USC top Program of All time

[trojanfan12]

How many Oregon Ducks fans voted in this thing?

Probably just Shaver. He should be along any minute now saying that it proves he's not butthurt. OD will follow along shortly after that claiming that he voted, but the whole poll is nothing to be excited about.

 

[trojanfan12]

I'm not sure I agree with the methodology here. I'm not sure why anything NFL draft pick wise is included in this as that really has no impact on a college team's on field performance.

Yes, because after all, everyone knows that having NFL caliber talent on the roster, never helps a team win games.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Sure, I definitely see what you're saying. The highlighted part, though, was why I referenced the smaller programs. They aren't successful and they don't put much in the pros, so there's an obvious correlation. Since the NFL has been around for far less time than college football, it's a relevant measure because it's taking into account modern football.

However, when you reference all-time wins, you see teams like Harvard, Penn and Princeton near the top, when obviously that means nothing in terms of their program since they haven't been nationally relevant in many, many years. I know it seems like I'm taking a direct dig at michigan, which I'm not, but it's a good illustration of my point - 153 of their wins came before the forward pass was even legal.

Fair points. I just think when you're talking about the 10 or so elite programs of all time, you can use those metrics simply because most of the programs have equal data to compare. Most were around in the last 1800's/early 1900's and had similar win statistics in the "old days".

 

[trojanfan12]

Personally I think Notre Dame , Michigan, Bama , USC , Ohio State , Texas, and Nebraska are the the elite and you really cant separate them because of a NC back in 1912.

I'd throw Oklahoma in there too. I see them all as pretty interchangeable. Every one of those programs can make a strong case.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Yes, because after all, everyone knows that having NFL caliber talent on the roster, never helps a team win games.

It should help a team win games....but it doesn't guarantee anything. As mentioned, some players are awesome college players that can win Heisman trophies....and then suck it up in the NFL. There are plenty of examples of this to prove that point.

 

[trojanfan12]

USC exists to provide context for the Song Girls.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

 

[Tin Man]

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Read the fine print. Our editorial policy disavows any responsibility for paid messages.

 

[Tin Man]

I always put Notre Dame at the top. There just is not a bigger name in College sports, than ND football. Got their own TV contract with NBC. Multiple movies about the program. It is annoying, but they are the face of college football. Other programs have won more bowls, games, or NC, but nobody has a bigger presence. It may fade over time, but I do not think that time as come yet.

EMERGENCY! Somebody help this Texan get his horns back.

 

[trojanfan12]

It should help a team win games....but it doesn't guarantee anything. As mentioned, some players are awesome college players that can win Heisman trophies....and then suck it up in the NFL. There are plenty of examples of this to prove that point.

How they performed in the NFL doesn't really mean a whole lot when talking about how they performed in college (although USC is pretty high on the list of NFL HOF'ers as well). It's about the fact that they had NFL talent in the first place and got drafted. Using Matt Leinart as an example, the fact that his NFL career didn't pan out, doesn't change the fact that he was a top 10 pick in the NFL draft.

On the flip side, Tom Brady is one of the the greatest qb's in NFL history, but he was a 6th round pick coming out of Michigan. He's easily had a much better NFL career than Leinart, but Leinart had the much better college career and it's college programs that are being ranked here.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

How they performed in the NFL doesn't really mean a whole lot when talking about how they performed in college (although USC is pretty high on the list of NFL HOF'ers as well). It's about the fact that they had NFL talent in the first place and got drafted. Using Matt Leinart as an example, the fact that his NFL career didn't pan out, doesn't change the fact that he was a top 10 pick in the NFL draft.

On the flip side, Tom Brady is one of the the greatest qb's in NFL history, but he was a 6th round pick coming out of Michigan. He's easily had a much better NFL career than Leinart, but Leinart had the much better college career and it's college programs that are being ranked here.

I'm not thinking of someone who was great in college, got drafted and then failed. I'm thinking of someone who was great in college but wasn't drafted high, or at all, because of one factor or another that wouldn't make them a great NFL player. There are plenty of really good college players that end up not getting drafted at all.

 

[trojanfan12]

I'm not thinking of someone who was great in college, got drafted and then failed. I'm thinking of someone who was great in college but wasn't drafted high, or at all, because of one factor or another that wouldn't make them a great NFL player. There are plenty of really good college players that end up not getting drafted at all.

You're making my point for me. There are only so many spots available in the NFL and some guys go undrafted. However, if they had performed in college in a way that got them noticed by the NFL, they'd have been drafted. This is about college performance, so if a guy plays well enough in college to get drafted into the NFL, it's safe to say that he had a pretty darn good college career. The more guys a team has that play well enough in college to get drafted, the higher they are likely to be in lists like this one.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

You're making my point for me. There are only so many spots available in the NFL and some guys go undrafted. However, if they had performed in college in a way that got them noticed by the NFL, they'd have been drafted. This is about college performance, so if a guy plays well enough in college to get drafted into the NFL, it's safe to say that he had a pretty darn good college career. The more guys a team has that play well enough in college to get drafted, the higher they are likely to be in lists like this one.

Not always, some kids just don't meet the physical requirements to do well in the NFL but can excel in college. The NFL can be this selective because it does have limited spots. Plenty of good college players get skipped over because spots are limited. So a team can be made up of some pretty good players that just don't make it to the NFL.

 

[Across The Field]

Fair points. I just think when you're talking about the 10 or so elite programs of all time, you can use those metrics simply because most of the programs have equal data to compare. Most were around in the last 1800's/early 1900's and had similar win statistics in the "old days".

Yeah you're right, and it's not like you don't see the marquee programs near the top of that list. The argument of "best program of all-time" will always remain unproven just because of the many changes that have happened in college football since it's beginning.

 

[BeaverShaver]

I am sensing some major Oregon Ducks butthurt. How can we possibly NOT be the best program of all time???

 

[Boise4Life]

I just don't see how Bama could be #4 based on any metric. The national titles speak for themselves. That's the only measurement that really matters to me when you're trying to come up with a list of the best.

 

[Across The Field]

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Is the one in the middle Willem Dafoe?

 

[Across The Field]

I just don't see how Bama could be #4 based on any metric. The national titles speak for themselves. That's the only measurement that really matters to me when you're trying to come up with a list of the best.

This should open some interesting dialogue.

 

[outofyourmind]

I am sensing some major Oregon Ducks butthurt. How can we possibly NOT be the best program of all time???

That's a long list.
We don't have time right now for that.

 

[outofyourmind]

I just don't see how Bama could be #4 based on any metric. The national titles speak for themselves. That's the only measurement that really matters to me when you're trying to come up with a list of the best.

We have 23.
So were the best
Thanks for clearing that up.
Oklahoma All National Championships

 

[trojanfan12]

Not always, some kids just don't meet the physical requirements to do well in the NFL but can excel in college. The NFL can be this selective because it does have limited spots. Plenty of good college players get skipped over because spots are limited. So a team can be made up of some pretty good players that just don't make it to the NFL.

The team that has the most players who actually get drafted into the NFL is pretty much always going to be more highly regarded than those that don't. Yes, there are plenty of good players who never get a shot at the NFL for a variety of reasons. In fact, I'd say that to even get a schollie to a 4 year university (especially one in a P5 conference), you have to be pretty darn good.

However, this list or poll or whatever is measuring players who actually had good enough college careers to get drafted into the NFL as part of it's metrics.

I'm not saying that I necessarily agree that USC should be #1, but to act like having the most players who have been good enough to get drafted to the NFL doesn't mean much seems kinda silly considering the talent required to get drafted.