The Ten Greatest Programs in College Football History

[Red_Alert]

Correct. Arizona St, Arizona, UCLA, FSU, Florida, Miami, South Carolina, Texas, etc... Wreck your argument too.

How do those schools wreck my argument ... 4 of those schools, from the south, have NCs in the modern football era?

17 of the past 20 NCs are from the south. If I had the time to run the numbers, the top teams are predominantly from the south.

To go by your reasoning, the teams I listed (et al) should be juggernauts year in and year out for the past 2 or 3 decades. No team north of 37 degrees in latitude should've even be ranked in the Top 20.

You're a narrow minded tool.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

Ah, but you see it slights OU in some way/shape/form...which is directly behind Husky sunshine-pumping in his posting frequency.

Some of my brethren are easily lured into the fray.

He has posted more about the Cowpokes, tornado-birds, hornytoads and dongers than their own fans here have.

3 week countdown <--- you seem to forget that I was the first one to post in your OU thread.

 

[Guy Incognito]

Dumb list is dumb.

They basically took the top 10 teams in wins per season, excluded Florida State because they've played about 50 seasons less than the rest of the programs, then seemed to make up reasons why 3-10 shook out that way.

There's no reason to sort this list by wins per season, then move Oklahoma to last. Other than to troll Sooner fans.

 

[Red_Alert]

Yeah, and fuck that "awarded" bullshit. Your example of 1947 proves just that -- ND awarded the title prior to bowl games, Michigan beats USC by a greater margin than ND did in the Rose bowl and ND doesn't participate in any bowl.

Again, we're talking all time. There is no weighting current titles vs. older titles. If you want to talk about recently? I'd still argue in the last 50 years Michigan has been one of the top 10 programs. In fact, I found a list that looks at just that:

College football's winningest programs over past 50 years

And throw a national title in that span as well. Michigan ranks 5th. And keep in mind, that's with whatever atrocious football we played for 7 years under Hoke and RR.

Ohio St #1?

How can that fucking be? It snows there and the south started allowing black players in the past 50 years, ya retard.

No way that list's legit, right @LawDawg ?
.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Ohio St #1?

How can that fucking be? It snows there and the south started allowing black players in the past 50 years.

No way that list's legit, right @LawDawg ?
.

Wait. I'm confused. You didn't call me a retard.

 

[Bullitt08]

Yeah, and fuck that "awarded" bullshit. Your example of 1947 proves just that -- ND awarded the title prior to bowl games, Michigan beats USC by a greater margin than ND did in the Rose bowl and ND doesn't participate in any bowl.

Again, we're talking all time. There is no weighting current titles vs. older titles. If you want to talk about recently? I'd still argue in the last 50 years Michigan has been one of the top 10 programs. In fact, I found a list that looks at just that:

College football's winningest programs over past 50 years

And throw a national title in that span as well. Michigan ranks 5th. And keep in mind, that's with whatever atrocious football we played for 7 years under Hoke and RR.

First that was not "my" example that was a list of all claimed titles by team and year.


So your list shows five teams four of which have multiple NCs in the time frame. One team has one lonely trophy. Again mostest with the leastest. Thanks for proving that simple fact.

 

[LawDawg]

Black players have been playing in the south since the 70's, 80's, and 90's. GTFO
.

I'm from the south, and the percentage of black v. white players has changed dramatically in the last 2-3 decades. I look at the UGa teams of the 70s and 80s, and yes, there were black players. But they were a minority. It was in the 90s and on that it has dramatically shifted in the south.

But, let's assume that it's the last 50 years. My overall point still stands ... demographic trends are against the northern teams for the reasons I stated. Nothing you or anyone else has stated here shows me a way that is going to be reversed. What you do you think will turn that around?

 

[LawDawg]

Black players have been playing in the south since the 70's, 80's, and 90's. GTFO
.

Ok, s

To go by your reasoning, the teams I listed (et al) should be juggernauts year in and year out for the past 2 or 3 decades. No team north of 37 degrees in latitude should've even be ranked in the Top 20.

You're a narrow minded tool.

So, if someone says that southern teams are better than northern teams, in general, something that is demonstrably true, you pointing out some bad teams invalidates that argument. And, you throwin 4 teams who have won NCs, 3 of whom have won multiple NCs. And, then you go the absolute of no northern teams at all should be in the top 20. LOL.

You aren't very good at this, except the name calling part. I suspect you are the best at acting like a 3rd grader on this forum ... rarely challenged, I imagine.

 

[LawDawg]

Ohio St #1?

How can that fucking be? It snows there and the south started allowing black players in the past 50 years.

No way that list's legit, right @LawDawg ?
.

I suppose you think you are funny or cute, yet you've not shown how my position with regard to the shift of power in college football, and the reasons for it, from the north to the south is incorrect. Carry on. I think I'll reserve my limited time here for the adults.

 

[Red_Alert]

Wait. I'm confused. You didn't call me a retard.

Yeah I did.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

First that was not "my" example that was a list of all claimed titles by team and year.


So your list shows five teams four of which have multiple NCs in the time frame. One team has one lonely trophy. Again mostest with the leastest. Thanks for proving that simple fact.

11 national titles. 3rd all time. Most all time wins. Highest winning percentage. You are wrong.

 

[Red_Alert]

I suppose you think you are funny or cute, yet you've not shown how my position with regard to the shift of power in college football, and the reasons for it, from the north to the south is incorrect. Carry on. I think I'll reserve my limited time here for the adults.

It's coaching.

Those southern teams learned to pay up for coaches.

Anything other than an elite coach is simply an also ran.

That you cannot see the larger impact of coaching over weather tells me you're somewhere between 15 and 30 years old.

 

[ericd7633]

Recognize. Florida State & Miami U. These two should had been on the list.

I can understand why they aren't from an all-time list, but I'm weighting mine a little differently. Even in the AP poll era they belong top 10 IMO.

 

[Bullitt08]

11 national titles. 3rd all time. Most all time wins. Highest winning percentage. You are wrong.

Hmm keep moving those goal posts. No you are not 3rd all time. Looks like you are 3a or b or c. Tell you what find me somebody that actually watched those first 5 nattys and I will admit I was in error.

Also the ratings back then were slanted toward certain teams. In fact until 1926 when Alabama beat Washington in the Rose Bowl Southern teams were considered inferior and were not given any credit for playing good ball. 6 awarded national championships in 56 years. LMAO. Bias much??

 

[Bullitt08]

Ohio St #1?

How can that fucking be? It snows there and the south started allowing black players in the past 50 years, ya retard.

No way that list's legit, right @LawDawg ?
.

Meh. Easy to rack up wins when your schedule is full of little sisters of the poor. In those 50 years when playing OCC they typically had their azzes handed to them. In the 70s and 80s what 1-6 in the Rose?

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Hmm keep moving those goal posts. No you are not 3rd all time. Looks like you are 3a or b or c. Tell you what find me somebody that actually watched those first 5 nattys and I will admit I was in error.

Also the ratings back then were slanted toward certain teams. In fact until 1926 when Alabama beat Washington in the Rose Bowl Southern teams were considered inferior and were not given any credit for playing good ball. 6 awarded national championships in 56 years. LMAO. Bias much??

"all time" not "within bullitt08's lifetime". This is not a list ranking the best teams within our lifetime.

 

[Bullitt08]

"all time" not "within bullitt08's lifetime". This is not a list ranking the best teams within our lifetime.

TBH in my lifetime matters more to me. I basically don't care what happened when they were riding horses to get around.

CFB didn't really start becoming a balanced sport as far as inter-sectional competition until the 20s.
Before that being awarded king of basically a mole hill ain't that impressive.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

TBH in my lifetime matters more to me. I basically don't care what happened when they were riding horses to get around.

CFB didn't really start becoming a balanced sport as far as inter-sectional competition until the 20s.
Before that being awarded king of basically a mole hill ain't that impressive.

That's fine. You could argue this list matters less to you than a list of the best teams in your lifetime (which would still probably include Michigan). But this is an all time list, which includes a lot of time.

 

[ericd7633]

That's fine. You could argue this list matters less to you than a list of the best teams in your lifetime (which would still probably include Michigan). But this is an all time list, which includes a lot of time.

It would be close for me in my lifetime. Honestly, I don't think ND or Michigan is top 10 in my lifetime(1986).

 

[Rolltide94]

Of course not, I agree with your statement here. Winning a natty cures a lot of ills and reshapes the perception of a program's legacy.

Let me ask you this:

Program A: averages 10 wins a season, never wins a natty but is generally in the picture

vs.

Program B: averages 5-7 wins a year but within that decade pulls it together and wins 1 natty.

Who is the better program overall?

Program A is Michigan in the 60's and 70's, Program B is Georgia Tech.

Here is a list of most wins for the last 100 years. Really anything before that is Rugby. I find it hard to take seriously anybody that compares today's football to what was played between Michigan and the University of Toronto in 1887, or even 1887 to 1925 and pretends we are talking about the same game.


WINS SINCE 1918

Alabama - 807
Oklahoma - 783
Texas - 763
Ohio St - 756
Notre Dame -750
USC - 748
Tennessee - 740
Michigan - 736
Penn St - 735
Nebraska - 733