September 6, 2006
What are the premiere programs in the country?
Two conversations this weekend sparked a little controversy amongst some fellow fans this weekend as we tried to determine what are the top college football programs in the country?
Forget the polls and the white noise that accompanies your "one hit wonders" making a nice little run. I'm talking about the PREMIERE teams - with the core ingredients of recent success, legend, and football lore. I don't care about academics, or where your grandma's uncle's nephew went... we're talking about THE big time football schools of our era.
Let's come up with the top 20 programs nationwide. I want to know -- if your son was going to play for any school (REGARDLESS OF YOUR OWN LOYALTIES) -- what offer letters you would be proud to see in his mailbox?
In no particular order, here's my premiere 20 programs in the country:
| Ohio State | Michigan | Penn State | Wisconsin | Notre Dame |
| USC | Texas | Oklahoma | Nebraska | Texas A&M |
| Auburn | Alabama | Florida | Tennessee | Georgia |
| LSU | Florida State | Miami | Virginia Tech | West Virgina |
How close am I? I think you would have a hard time arguing any of my Premiere 20. You could argue that this list should be longer and "x" school should be on it, but -- c'mon -- these are the premiere schools of our era, right?
With the PREMIERE teams established, who's on the bubble? What teams have the pedigree but are just lacking a few good years from breaking into (or maybe back into...) the upper crust? Here's my stab at the next 5 - brining our list to twenty-five teams so far.
Clemson
Georgia Tech
TCU
Colorado
UCLA
Here's where the argument gets juicy, because there are several teams that could easily be "on the cusp". I'm thinking Iowa, Navy, Michigan State, Kansas State, Pitt, Arkansas, Oregon, Arizona State, and a few others are really close to being on this "cusp" list. And --with all due respect-- you can keep your Boise State's, South Carolina's and Louisville's to yourself.
I'll probably catch some flack for TCU, but you cannot ignore TCU's past history, legendary players, and their success over the past eight years. Navy, Pitt and Arkansas match them closely enough for history points, but lack the recent success. Michigan State, Iowa, Oregon, and ASU are very comparable in terms of recent success, but lack some of the legend & lore that TCU brings with it's National Championships & notable alums.
So that's my list of the top programs in the country. Have I missed on the PREMIERE teams? Who else is on the cusp? Tell me where I'm wrong.
Comments:
Bring Brady Back MgoBlue said:
posted on September 6, 2006 1:59 PM — 216.46.212.20 — link — abuse?
Michigan? hmmm They scare me! Coach carr looks great one week and get's praise from Michigan fans,but the next week you have to wonder if he was sober! They can hang with any team in the country,but you always have to wonder....will carr strike again! he is an OK coach who will have many more Rosebowls,but I wonder if Michigan will ever make another NC under Carr? hmmm oh well I like the Rosebowl!
Michigan vs. USC jan 01 rematch! Bring it on!Chuck said:
posted on September 6, 2006 2:08 PM — 65.28.0.241 — link — abuse?
Virginia Tech? West Virginia?
Virginia Tech: 0-34 vs. Top 10 opponents. 7-12 in bowls. They've only won 5 conference championships and they've played in the Big East and ACC. 0 National Championships.
West Virginia: 2-12 in their last 14 bowl games. They've only been able to muster 3 Big East chapmionships. C'mon, it's the Big East. 0 National Championships.
Who would I replace them with? Illinois...4 National Championships, 15 conference championships. Georgia Tech...3 National Championships, 15 Conference Championships, 22-12 in bowl games, been to a bowl 9 years in a row.
posted on September 6, 2006 2:33 PM — 64.3.228.130 — link — abuse?John Ludwig said:
I just can't see UCLA as the first Pac-10 team after USC to make the list. They perpetually underperform, have been a revolving door of coaches, don't even have a stadium on campus, ...
Cal, Oregon certainly belong ahead of them. Heck I'd even consider an Arizona school or a Washington school ahead of them.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 6, 2006 3:48 PM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
What do you mean when you stat "big time football schools of our era"? Some of the schools that you listed as top 20 or the additional 5 haven't had good programs since the 60s and 70s. That can't be considered the average readers era. You should put a better time frame on your listing.
Evan said:
posted on September 6, 2006 3:55 PM — 71.56.42.66 — link — abuse?
I just don't think there are 20 programs. Clearly, Virginia Tech (aka, The Running Michael Vicks) and West Viginia (Amous Zeroe??) don't belong in the same class of the OSUs, USCs and Notre Dames. Additionally, Georgia is a Herchel Walker away from being South Carolina.
DK said:
posted on September 6, 2006 4:29 PM — 198.82.17.117 — link — abuse?
Chuck, you can't be serious. First your numbers about VT are startlingly wrong which makes me think it was intentional. I'm not going to go look up the record against the top 10 but just off the top of my head, two years ago VT beat a #6 WVU team and a #9 Miami team. In the years before that there are plenty of other examples, not that you care about accuracy. You also use GT as an example of a premiere team citing in part their 9 straight bowls. Well VT has now been to 13 straight, the third longest such streak in the nation. Illinois? Is that a joke? The post is about the CURRENT premiere programs. National titles won more than 30 years ago wouldn't seem to have any bearing on that. If that is your criteria, where is Army?
posted on September 6, 2006 4:47 PM — link — abuse?
I'll take 'em in order:
Michigan State - They're on the cusp of something. They may/may not ever get there.
Michigan - Regardless of what you think of their current coach, Michigan is --without question or reservation-- a premiere football school.
Va Tech - Given their history and performance in the last 10-15 years, how can you not include the Hokies? True, the VPI is 7-12 in bowls, but 5 losses were pre-1984 and their 7-7 bowl record is pretty salty when you look at who they played, where, and when. A three point loss to Auburn & Cal aren't knocks on VaTech. A National Championship game loss to an FSU that was the first ever wire-to-wire champs? I gotta disagree that the Hokies aren't a top team.
WVU - If there was one squeaker in the bunch, WVU was it. WVU has four BE titles, two of which were during the salad days of the Big East, with the 'Canes & Hokies. WVU has a winning record against the Big XII, Big East, and SEC. Throw VaTech & UM back into the Big East and the Mountaineers have a winning record against 4 of the 6 BCS conferences. Not too shabby. Are there others that can hold that line - yeah, probably so.
UCLA - In the Pac10, UCLA has its' conference stablemates (with the exception of USC) bested easily in history, legend & lore. The Bruins could be on the cusp of getting back into the national spotlight BIG TIME if they can swing together a few good years. Can ASU say that? Maybe not.
In retrospect, Chuck makes a good point and has the facts to back it up. Maybe we should move GT up for WVU. Anybody??
Regan said:
posted on September 6, 2006 4:53 PM — 192.24.243.21 — link — abuse?
We seem to be defining the premiere programs differently. My definitions are:
1) Teams with historically strong (or at least decent) programs, if not always on the National stage, at least regionally strong.
2) Teams that have performed particularly well during the past 10 years or so, and
3) Teams that seem to have bright futures.My 20 would be:
Alabama, Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, LSU, Miami (FL), Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Oregon, Penn State, S. California, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
I’d put Nebraska, UCLA, and Louisville on the bubble.
Clemson and Georgia Tech have strong histories and legendary stadiums; the two teams are regular nightmares for powerhouse teams and are strong year-in-and-out. Their only issue has been consistency, and the two programs appear to be solid for years to come with incoming talent.
Oregon has had a tremendous program under Bellotti, should have gotten a chance to lose to Miami in 2001 NC game, and have been solid for several years now despite a brief drop-off after Harrington left. Anyone with the Ducks on their schedule have the date circled, trust me (and I’m an East Coast guy, FYI).
Nebraska will be back on the list soon enough, there is too much tradition and hysteria in that state for it to all of a sudden find a new hobby – and who would have thought that the spread offense might actually be working in Lincoln? I don’t think they are there just yet; OU and Texas are too strong to really let Nebraska’s stars shine too brightly just yet.
Texas A&M has the history and reputation for playing a tough game, but have not appeared to be able to handle their schedule well enough in the past 6-7 years or so. They should not have gotten rid of Slocum.
Wisconsin owes Alvarez more than anyone can know, but outside of a Rose Bowl win far too long ago and a good win percentage, the Badgers really haven’t done that much to impress me lately. Then again, I admit I don't really know much about them, so I won't take offense if anyone disagrees.
All of these IMHO, of course. :)
posted on September 6, 2006 4:56 PM — 70.5.219.241 — link — abuse?
Canning VT and WVU? Somebody's cherrypicking stats (and incorrect ones at that... I seem to recall Miami being #3 when VT knocked them off in '03). When you're counting conference championships, remember that neither of those schools had a conference to play in from 1954 until 1991.
That's really irrelevant, though, because the key requirement in this discussion is current success -- without it, you don't even qualify. What has Illinois done in the past fifteen years? Not bloody much. Conversely, all the conference championships you point out for VT and WVU took place within the past fifteen seasons, and if you want to quote bowl streaks, VT's current run is at thirteen (6-7 by my memory). You've got a slightly better argument for Georgia Tech, but I'd put them on the cusp... with a better coach they'd be in the discussion, though.
I can't believe I just defended West Virginia.
Tom Blogical said:
posted on September 6, 2006 5:19 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse?
I have no qualms with your list, other than I think Nebraska may be slipping onto the bubble list. We'll see how their season goes this year. I agree with Regan's points.
This is a great topic, however, (and I say this with as much politeness as possible, and don't want to hijack the thread) I am very surprised that this site hasn't mentioned anything about this news and the affect on this week's 1 vs. 2 matchup:
http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/5938096
I've been checking here every day for more details, as this is the place to go for College Football news.
Chuck said:
posted on September 6, 2006 5:34 PM — 65.28.0.241 — link — abuse?
DK, sorry I didn't clarify. That stat, 0-34, is based on end-of-season rankings not the rankings of the week they played them. In 2004, West Virginia didn't even finish in the Top 25 and Miami finished #11. I did miss a couple, though, because I didn't realize the site I got that off of was a couple of years old. In 2003, they Beat Miami who finished fifth, but in 2004 lost to USC and lost to Auburn. So, the correct record would be 1-36. I think we can agree that that is less than impressive.
And, if this list is completely about current teams, why is Nebraska on there? Their last conference championship was in '99. Illinois won the Big 10 in 2001. Why is Alabama on there? Last year was their first good year in quite a while. Smae thing goes for Penn State. And, if you're going to go by recent history, Texas A&M should definitely not be on there.
brownsrodeo88 said:
posted on September 6, 2006 7:33 PM — 205.188.116.133 — link — abuse?
Canes alum,
I beleive Alabama and Auburn both finished top 10 last year. Is that recent enough?
If my son were being recruited at a major D-1 level, I'd want him to play for a team like Alabama, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Michigan, something like that. A team that has an inescapable aura of tradition and pride that cannot be touched by most teams.
Anyone who says teams like Penn State, Bama, Nebraska, shouldn't be there needs to look into what those campus and locker rooms are like, what the alums expect and how the programs are run.
Those teams have only been down for a short while and they will inevitably be back becuase the alumni will not stand for mediocrity, or even good play. They demand greatness in every aspect: athletics, academics, class, and pride.
Nick Righter said:
posted on September 6, 2006 7:41 PM — 71.48.72.91 — link — abuse?
1. Ohio State
2. Michigan
3. Notre Dame
4. Oklahoma
5. Texas
6. Nebraska
7. USC
8. Florida State
9. Florida
10. Miami, FL
11. Tennessee
12. Auburn
13. LSU
14. Georgia
15. Iowa
16. Texas Christian
17. Wisconsin
18. Colorado
19. Alabama
20. WisconsinWB said:
posted on September 6, 2006 7:53 PM — 71.14.120.150 — link — abuse?
Clemson? CLEMSON? You must be kidding me. Clemson won a national championship 25 years ago, and basically has been a decent/not good team since. How could they possibly be in "the next 5"? I am a South Carolina fan, but I will readily admit that SC isn't even in the conversation for any of this. I'm being objective about Clemson. CLEMSON? Puuuuleeeeease.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on September 6, 2006 9:14 PM — 206.135.38.195 — link — abuse?
A program is good for more than two years you know? Therefore, since West Virginia has only recently inquired, they might be dropped from the list. For that matter: why not include Louisville? Oregon has matched USC in the Pac-10 for the last ten years or so and has had a number of very highly regarded teams. Where are they? I'd say that Texas A&M is probably on the bubble also. What have they done in quite awhile? And, Colorado on the bubble? Come on! Fresno State would massacre that team. But, I'm just nitpicking the bottom feeders. Truly, Oregon has probably got to be included and Texas A&M ought to get the boot. Or, maybe Texas Tech gets included. They have been on the rise for some time.
Tommie T
lsutiger08 said:
posted on September 6, 2006 11:55 PM — 68.222.48.221 — link — abuse?
TCU??!!
What is all that about? I thought we were talking about the best programs of OUR era. All I know about TCU football is that they beat LSU 3-2 in a Sugar Bowl back in the 1930s. Oh yeah...give 'em credit for their 1938 National Championship. WHAT?! I think my grandmother was in diapers back then. They were great in those days, but those teams can't be compared to some of the teams of the last 20 years...or even the last half century!!
True, the frogs have had SOME success in recent years, but what is considered success? A middle-of-the-road bowl game is great for a C-USA team, but it just doesn't compare to the other great progams from power conferences. I wanta see BCS, baby!!!!!!!!
You can't honestly say that TCU's recent "success" even comes close to matching, say, the Washington teams of the early '90s (a major omission, by the way).The Mayor said:
posted on September 7, 2006 5:03 AM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Oregon would have to win another 100 games over the next ten years to make the list. Anyone who was there from 1969 to 1990 knows what a dismal program it was. Thanks to all of you Nike consumers, we have the facilities now to attract players, coaches and put some butts in the seats. Still with that history behind us, we can't be consider a Top Tier program historically. Also our Bowl Record is sub par. Too much time at Disneyland, Zoo and Sea World I guess.
I did see Phil Knight at the UO game this weekend. All that Nike money and he still dresses like a bad stand up comic (ratty sports coat, jeans and white tennis shoes? In 92 degrees? Even Jerry Seinfeld has moved on to grown up clothes).
Chris Jackson said:
posted on September 7, 2006 6:30 AM — 199.31.3.197 — link — abuse?
I am sick and tired of people talking junk about WVU. If you want to live in the past and talk about bowl history, you have some growing up to do. WVU has a bad bowl history, this is true. But they also had a different coach, with a different philosophy on how the big games should be won, different ways of motivating his players to get up for the game. Rich Rodriguez is no joke. He leads the Mountaineers with his play-calling, and leads them even better in the off-season by bringing in players that WANT to play for the blue and gold. Enough about that. I would LOVE to see WVU play the "powerhouses" of college football. The problem is, those "powerhouses" would be most unwilling to schedule the Mountaineers as a non-conference game. With the Big East seen as an inferior conference, those traditional powers would lose all credibility in the BCS race should they suffer a loss. Example: Northern Illinois ran absolutely "Buck-wild" on the Buckeyes, what makes you think the Buckeye defense can stop one of the premier running attacks in football? Don't sleep on WVU, that's what Georgia did in the Sugar Bowl. Turns out they were dead wrong.
posted on September 7, 2006 10:36 AM — link — abuse?
I'm with The Mayor, Oregon stunk it up for a good long time. If losing 4 games a year or so makes one a premiere team, then we're going to need a much longer list.
Please don't bring up Texas Tech. SO.NOT.WORTHY.
Neville said:
posted on September 7, 2006 10:38 AM — 70.167.26.232 — link — abuse?
I went through this exercize a couple years back just before OU and USC played in the Orange bowl (they came out tied for #1 at the time). The criteria I had was to weight 50% for short term success (BCS era) and 50% for long term success. Inside the long term I counted total number of national titles claimed (80%) (ignoring stuff prior to 1930s - AP poll era), heisman trophies (5%) and conference championships (15%). For the short term I counted BCS bowl success / appearances.
At the time I ran it the list looked like this:
1 Oklahoma
1 Southern Cal.
3 Miami, Fla.
4 Ohio State
5 Florida State
6 Nebraska
7 LSU
8 Tennessee
9 Notre Dame
10 Alabama
11 Texas
12 Michigan
13 Minnesota
14 Florida
15 Pittsburgh
16 Army
17 Penn State
18 Auburn
19 Washington
20 Colorado
21 Maryland
22 Syracuse
23 Texas A&M
24 UCLA
25 Brigham Young
26 Clemson
27 Georgia
28 Georgia Tech
29 Michigan State
30 TCU
31 Virginia Tech
32 Wisconsin
33 Oregon
34 Oregon State
35 Utah
36 Illinois
37 Iowa
38 Kansas State
39 Purdue
40 Stanford
41 Washington State
The full list and spreadsheet is here .I never did enter in heisman data or conference championships, or update it for the last two years, so if someone has a lot of time on their hands today and wants to do that great! Also, you can sound off on my formula if you want. The formula is in the spreadsheet.
Neville said:
posted on September 7, 2006 10:42 AM — 70.167.26.232 — link — abuse?
Opps wrong link for the spreadsheet. The full spreadsheet / formula is here.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 7, 2006 11:29 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
AUfan036002 you may have went 13-0 but do you have anything to show for it? The only thing that matters is national championships and unless I am mistaken you don't have any do you? With the loser mentality of the SEC fans that a conference championship is good enough, you may think that number 2 in the nation is good, but the only place that gets remembered is #1.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 7, 2006 11:35 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Neville tht is a well thought out post. I'm glad to see someone actually take the time to calculate a formula instead of being biased towards conferences. I believe that Miami at number three is a deserving locating due to their success in the past 25 years, but nothing earlier than that.
1fan4WVU said:
posted on September 7, 2006 11:47 AM — 24.140.92.2 — link — abuse?
Preach on Chris Jackson, Preach on!!!!!
Bowl history is not great for my mountaineers, this much is true. It is also true the HOF Coach Don Nehlen is no longer running things in Morgantown. Coach Rod has built excitement up throughout the state for WV and it's a great time to be a Mountaineer fan. The entire country now knows about WVU and the super sophomores, watching media coverage it looks like we are finally getting to the point where some folks have a positive view on WVU football.
WVU is one of the premiere programs in the country. Period.
Jim said:
posted on September 7, 2006 12:44 PM — 65.103.109.75 — link — abuse?
I don't know Kevin, Texas Tech caught my eye after they tore Cal a new one. I'm gonna have to go with Tommy on this one, they haven't had a losing season in 11 or 12 years. They still don't do well in bowls but I would consider them on the cusp of the cusp. (they tear up my Aggies year after year, it's getting real old).
Still kinda torn on TCU, I think they would have a hard time playing in a BCS conference, sure they beat Baylor this year, but hey it's Baylor.
Gerald said:
posted on September 7, 2006 12:51 PM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
Tampa Hurricane:
Well, they may not have been handed the national title by the media, but Auburn did one thing that year: they beat ACC champs Virginia Tech. Who, lest we forget, beat Miami that year. In Miami. Speaking of national title games, boy Gino Torreta sure showed that he deserved the Heisman over Marshall Faulk and Garrison Hearst in that infamous national title game against Alabama, right? And no one in the media gave Alabama a chance in that game, remember? Just like no one gave Texas a chance last year, and no one gave Nebraska a chance in that 1995 62 - 24 wipeout. I bet the same people who voted Auburn over USC were the ones who had Cal ranked #9 going into Tennessee last weekend. Well, if such objective experts and historically accurate prognosticators say that it is so, then I guess it is, and we should not complain or dissent. SEC fans are just fine accepting that Auburn was the Sugar Bowl champs ... and victors against ACC champs Virginia Tech. Who beat Miami IN Miami. But do not worry Tampa Hurricane. Butch Davis will be back at Miami rebuilding that program into a national contender in about six months. Just hope that he is able to hold onto your defensive coordinator, who has pretty much been the only person keeping your program running during Coker's benign neglect.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 7, 2006 1:01 PM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
What is this, are all the SEC losers going to start in trying to make it seem like not winning the national championship is a good thing? Gerald I could care less about who Auburn defeated that year, they also played an easy out of conference schedule that cost them any chance to play for the national championship. When you usually play terrible teams for your out of conference schedule like SEC teams are prone to do, you can make all the excuses you want to about being overlooked. It all comes down to the fact that if they had played one tough out of conference game, they would have been in the championship game instead of a game that didn't matter. The SEC has a losers mentality, with second place being good enough for its fans.
Brettski said:
posted on September 7, 2006 1:16 PM — 63.198.5.174 — link — abuse?
Man, that spread sheet is a joke! Michigan has like 10 national titles, not two. And they have won the Big Ten BY FAR more than any other team. How can they be twelve on your list when they have also made
4 BCS appearances and won a national title not even 10 years ago?Gerald said:
posted on September 7, 2006 2:05 PM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
Neville:
Any formula that ranks BYU over UGA is flawed. It obviously fails to include, for instance, the number and/or percentage of victories of other ranked teams. Of course, such a formula would be extremely unwieldly, because you would have to know each opponent for each of the 117 I - A teams. You would also have to run the numbers twice: once to generate a raw 1 - 117 list, and then again including the data for quality of opponents. Argh! Even if it were possible, it would be a real waste of time gathering and entering the data and programming the models.
Greg said:
posted on September 7, 2006 3:22 PM — 152.163.100.196 — link — abuse?
Dante's inferno
While I admire the progress the Florida schools have made in the past twenty five or so years, one must remember the Notre Dames, USC'S, Nebraska's, Ohio st.'s, Alabama's never really go away. Their programs have been well established from the days of leather helmets until today.
Neville said:
posted on September 7, 2006 3:49 PM — 70.167.26.232 — link — abuse?
Gerald, actually BYU and Georgia are tied with a .3 total rating, based on each having 1 national title. If this was updated it would leap Georgia ahead since last year they had a BCS bowl appearance.
I would love for someone else to enter the data, as that is the hard part.
Here is the formula I came up with, and this is where I would be interested in feedback (the formula, not the teams)
50% of the rating goes to long term success, defined as success from 1936 (the 1st year of the AP poll) on. The 1936 requirment pulls out Harvard and Yale, which would dominate this list if you included national titles back to the 1800s. It also hurts USC since they claim national titles back then that I do not give them credit for.Of the long term number what I am interested in is championships. I gave an 80% weight to number of national titles, 15% to number of conference titles and 5% to heismans. The way I do that is look at the leader in one category and they get all points possible, the other get a percentage. For example, Notre Dame has the most national championships (8). They get a full 1 point (which then get the 80% weight which then get the 50% weight). So, the overall effect of NDs 8 national titles is 1*.8*.5 = .4 Michigan has 2 national titles. In my world I gave them .5 for their title score, so the total factor for them is .5*.8*.5 = .2 Notice I gave this on a sliding scale. I figure it is much more important for a programs greatness going from 0 national titles to 1, as opposed to from 4 national titles to 5.
As I look at this now, I am thinking my initial weights were too tilted to national titles. If I were redoing this today I'd give, say, 60% to national titles, 25% to conference championships, and 15% to heisman trophies.
For the short term, my intent was to do BCS era on, only. That becomes harsh if you are a Nebraska fan since they won a couple titles in the mid 90s but have no crystal ball. Those titles get the same treatment as Minnesota's titles back in the 50s. I figure this is good because 1- everyone wants a crystal ball, and 2 the 17 year old kids finishing high school today have about the same level of memory for things like the 4 horsemen of Notre Dame and Nebraska running all over Florida in that championship game. It is all ancient history if you are in high school / early college today.so for the 50% short term (defined as BCS - 1998 on) I gave 10 points for a national title, 5 points for a BCS runner up, 3 points for winning a BCS (non championship) bowl and 2 points for losing a BCS non championship bowl.
My intent was also to count the number of bowl games played in since 1998 and give a number of points for that - 10 points if you played in a bowl every year since 1998 down to 0 points if you played 0 bowls in the past 8 years. Add those numbers up and give each team a percentage of the team with the maximum points. I kind of muddling through the explanation, but I really don't have the time to invest right now in a good explanation. Anybody who has read the formula for the colley matrix and understands that, well my formula is baby food compared to that.
I guess I can count this as the computer poll to go along with the human votes on this subject. And, yes the colley matrix is by far the coolest computer poll out there.
Again, if someone wants to enter the data and post here, have at it!
posted on September 7, 2006 4:34 PM — 67.135.221.54 — link — abuse?
#10 Regan, are you kidding me. Your three stated criteria would make Nebraska #1. Lets review them:
1) Teams with historically strong (or at least decent) programs, if not always on the National stage, at least regionally strong. >> No question Nebraska one of the tops for this criteria.
2) Teams that have performed particularly well during the past 10 years or so >> Well, does anyone have more than three NCs (should have been another NC in 1993 as well) since 19943) Teams that seem to have bright futures. >> No question the future is bright based on end of last year...still remains to be seen, however, but your criteria is speculative as well.
Gerald said:
posted on September 7, 2006 5:04 PM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
Neville:
You did a lot of hard work there buddy! I suppose that I want to give, say, USC more credit for their wins over, say, Notre Dame, than I want to give BYU credit for their wins over Utah State and Idaho. But that brings up another question: do we want to say that Vanderbilt is a better program than Marshall just because Vanderbilt is in the SEC? Not picking on Vandy or glorifying Marshall; just naming what has traditionally been a bad major school and a very good mid - major one. This is especially a good point considering that I - A and I - AA did not split until 1978. Before 1978, you had schools that are now considered I - AA outposts playing in major bowl games and winning national titles (Georgia Tech was in the Southern Conference, which now has I - AA powerhouses like Appalachian State, Furman, and Georgia Southern and once had Marshall when they won their national titles in the Bobby Dodd era). So yes, I think I like your model pretty good, even if it does make BYU equal with UGA.
Bring Brady Back MgoBlue said:
posted on September 7, 2006 5:29 PM — 216.46.210.75 — link — abuse?
Hey Greg!
Michigan all time W/L record-849-280!
first football game-1879!
National Champions-11 times!
Big Ten Championships-42!
Rose Bowls-19!
W/L record against non conf. SEC,Pac Ten,ACC,Big Twelve,Big East- 103-41!
Consecutive Bowl games-31!
last season with a losing record-1967!
W/L record against the SEC,America's best conf. 22-5! Yeah Baby!
Last Ohio State Big Ten Championships-2001-2002!
Last Michigan Big Ten Championships-2000-2003-2004!
State Penn was the 2005 Big Ten Champions losing only to Michigan!
Michigan-Notre dame Rivalry-Mich Leads 18-14!
Michigan-Ohio State Rivalry-Mich leads 57-39..so Ohio State only has to win for the next 18 years to tie it up!
Oh well...maybe your just another Ohio State fan who hates Michigan becouse they have beat you so many times! =) UofM GOBLUE! 1-0
Robstan said:
posted on September 7, 2006 5:30 PM — 66.0.85.89 — link — abuse?
Tampa Hurricane,
You are so biased it is clouded your judgement. What makes you think that the SEC is used to finishing second. In the past 15 years, the SEC has won 4 National Championships:
'92 - Alabama
'96 - Florida
'98 - Tennessee
'03 - LSUThe most by any other conference is the Big 12 with 4 as well (2 by Nebraska, 1 by Oklahoma, and 1 by Texas). You shouldn't make general comments about a conference! After all there are 12 teams in the SEC with a lot of differences.
You're just upset about getting killed by SEC member LSU in the Peach Bowl last year by their backup quarterback.
Oh, and Auburn probably wouldn't have ever played for a National Championship in 2004 because USC and Oklahoma were ranked above them all season long. Auburn started ranked 17. I don't really think it mattered who they played, voters wouldn't have moved them up...
Get over your bias and respect the teams that deserve it! I can't stand Alabama, but I can respect that they have a football program worthy of being included in the elite.
Mooka said:
posted on September 7, 2006 6:49 PM — 138.163.0.44 — link — abuse?
YEAH, Just as I thought. There are others out there who recognize 6 teams out of SEC to be "Premiere Programs." I would also keep 3 more teams outside the cusp in South Carolina, Arkansas, and Ole Miss. Only ingnorant people say SEC is hype.
LARRY IN FL said:
posted on September 7, 2006 7:20 PM — 70.46.7.202 — link — abuse?
As shown in the previous 48 comments we all have a list of who we think should make this list. Whether our team (mine is Florida) is #1 or 20 or 100 we have the best entertainment in the world and gives us a reason to look forward to the tail gate parties and Saturday. No one player, coach or school can make this game. Every school and it's fans consider them self #1 and that what make the game so exciting.
vtstudent said:
posted on September 7, 2006 7:27 PM — 69.174.75.112 — link — abuse?
I think its thats a good selection, but TCU??? no, I also do not think GA Tech or Colorado should be up there either. Iowa should replace at least one of those teams... and also I'm not sure I agree with the selection of Wisconsin, I'm not familiar with their latest stats but I'd consider them a decent team not quite worthy of a top 20. Go Hokies!
Brownsrodeo88 said:
posted on September 7, 2006 7:48 PM — 64.12.116.199 — link — abuse?
Roll Tide,
Notre Dame has more championships than Bama, so go ahead and quit saying got twelve?
What matters is Bama has 12 times as many championships as Auburn. Twice as many as Miami, including one huge national championship win over Miami.
Robstan,
Alabama was a very mediocre/bad team in 2004, with 34 players on the IR on one time or another. In the Auburn game, Bama was missing starting, qb, tailback, halfback and offensive linemen. They were unranked and had a 1st year head coach.
And I'm pretty sure that Alabama's nickname is the Crimson Tide, not the Roll Tides.... or is that some lame thing like calling the Blue Devils the Dookies?
And yet they still played Auburn closer than anyone that year. I beleive it was like 24-18 or something, and Bama lead at the half. I could be wrong.
And if it wasnt for that miracle season, Tommy Tubberville would still be considered a totally average coach, as he should be. Instead, Auburn quit interviewing coaches behind his back and kept him, becuase he can recruit talent thats good enough to keep his team afloat. The only reason they were even close to 13-0 that year was becuase they had a great backfield, not becuase of good coaching or play calling.
As far as SEC fans settling for 2nd place... uh, no. The fact that you would say that with a straight face pretty much nullifies any of your opinions becuase your view of college football is obviously a highly perverted one.
The SEC demands alot out their coaches and players, more than any conference with the only potential exception being the Big 10, who has the same legacy of excellence that the SEC has.
Oh, and btw, Vanderbilt easily has a better program than Marshall... as a Troy (formerly Troy State) fan, I can remember when Marshall went into Movie Gallery Stadium and got beat by second year D-1 team. Then I remember as an Orlando resident when they went into the Citrus Bowl and got owned by a UCF team that hadnt won a game in 17 straight attempts.
At least Vandy has some tradition.
rolltideroll said:
posted on September 7, 2006 8:55 PM — 4.153.92.230 — link — abuse?
Notre Dame has 11 national championships. Alabama has twelve. Auburn has 1.. that was shared. Auburn has been good the past four years. We have been adjusting to a new coach, going through injuries, etc. Auburn can say "fear the thumb" and go ahead and win 5 in a row.. it will be a first time accomplishment. Alabama has had several 4 year streaks and a 10 year streak against auburn in the 70's. So auburn fans can say that is ALL IN THE PAST.. but dont be hypocritical.. those 4 wins are ALL IN THE PAST. Alabama has a better tradition than auburn so au fans stop bickering. Oh and 1993 sugar bowl.. ALABAMA 34 MIAMI 13.. that was one of the best games ive attended. GINO who???
Pig Sooie said:
posted on September 7, 2006 9:45 PM — 66.32.112.211 — link — abuse?
As a Razorback (who have been disappointing in the recent past), living in Miami, I must say that the Miami Hurricanes only have such a great past history, b/c they were in a weak weak conference. How easy was it for the Hurricanes to go undefeated in conference play in the Big East?!! Take a team from the SEC (the best conference in the nation) and try to go undefeated. It is extremely tough. Would Miami have won so many titles if they had a tough game every week. I think not. The ACC will be good to Miami (even though it is no SEC) in that they will now have tougher and less winning seasons for years to come.
BUCKEYE MARK said:
posted on September 7, 2006 9:53 PM — 65.24.61.71 — link — abuse?
How about this formula?
Stadium size says a lot about a program
1-point per 1,000 stadium capacity
1-point per win in last ten years
victories over ranked teams last ten years 25 points for beating #1 24 for #2 and so on
15 points for "NC"
10 points for BCS bowl win
5 points for BCS loss
5 points for Bowl win
2 ponts for bowl loss
Zac said:
posted on September 7, 2006 10:21 PM — 65.31.229.230 — link — abuse?
I must say, Mr. Donahue, you might have aroused more controversy had you discussed, the US in the Middle East, Abortion, or Gun Control, but I'm doubting it. It doesn't matter who you are, Coach, Sports Media, Historian, or Arm-Chair-Quarterback. I challenge you to get two people to agree on any top 20 or 25 teams you name. And your criteria: "...core ingredients of recent success, legend, and football lore..." There are so few teams which meet the criteria. Speaking of which, how did you miss Florida St? And given your criteria, you could argue Army should be among the teams listed. They had quite the competitive bunch throughout the coach Cahill years, till his last year, that is. What about BC during the Flutie years? It's arguable Maryland deserves consideration. And lets not forget; North Carolina had an undefeated team once. Even as a Mountaineer fan, and believe me; I appreciate the plug; I have to say you've mis-listed them. They belong with the up-and-coming. True, they had some good years when Sam Huff was a player, or when Carlin, Bowden, and Nehlan were coaches, but they were hardly consistently on par with the Alabamas, Michigans, Nebraskas, Notre Dames, or Oakalhomas of college football. Coach "Rod" my have them going in the right direction, but they still may be a year away. The point is; if you were looking for some agreement, this article is loose/loose. On the other hand, if you were looking for controversy, you definitely got yourself a winner. On that, I think we can all agree.
lsutiger08 said:
posted on September 7, 2006 10:24 PM — 68.222.48.221 — link — abuse?
Mayor:
I don't know if Herbstreit and Corso are the curse, but it sure looks that way. In the first Ore. St. game they've called since 2004, kicker Serna misses a 36 yard chip shot.Ahh...brings back good memories,eh.
Neville said:
posted on September 8, 2006 12:00 AM — 70.167.26.232 — link — abuse?
OK, I went ahead and entered the data. I included national titles, heisman trophies, number of bowl games played, bcs title games, bcs bowls (rose, fiesta, orange, sugar) in the last 8 years, and number of bowl appearances in the last 8 years. I came up with this list:
Rank School Total Points:
1 Southern Cal. 1.75
2 Oklahoma 1.69
3 Ohio State 1.60
4 Miami, Fla. 1.55
5 Florida State 1.47
6 Texas 1.38
7 Nebraska 1.15
8 Notre Dame 1.08
9 LSU 1.05
10 Tennessee 1.05
11 Michigan 1.00
12 Florida 0.91
13 Alabama 0.83
14 Georgia 0.75
15 Minnesota 0.69
16 Auburn 0.63
17 Penn State 0.61
18 Pittsburgh 0.59
19 Georgia Tech 0.57
20 Colorado 0.56
21 UCLA 0.56
22 TCU 0.55
23 Wisconsin 0.54
24 Virginia Tech 0.54
25 Texas A&M 0.51
26 Washington 0.47
27 Syracuse 0.46
28 Army 0.44
29 Clemson 0.43
30 Brigham Young 0.41
The full list is still here
Some interesting things I noticed:
-Alabama and Tennessee have *zero* heisman winners. You would expect more, since those are generally regarded as elite.-Pittsburgh outranks Va Tech by 6 spots. If you inspect it, Pittsburgh has 2 national titles, 1 heisman, has been to 24 overall bowls and has played in 1 BCS level bowl since the BCS. VA tech claims 0 national titles (although they have a spot reseved for the trophy in their trophy room!) 0 heismans, 19 total bowls and have played in 2 BCS level bowls since 1998. Pittsburgh being ahead of Va Tech is something I would not have predicted.
- Ohio State beats Michigan handily (7 vs 2 national titles, 6 vs 3 heismans). Of course Michigan is hurt by my arbitrary designation of their 1997 title as long term (not short term success)
- The best school in the SEC? LSU (the power of the crystal football). Alabama is #4 in the SEC.
- Yes, with the data in there Georgia #14, BYU #30. All is well in the world now...
So to Kevin's original list of 20, my computer says:
Lose Wisconsin, Va Tech, Tx A&M and West Virginia from your top 20 (I can't believe you included W Va).
Move in Minnesota, Pittsburgh, Ga Tech, and Colorado (even though they lost to Montana State last week - heck, what does a computer know anyways!)
posted on September 8, 2006 1:06 AM — 69.55.136.18 — link — abuse?
I cannot believe all the HYPE the Sooners and Fighting Irish are getting.They both nearly got bushwacked by mediocre teams.Without Bomar,the Chokelahoma Sooners are a total has been outfit.Quite frankly they and Notre Dame shock me ,as being a Nebraska fan, I firmly believe Notre Dame and Oklahoma have the two best coaches in the nation.If these two outfits play the remainder of their games like they did the first one they are destined to meet in the Toilet Bowl.
BUCKEYE MARK said:
posted on September 8, 2006 3:13 AM — 65.24.61.71 — link — abuse?
here is a list I put together based on past ten seasons final rankings #1=25 points #2=24 points and so on
#1 Florida St 160
#2 Miami (FL) 147
#3 Florida 137
#3 Ohio St 137
#5 Michigan 136
#6 Texas 134
#7 Tennesee 134
#8 Nebraska 119
#9 Oklahoma 116
10 Georgia 115
11 Kansas St 111
11 Virginia Tech 111
13 Louisianna St 104
14 Southern Cal 96
15 Pennsylvania St 86
16 Auburn 73
17 Alabama 66
17 Washington St 66
19 Wisconsin 65
20 Oregon 6321 Iowa 62
22 UCLA 49
23 Washigton 48
23 Notre Dame 48
25 Arizona St 41
25 Colorado 41Texas A+m and West Virginia not even on Cusps @24,22
Cusps teams mentioned not cutting it
TCU 24
Arkansas 19
michigan St 19
Clemson 19
Pitt 8
Navy 2"Keep it to yourself"
Louisville 36
Boise St 33
South Carolina 20Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 8, 2006 8:41 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
MIKE MACKAN how could anyone with brain activity think that that is a good top 10. You have Florida with their 1 national championship and FSU with their 2, but you don't have Miami and their 5 in the past 25 years?!? Please tell me that your reasoning for this is. The only acceptable answer is you had a massive head trama and were just typing gibberish.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 8, 2006 8:43 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Mooka, how could you say "3 more teams outside the cusp in South Carolina, Arkansas, and Ole Miss"? What are your next three teams on the cusp, Central Michigan, Duke, and FA(I)U? Believing that those three teams are on the cusp is what I would call overhyping the SEC!
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 8, 2006 9:37 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Robstan, your numbers are crap. Sorry but there is no nicer way to state it. Using your period of the past 15 years, there have been a total 17 national championship teams because in two years there was a split title. The break down for current conference affiliation is as follows:
ACC - 4
Big 10 - 2
Big 12 - 5
Pac 10 - 2
SEC - 4As you can see your statistics are totally skewed towards the SEC which tied for second in that period not first as you claimed.
Robstan said:
posted on September 8, 2006 9:46 AM — 66.0.85.89 — link — abuse?
Brownsrodeo88,
Keep in mind that I think the SEC is an excellent conference with a ton of tradition. I'm not saying that the fans settle for 2nd - that's what Tampa Hurricane was mentioning and I was wondering what part of Busch Gardens he spent too much time in!
And as for coaching, no, no no. Coaching is extremely important and any knowledgeable fan knows that. Even though USC has world class talent each year, do you honestly think they would play as well as they have without Carroll (and Chow, etc)? Auburn struggled in 2003 with basically the same team as 2004. The difference was coaching - Borges. So, don't sell the coaches short. They are the ones who build programs, the players come and go. The players win games, but the coaches are what helps make them successful.
Think what you want about Tubberville, but Auburn has won at least a tie of the SEC West nearly every year since he's been at Auburn. Very consistent for a division that is usually all over the place...
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 8, 2006 9:48 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Robstan to continue with my point I have listed the national championship teams for the past 25 years along with current conference affiliation to show you the stronger conferences when it comes to national titles.
2005 Texas Big 12
2004 USC Pac 10
2003 LSU SEC / USC Pac 10
2002 Ohio State Big 10
2001 Miami ACC
2000 Oklahoma Big 12
1999 FSU ACC
1998 Tennessee SEC
1997 Michigan Big 10 / Nebraska Big 12
1996 Florida SEC
1995 Nebraska Big 12
1994 Nebraska Big 12
1993 FSU ACC
1992 Alabama SEC
1991 Miami ACC
1990 Colorado Big 12
1989 Miami ACC
1988 Notre Dame independant
1987 Miami ACC
1986 Penn State Big 10
1985 Oklahoma Big 12
1984 BYU Mountain West
1983 Miami ACC
1982 Penn State Big 10
1981 Clemson ACCDuring that 25 year period there were 27 national championship teams. There current conference affiliations are as follows:
ACC - 8 (29.63%)
Big 10 - 4 (14.81%)
Big 12 - 7 (25.93%)
Independant - 1 (3.70%)
Mountain West - 1 (3.70%)
Pac 10 - 2 (7.41%)
SEC 4 - (14.81%)How does this show dominance in national championships like you claim?!? The SEC is tied with the Big 10 for 3rd place! The ACC and Big 12 have dominated in the past 25 years!
AU03 said:
posted on September 8, 2006 10:10 AM — 205.255.224.10 — link — abuse?
If Auburn counted NC's like BAMA did, they'd have around 6 and not 1.
What other school would count a NC given by a group called the Football Thesaurus after being shut out by two conference teams? (1941)
They still have 11, but you also have to take into account the fact that NC's used to be given before bowl games, and BAMA lost bowl games a few of those other years. It would have been like USC getting the NC last year before playing Texas
it kind of defeats the purpose of playing the bowl game.I will say, however, that BAMA is arguably the most accomplished football program of all time, certainly one of the top 5, and anyone who thinks they should not be included in these rankings(Tampa Hurricane, I'm looking at you) is a moron.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 8, 2006 10:18 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
AU03 you are the moron. This listing is for the premiere programs "of our era." All the success of Alabama (which they do have a lot) is far from during my era. That success all happened before most of the bloggers on this site were even born. AU03 hopefully you can look up what our era means and realize that success in the 40s through 60s isn't in the era of a lot of readers. If this posting was for the premiere programs of all time, then Alabama should be included. However, it is for the premiere programs of my era and they are far off that list!
Gerald said:
posted on September 8, 2006 10:35 AM — 65.12.162.103 — link — abuse?
Tampa Hurricane:
Claiming Miami's national titles won as an INDEPENDENT and as a Big East member for the ACC is absurd and dishonest and you know it. Miami didn't even play any ACC schools back then, especially when they were independent, because back then FSU was independent too.
Until FSU joined the ACC, they had two national titles in their history: Clemson in 1981, and Georgia Tech in 1990. When FSU joined, they won 2 more. Period. And until Coker gets replaced with either Randy Shannon or Butch Davis, they are going to stay at 4 until the cows come home.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 8, 2006 10:47 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Gerald,
I stated that the national titles are with current affiliations. In every statistic with national titles, you consider them with the conference that the plays for now. Taking your line of reasoning, when a team won a title for the Big-8 does it not count now for the Big-12? The ACC teams have 8 national titles in the past 25 years. I know this is a hard statistic for an SEC fan to comprehend due to the fact that your conference looks below average in national titles within the past 25 years, but quit crying about it.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 8, 2006 10:50 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Gerald, are you just upset that your weak SEC is only 3 national titles ahead of the powerhouse Mountain West Conference in the past 25 years? Maybe the SEC should consider the Mountian West their type of opponent and nearest rival in skill level?
Greg said:
posted on September 8, 2006 11:24 AM — 152.163.100.196 — link — abuse?
Mgoblue
I would certainly include Michigan,whose fight song along with Notre Dame's and USC'S are the best,among the all time elite.My regrets also to any sooner fan out there. By the way I am an Alabama graduate who just loves college football.Hail to the victors and Roll tide
Mooka said:
posted on September 8, 2006 11:32 AM — 138.163.0.37 — link — abuse?
Tampa,
I'm not talking about recent accomplishments for SC, ARK, and Ole Miss. I'm talking about overall accomplishments that put those programs outside the cusp. Did Duke, FA, and whoever else ever win a NC? No, but these teams did and SC is only a few years away from getting there.
Tomcat said:
posted on September 8, 2006 12:04 PM — 70.249.42.116 — link — abuse?
Hey guys Seems like everyone here has their own formula.I dont have any formula.Check out these facts, note these do not include last weeks games for example Texas has 801 wins not 800
NCAA Div I-A all time lists
Victories
1. Michigan 849 wins .744 pct.
2.Notre Dame 811 wins .744 pct.
3.Texas 800 wins .714 pct.
4.Nebraska 794 wins .707 pct.
5.Alabama 774 wins .711 pct.
NCAA Div I-A winning percentage
1. Michigan .744
2. Notre Dame .744
3. Texas .714
4. Oklahoma .713
5.Alabama .711All time Bowl Appearances
1. Alabama 53 .594 win pct.
2. Tennessee 45 .533 win pct.
3. Texas 45 .511 win pct.
4. USC 44 .636 win pct
5. Nebraska 43 .512 win pct.All Time Bowl Victories
1. Alabama 30
2.USC 28
3.Tennessee 24
Oklahoma 24
Penn State 24
6.Texas 22
Georgia 22
Georgia Tech 22
Nebraska 22
10. Mississippi 19sorry Florida teams dont make any of these list
Texas is 2-2 vs Miami 2-0 vs Florida
Texas is 7-0-1 vs Alabama Texas is 59-39-5 vs OK
Texas is 55-21 vs Ark Texas is 6-4 vs Neb
Texas is 1-0 vs Ohio State Texas 1-0 vs Mich
Texas is 9-7-1 vs LSU Texas 2-1 vs Tenn
Texas is 60-20 vs TCU Texas is 41-14 vs TTechHookem -Horns #10 or #11 on some peoples list
thats okay, looks like we are in the top five of everything all time
Recent Times
11-2 11-2 10-3 11-1 13-0 Hookem-HornsThe Mayor said:
posted on September 8, 2006 12:19 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
lsutiger08
I really enjoyed the first 6 minutes of the Beaver Bronco game last night. Even though I am a Duck, I root for the Pac-10 in out of conference games. I was impressed with the way Justin Wilcox (Defensive Coordinator for the Broncos, former Duck and son of Hall of Famer Dave Wilcox) got the defense for Boise State back in the game.
Yes, Serna's kick and the subsequent replays of his performance at LSU two years ago, brought back memories...great memories, I was in Maui watching that game at a beach bar. "Ease his pain." I thought, 6 longboard beers did the trick just fine.
So far this season it looks like the Trojans + 9 conference again, aaauuuuggghhhh, an entire season of taunting from SEC fans. I have the stones, I can take it though.
Ducks over the Bulldogs on Saturday in a close one, take the over (54).
The Mayor said:
posted on September 8, 2006 12:29 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Neville,
Interesting spreadsheet. Might want to double check your entries though. The Ducks were the BCS Runner Up in 2001-2002 yet you did not give them any credit for that. It jumps them up to 26th place on your list.
Pac 10 apologist said:
posted on September 8, 2006 1:13 PM — 66.195.220.211 — link — abuse?
One thing is evident about this list how poor the Pac 10 and teams out west really are. Last night's Oregon St debacle further exemplifies the soft rep the Pac 10 has is patently accurate. The media tries to sweep aside what is so obvious that the Pac 10 sucks, and USC would have zero national titles if they played in a real conference week in and week out.
AU03 said:
posted on September 8, 2006 1:27 PM — 205.255.224.10 — link — abuse?
TampaHurricane, did you watch the 1993 Sugar Bowl?
Would you consider that "our era?"In addition, a lot of the people posting here were alive in the late 70's (not myself), but many were. The SEC won NC's in '78, '79, and '80, the 3 years before your list begins.
To defend Auburn, they've had two perfect seasons in the past 13 years- no other 1-A college football team can say that. They've also gone 16-1 in the SEC in the past 2, which hasn't been done since in around a decade
Miami's had a grat run in the past quarter century- they didn't deserve the 1983 NC- they played one good team in the regular season that year, and lost to them by 25 points, a team that Auburn beat, but still a great run. Had Miami have had Auburn's schedule in 1983, they would have lost at least 3 games.
Auburn and Alabama both belong here, though. For you to think otherwise is absurd.
TankBlack said:
posted on September 8, 2006 2:48 PM — 171.161.224.10 — link — abuse?
Clemson? Come on. They have done nothing in the last twenty years. They roughed up a very weak ACC in the 80s, but have done little since. The last few years, the have been to the Champs Sports Bowl, the Humanitarian Bowl and the Tangerine Bowl. How many elite schools would call that a success?
I do not get Wisconsin or Texas A&M either.
Anonymous IV said:
posted on September 8, 2006 3:40 PM — 71.15.112.79 — link — abuse?
The amount of conference re-alignment makes an objective view of this rather difficult. Even looking at individual schools one also has to view the schedule they played. There is also is a large amount of media bias involved.
Brownsrodeo88 said:
posted on September 8, 2006 3:48 PM — 64.12.116.199 — link — abuse?
Robstan,
Look at the 1999 Bama team. That coach blew like a Category 5 hurricane, and the team finished top 10 with an SEC Championship.
Then when, Shaun Alexander and Andrew Zow and some big defensive players left, the team blew, and the coach is now a D-3 coordinator after a few years coaching high school and furthering his name as an anus.
Gerald said:
posted on September 8, 2006 3:51 PM — 65.12.162.103 — link — abuse?
Tampa Hurricane:
If adding Miami's national titles as an independent to the ACC national title total so that you will have some way of claiming superiority over the SEC makes you happy, then go ahead. I will say that regarding the Big 12, the Big 12 is merely the old Big 8 that added 4 Southwestern Conference teams when the SWC went bankrupt. So, the Colorado, Oklahoma, and Nebraska national titles in the Big 8 still count because they never changed conferences. But the Texas 1969 national title does not count towards the Big 12 total because in 1969 Texas was not in any incarnation of the current conference but in another conference altogether.
By the same token, the SEC has no claim on George Rogers' Heisman Trophy, because South Carolina was an independent. Nor do they have any claim on any success that South Carolina had when they were in the ACC. And likewise the ACC has no claim on the excellent seasons that Georgia Tech and Clemson had when those schools were in the SEC and the Southern Conference.
But again, hey, who cares. Add Miami's 4 national titles to the ACC's haul if you choose; it means nothing to me. What WILL mean something to me will be the outcomes of the Georgia - Georgia Tech, Florida - FSU, South Carolina - Clemson, and the Peach Bowl games, and also if the SEC plays the ACC in a BCS game. Those have, er, tended to go the SEC's way the past few years, going way back to Tennessee beating FSU for the national title in 1998 and climaxing with that Peach Bowl debacle last year. Do you disagree? It appears that your ACC needs to go back to its roots and rediscover its historical dominance, just as the SEC had to after an extended down period in the 1980s during which they won only 1 national title. Then again, even during that down period, Tennessee still managed to destroy defending national champions Miami in the 1985 Sugar Bowl. So the more things change, the more things stay the same ...
posted on September 8, 2006 5:09 PM — 68.35.226.201 — link — abuse?
USC
Texas
Ohio State
Penn State
Oklahoma
Notre Dame
Virginia Tech
FSU
Florida
Miami
Georgia
West Virginia
Michigan
LSU
Auburn
AlabamaBring Brady Back MgoBlue said:
posted on September 8, 2006 5:09 PM — 216.46.212.153 — link — abuse?
Hey Buckeye Mark!
Post 56 was great!.... What were you thinking?
You said stadium size says a lot about a program!
Everbody knows Michigan stadium is bigger than the shoe!
Michigan stadium record crowd-112,118 (against the Buckeyes =)
The HorseShoe-105,565-against Texas.
C'mon man don't ever give Michigan an advantage!
That's...that's ..LIKE A TOTAL BUCKEYE SIN!
PUNISHABLE BY DEATH...IF YOU LIVE IN COLUMBUS OHIO! hahaha I have too much fun with Buckeyes ! Good luck against Texas Saturday! Go Buckeyes! UofM GOBLUE! And NO I DON'T HATE THE BUCKEYES!.....
I just don't like em!Bring Brady Back MgoBlue said:
posted on September 8, 2006 5:29 PM — 216.46.212.153 — link — abuse?
Notre Dame should sooo not be ranked in the top 5!
here's my event's list for Notre Dame!
#1 Michigan will Burn Their BCS Bowl invite!
#2 Penn State will Burn Brady Quinn's Hiesman invite!
#3 Michigan State is going to beat them for the 3rd straight year!
#4 USC is going to bump them off the top 25!Sorry to all you Notre Dame fan's! Why don't you join the Big Ten? Much better chance of a descent bowl game! Your already playing 4 big ten games this year. although after you lose to three of them...you will be reeeaal happy you only play 4 =)
Detroit ND FAN said:
posted on September 8, 2006 5:39 PM — 71.79.126.192 — link — abuse?
Tampa, you sure are bold. But its pretty funny.
Cool Hand Mike said:
posted on September 8, 2006 5:45 PM — 204.29.117.4 — link — abuse?
Canes Alum:
Alabama hasn't done much except spanking that Miami ass in the Sugar Bowl for a national championship.
neville said:
posted on September 8, 2006 6:16 PM — 70.167.26.232 — link — abuse?
Mayor (77), sorry the way I set it up gives the loser of the BCS championship game more points (5) than the team that comes in #2 in the final polls (3 points, in that case). In 2001 a very undeserving Nebraska team got the BCS runner up status (as I am defining it).
That was a highway robbery year. Oregon should have played. Still though- in general, USC is the only program in the top 20 (human or computer)
neville said:
posted on September 8, 2006 6:31 PM — 70.167.26.232 — link — abuse?
Tomcat 75 - that is junk. Why don't you post Texas' all time record vs Notre Dame, BYU or for that matter Colorado College? The Florida schools have been good enough for long enough to be considered right there with Texas.
By the way TX is still 1/2 of Oklahoma in terms of total national titles and Heismans. Have fun looking up at Oklahoma for many years to come.
Plus, can any school be taken seriously with Mack Brown as a head coach?
Paragon SC said:
posted on September 8, 2006 7:09 PM — 68.37.204.187 — link — abuse?
I have a problem with Navy being on the cusp. Because of the necessity of a congressional appointment to attend Annapolis and the five year commitment post graduaion they just don't recruit top notch "players". Its a great place for an education and molds character and maturity but very few academy grads see a future in football.
Zac said:
posted on September 8, 2006 10:57 PM — 65.31.229.230 — link — abuse?
Mr. Donahue: Remember what I said about achieving any agreement? I rest my case. If anyone does come up with a formula for figuring the best teams of "our era", one that's fair, valid, and accurate, give the BCS a call. They're the ones who really need it.
Mooka said:
posted on September 8, 2006 11:56 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
LOL @ PAC-10 apologist. Let no other network ever, ever try to hype up the PAC-10 again!!!! Just be/c USC is good does not mean any of those other teams are good. Isn't it ironic one of the best teams come from the weakest conference? Sorry PAC-10ers I'm not trying to bash too hard, but the only team I halfway respect besides USC is UCLA and I don't even know about them.
BUCKEYE MARK said:
posted on September 9, 2006 12:08 AM — 65.24.61.71 — link — abuse?
Brady I know Michigan has a bigger Stadium not by much though and I respect Michigan as much as I hate them and they should be in the top 5 programs of all time top 10 in the current era
only four teams have stadiums with over 100,000 capacity
Michigan
Penn ST
Ohio St
Tennesee
and all four are from the only two conferences that are truly competitive every yearThe Mayor said:
posted on September 9, 2006 12:10 AM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Neville,
No problem, your criteria are your criteria, like I said earlier, between Len Casanova and Mike Bellotti it was dismal time, so bad that if we won 100 games over 10 years we still would not be not worthy of calling us a premium program in history of college football.
In my four years at Oregon we won 12 games, 12 total games! That is what the makes the recent success so sweet...not like spoiled fans at other schools that scream for their coaches head after a .850 winning percentage. Good lord, we stuck with Rich Brooks for a lifetime and all we got was one Rose Bowl loss to Kijana Carter.
Silas Walker said:
posted on September 9, 2006 7:57 AM — 74.241.169.46 — link — abuse?
Hey add Oklahoma State yes they are in the shawdow of Oklahoma but they do live in the big 12. I believe it is one of if not the toughest conference in the country. Sure Nebraska and Colorado are down the last few years. Not only has OSU produced a couple of heisman winners it also has produced a bunch of excellent coaches. So why shouldn't it be on the "cusp" Stillwater is a great small college town just a couple of hours away from one of the country's greatest colleges, OU.
posted on September 9, 2006 8:32 AM — link — abuse?
Zac - #1, drop the Mr. Donahue stuff. It's Kevin. Mr. Donahue is my father, regardless of how old I keep getting every damn year.
#2 - FSU is on the initial list. There's no way you can leave the Seminoles off. Even if you did a top 5 of the last 20 years, FSU is on the list.
Robby Bonfire said:
posted on September 9, 2006 9:04 PM — 70.100.231.35 — link — abuse?
UCLA a revolving door of coaches? Let's see, since 1977 the Bruins have employed: Terry Donohue, Bob Toledo, and Karl Dorrell. Three coaches in 29 years. Not exactly a "revolving door." Regarding not having a stadium on campus, well they do commute to a little yard called THE ROSE BOWL. Or is that ancient concrete palace on the other side of town, located right in the middle of crack house row, and where local anti-Korean street riots erupt on occasion, a more desirable venue?
By the way, McKay, Tollner, Robinson, and now Pete Carroll - the Trojans have had more coaches than the Bruins over the last three decades.
okhurricane said:
posted on September 9, 2006 11:33 PM — 69.129.235.155 — link — abuse?
Some are wanting to knock Miami for various reasons; but if you look at the statistics, for the past 25 years no other program comes close to their success. Five national titles, 2 Heismans, a 58-game home winning streak (NCAA record), a 34 game winning streak, one of the top in NFL draft picks, top in first round draft picks, etc.
Let me say that for all the arguments about top conferences and top programs, ranking them in order is difficult at best. I think the list is pretty solid. Some of the arguments made fit in the history section, but leave them out of the modern era.
Gerald said:
posted on September 9, 2006 11:42 PM — 65.12.162.103 — link — abuse?
Robby Bonfire:
You left off Paul Hackett and Larry Smith from the list of USC coaches in that era. Hackett was between Robinson and Carroll, Smith between Robinson and I believe Tollner. Further, Robinson was USC's coach TWICE between 77 and now. But I am not certain that McKay belongs on your list. I am relatively certain that McKay won the 73 USC title and Robinson the 78 one, so I think that by 77 McKay was coaching the Tampa Bay Buccaneers in the NFL. Didn't McKay draft Grambling State's Doug Williams in 1978 for the Bucs? I am relatively certain of it. But in any case, your point is still good.
Gerald said:
posted on September 10, 2006 12:05 AM — 65.12.162.103 — link — abuse?
Neville:
"Plus, can any school be taken seriously with Mack Brown as a head coach?"
I can name you three schools that would very much disagree with you. North Carolina and Tulane both very much wish that Mack Brown was still coaching their schools. School #3? Southern Cal, who also wishes that Mack Brown were still coaching at Tulane or North Carolina instead of at Texas last year. Then again, had Mack Brown stayed at UNC or Tulane, he would have have simply built national title winning programs at those.
People who denigrate Mack Brown just do not look at where Tulane, UNC, and Texas were before Mack Brown arrived, nor do they look at where Tulane and UNC are now. Especially UNC. In Mack Brown's last year there, they were 11 - 1 and ranked #3 in the country. Look at them now ... losing to Rutgers.
The guy took a skinny kid from the inner city that every other major program would have moved to wide receiver in five seconds, and turned him into a 2 time Rose Bowl MVP and the #3 pick in the NFL draft. It is ridiculous that guys like Rick Neuheisel get revered as coaching geniuses while Mack Brown is regarded as a numbskull.
Aufan322006 said:
posted on September 10, 2006 12:16 AM — 208.45.204.72 — link — abuse?
TampaHurricane
Auburn may have had a light nonconference schedule that year but we beat four teams ranked in the top ten that year. USC and OU played four between them. And besides we started out the season ranked 17 instead of 1 and 2. Now had Auburn played USC in the Title game it would have been alot better than OU.
And still what has Miami done in the last couple years. oh yea lose the big games and beat up on the little guys when they can. Sounds more like bullies than a football team.OU Fan said:
posted on September 10, 2006 1:16 AM — 69.179.197.88 — link — abuse?
The Mayor, man I'm not going to try to predict next weekend dude. I really don't know what will happen. It will be a good game, and I can't wait. The Ducks will be a tough team for the Sooners to beat. If I were you though I would be thinking the same thing. Don't underestimate Paul Thompson. Go Sooners!!!
Neville said:
posted on September 10, 2006 2:02 AM — 70.167.26.232 — link — abuse?
With regard to Mack Brown, it is just something about the way he looks and the way he acts, and despite all the statistics in the world I will just always believe the guy is a loser. It is hard to quantify, but it is a feeling I have and can not deny. It may be I have heard him apologize to the world and Bevo too many times after an Oklahoma loss. Something about the way he acts and looks just prevents me from giving him the respect I would of a major college head coach.
I'll give him 1 call throughout his career that impressed me. When Texas played Texas Tech about 3 years ago Texas tech took a lead with 1 minute left in the game. Mack brings in a very cold Chance Mock who had not played a down that game for a borderline effective Vince Young and Chance did a 90 yeard drive in under a minute to win that game.
Short of that though, it will be hard for me to ever really respect Mack Brown. In my mind, all of the success the last 2 years has been due to an amazing Vince Young, and not Mr February Mack Brown. In fact, Mack himself acknowledges that Texas had success last year only because Mack let up on Vince and gave him less, not more, direction and instruction. When Mack turned Vince loose, he became unstoppable.
Tim said:
posted on September 10, 2006 9:07 AM — 198.49.239.248 — link — abuse?
Any person who did this stupid spreadsheet is a dork! If you have a family and young kids get off the computer and pay attention to them and let the football season play itself out. I don't care what the stats say the best program in the last 20 years has been NEBRASKA! I know that and I'm a Colorado fan.
Zac said:
posted on September 10, 2006 10:47 AM — 65.31.229.230 — link — abuse?
Kevin: I'm reminded of a line from Finding Nemo: "Mr. Turtle is my father. The name's Crush." "Kevin" it is.
As for my having somehow missed FSU on your list, I have no explanation for that; I just flat out missed it. If that were my biggest screw-up, life would be easy. But, it isn't, and it's not.
Speaking of FSU, how about those men of "Troy" giving the Noles all they could handle, in Tallahassee no less? Come to think of it, how about the entire weekend? Virginia, USF, Navy all survive by one against Wyoming, FL INTL, and UMass respectively. NH beats NWstrn, and Akron wins at NC St. Even a Tate-less Iowa had all it could handle at Syracuse. (I watched the game; 3 of the back-up QB's INT's were not his fault.) Even Buffalo almost won its second game in a row. So, is it parody; is it that "on any given day" thing, or both? By the way, I think the questions about OSU's replacements on "D" have been answered. I won't lie; I wanted to see OSU win, but expected the Horns to take it. OSU really showed us all something; they really brought it against the Horns.
Bugeater1 said:
posted on September 10, 2006 1:09 PM — 71.34.135.248 — link — abuse?
If one cherry picks a period, say, since 1970: Nebraska comes up #1 in wins, winning percentage, heisman winners, and tied for #1 in number of national titles. And that includes NU's only down period of the past 40 years (1st half of this decade).
Go Big Red - Beat USC this week.
Bring Brady Back MgoBlue said:
posted on September 10, 2006 5:14 PM — 216.46.213.103 — link — abuse?
Hey zac ! that was some stand by the Iowa D-line! what was that,8 stands inside the 2 yard line! amazing!
Here's my list. for the Big Ten.
#1 Ohio State eerrrrrr! Too many Hiesman candidates to mention! Why do they all go to Ohio State???? oh yeah! $$$$$$$$$$$ haha!
#2 Michigan...Best Defense in a long time..Defense wins championships! and too many RB's to count!
#3 Iowa...Big D plus Tate=Great season!
#4 Michigan State..Big Offense..if they find their game.
#5 Wisconsin...those cheese-head fans will keep the home record up there.
#6 Penn State...They forgot how to play football since last season.
#7 Indiana... wow that's great for the Hoosiers!
#8 Minnesota....lost both running backs..(their whole team)
#9 North Western....lost head coach.
#10 Purdue....Lost head coach.
#11 Illinois...they have a football team?Brooks said:
posted on September 10, 2006 10:01 PM — 67.140.229.70 — link — abuse?
I just wanted to write about how mediocre the Gamecocks are and always will be. All us Dawg fans heard was Steve Spurrier this and Steve Spurrier that. Reality is that South Carolina football is a joke. 8 wins is a miracle. I feel sorry for all the South Carolina fans. Constant disappointment is a way of life over there. It's okay though. We'll just keep taking your state's best players. They like to win championships. Bow down to the DAWGS. A real football program. GO DAWGS!
IrishJT said:
posted on September 11, 2006 8:29 AM — 71.207.229.9 — link — abuse?
It's amazing how many of you thought Penn State would end Brady Quinn's Heisman hopes and Notre Dame's BCS hopes.
It was 41-3 before the JV defense took the field. JoePa called 2 timeouts in the last 6 minutes so his offense could put a few points up. What a joke!!
poz4ua said:
posted on September 11, 2006 10:54 AM — 69.244.4.104 — link — abuse?
I want to thank all of our soldiers who have and who are fighting for our freedom. Because of them I'm writing this today. My thoughts and prayers are for all of the people who passed away in the towers and there family's who are without them today. We should never forget what happened that day. We need to remember all of those who made the ultimate sacrifice for our freedom. God bless each and everyone one of our soldiers, police, fireman,etc. Thank you! God Bless America
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 11, 2006 1:17 PM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Aufan322006 if they were such a great team that year then where is their national title. I realize that fans of loser programs might not understand it, but the reason to play is to be the best. Second place doesn't cut it. It doesn't matter how many times your weak school can manage a second place finish, they are still losers unless they get the championship!
Miami has more national titles in the past 25 years than the entire SEC combined, so how does that make the SEC a powerful conference?!?
Tomcat said:
posted on September 11, 2006 2:30 PM — 70.249.42.116 — link — abuse?
In response to post#92 Neville I did not post junk these are NCAA Records, If you dont like the facts than I cant help you.#99 OU Fan you said crap? No not crap NCAA records are what they are.I didn't produce favorable stats and formulas I just looked at the records.This thread is about top premiere football programs and whether yall like it or not, thats the way it is.
As far as recent times UT has two losses over three seasons. OU has five. Whos your team Neville what are their records ETc.Etc.
Mr. Mayor good luck this weekend, Go Ducks
Looked like Macks brother Watson and the UAB Blazers gave those Sooners a close one.
Hookem-Horns OU sux
post #113 Wow now thats really an intelligent list ,are you a Big 10 fan?Tomcat said:
posted on September 11, 2006 2:57 PM — 70.249.42.116 — link — abuse?
Thanks Kevin for the link, Ou fan and Neville need more, check it out
Texas against other conferences
ACC .654 pct.
Big 10 .625 pct.
Pac 10 .656 pct.
WAC 1.0 pct.
SunBelt 1.0 pct.
SEC .671 pct.
Big East .591 pct.
C USA .734 pct.
Ind .429 pct.
Yes .429 against independents yes Notre Dame is a premiere program.Bring Brady Back MgoBlue said:
posted on September 11, 2006 4:37 PM — 216.46.213.170 — link — abuse?
So sorry Irish JT.
The Penn st. defense lost like two starters on defense from last year? And their defense was their strong point last year! So I was assuming Joe PA would give the Irish a game. read post 113.
I guess the Irish will be challenged three more times,against Michigan...if Michigan steps up play from the first two games,or else they will join Penn st. in the losers circle!
And against Michigan st....only becouse Michigan st. has beat Notre Dame two years in a row!
And USC...I think after the Arkansas game they proved they re-loaded reeaal quick..will know more after the Nebraska game!
But don't expect to blow out Michigan! Last season they lost all five games by 7 or less and did a lot better against Ohio State than Notre Dame did,Michigan led the Ohio State Buckeyes 21-12 with 7 minutes to play,and it was a late Ohio State comeback to win! And last year michigan lost by 7 to Notre Dame! Should be another good game!Bring Brady Back MgoBlue said:
posted on September 11, 2006 5:05 PM — 216.46.213.170 — link — abuse?
Hey Tomcat! Remember the 2005 rosebowl?
Were you scared?
Remember Texas was down by two with a couple seconds left!
Remember how Vince ran down the field the last drive?
Without vince that was a loss for Texas!
How about a rematch! Texas-Michigan Rosebowl jan 01!
Sorry without V.Y. there will be no last second win!
I guess it's obvious V.Y. won the first Ohio st. game!
Without V.Y. Texas will lose to Michigan in a rematch!
How many Big Ten games has Texas played?The Spirit of Bill Oliver said:
posted on September 11, 2006 9:28 PM — 152.163.100.196 — link — abuse?
"Cane creep", is the 34-13 beat down in 1992 recent enough?
How about the 10-3 1999 with Shaun Alexander, Chris Samuels, and Cornelius Griffin at the helm?
10-3 2002, 10-3 in 2005
Alabama beat a Ohio State team that featured Eddie George and Joey Galloway back in 1994.
That was a 11-1 season with a one point loss to Florida in the SEC Championship. Wasn't Derrick Rudd and Deshea Townsend on that team?, yes they were.
Tomcat said:
posted on September 12, 2006 2:45 AM — 69.152.139.90 — link — abuse?
Hey Bring Brady Mo Blue Yes I Remember the Alamo Bowl Game, yall lost that year to another Big XII team,a team that lost to Kansas and Mizzu.
This thread is about premiere programs and if you will look at my previuos post you will see Michigan.You will also see Notre Dame,Nebraska,Alabama and Texas.
To answer your question go to
www.mackbrowntexasfootball.com and look at the records section.To the best of my memory Northwestern has a winning record against the Horns. The Horns have played Wisconson several times and also Penn State.We have only played Michigan once 1-0 and Ohio State twice 1-1.
Texas has a losing record against USC 1-4 and Notre Dame, and I believe Vanderbilt. You check the stats for yourself.Corso for President said:
posted on September 12, 2006 3:57 AM — 24.176.198.70 — link — abuse?
After reading all the posts i have a few conclusions...
The topic of this discussion is Premere Programs in the country.
1. Notre Dame - I cannot discount the Irish from the top 20 list, but I take every accomplishment ND makes with a grain of salt. A blimp of a TV contract and BCS preference gives them a HUGE advantage every year. ND pick a conference for goodness sake and do it like everyone else.
2. Big 10 Fans - Talk way to much
3. Florida Schools + Texas - Great programs, defenetly on my list, but keep your players on the field and in class, not in jail.
4. Clemson & Wisconsin = Do not belong in consideration.
5. LSU - Top 5 program hands down. Dominate SEC, whethered the storm, and Pac-10 killers.
4. USC - Top program in the country.
5. Oregon - The fact that Oregon is brought up in this conversation, and others, more than any other team speaks to the success of their program. Oregon has become a marketing machine under the guise of Nike (Knight). Their Jerseys (I think they are the best in football, pro or college.) garner more attention than half of the D1 football programs get total. Playing at Autzen in the past 10 years has become the ultimate test in college football (OU say your prayers. They have become a marketing machine that has made a fan out of me. (I am a traditional CU fan and we stink as bad as Charlie Weis' shorts after the GA Tech game). I think they are a top ten current program and will move up the list in the next five years.
MY list (based upon last 10 years + future potential)
+ on the rise
= Steady
- FallingUSC +
Oklahoma =
LSU +
Ohio St. +
Notre Dame - (beause they cheat)
Miami -
Florida ST =
Texas - (Vince syndrome)
Tennessee +
Oregon+
Penn St. +
Auburn +
Alabama =
Georgia =
Michigan -
Florida =
West VA+
Nebraska =
TCU +
Boise St + (need out of WAC)
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 12, 2006 9:04 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Since this posting asked for the big time programs of my era, I did some research and came up with the following list of the top 18. Disclaimer my era did not start until 1978 so all the programs that had success in the 50s, 60s and early 70s there is no need to bitch about being left off the list.
Miami
Nebraska
Alabama
FSU
USC
Oklahoma
Penn State
Florida
Notre Dame
Michigan
LSU
Ohio State
Texas
Clemson
Tennessee
Georgia
Colorado
BYUThis listing will get a lot of the losers that believe that a conference championship is just as good as a national championship complaining, but they need to realize the only thing that true champions play for in college football is the national championship.
Patrick Clark said:
posted on September 12, 2006 9:07 AM — 168.8.84.2 — link — abuse?
Did Alabama beat Ohio State in 94 also?? I remember Tennessee beating Ohio State in the '96 Citrus Bowl. (see post 126)
There's no doubt that you can argue any of 30-40 teams into a top 20 all time team. However, I think that you have to admit conference wise you CAN NOT ignore the SEC over the course of football history, and you especially can not ignore the SEC over the last 20 years. The SEC may not have those huge NC #s that we all like to see, but that's because there are usually more top 25 match ups within the conference. There are some other conferences that will have a good year, but year in and year out there are more big time match ups week in and week out than any other conference. Florida/Georgia/Tennessee/LSU/Auburn/Alabama would ALL have at least one more national title if they had played in a weaker conference. Oh yeah, there's that little thing called a conferecen championship that only 2 major conferences have been forced to play at the end of each year. (Yes, I know the ACC is this year, but they haven't in the past.)
The additional game has in the past, and will in the future caused teams to miss a national title game. No excuses, it just proves that there is a ton of talent within the SEC that can beat anyone on any given day.
Having said all that, the only way to have a TRUE national champion, PLAYOFFS!!!!!!!!Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 12, 2006 9:30 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
The Spirit of Bill Oliver, some loser programs might be proud of a three loss season (it seems like you are), but we are talking about the premiere programs in the nation to which a three loss season is a failure. Your post goes to show what is wrong with the thinking of an SEC fan that is proud to be 10-3 while a Hurricane would call that a failure!
Dawgman said:
posted on September 12, 2006 2:25 PM — 168.8.176.2 — link — abuse?
If you look at the top programs, you have to put all SEC teams at the top of the list. I know we have all heard it before- "If only USC played in the SEC". It's true USC plays in a lollipop conference. USC plays a watered down conference schedule. The only team to worry about is occassionally Cal and Oregon. Their road trips are nothing like the SEC. Wisconsin, Texas A&M, and West Virginia are not traditional powers. They might have 2 good years every 10. Texas A&M hasn't done anything in years. As a Dawg fan I am biased of course but the Dawgs have to be one of the top 5 programs of late. The schedule and the wins are pretty impressive. GO DAWGS
elliott1612 said:
posted on September 12, 2006 2:26 PM — 207.242.176.10 — link — abuse?
As of the 2005 season the University of Georgia (UGA) football program has won five national championships, played in eighteen different bowl games (more than any other program in the country), won eleven Southeastern Conference (SEC) titles, and produced two Heisman Trophy winners, running backs Frank Sinkwich (who won in 1942) and Herschel Walker (who won in 1982). Who was the complete moron who compared Georgia to South Carolina? Surprised he has the brain cells left to type.
BUCKEYE MARK said:
posted on September 12, 2006 2:37 PM — 65.24.61.71 — link — abuse?
post 130 USC the top program in the country?
you make as much since as "lee Corso" !!!
this discussion is our era not our decade !!
USC final rankings past 15 years AP,USA TODAY
91 nr
92 nr
93 nr,25
94 13,15
95 12,11
96 nr
97 nr
98 nr
99 nr
00 nr
01 nr
02 4,4
03 1,2
04 1,1
05 2,2
a top 20 team yes, #1 you are crazy
maybe #1 so far this decadejosh said:
posted on September 12, 2006 3:03 PM — 71.48.210.100 — link — abuse?
top 20 hmm, here you go
Notre Dame, USC, Michigan, Oklahoma, Miami,FSU, Ohio St., Nebraska, Alabama, Tennessee, Auburn, Georgia, LSU, Florida, Texas, V.T., Penn St.,Boise St.,T.C.U.,West Virginia.
a top 15 is easier than 20!
Nobody is close to the SEC!!!
Buckeye Fan said:
posted on September 12, 2006 4:59 PM — 140.212.213.41 — link — abuse?
Check out this for the REAL Champions list.
School Name (Total NCAA # 1s)
Princeton (29) -
Yale (27) -
Notre Dame (21) -
Alabama (17) -
Oklahome (16) -
Michigan (15) -
Ohio STate (14) -
Southern Cal (14) -
Nebraska (12) -
Harvard (12) -
Pittsburgh (10) -
Texas (8) -
Miami (Fl) (8) -
Pennsylvania (7) -
Penn St (7) -
Tenn (7) -
Florida State (7) -
Michigan State (6) -
Minnesota (6) -
Georgia Tech (6) -
Lousiana State (6) -
Cornell (5) -
Army (5) -
Illinois (5) -
Iowa (5) -
California (5) -
Georgia (4) -
Auburn (4) -
Washington (4) -
Lafayette (3) -
Texas (3) -
Florida (3) -
Southern Methodist (3) -
Arizona State (2) -
Arkansas (2) -
Stanford (2) -
Mississippi (2) -
Chicago (2) -
Vanderbuilt (2) -
Maryland (2) -
Texas A & M (2) -
Dartmouth (1)-
Brigham Young (1) -
Colorado (1) -
Wash & Jeff. (1) -
Navy (1) -
Rutgers (1) -
Detroit (1) -
Wisconsin (1) -
Missouri (1) -
Kentucky (1) -
Clemson (1) -
Texas Christian (1) -
Purdue (1) -
UCLA (1) -
Colgate (1) -
Syracuse (1) -
This is based on the recap of the NCAA's list of Champions. It has more champions than there are years due to the obvious problem of not having a REAL NCAA Championship in Division 1. Th emost recent example of this controversy happened when USC claimed a championship and didn't play in the BCS game. So, following that premise, I made NO decisions regarding who named the school the champion. If someone did (alumni associations excluded) I included them.As you can see....over the entire history of NCAA football, its not the big "Premire" programs that dominate. It is Princeton & Yale. Two schools that no longer even play Division 1 ball anymore. Funny how they are always top drawer when it comes to listing the EDUCATIONAL value of a school. Maybe there is a message there.
The list in its original web form is located at: http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_football_past_champs.html
brian said:
posted on September 12, 2006 6:26 PM — 65.115.141.154 — link — abuse?
All of the programs listed above can definitely more or less make the argument. In my opinion right now, the programs that can make an argument as the best among the best in no particular order are:
Ohio State - Unless they somehow are upset, this is their season to win or lose - right now, the best team money can buy.
USC - Unless they lose a couple of games which may be possible still deserves tremendous respect. Besides, it took Texas nearly 60 minutes to dethrone the previous defending national champs.
Notre Dame - Definitely has the chance to win it all this year.
LSU - I don't think many college programs look forward to playing LSU.
Auburn - A dramitically improved program ever since losing bad to USC on their home field way back in 2003.
Texas - They are still a great program despite losing recently to OSU. I give OSU and Texas all of the props for scheduling each other early the past two seasons.
SHANE said:
posted on September 12, 2006 6:28 PM — 64.13.43.16 — link — abuse?
you know you all can talk about the big ten and the pac 10..did anybody...anybody see what boise state did to oregon on national tv....i wonder how many coaches wish they didnt pass on ian johnson....youd better keep an eye on this team all you know it all pollsters!
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 12, 2006 6:50 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
What does "our era" mean? Since the BCS began? Since 1990? Since 1980?
The core ingredients are What?: "recent success, legend, and football lore". Isnt legend and lore virtually the same thing (explain if different)?
And isnt "recent lore" an oxi-moron? so which is it?Going with the recent era...
Wisconsin, West Virginia definitely dont belong.
UCLA has a better overall record than either one of those teams since 1980 - I think even Syracuse has done better than Wiscy. Oregon has a better record over the 16 years that Barry Alvarez was with Wisconsin (since 1990).VTech and aTm should NOT be there over Washington! Those 3 teams have similiar records since 1980, but Washington has Won a Title in that time, the others havent.
bigblue said:
posted on September 13, 2006 12:08 AM — 24.148.32.146 — link — abuse?
Its impossible to find a perfectly fair and objective criteria to list the top 20 teams, let alone put them in order. All programs including Miami, Fl.St, Notre Dame, Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Ohio St., Michigan, USC and prolly a couple others could legitimately claim to be the most storied/reputable/successful/premiere (pick ure favorite adjective here) program. Some other factors that might be considered noteworthy but sometimes get left out are coach/team character, player criminal records, NFL draft results, NCAA admonitions/penalties etc. Basically the point is that no one can claim to come up with the right criteria... Picking a president is infinitely easier than picking the top football teams in NCAA and this entire country working together managed to fuck that up - what chance do a bunch of bloggers have of getting this right?
Tomcat said:
posted on September 13, 2006 1:00 AM — 69.150.79.183 — link — abuse?
Hey So-Cal Washington? are you seriuos Does Texas A&M play them this year I dont remember.Texas A&M has to play Texas, Oklahoma,Texas Tech and Nebrasksa in their conference.They have always had a good SOS as well playing teams like Clemson,Pitt and others.Its very difficult to count them out and include a mediocre pac-10 team.
Tomcat said:
posted on September 13, 2006 4:06 AM — 69.150.79.183 — link — abuse?
Thanks T-Mac My list is simular to Kevins, However Clemson, Georgia Tech and others probably should be included.To narrow it down to 20 there will always here some arguments from somebody.
For example the Big Ten guys would include more from their perspective conference and the same for ACC and Big East.
The SEC has 6 for sure and maybe 8 if you include Ole Miss and Arkansas.
The Big XII has 4 for sure 6 if you include Texas Tech and Colorado
Okay thats ten already
The ACC 2 for sure 5 if you include Georga Tech, Clemson and V Tech
The Big Ten 5 for sure 7 if you include
Thats 17
Include 1 Independent ND 1 Big East WV
That leaves 1 PAC-10 USC
Sorry TCU, Lousiville,BYUGator bait said:
posted on September 13, 2006 6:29 AM — 12.31.208.217 — link — abuse?
I think the list is pretty good except for maybe virginia tech and west virginia.
To everyone that is talking bad about the SEC you must be crazy. There is no other conference that comes close the the SEC. Every year including this one ESPN rates the different conferinces and every year the SEC is proven to be the hardest. If teams like Miami, USC, or Texas would play in the SEC they would not have undefeated seasons or as many national championships that they have.
Did everyone see miami loose to florida state and then florida state almost loose to troy?
Thats was awsome.
And you say these teams can play in the SEC?
PLEASEGO GATORS!!!!!!!!!!!
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 13, 2006 9:13 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Buckeye Fan that's a great list if you don't take into account that many of the national championships listed on that list are not recognized as true national championships. Miami only has 5 national championships that truly count, but your shitty list has them down for 8. Also, unless you were around in 1869, the championships won then don't count towards the premiere programs in our era.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 13, 2006 9:20 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, you need to drop 3 teams from you list in the SEC. Ole Miss, Auburn, and Arkansas have not done anything in my era to deserve to be on the list. To be a premiere program you need to have one a national championship. This by default has to be a minimum requirement to be considered a premiere program. All the teams that haven't won a national program in our era should not be allowed on the list of premiere programs. Post 132 shows the premiere programs since 1978 (my era). There are 5 SEC teams on it, and no more deserve to be considered a premiere program in my era. (not your biased number of 8)
Bring Brady Back MgoBlue said:
posted on September 13, 2006 1:31 PM — 216.46.213.216 — link — abuse?
Tomcat!
I was replying to zac and was simply giving him my final standings for the "Big Ten"!
I realize there are no premier programs in the Big Ten! The Big Ten is horrible! C'mon they could only beat Texas by 17! If you can only beat Texas by 17 your going to get crushed in the SEC (Americas best conf) I don't think the Big Ten has what it takes to compete outside the conf =)
Just like Michigan getting blown out in the 2005 rose bowl by Texas 37-38! yeah I guess Michigan cannot even compete with Texas! And I realize Me and Buckeye Mark talk way tooo much! They should make all the Big Ten schools division 2 becouse it's obvious they get crushed outside of their own conf! My conf is sooo stupid....I wish I were an SEC fan.....NOT! GO BLUE! GO Buckeyes!....I hope Michigan DESTROYS Notre Dame this weekend! Then you can move Michigan to #2 untill the Ohio State- Michigan game! And then Michigan can dethrone the Buckeyes!Tomcat said:
posted on September 13, 2006 10:55 PM — 69.150.79.183 — link — abuse?
Hey Guys this is fun, in response to the Hurricane fan.Please read my list one more time 6 SEC teams, and if you will look at it yes I included Auburn, a consistantly winning program that is a premeire program,Just because they got scewed in 04 and should have played in the N C game.
In response tp #152 no premeire programs in the Big 10 ? okay you got me 3 Ohio State Penn State
Michigan. That leaves room for Georgia Tech and Clemson.
Yes the SEC has 6 for sure now and 9 in the future.Only problem there is they have to play each other simular to the Big XII
For example
Oklahoma beats Texas A&M beats Oklahoma
Texas beats A&M that happened one year
One year Nebraska beats everybody and loses to Texas or
Texas beats K State Ok beats Texas K State beats OK
In the tougher conferences every game is important not just the so-called "big Games"
Thanks Tommie post # 154 The Dogs from the XII would go undefeated in Big East and would be competitive with Pac-10 we will see this weekend with several Pac-10 vs Big XII matchups
Post # 153 Saw yalls game against Kentucky looked purty good, sorry about Bushs injury.
But there are several teams I would pick over Louisville V-Tech T-Tech TCU peace outI'm a Gator Hater said:
posted on September 13, 2006 11:05 PM — 65.9.205.228 — link — abuse?
TampaHurricane, you've got an ally in me. Sure, the 'Canes aren't at their best right now, but no other team has shown such constant dominance over the past 25 years. You cannot touch the U, especially these sub-par SEC teams. I think the best way to judge a team's success and prestige is by looking at their standards. At Miami, 9-3 is a horrible season (as was last year), but at a lot of these so-called 'great' programs, 9-3 is a good year. And as for all of you talking about how the Orange Bowl is half-full, you're right, if you're at some crappy FAMU game or something. But no other stadium in America can match the energy of the Orange Bowl in a big game..not one!
And, yes, I am a hater of the 'chicken Gators..'
Boston said:
posted on September 14, 2006 1:02 AM — 216.15.126.162 — link — abuse?
#113 - Iowa finishing third in the Big Ten would not be a "great season" by any stretch of the imagination.
Also, the Hawkeyes would be a clear-cut favorite for this list if it hadn't been for the (very) down period from 1998 to 2000 - assuming that we're counting the period from 1981 to 1991. Before the Fry era, however, you'd have to go back all the way back to 1960 or so to find success.
Miami and Florida State have skewed numbers from playing in such weak conferences. This not only affects winning percentages, but also national championships.
bmbr said:
posted on September 14, 2006 8:58 AM — 86.135.16.46 — link — abuse?
Before we talk about who the elite are, let's define "elite". Your definition and mine are very different. An elite team should be:
Top 10 - three out of four years (top 20 the 4th)
Top 5 - 50% of the time, 5 out of 10 years
Serious Nat'l Chanp contender 1/3 of the timeAnd they need to do it for 7-10 years to be considered....not just the last tow or three. ND is there, but needs to keep it up, NO PAC10 team other than USC is even close. Colo, USCLA, Wisconson, Penn ST????? ELITE???? PALEEEEEZ! Elite does not mean above average, and some of those aren't. Elite means most fans will watch them because of the quality year in year out....just my opinion, could be wrong, but I doubt it
Frazier said:
posted on September 14, 2006 4:41 PM — 146.243.4.157 — link — abuse?
This is the year Louisville breaks through. Miami is overrated, and they lost their swagger when LSU took them behind the woodshed last year. Coker is hopeless as a coach. This is the yaer. If anyone is interested in some more previews of this weekends action, or just college football content in general, check out the323.blogspot.com.
So Cal Rebels USMC said:
posted on September 14, 2006 6:40 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Washington = 1991 National Champs (Coaches) and has a 65.7% win-Record since 1980.
aTm has a 65.4% win-Record and no Title since 1980.
VTech has a 65.6% win-Record and no Title since 1980.
(and btw, Wisconsin, LSU, West Virginia have clearly worse records, in that span; only LSU has a Title)Tomcat, TMac,
Like I asked before, whats the Criteria, what does "our era" mean, how do you quatify ~lore~ (almost gotta laugh at that one), who the fugk is Kevin Donohue, etc ?!?!?????Here's some ~lore~... Head Coach Gil Dobie has the BEST RECORD of ALL-TIME of any Coach with one team (with atleast 5 years at the program). He had 9 straight UNDEFEATED Seasons at Washington. Is that ~lore~?
So Cal Rebels USMC said:
posted on September 14, 2006 7:13 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
TMac, whats the criteria youre using that makes you say this ~you know it, I know it, everyone knows it~ stuff?
Washington was arguably a Top 10 program throughout the 1990s, and solid in the 1980s. Washington Clearly belongs Over those two (and others) going back 20-25 years.
But that incredulous attitude you have is so re-freshing, er, I meant dank (not that kind of dank).
T-Mac said:
posted on September 14, 2006 8:25 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,I don't break every single thing in College FB down to a digit,decimal point,or percentage bro.That's for my accountant.Once all that crap comes into play then we lose focus of what CFB is all about man.It's about fun!NOT A STAT,DIGIT,OR PERCENTAGE.That's like Chemistry class in college.BORING,BORING,BORING!BTW-So Cal,I've never once said the words "our era" at anytime!As far as lore goes I couldn't care less about it.I live in the here and now!T-Mac
So Cal Rebels USMC said:
posted on September 14, 2006 9:25 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
TMac,
Ya see... THATS the reference made in this blog's heading!... Premiere teams... "we're talking about THE big time football schools of our era."
Thats why Im asking what "out era" means, and who's Kevin Donahue.The guy has West Virginia, Wisconsin, VTech, but doesnt even list Washington as one of the "next 5"... Thats Moronic! What is he going by?!?! Is it that Washington is "down" right know; how great has Texas A&M been lately? and teams like LSU, Oklahoma werent very hot as recently as the 1990's.
Shee, even UCLA has a better arguement than some of those teams listed (depending on the criteria).No, its doesnt come down to a decimal point (didnt I mention Washington's National Title?), but you have to have a BASIS for what youre talking about! (that goes to Kevin Donahue moreso than to you T, in this case) You get what Im saying?
Tomcat said:
posted on September 15, 2006 12:55 AM — 69.150.79.183 — link — abuse?
In reference to post #158 Hey Tampa its apparent that we all base what we consider premeire football programs upon different criteria.The term our era can very quite substanceshuly.For example a person born in 1955 era may be different than someone born in 1985.I personnally beleive that who has the most Nat champs or heismans doesnt mean as much to me as who has been a the more consistant winner for many years.
Yes Penn State and Auburn are on my list.
Miami defeated the Horns back in the seventies, I guess that was before your era, so it doesnt count.The Horns hadnt won a Nat. champ in 30 years, so if USC had won under your criteria they would not be considered a premiere program.
Hookem-HornsGator bait said:
posted on September 15, 2006 2:24 AM — 12.31.208.217 — link — abuse?
Hey Gator Hater,
The only reason why a 9-3 season would be bad for miami is beacause they play a way easier schedule every year than a SEC team does. In the SEC right now there are 5 teams in the top 15 right now, how many are there from the ACC?
This is a quote from ESPN:"Florida became one of just three teams in NCAA history to be named the national champions in the same season in which it faced a schedule that the NCAA deemed the nation's toughest. Penn State (1984 champion), Colorado (1990 co-champion) and Florida (1996 champion) were the only teams in NCAA history to accomplish that feat."
The gators schedule is one of the toughest every year and that is a fact. So yes a 9-3 season is good when you play the hardest schedule in college football and not a bunch of high school teams.GO GATORS!!!!!!!GO GATORS!!!!!!!!!GO GATORS!!!!!!
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 15, 2006 8:46 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Gator bait how about Florida's out of conference schedule. Besides FSU, who does Florida play? So Miss, UCF, W Carolina that has to be the easiest out of conference schedule of any team. Of course UF fans are happy with only a 3 loss season with the powerhouses you face like Western Carolina. Gator fans are happy with a 3 loss season because they are a middle of the road program in the SEC. SEC fans may be willing to accept a 3 loss record as being good, but fans for premiere programs will not accept that.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 15, 2006 8:51 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Tomcat being a consistant winner for multiple years is important, but to be a premiere program you must have a national championship. You can include Auburn on your list for above average programs due to the fact that they have been winning for a couple of years now, but without a national championship, they are not premiere.
You are correct in your observation that Texas would not have been on my list if it wasn't for last season. They have been an above average program in my era, but they did not have the national championship that is required to be obtained to be considered premiere.
As for the heismans, it wasn't considered on my list of premiere programs on post 132. The heisman is an individual award and has no part in discussions about premiere programs. There are many heisman winners that did not play for premiere programs, so I didn't include it as a factor for my listing.
Mike said:
posted on September 15, 2006 10:44 AM — 12.149.217.225 — link — abuse?
The orgiginal list is good, but has a few flaws/questionable calls. For the record, I am a Clemson fan:
Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
Wisconsin - DOES NOT BELONG ON THIS LIST
Notre Dame
USC
Texas
Oklahoma
Nebraska
Texas A&M - VERY QUESTIONABLE
Auburn - QUESTIONABLE
Alabama
Florida
Tennessee
Georgia
LSU
Florida State
Miami
Virginia Tech - QUESTIONABLE
West Virgina - DOES NOT BELONG ON THIS LISTMike said:
posted on September 15, 2006 10:44 AM — 12.149.217.225 — link — abuse?
The orgiginal list is good, but has a few flaws/questionable calls. For the record, I am a Clemson fan:
Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
Wisconsin - DOES NOT BELONG ON THIS LIST
Notre Dame
USC
Texas
Oklahoma
Nebraska
Texas A&M - VERY QUESTIONABLE
Auburn - SOMEWHAT QUESTIONABLE
Alabama
Florida
Tennessee
Georgia
LSU
Florida State
Miami
Virginia Tech - VERY QUESTIONABLE
West Virgina - DOES NOT BELONG ON THIS LISTGator Bait said:
posted on September 15, 2006 10:54 AM — 24.143.9.237 — link — abuse?
Hey Tampa,
Lets look at Miami's schedule: Florida A&M, Houston, UNC, Florida Int'l, Duke. Wow that is some real power houses. Miami plays 4 ranked teams this year, Florida plays 5 and three of those teams are in the top 10, so lets not talk schedule strengh.
And you say Florida is a "middle of the road program in the SEC" even though they hold so many SEC records like: 12 strait years in the top 15, 9 strait years in Jan. bowl games, highest winning percentage in the SEC with .817, and a record 4 strait SEC titles, 1993,94,95,96 along with many others.And you say premiere teams will not accept a 3 loss season, but with the mighty Miami with one loss already and having to play Louiville Sat. and how crappy they look you might have to accept it. Because lets face it, Miami is just a middle of the road ACC team.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 15, 2006 11:58 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Gator Bait I was talking about out of conference schedules and your stupid ass listed some of the weaker in conference opponents. Compare Florida A&M, Houston, FIU, and Louisville to So Miss, UCF, W Carolina, and FSU. Louisville and FSU are a wash in rankings so the comparison is Florida A&M, Houston, and FIU to So Miss, UCF, W Carolina and UF has no rights to brag when comparing their out of conference schedule to Miami's. It doesn't matter what conference a program is in, a 3 loss season should be viewed as a bad season by any team that can be considered premiere. I can't wait until the gators finally grow the balls to play Miami. I know they have a home and home series scheduled in the future and hopefully UF will not puss out of future meetings.
Bring Brady Back MgoBlue said:
posted on September 15, 2006 12:17 PM — 216.46.210.26 — link — abuse?
Hey Boston!
If your team finishes top three in the SEC,Big Ten,Big 12,Pac Ten,ACC,or Big East you have to be happy!
If Michigan finishes third in the Big Ten that is still a GREAT season!
Iowa lost their Starting WR. Calvin Davis! And Tate is having some trouble with pulled muscles! If Iowa finishes third wich I think they will! Their record should look like this 10-2!!!!! NOT A GREAT SEASON!!!!!!!!!! LOSING TO MICHIGAN AND OHIO STATE!!!!! 10-2 AND A TOP 20 FINISH!!!!NOT A GREAT SEASON!!! WHAT DO YOU EXPECT!!! A NC EVERY SINGLE YEAR!!!! GET REAL!!!! M GO BLUE!!!!Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 15, 2006 2:43 PM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
I believe the USC should be crossed off the list of premiere programs. They are allowing so many paid athletes on their team, they should lose their classification of a college program and just be called a weak pro team.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 15, 2006 3:07 PM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Bring Brady Back MgoBlue you show exactly what has gone wrong with the fans of some major programs. If a team finishes in the top 3 of their conference they shouldn't be happy, that is a loser's mentality. The team should only be happy if they finish at the top!
Zac said:
posted on September 15, 2006 4:28 PM — 65.31.229.230 — link — abuse?
Post 113 - Big MgoBlue, I wanted to see the Orange win. But, just like last year against VA, and the year before against FL St, a bridesmaid not a bride. Syracuse doesn't have a bad "D"; it's their offense that needs retuned. Iowa's "D" was awesome!!! Nuf said.
Post 117 - IrishJT, I wanted Joe Pa to win; I expected ND to win. Their game against GT wasn't a fluke; it was just a tough first game of the season on the road. Herbstreet put it best. They just needed to relax at home. I never expected them to abuse the Lions they way they did. Quinn's got the offense rolling, and the "D" looks almost as good as when Stonebreaker played MLB.
Post #118 - Poz4ua, thanks for the reminder. I have many a friend and colleague who've spent time in Iraq. One of them earned a Silver Star; he still doesn't talk about it.
Post #127,161,164 - So Cal USMC. Kevin Donahue is...Mr Donahue's son. Just ask him. Semper Fi!
Post #133 - Patrick Clark, I agree! Let's have a play-off.
Post #158, 169 - Gee, Tampa, BYU has a National Championship. Would you call them a "premier" program? Somehow I'm doubting it. They have good tradition and an overall good program, but consistent, premier, that's stretching it. So R U, with your "own a national championship or you're a looser" attitude. There are plenty of teams out there with solid programs, good winning percentages, and no championship. That doesn't make them loosers, nor does your saying it. As for the rest of you, all good teams have a down year or two. Alabama, Colorado, FL, FL St, Miami, Michigan, ND, Nebraska, Penn St., Syracuse, UCLA, USC... Nobody's immune. It's the true champions who bounce back. So, if you're thinking of penciling in a game against Miami in the win column, I'd wait until the fat lady sings.
Post 159 - bmbr, you don't spell so well. I like that. It makes me feel right at home.
Post 171 & 172 - Mike, did you stutter? For the record, I'm a WVU Mountaineer. As I've stated in other blogs, I agree; WVU is up-and-coming. They're not quite "premier" status. If they can do over the next five years what they've done over the previous five, I think you can pencil them in. Until they're consistently 9-3 to 12-1 with an undefeated season hither and yon and a good bowl record (And yes, I'd like to see a tougher schedule.), well, we'll just have to see, won't we.
As for the Big Ten guys having the Big Mouths, that's because they've got something to talk about. So does the Big 12, Pac 10, and SEC for that matter. We of the Big East think we've got something to talk about. Nobody takes us seriously, is all. Which is OK. That's why WVU beat GA this past January. And we all know the "Dawgs" (That's Brooklyneeze for "Dogs"; southern would be "Doags".) are a good team.
Pheeew!!! You guys are hard to keep up with. Anyone wanna talk play-offs? I know how we can do it. If only the naysayers had the imagination…
Bring Brady Back MgoBlue said:
posted on September 15, 2006 9:48 PM — 216.46.213.14 — link — abuse?
Hey Tampa! Going to fire the ball coach? HE LOST!!!!!!! THAT'S UNTHINKABLE!!!!!
Listen,I don't think your goal is to finish third.
But you are going to lose once in a while.
And you have to be mentally prepared to except the fact that with your current team,that just maybe a third place finish and a bowl game was a pretty good season!
So what does Illinois do? Fire their coach every year? If they placed third in the Big Ten they would give the coach a lifetime contract!If Michigan loses to Notre Dame for the fourth year in a row, you know what i'll do? I will get over it and let's move on to Wisconsin!
Zac said:
posted on September 15, 2006 10:43 PM — 65.31.229.230 — link — abuse?
Hey Kevin!!! Howzabout splainen to So Cal USMC as to who you are. He's been asking enough times. (BY the way, I like his "K-Hue" thing.)
The best way to answer the broad debate, at least on a year by year basis, as to who's the best team, Div 1-A needs a play-off system. All the naysayers use the "ruining of the bowl system" as an excuse, among others, as to why there shouldn't be one. If you use the bowl system, a play-off would work. Consider this: At the official end of the season, the almighty BCS computer picks the top 25. The bottom two play off at the site of the higher seed; or, if the match-up is a good one, get invited to a lesser bowl. The winner of that game leaves 24. The top 8 get a bye; the bottom 16 play off, either on the field of the higher seed or in a bowl based upon invitation; again, because of an advantageous or worthy match-up (Face it; money talks.). The winners play the top 8, and so on. Eventually, the top 4 will play off in one of the five major bowls, pre-determined by agreement among those bowl committees. As with now, the final would be played at a different major bowl every year, and so on. The only thing that would be different would be the timing. Instead of the traditional New Years day championship (There could still be play-off bowl games on this day, the sweet 16 maybe.), the quarter-finals would be the 2nd Saturday in January, the semi-finals would be the 3rd Saturday in January, and the championship would be on the Saturday, the day before the Super Bowl. Talk about a set-up for an epic sports weekend. Even if it were limited to the top 16, there are enough bowls around to accommodate the bottom 16. The reason it won't happen, is due to there being too many naysayers, who lack the imagination to make it happen. And, of course, if there's not enough money in it, well... Nuff said.
Tomcat said:
posted on September 16, 2006 2:55 AM — 69.150.79.183 — link — abuse?
Hey Tampa You cant help it, your a Cane fan.
I have to agree with Zac about Nat Titles do not make you a premire program.A consistant winner year after year, High winning percentages and many bowl appearances.Having players drafted in every NFL draft every year since the beginning. 801 wins.
Refer to post # 75 I dont see any Florida Schools on that list. Georgia, Georgia Tech and Mississipi have appeared in more bowls than the canes. What is a Hurricane ?
Alot of hot air that blows from the south, Look foward to another three or four loss season, your off my list and I'm including TCU they have a Nat title Go Frogs
and of coarse so does A&M.Just Thinkin' said:
posted on September 16, 2006 3:38 AM — 72.8.64.43 — link — abuse?
During and since their championship year in 1984, BYU has wins over the following:
Notre Dame
Miami
Texas
Michigan
Oklahoma
Penn State
UCLA
Washington
Texas A&M
Georgia Tech
Oregon
Arizona State
Pittsburgh
Boston College
Colorado
California
Virginia
Mississippi State (okay - but it is fun to spell)1 Heisman, 2 Outland trophies, 1 Doak Walker award, and let's not even start with Johnny O'Brien awards. P.S. - two NFL MVP awards, a Super Bowl MVP and the best football dance of all time - the Super Bowl Shuffle.
Regardless of conference affiliation, wins are wins. I am sure that someone will explain away why a team from the Mountain West is unworthy, but the record stands for itself.
helo said:
posted on September 16, 2006 9:48 AM — 70.121.194.185 — link — abuse?
First
off, Michigan doesn't have 11 championships unless you count every
street corner publication that says you are #1. They legitimately
have 7 with maybe an 8th one being debatable. What's funny is how Bo
is worshipped yet Carr is vilified yet Bo never won a NC.
http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/bigten/michigan/national_champs.php
I
also have to fix this post by Tampa Hurricane and point out his errors.
Tampa
Hurricane says:
posted
on September 8, 2006 09:48 AM — IP: 24.96.199.254 — link
Robstan
to continue with my point I have listed the national championship
teams for the past 25 years along with current conference affiliation
to show you the stronger conferences when it comes to national
titles.
2005
Texas Big 12
2004
USC Pac 10
2003
LSU SEC / USC Pac 10
2002
Ohio State Big 10
2001
Miami ACC
2000
Oklahoma Big 12
1999
FSU ACC
1998
Tennessee SEC
1997
Michigan Big 10 / Nebraska Big 12
1996
Florida SEC
1995
Nebraska Big 12 <- Member of Big 8 till
1996 but pretty much same
1994
Nebraska Big 12 <- Member of Big 8 till
1996 but pretty much same
1993
FSU ACC
1992
Alabama SEC
1991
Miami ACC <- Member of Big East till 2004
1990
Colorado Big 12 <- Member of Big 8 till
1996 but pretty much same
1990
Georgia Tech ACC
1989
Miami ACC <- Independent till 1991
1988
Notre Dame independant
1987
Miami ACC <- Independent till 1991
1986
Penn State Big 10 <- Independent till
1994
1985
Oklahoma Big 12 <- Member of Big 8 till
1996 but pretty much same
1984
BYU Mountain West <- Member of WAC till
1998
1983
Miami ACC <- Independent till 1991
1982
Penn State Big 10 <- Independent till
1994
1981
Clemson ACC
During
that 25 year period there were 27 national championship teams. There
current conference affiliations are as follows:
ACC
- 8 (29.63%)
Big
10 - 4 (14.81%)
Big
12 - 7 (25.93%)
Independant
- 1 (3.70%)
Mountain
West - 1 (3.70%)
Pac
10 - 2 (7.41%)
SEC
4 - (14.81%)
How
does this show dominance in national championships like you claim?!?
The SEC is tied with the Big 10 for 3rd place! The ACC and Big 12
have dominated in the past 25 years!
*************
If
you are going to make a NC list, you can't retroactively claim
championships because a team changes conference affiliations. Thats
just stupid. You also missed Georgia Tech in 1990. Your new % list
would look like:
ACC
- 4 (14.3%) [3 teams]
Big
10 - 2 (7.1%) [2 teams]
Big
12 - 7 (25%) [3 teams]
Independant
- 6 (21.4%) [3 teams]
WAC
- 1 (3.6%) [1 team]
Pac
10 - 2 (7.1%) [1 team]
SEC
4 – (14.3%) [4 teams]
Big
East - 1 (3.6%) [1 team]
Looks
like the SEC is the most balanced conference with 4 different
winners. That does exclude the 2004 Auburn team and the 1994 Penn St.
team both of which ended undefeated.
If
you look at the recent trend of the past 10 years, it would look
like:
Big
12 - 3 (25%) [3 teams]
Pac
10 - 2 (16.7%) [1 team]
SEC
- 3 (25%) [3 teams]
ACC
- 2 (16.7%) [2 teams]
Big
10 - 2 (16.7%) [2 teams]
The
past 10 years the conferences are pretty close.
posted on September 16, 2006 10:45 AM — link — abuse?
SoCal- K'hue? Ummm...ok I guess. Now I have street cred.
As for Washington, I think they fall apart on recent success. U-Dub has been to -what?- 9 bowl games in 20 years. You have to give props for the undefeated national championship (was that a split?) and their success like 1990,1991. If they hadn't fallen off the face of the earth in the last 5 years, I think they make the list.
CANES ALUM said:
posted on September 16, 2006 7:46 PM — 71.101.27.11 — link — abuse?
Tomcat thank's for showing everyone you are a dumb ass. How can you cross Miami off the list when they have owned college football for the past 25 years. I also agree that a team must have a national championship to be considered premiere, most of the teams that you listed are average or above average at best.
Bring Brady Back MgoBlue said:
posted on September 16, 2006 7:57 PM — 216.46.211.191 — link — abuse?
You want to know why the SEC and the Big Ten have fewer NC's???? It's reeeaaal simple.......They are tougher conferences! The reason other conferences have more undefeated teams is becouse their are one or two good teams and the rest STINK!.....although I would not say the Big Ten look's too good this year aside from Ohio State,Michigan,Iowa,Michigan State,and Maybe Wisconsin!......wait thats like half the conf. =) And the SEC has five or six very good teams this year!
Anonymous Fan of Media Hype Machine said:
posted on September 16, 2006 9:10 PM — 128.101.252.209 — link — abuse?
pete carroll is a d-bag. the university of spoiled children. i like the point raised previously - they should be considered a weak pro team. reggie bush = unscrupulous. faked suicide - yeah really f-ing funny asshole, i didn't know that depression was such a laughing matter. sanchez the rapist. you guys are no better than the criminals of the U or FSU
and before anybody feels compelled to correct my grammar, remember its an f-ing blog nobody gives a damn. nothing bothers me more than people who feel superior for spell/grammar checking blog posts. its not as if blogging is tantamoung to enlightened philosophical discourse. get over yourselves.Zac said:
posted on September 17, 2006 12:22 AM — 65.31.229.230 — link — abuse?
helo: I minored in math. I don't think it would have mattered if I got my degree in math. I can't figure what it was you did there. It looks to me as if you spent a lot of time, took up a lot of room to prove...something!?! Call me a moron; guilty as charged; I couldn't make sense of it. That, however, is OK with me. It really was an interesting exercise in...confusion. Your right, freedom of the press, expression, and all that. Just ask Mr. Anonymous Fan of Media, etc., etc. It's a f...king blog, after all. It's not an exercise in advanced statistics, which sadly is a strong indication, but doesn't tell the whole truth. Nor is this an exercise in philosophy or logic. In spite of the numbers, what ever they mean, those who believe in what they believe, will still believe in just that. The point is, the ACC guys will always say they're it; the SEC guys will always say they're it; the Big 10, Big 12, Pac 10, will fight for the same claim; the Big East will never get any respect, and those working just as hard in the Mountain West, Conf. USA, MAC, and other "mid-majors" will be left out in the cold despite their hard work and accomplishments because some people think you have to own a National Championship to be "premier", and we all know only "premier" teams play for National titles. We need a play-off system!!! Cause everyone who loves college football will sit back, in spite of the records, and say, "My team's better than yours is." Only now, it's entire conferences. And, that's OK too. Cause that's f...king college football, and this is a f...king blog that supports it and our opinions of it. There, "helo", I think I made about as much sense as you did.
Tomcat said:
posted on September 17, 2006 3:47 AM — 69.150.79.183 — link — abuse?
Hey Canes Alum I was just messing with that Tampa dude.I had Miami on my list.Miami is always overrated and I hope yall can consistantly prove me right.Lets face it Dude,even the Seminoles beat yall, another overrated 2 loss team.
Okay I dropped FSU and MU included Louisville & Clemson. Dumb ass perhaps-loser noPig Sooie said:
posted on September 17, 2006 5:18 PM — 65.9.135.105 — link — abuse?
Problems at the U. I think Larry Coker should stay for a long long time. In his after loss press conference he said "we are not a good team." I could not say it any better than Coker did himself.
And as for FSU, Bobby should stay and keep recruiting mediocre QBs! Go ACC!!
Randy said:
posted on September 17, 2006 7:58 PM — 66.82.9.57 — link — abuse?
Tampa Hurricane you talk about the loser mentality of the SEC. There are currently four (4) teams in the top 10. After your dismal performance this past weekend, I would think that you would be busy drinking your shutup juice.
Gator Bait said:
posted on September 17, 2006 8:46 PM — 24.143.9.237 — link — abuse?
Hey Tampa
How about those Canes, out of the top 25 three weeks into the seaon, wow what a "Premiere" team. I cant wait until 2008 either when the Gatros play the Canes, beacause it doesnt take balls to play a crapy team like Miami.
Florida Gators Ranked #5
Miami Canes not even ranked
Whos the stupid ass now.Aufan322006 said:
posted on September 18, 2006 12:33 AM — 208.45.204.125 — link — abuse?
Hey randy one play does not make a game. The shoulda,coulda,wouldas can go on forever. the only thing that really matters is the final score. And this is not the first time a bad call by the zebra people has had an affect on a game.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 18, 2006 8:34 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Gator Bait if you look at the teams that Miami has tried to schedule, both Florida and ND didn't have the balls to play a home and home with Miami. UF finally agreed to, but with the game in Miami being scheduled for 2013. I have to give respect to Oklahoma for being one of the few premiere programs to have the balls to play a home and home with Miami. Gator Bait, how can you be so cocky with you one national championship? I would have to say a program with 5 national championships in the past 25 years is a lot more of a premiere program than one with 1 national championship in its entire existance! By the time that we finally play you pussies in 2008, we will have a new coach that knows how to coach and we will humiliate you like always. Do you rememeber back a few years when UF, FSU, and Miami had the trophy for the head to head to head series winner between the three programs (before UF pussed out and quit playing Miami)? That trophy never left Miami. We owned you and we still own you!
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 18, 2006 8:41 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
helo if less you are too stupid to read, I posted that my list included current conference affiliations! The national titles that those programs do not just disappear when they change conferences. Just because you are disappointed that your conference didn't stack up as a major conference doesn't mean that you have to cry about it. My post was showing the different teams that won the national championships in the past 25 years and the current conference affiliations of those teams to show that the SEC is not the powerhouse conference its fans are making it out to be.
Gator Bait said:
posted on September 18, 2006 5:02 PM — 24.143.9.237 — link — abuse?
Tampa Hurricane
I will give the Hurricanes this, once upon a time many years ago the Hurricanes where good, not now but they were. And the reason the Gators are waiting until 2013 to play the Hurricanes is because they hope by that time the Canes will have a team that is acually worth playing, because it wont be as nice to beat the Miami Hurricanes at home if they suck.Aufan322006 said:
posted on September 18, 2006 5:16 PM — 208.45.204.125 — link — abuse?
OK I have heard it from every Alabama fan I know about their 12 NC. I decided to look them up on the NCAA web site. These are the only ones that count for everyboby so Alabama I'm sorry you only have 10 not 12. Here they are:
1925 Split
1926 tied in their bowl game
1930 Split
1961
1964 Lost in the bowl game
1965
1973 lost in the bowl game
1978 split
1979
1992
Now can any alabama fan show a NC other than these that are approved by the NCAA? If you can then please post so that I can see. ThanksI don't want to offend anyone but enough is enough and by the way Yale has the most NC with 16.
VOLPIMP said:
posted on September 18, 2006 6:49 PM — 208.0.27.10 — link — abuse?
Gator Bait, great win this weekend man. Wish it had gone our way but...that's life. Both sides had some pretty crappy calls made against them though. Our int and your return both were legit from what I saw, what'd you think?
Aufan322006 said:
posted on September 18, 2006 7:27 PM — 208.45.204.125 — link — abuse?
Notre Dame has 11 NC, Michigan has 9 with four in a row(1901-04),and many others have more than 2 but less than 8. Here's the real deal in this day and age there are so many schools out there that can win a NC year in and year out that no one can say that their school is the best in the land. Many have stong traditions and historys. But let's face the facts if those teams were playing today they we fall short of the greatness that they achieved in their time. The fewer number of schools you have playing the better your odds are at winning the NC.
The best thing about CF is that we can argue till the cows come home(Cow reference for all you bama fans out there)but until we have a playoff system there will never be a TRUE NC.
It's not about the number of games or the players it's all about the money. If 1A CF had a playoff then all of the money would have to be split between all of the schools not just the conferences that are lucky enough to make it to the Bowl Games.
CF loves the money but we as Fans LOVE CF because of what it should be. Clean,Healthly competion,Charater,and sportsmanship from our teams and their opponents. And the fact that we will never agree on who's right or wrong about anything.JT said:
posted on September 18, 2006 8:03 PM — 71.213.226.54 — link — abuse?
Aufan322006--
I'm not an Alabama fan, but check splits in 1934 & 1941.
P.S. The NCAA doesn't actually "approve" national championships. That's why this site shows so many splits and why we at TCU claim 2 on our scoreboard -- 1935 & 1938 (the former which was a split decision by ONE of the 11 systems, and the latter which included the AP nod as one of many).
Aufan322006 said:
posted on September 18, 2006 9:19 PM — 208.45.204.125 — link — abuse?
Hey JT
Thanks for that link. I never knew that the NC was such a big mess. But if Alabama can claim 12 NC well then Auburn can claim 3 according to your link(57,83,93). So if I can claim all of those then Bama can claim 12.Zac said:
posted on September 18, 2006 11:02 PM — 65.31.229.230 — link — abuse?
Aufan322006: I have two words for posting 210: Here, Here!!! Seriously, I know I couldn't have said it better. (I wonder if K-Hue was listening.) Congrats on your tigers having won. I don't remember a defensive battle as grueling. It was one of those games you were sorry to see either team loose, but that's college football...no more ties. I honestly thought the team that scored the 1st TD would be the one to break the other. I was impressed with LSU refusing to give ground after AU scored. This was one for the ages.
Tomcat said:
posted on September 19, 2006 2:34 AM — 70.244.248.250 — link — abuse?
Yes Sports fans Miami has a csi tv show.Ya thats what they got.They should thank their lucky stars they don't have to face tough teams like Rice Owls.FSU has balls to scheuule such an opponent.
Lets face it Canes fans yall are worst than the A&M Aggies. Fire your coach and yall dont even face tough teams like Houston, Rice,TCU or Baylor. Yall will probably win one or two this year. Lets face it Canes Suck. Overrated YES
Yall couldnt even hang with the dogs from SEC or Big XII yall suck-bring back J Johnson.'69 Aggie said:
posted on September 19, 2006 3:49 PM — 128.194.68.10 — link — abuse?
I've been an NCAA football fan for nearly my entire life approaching 60 years next month. While I would love nothing more than to say my Aggies belong in the top 20 list, our mantra of "Wait 'til next year!" says a lot about our success. Not since the days of Dana X. Bible and Bear Bryant have we had true national power houses. We had a modicum of success under Emory Bellard, Jackie Sherrill (without regard for school sanctions), and R. C. Slocum, but those victories were largely at the expense of a weak SWC slate. The truth was evident when we went to bowl games and played some real teams such as Notre Dame and Penn State and Ohio State. We had an early championship in the Big XII in '98, but not much since then. Following is a list of groups of five (top five, second five, etc.) in no particular order within each grouping, based on my 60 years of "fandom."
Top Five:
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Ohio State
Michigan
USC
Second Five:
Texas
Penn State
Nebraska
Alabama
Florida
Third Five:
Florida State
Tennessee
LSU
Miami
Auburn
Fourth Five:
Georgia
UCLA
Arizona St.
Iowa
Wisconsin
Programs on the Rise:
Texas Tech
Louisville
Oregon
Air Force
TCU
Programs on the Decline:
Colorado
KSU
Mississippi State
Texas A&M
Oklahoma St.gatorhippy said:
posted on September 20, 2006 11:13 AM — 209.16.115.5 — link — abuse?
I still can't understand how a conference can claim mnc's won by a team when they were in another conference...
Those titles were not awarded when say Miami was in the ACC. They were independent and Big East affiliates when they won their titles. To give the ACC credit for MNC's won by a team that wasn't even in their conference is ludicrous.
Please link any other site or media outlet that gives this kind of credit to conferences that have expanded and get to include titles won by teams joining in their conference MNC title count.
This is the only site where I see this silly practice...
All Criminal Conference (ACC) said:
posted on September 20, 2006 11:36 AM — 168.216.24.38 — link — abuse?
1. Notre Dame
2. Michigan
3. USC
4. Oklahoma
5. Ohio State
6. Penn State
7. Georgia
8. Alabama
9. Texas
10.NebraskaPrograms on the Rise (Past 5-10 yrs)
1. Va Tech
2. West Virginia
3. Oregon
4. Tennesee
5. LouisvillePrograms on a MAJOR decline
1. Miami
2. Florida State
3. Colorado
4. Texas A & M
5. Oklahoma StateConferences that are Dying
1. PAC 10 (USC) is the 1 man Show
2. ACC (A joke)
3. Conference USA (Hurt the most by ACC)Conferences on the Rise
1. Big 10
2. SEC
3. Big East (No longer has the Thugs)
4. Mountain WestTampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 20, 2006 11:39 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
'69 Aggie based on your era, I would say your top 5 is correct. However, is there any reason that UF would be in the second 5 and Miami in the third 5. There is no comparison between the two, UF doen't have any success when compared to the success of Miami.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 20, 2006 11:39 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
'69 Aggie based on your era, I would say your top 5 is correct. However, is there any reason that UF would be in the second 5 and Miami in the third 5. There is no comparison between the two, UF doesn't have any success when compared to the success of Miami.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 20, 2006 2:15 PM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
All Criminal Conference (ACC) how stupid do you have to be to say Miami is a program on a major decline in the past 5-10 years? Unless my math is incorrect the national championship we won in 2001 would fall under that time frame. It shows how great a program is that it is considered on a decline if they only have 1 national championship in a 5 year period.
All Crimiaal Conference (ACC) said:
posted on September 20, 2006 6:05 PM — 129.71.136.32 — link — abuse?
I'm not stupid....I'm just pointing out the fact that Miami has fell hard in the past five years....Coker won with Butch Davis's team, and Miami has been well behind FSU and VT in the new ACC. With the talent that Miami has...some of the most talented men in the Country, and is falling like they are is almost laughable. Need proof??? Saturday's (9-16-06) loss to Louisville 31-7, The Offensiveless night against a weak FSU D on labor Day, and The "U"s performance in last season's Peach Bowl vs. LSU (LSU has an awesome Defense, but 40+ points, come on) The fact that the Canes won the National championship 5 years ago only strengthens my argument. Face the Fact Jack, That Hurricane swagger and dominance is done.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 21, 2006 2:18 PM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
That's funny Buckeye Mark. If the program has been on such a steady decline the past 5 years like you claim, then whey do the have the number 1 defense over the past 5 years? With a bad coach they are not playing up to Hurricane expectations, but they are still a premiere program.
grstcu said:
posted on September 21, 2006 2:35 PM — 66.196.255.43 — link — abuse?
While I may be biased because I am a TCU alum, I do have a few points I want to make.
The original post says that TCU brings its past "National Championships" to the table, meaning more than 1. The only national title TCU has won was in 1938.
TCU has made some great progress since I graduated 8 years ago. Gone are the days of running a draw play on 3rd and long and playing to punt. Gary Patterson was mentored by Dennis Francione and knows what it takes to win ball games.
As much as I would love to put TCU as one of the premier programs in the country, they still have a lot of work to do. The Mountain West conference is somewhat strong, and they are beginning to play some reputable opponents during non-conference play (i.e., OU in 2005, Texas Tech in 2006 and Texas in 2007).
The fact that TCU has the nation's longest win streak going into next weekend (TCU is idle this week) does help. However, TCU needs to win more than a Houston Bowl to prove to the rest of the NCAA that the program has finally arrived.
I would like to say that 9/8/2007 is probably going to be the biggest day in TCU Football history as I think that will be the day you can call TCU a "Premier Program."
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 21, 2006 4:02 PM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
All Crimiaal Conference (ACC) wow people the use the West Virginia Network for Educational Telecomputing computers sure think that they know a lot about premiere college football programs. Please refresh my memory, but how many national titles does West Virginia have? Is there any reason to consider what a fan of an average program like WV has to say about a premiere program like the U? Let's keep it like this, at Miami we will continue to build great football programs while at West Virginia you can continue to burn all your furniture to celebrate a meaningless win.
All Criminal Conference said:
posted on September 21, 2006 5:34 PM — 129.71.136.103 — link — abuse?
Tampa Hurricane...Did I ever say I was a Mountaineer fan??? Refresh my memory if I did. Secondly, I am a High School Social Studies teacher. I love all history and I particularly like studying sports history as a hobby. Really, taking shots about someone for a misspelled word, instead of realizing that I may have simply been in a hurry, is something I would expect from one of my High School students. Perhaps that is what you really are. I stand by my thoughts on the Canes...they are done. Obviously you are in denial.
If my son got offers from Miami to play D-IA football, I really think I would burn them. Over the years the canes have shown poor sportmanship, unfair play, cheap shots, disrespect for other teams, and a thuggish criminal attitude.
They can't fill up their own stadium...it's embarrassing to see the Orange Bowl half full for home games, Miami has one of the poorest attendance in the ACC. Players at Miami plays for themselves and the possibility of making millions at the next level, not for their university, family, or state pride.
But I guess Money is what the U really stands for....jumping to the ACC proved they had no loyality or respect for the Big East, a football conference they help build. The canes are now the third best in the State of Florida, and the ACC. Let's see if you can see if this is misspelled or not...R.I.P HURRICANE FOOTBALL.
The last post really said it best the "U" has been done since OSU beat them for the BCS National Title.
Just for clarification....at one time Miami was one of my favorite team in all of College Football, I have since been converted.
cougarblue said:
posted on September 22, 2006 1:32 PM — 67.186.217.184 — link — abuse?
Hmmm... this college football season is one of the more intriguing in recent memory. The first in a long while when the number one spot is truly "up for grabs" as for myself, i'm not sold on the Buckeyes, yes Troy Smith, Ted Ginn Jr., and Antonio Pittman lead one of the most potent offenses in the country but the BIG question for Jim Tressel and the Ohio State entourage is DEFENSE, I think OSU finishes top ten but around 4,5, or even 6 the defense is simply too inexperienced.
As far as the current top twenty programs I agree with ACC with one notable exception. Notre Dame as number one? you have got to be kidding the thrashing from Michigan heartily proves otherwise. As a lifelong BYU Cougar fan I must add my beloved Cougars to the list of programs on the rise. In the next three seasons BYU will finish in the top twenty.Zac said:
posted on September 24, 2006 3:14 PM — 24.154.129.225 — link — abuse?
I've said it before; I'll say it again. There can be little, if any agreement as to which are the top 20 programs in recent or past history. There's even less agreement as to which teams have premier programs, who's on the rise, or who's on decline. Use math; use logic; use reasoning; use historical fact; use legal precedence; it doesn't matter. There will always be those who're in the know, and those who think they know. There will always be those who love and care about the game, and those who only care about their "U". That's college football. As for calling people stupid or mis-spelling a word, that's just being human. Some are better than others. That's life. I'm not here to judge; I'm here to state my opinion. My opinion: There can be no "put-up or shut-up" until there's a play-off.
By the way, I am a Mountaineer. I'm proud of it; I'm proud of the school, both their accomplishments in R&D, and on the field of play. They may not be MIT, but they rank right up there in many of their programs as with Pitt, GT, VA Tech, ND, Cincinnati and BYU, among others high in academics. As for football, they may not have a National Championship, but the house that Rodriguez built is more than on the rise, it's within reach of being great. They just have to withstand the test of time. They may wax and wane in and out of the top 20, as with most great teams, but I think they're going to be around for a long time. Those of you who will, go ahead and trash them; bad-mouth them till your cows come home; feed them with your disrespect. They're just going to do what they do best. Prove wrong, those who don't believe.
Marlon said:
posted on September 26, 2006 11:44 AM — 24.123.186.114 — link — abuse?
I think with the addition of Dan Hawkins, Colorado should move into the top 20 at least make the real list for premiere programs. Their loss to UGA showed that he does have them in the right track, they should be able to salvage this season in the Big XII, and with his motivational skills and recruiting he should turn them around. I read his blog entry on the NCAA Football blog, Every Game Counts this morning and man he is good, here's the link to it:
http://everygamecounts.blogspot.com/2006/09/jumping-into-fire-dan-hawkins-blogs.html
Buffs4life said:
posted on September 26, 2006 11:46 AM — 24.123.186.114 — link — abuse?
I think with the addition of Dan Hawkins, Colorado should move into the top 20 at least make the real list for premiere programs. Their loss to UGA showed that he does have them in the right track, they should be able to salvage this season in the Big XII, and with his motivational skills and recruiting he should turn them around. I read his blog entry on the NCAA Football blog, Every Game Counts this morning and man he is good, here's the link to it:
http://everygamecounts.blogspot.com/2006/09/jumping-into-fire-dan-hawkins-blogs.html
Chris said:
posted on September 26, 2006 4:02 PM — 204.137.64.112 — link — abuse?
Marlon and Buffs4Life are hysterical! CU should be in the Top 20 why again? Because they're 0-4? Or because they have how many National and Conference Titles? How many Heisman winners? They have won how many games against ranked opponents? What a joke. Those guys in Boulder are smoking way too much weed if they actually believe that Colorado is a "premeire program" in any way shape or form.
Chris said:
posted on September 26, 2006 4:48 PM — 204.137.64.112 — link — abuse?
Nebraska–College Football’s Winningest Program
Since 1970
The bulk of Nebraska’s football success has come since 1962 when Bob Devaney arrived from Wyoming and resurrected the Husker program. Devaney capped his career with consecutive national titles in 1970 and 1971, starting an unbelievable run of 10-plus victory seasons, and conference and national championships.In the past 37 seasons (including 2006), beginning with 1970, Nebraska has posted a remarkable 364 victories, an average of 10 wins per season. The Huskers’ overall record in that time period is 364-81-5 for an .814 winning percentage in 448 games.
In that time span, Nebraska has easily established itself as the nation’s winningest program, posting 29 more victories than second-place Michigan, followed by Oklahoma (324), Ohio State (324) and Penn State (320).
*
Nebraska has won 10 games or more 24 times since 1962, including 21 times since 1970.
*
The Huskers have finished the regular season undefeated and untied seven times since 1965, and played in 13 national title games (for one of the two teams) and won the national title five times since 1970.
*
Nebraska was the first team in college football history to win 100 or more games in consecutive decades, ranking first in the 1980s (103-20, .837) and second in the 1990s (108-16-1, .868). Nebraska narrowly missed 100 victories in the 1970s with 98 wins, and posted a nation-leading 309 wins from 1970 to 1999
Tomcat said:
posted on September 26, 2006 8:03 PM — 68.89.137.96 — link — abuse?
#229 I Agree with that post Go Houston beat Miami
# 235 No Doubt that the Huskers are a premiere program looking foward to the UT game in Lincoln.
69 AGGIE As a lifelong Horns fan I'd really like to see the Aggs improve.Yall have a big test this weeekend with TTech at Kyle feild GIG-em Aggies
Auburn#1 said:
posted on September 27, 2006 9:53 AM — 131.22.200.55 — link — abuse?
I hate when people just look at Auburn's ooc and say look at that week team. But why should Auburn have to play a tuff opponent when there in conference opponents are tougher than other conferences. Auburn will likely play atleast 3 TOP TEN teams this year. That should be good enough. Who cares who there ooc opponent is. Why should Auburn have to add another tuff opponent when few schools if any will play 2 Top ten teams.
Nathan said:
posted on September 27, 2006 1:36 PM — 209.165.162.138 — link — abuse?
What's the big deal with A&M, really? I'm a Texas native but went to college out-of-state, and I've never understood A&M. They're just not a good football team, haven't been since the Eisenhower Administration.
And why are they so obsessed with Texas? It's not like A&M does anything, athletic or academic, that Texas doesn't do better, except for I guess Animal Husbandry. Seriously. This obsession is cute, but annoying. I would instead obsess over McNeese State, maybe LA-Lafayette. Texas/Texas A&M isn't a rivalry, at least my Texas friends don't think so. At least OU beats them now and then.
And cut out the "T.U." business. Again, cute but annoying. Obnoxious, really.
Chris said:
posted on September 27, 2006 3:03 PM — 204.137.64.112 — link — abuse?
BBBMgoblue,
I agree completely that the Big 10 is certainly one of the top 2 if not the top conference in the nation. No question. The Pac-10, ACC, and SEC representatives on this site however seem to lack perspective in some instances.
matt said:
posted on September 28, 2006 11:58 PM — 216.64.24.21 — link — abuse?
the only one I agree with is the one that wrote this board from the start and REGAN. Im a dawgs fan and they have the second most SEC championships behind BAMA and the future is looking EXCELLENT under Richt who is about to join the BEAR and Spurrier With 10 wins in 5 straight years. Georgia Tech deserves to be on the top 20 too. If for no other reason than the Heisman trophy. Great discussion. ignore the tards.
cardman steve said:
posted on October 11, 2006 3:28 PM — 74.131.192.46 — link — abuse?
mr. tommie trojan, love usc football,this team has only re-loaded for the 2006 season. the way i see things. i think the gators will go unbeaten in the sec. i think the west is div of the sec is over rated. they can,t score and usc beat the living crap out of arkansas that beat the auburn that beat lsu. that,s part of my point on the sec. usc could play fla for the bcs title game. the said factor for a usc fan as you,the winner of mich vs ohio st will play the gators. other points,as i said the sec is over rated,but the powers at be will choose fla vs the winner of the ohio st vs mich. what is a louisville card which you posted back in sept. the pac 10 is weaker than the big east this year. i know,that hurts your feelings. my cards ,i hope can go unbeaten and if this all plays out,you,ll know what a louisville card is mr. tommie usc. i know,my boys are playing with big boys. don,t care about the top programs or who has more bowl wins and so and and so forth,but i hope my cards are the team that plays usc and show them we belong. just ask miami,bosie st, the ky tamekittens, fla st as well. reguardless who wins,both teams will score 40 plus points on 1 another and my cards can score alot on anyone and this year we got a d#### cardman steve
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on October 11, 2006 4:26 PM — 206.135.38.217 — link — abuse?
Cardman Steve:
My comment was made before Brohm and Bush went down and Miami got pasted. I was a little ticked on somebody's tude that day. No, really, the greatest job done this year is by Rick Pitino at Louisville. To lose those guys and keep hammerin' teams is unbeleivable. I am a beleiver today in the Louisville program. It has obviously climbed to the very top of the mountain. I just can't get em' rated any higher until they meet West Virginia. But, yeah, I think they would give USC or anybody else fits come bowl time.
Tommie T
cardman steve said:
posted on October 12, 2006 8:27 AM — 74.131.192.46 — link — abuse?
you,re right tommie trojan. the cards need to get on the mountain and stay. i like ythe trojans for years. this is to anyone,the teams out west put the ball in the air and the games are alot more fun to watch. the powers at be ruin college to a degree. the sec is a perfect example. 8 bowl tie ends. the gators are the best team in the sec and will run the table. no one can score points,despite having good d### in the sec. i lived in the moment reguarding football. the bcs stamp ruin it to a degree. i remember when jim kick and wyoming played lsu in the sugar bowl. smu againist ga bulldogs. the mac blasting the sec in tangerine bowl now the citurus bowl. most confs. have a couple of good teams every year and the rest is hype. this year fla in the sec, usc, the winner of ohio st vs mich game,louisville vs w. va all are major players for the bcs champ game. tenn and bosie st should get love and texas,the irish and clemson in my opinion should be on the border line for a bcs game. same goes for lsu, auburn. i konow acc should get a team,but only 1. powers at be ruin football. the sports pundits will sale teams that don,t belong and hammer teams that do. write me back anyone.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on October 12, 2006 11:49 AM — 206.135.38.217 — link — abuse?
Cardman Steve:
Yeh, I agree with your assessment of all of the BCS tie-ins. I don't agree with it. I like the good ol' days like my friend the Mayor does. I don't really care who wins the "Mythical National Championship". I remember in 2002 when the Trojans were on the rise (just like Louisville is now) and had to "settle" for an Orange Bowl with Iowa. They went out and hammered them 38-17, and I swear, it was the greatest moment since then. Even the National Championships were not as good as that shellacking of Iowa on the way up. Hopefully, the Cards get a shot at a Top BCS team before it's all over this year. If they go out and roll 60 on one of these teams, it'll be as they say, "The proof is in the pudding".
Tommie T
Zac said:
posted on October 14, 2006 4:22 PM — 65.31.231.119 — link — abuse?
Matt: Your "Dawgs" didn't look so good against Vandy today, nor did they look all that good against TN or now 0-6 CO. Which proves my point with Tommy T. in another blog. Over the past 4 years, there's no question GA owns the consistency argument. This year, however, is just not their year.
I've said it in other blogs. I think FL goes down at Auburn, and that the championship eventually comes down to OSU & USC. Michigan is solid; they did win in South Bend, but another win on the road in Columbus is too much to ask.
Cardman Steve: I hate to say it. No matter who wins on Nov. 2nd on Poppa John's Field, while they may go undefeated (unless a couple of more teams fall), they're not going to the National Championship. That's why we need a play-off!!!
Deerbedar said:
posted on October 19, 2006 12:07 AM — 70.153.141.129 — link — abuse?
1930 National Championship- The Davis poll says that Bama tied Notre Dame for NC this year. This was the only one to award it to Bama. Notre Dame was named NC in 6 polls
1934 National Championship- Alabama says they share this with two other teams. The awarders are Dunkel, Williamson, and Football Thesaurus. Dunkel was an individual who came up with his own system.
1941 National Championship- This is a complete joke. The AP ranked Alabama 20th in the nation with 14 teams with better records in the top 20. Once again it is the Football Thesaurus that retroactively awards it.Bama finished 3rd in SEC
1961 National Championship- Finally a legitimate NC. One poll didn't give it to Bama though
1964 National Championship- While the AP did award the NC to Bama (10-1-0), Arkansas had the better record, 11-0. Alabama played Texas in their bowl and LOST. The AP final poll was before the bowl.
1965 National Championship- The AP gave this to Bama. That year there were three teams with better records than Bama. Bama 9-1-1, Michigan St 10-1-0, Arkansas 10-1-0, Nebraska 10-1-0
1973 National Championship- AP puts Bama 4th after their bowl game loss. Bama claims a NC from the UPI poll that was taken before they met Notre Dame in the bowl game and lost
here were 3 teams with better records than Bama that year. The embarrassment of naming Alabama number one caused the UPI to name champions after bowl games.
1978 National Championship- AP gives this to Alabama(11-1-0) even though USC (12-1-0) had the better record Guess who Alabama lost to that year? USC!!!!!!!!!. UPI gave the NC to USC
1979 National Championship- Their second legitimate NC. Their first Unanimous NC.
1992 National Championship- Their third legitimate NC. Their second Unanimous NC
You can see why people ridicule Bama fans when they talk about 12 NCs. The early ones were awarded by individuals years after the games were played.
IrishJT said:
posted on October 19, 2006 9:30 AM — 71.207.226.16 — link — abuse?
Deerbedar,
Great post. I live in Alabama, wife went to Auburn and I went to Notre Dame. I become vomitous when I hear about the 12 National Titles. I wish the media would do something about it. There are many schools that got a "Thesaurus" share of the NT, to include Notre Dame, but they don't count it (ND has around 25 by Alabama standards).It really is disingenuous at best, most likely a lie and certainly NOTHING for the Tide to be proud of.
Blackshirtdomination said:
posted on October 19, 2006 8:18 PM — 64.89.58.165 — link — abuse?
43 Bowl games - 35 straight
5 National titles
3 Heismans
800 all time Victories
44 Conference titles
34 National award winners
75 First Team all americans since 1970
85 academic all americans since 1970
Winningest program since 1970 - 374 wins
275 consecutive sellouts
NEBRASKA
NUFF SAID.Syd_X_Barrett said:
posted on October 20, 2006 5:29 PM — 70.187.162.214 — link — abuse?
Anyone who puts TCU on an all-time list over A&M should be banned from posting.
You understand they haven't beaten A&M since 1972, right? That's 24 straight for the record, including whipping them in 2001. A&M has gone through a down period, but those "real impressive" WAC & MWC titles don't mean a whole lot, sorry.
AngryFrog said:
posted on October 27, 2006 1:58 PM — 24.0.175.191 — link — abuse?
Hey Syd, A&M has played TCU exactly once in the last 11 years - our 6-6 team in 2001.
If you guys are so confident you are a superior program, and would be at no risk of losing, why won't your AD schedule a game with us? You schedule Rice, ULaLa, Sam Houston, SMU, etc.
I think you know the answer. It's not the 70s or 80s anymore Syd.
Nathan said:
posted on October 28, 2006 6:55 PM — 209.165.162.138 — link — abuse?
SYD and ANGRY FROG:
Both you guys need to give it a rest. Debating who's better, A&M or TCU, is like debating whether Northern Illinois is in fact better than Western Michigan. Outside of the given region, no one cares.
Not sure which is more annoying: A&M, which used to be ok but is in denial that they now suck, or TCU, who's been phenomenal against horrible, horrible teams for awhile now. Neither program comes close to OU or Texas, even if A&M gets lucky every five years.
Again, no one cares.
UnderPar said:
posted on November 1, 2006 10:14 PM — 66.157.228.238 — link — abuse?
I like the Gators - but before 1992 they were in the bottom half of division 1 programs. I had heard that 1-36 stat on Virginia Tech before, I don't have much respect for them. I have always believed that Georgia and Auburn play NOBODY out of their conference. Tennessee had that problem until the last few years, so hats of to them for stepping up to strong non-conference opponents.
Over the past 20 years, the scariest teams I would not want to see on my schedule were:
FLorida St. Miami Michigan Ohio State Oklahoma.
Please note that all comments are subject to the Fanblogs Comment Policy.
Bring Brady Back MgoBlue said:
posted on September 6, 2006 1:50 PM — 216.46.212.20 — link — abuse?Michigan State! aahhhhahaha I have to laugh every time they are mentioned as being one of the up and coming teams!
OK I live in Michigan! I live not too far from Michigan State....and they will beat any top ten team they play! great huh? no no no! if they played division 2 ball they would lose every game! Yes they have talent! yes they have a good coach! yes they should be a top 25 team with the talent they have! But they blow out #5 Wisconsin and the next weak they are blown out by Northwestern! Let's make the Spartans prove they can beat the little teams along with the Big boys! =) then let's talk Spartan football! U of M GO BLUE! 1-0