent in a bowl game, making it so that each team had one SEC loss afterwards. The fact that Alabama doesn't claim the 1963 conference title (since it's officially bestowed before a bowl game) should help clarify things. [http://crimsontider.com/sec_champs.htm -- LS Shoals (talk) 19:07, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Cadillac vs. cigarette lighter / Adolph Rupp myth, claimed as fact here

The myth about Bryant leaving Kentucky because he got a cigarette lighter while Rupp got a Cadillac is not a true story. It should not be spoken about in this article as fact. Note that there is no citation to it. It should be removed.

Legacy section

Sorry for the delay of this addition, but you may have noticed that I re-formatted the Legacy page, as it was previously hard to read. Hopefully it's an improvement. I also changed it to include names of people who went on to become head coaches and listed only their jobs in that capacity, as including names of people with direct ties to Bryant who have been or are currently assistant coaches somewhere would make for too long of a list. Please leave any suggestions regarding this section. Thanks! -- LS Shoals (talk) 23:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Tribute poem and namesakes

I don't see how the "tribute poem" section is necessary. It doesn't provide any further valuable information about Bryant and it seems it's meant simply to showcase the poem itself. It's my opinion that it should be removed. Removed "namesake" tidbit once again because its placement causes a topical break, and violated Wiki MOS for OR and verifiabilty. Citations and elaboration needed. Original info can be assumed simply from reading article and realizing his influence (people are named after The Beatles, Presidents, actors, etc., but there doesn't need to be an inclusion on each person's page to mention that people are named for them) -- LS Shoals (talk) 17:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I removed the tribute poem based on Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. It can be perceived as a memorial piece, it includes first-hand journalism from a newspaper, and is self-promotion of the poet. I felt it was fair to remove the poem but still mention that it was written for him in the Honors and Awards section -- LS Shoals (talk) 09:03, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Coram award

I removed the line about Bryant winning a 1981 "Coram Award" because a web search on such an award came up empty. Does anyone even know what this is? There's such thing as a "Coram Design Award" but its for designs improving plumbing functions and overall bathroom efficiency. Plus, the award was handed out between 1999 and 2006. LS Shoals (talk) 08:38, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

The Houndstooth

I removed the personal research as to what Bryant's hat actually was (claiming it was purely "plaid"). In my opinion, several fans of opposing teams have this vendetta-like attitude and mission to prove that Alabama fans are dumb by suggesting that the pattern on the hat isn't truly what they believe it is (houndstooth). Here are several links ([2][3][4][5][6][7]) Each makes a case that the pattern is indeed houndstooth, and, at the very least, more resembles houndstooth than plaid, even if the hat could be perceived as a combination of both. I suggest looking at this links, and then discussing this issue more before getting specific as to what the pattern really was in the article. - LS Shoals (talk) 07:39, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no move. JPG-GR (talk) 20:13, 13 November 2008 (UTC)`

Have just been thinking it would be a little more historically accurate or at least encyclopedic to rename the article Paul Bryant and just redirect Bear Bryant to there. Please post your opinions below. Thanks. Rtr10 (talk) 22:41, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

According to WP:NC we should use the most common (unambiguous) name, nickname or otherwise. Hence articles at Pelé, Bill Clinton, Cher etc (more examples at WP:Naming conventions (common names)). If you can demonstrate that Paul Bryant is used more commonly than Bear Bryant though, you might be talking. Knepflerle (talk) 23:09, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't think there's a big problem here. We should use the best recognized name and it's really 50–50 on which he was better known as, so I'd support a move to Paul Bryant. Latics (talk) 23:14, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, a quick Google search ... Bear Bryant 280,000 results, while only 82,600 for Paul Bryant. I think it'd be safer to keep the current article name. Although the museum is the Paul W. Bryant Museum... Latics (talk) 23:18, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Also to be noticed is that many results for on the search for Paul Bryant have nothing to do with this man. A further reason (and there are many) why Google is a bad choice of measuring stick for this sort of thing, but in this particular case there's a big enough difference between the results that the conclusion is still valid. Knepflerle (talk) 23:40, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

More people associate him with Bear Bryant, even though Paul is his given name. Just like Babe Ruth given name was George.--Levineps (talk) 23:37, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Evidence of that would be nice. Knepflerle (talk) 23:40, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I oppose the move. Bear Bryant is the more common name. For instance, on sports television, I hear him referred to as Bear Bryant and, rarely, Paul "Bear" Bryant. I do not hear him referred to as simply Paul Bryant. →Wordbuilder (talk) 23:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Wordbuilder, and oppose the move as well. BlueAg09 (Talk) 02:21, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

• I agree with those above, who support maintaining the current title (oppose move). I've rarely, if ever, heard Bryant referred to simply as "Paul Bryant" and always hear either "Bear Bryant" or "Paul 'Bear' Bryant". The current title seems to be appropriate per MOS. - auburnpilot talk 03:06, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose. There is no basis in policy, guidelines or conventions to move this article to Paul Bryant. Since the name of the topic is mostly commonly referred to, and known as, Bear Bryant, that should be the title. That's Wikipedia 101. --Born2cycle (talk) 01:15, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose. A targeted Google search shows more extreme results, a 1:100 ratio. "Bear Bryant" "football coach" returns 30,000 hits, as compared with 3,000 for "paul Bryant" "football coach". Other variations of his name using the same search parameters show an even more extreme disparity.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:02, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose. WP:NC says we should use the most common name. Think Jimmy Carter rather than James Carter. The subject is best known as Bear Bryant. Majoreditor (talk) 03:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Name of article is Bear Bryant?

Really? Really? I wish I'd seen the above debate while it was going on. The man's name wasn't "Bear", people, it was "Paul". Sometimes Wikipedia gets the most obvious things wrong. Vidor (talk) 15:05, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

This actually is a valid point. When we would watch the games on T.V. back them they would even call him Paul "Bear" Bryant. That is interesting that they keep him as Bear Bryant even when you point it out 7 years ago.Easeltine (talk) 00:19, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

@Easeltine: there was a proposal to move the article in 2008, which failed. The general rule on Wikipedia is to title an article with its most common name as seen in reliable sources, and "Bear Bryant" seems to be the most common name here. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:04, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Attribution of 1980 SEC Championship

The attribution of the 1980 Southeastern Championship to Bear Bryant and Alabama is blatantly incorrect. The University of Georgia were sole winners of the 1980 Southeastern Championship. This can be verified on the SEC football championships WP page or the SEC conference website. I have edited the incorrect attribution out. thehondaboy (talk)

SS Uruguay?

There was no civilian merchantman SS Uruguay on which 200 men died and that was ordered to be abandoned in World War II. The oil tanker USS Salamonie rammed the US Army troop ship USAT Uruguay in 1943, but only 13 men were killed and Uruguay's master, Captain Albert Spaulding, ordered emergency repairs that saved the ship. If Allen Barra's book The Last Coach: The Life of Paul "Bear" Bryant claims that 200 men were killed aboard Uruguay and that Spaulding ordered her to be abaondoned, it is inaccurate. — Motacilla (talk) 16:59, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

The 200 figure seems grossly inflated. However, I did add an apparently reliable source for Bryant's presence and actions on the USAT Uruguay. This source seems somewhat at odds, however, with the ship's history according to Moore-McCormack. (ETA: And yes, according to Amazon's preview feature, Barra's book does say 200.) Fat&Happy (talk) 18:25, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks: I've slightly revised the text accordingly. Uruguay is not a unique name for a ship, so I'm glad if we've at least made sure that Bryant is linked with the correct Uruguay. Best wishes — Motacilla (talk) 20:10, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Racial Integration on the Alabama Football Team

The description of racism/integration topic is inaccurate. In fact, Wilbur Jackson was a scholarship athlete at the time of the mentioned USC football game. The other mentioned player and Sylvester Croom, who I believe we're the first three African American scholarship football players at Alabama, also may have been scholarship players at the time of the USC game. Jackson was, and perhaps the two other African American players were, freshman at the time of the USC game. At that time, freshman did not play per rules relating to participation in varsity athletics. I believe these were NCAA rules. I would like to see these facts corrected by someone with access to support that can lend to accurate citation and thus avoid dispute over Bear Bryant's record on this important issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.224.200.182 (talk) 07:24, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

"The Bear" (1984 movie)

In the "Legacy" section, it listed 2 actors & movies where Bear Bryant was portrayed, but doesn't list the movie "The Bear" from 1984 starring Gary Busey, so I added it. It didn't require 3 separate lines, so I combined it into 1 paragraph. It also doesn't require a citation --- simply click the Wiki link to each film to verify. PhilOSophocle (talk) 01:45, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

His son

Since this article exists, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_W._Bryant_Jr. , perhaps the existence of the coach's notable son should be mentioned here somewhere and a link made. This source shows that Coach Bryant also had a daughter, Mae: https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/1739/paul-bryant — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.17.179.75 (talk) 14:58, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Coaches poll did not vote KY #1 in 1950, nor did the AP vote KY #3. Please correct in the grid area.

That is some retro ranking by saragin

Here's what the verbiage says (that agrees to other sources) which is in disagreement with the grid area.

Kentucky's final AP poll rankings under Bryant included #11 in 1949, #7 in 1950, #15 in 1951, #20 in 1952, and #16 in 1953. The 1950 season was Kentucky's highest rank until it finished #6 in the final 1977 AP Poll.

Corrected the above.Eman863 (talk) 07:06, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Quote about national championships as awarded by grocery stores

I'm searching for the source of this Bear Bryant attributed quote:

"It was basically the same thing that the late Bear Bryant once said - that even if a local grocery store were to name Alabama as national champions, the Crimson Tide would count it."

The Gadsden Times, January 6th 2005

Any help appreciated. PK-WIKI (talk) 17:28, 14 November 2023 (UTC)