re: All-time rankings of SEC teams

quote:

---

Yep. And since NCs are both subjective and reliant on outside factors of what happens with other teams, UGA should be higher than they are on the "subjective" list.

---

I get what you are saying, but totally ignoring national championships is pretty extreme. National championships are still kind of big deal even if sometimes subjective. You can't just completely ignore winning it all. And the site appropriately discounts the older pre-poll championships in my opinion.

Like I said it's not a perfect system but just using win percentage and schedule strength is pretty shallow and doesn't accurately reflect winning those certain big games. ND and Alabama both had one loss last year, but few would argue that ND and Alabama should be viewed as having basically equal seasons for purposes of historical rankings.

quote:

---

LSU was the most feared program in the 90s,

---

But oddly enough, during the 90's (92-99) , LSU still managed 5-3 against the Hogs.

Edit: I thought you were agreeing with him.

But - lsu only got good after saban. The rant 20 yr olds said so

Currently how is that working out for you?

quote:

---

Michigan 1664.54 (732.91 + 931.63)
Notre Dame 1619.01 (733.03 + 885.98)
Alabama 1611.63 (712.43 + 899.2)
Texas 1575.92 (714.05 + 861.87)
Georgia 1566.03 (647.2 + 918.83)


And it is very difficult to dispute this top 5.

---

Disagree strongly. Michigan has won just one national championship in the last 60 plus years (one in 97 and then you have to go back to 1948)

Georgia is a very good football program but the idea of ranking them ahead of programs like Ohio State, Oklahoma or Nebraska is badly wrong IMO. Any formula that kicks that out as a result doesn't pass any sort of eyeball test.

I personally put Alabama, Southern Cal, and Notre Dame down for my top three programs of all time. Oklahoma and Michigan are my #4 and 5 programs. Ohio State, Texas and probably Nebraska in some order are the 6 thru 8 programs.

But - lsu only got good after saban. The rant 20 yr olds said so

quote:

---

But - lsu only got good after saban. The rant 20 yr olds said so

---

Cut 'em some slack. They only know you guys from the 90s.

I remember the 80s. LSU always had my respect - and that really weird "home team loses" back-and-forth that continues, even to today. It's like our teams just feed off the hate in the opposing stadium.

quote:

---

Don't give a frick

---

quote:

---

You use whatever mickey mouse bullshite floats your boat though.

---

Wow, nice response to someone who simply and rationally disagrees with your subjective take on the best way to evaluate programs historically.

Leaving out national championships all together is certainly not without controversy. Again ND and Alabama both had one loss and similar strengths of schedule last year. Under your criteria those seasons were equal from a historical standpoint, when most people would readily acknoweldge that Alabama had the far better year by winning the most important game. There should be some accounting for that.

Again it's all subjective and there is no perfect system, but to dismiss including championships as "mickey mouse bullshite" is not reasonable, when in many situations your criteria would produce as ridiculous results as the system that includes considering championships.

quote:

---

Leaving out national championships all together is certainly not without controversy. Again ND and Alabama both had one loss and similar strengths of schedule last year. Under your criteria those seasons were equal from a historical standpoint, when most people would readily acknoweldge that Alabama had the far better year by winning the most important game. There should be some accounting for that.

Again it's all subjective and there is no perfect system, but to dismiss including championships as "mickey mouse bullshite" is not reasonable, when in many situations your criteria would produce as ridiculous results as the system that includes considering championships.

---

Much more accurate to leave out the NC bullshite.

You gave last year as an example of its inclusion helping. I will make 2 points to refute and give 2 examples.

1. The BCS matching #1 vs #2 is only a very recent thing and not representative of most of college football history where #1 vs #2 rarely happened in a bowl.

2. Two examples of where results and SOS get fricked by including mythical subjective championships. A. BYU in 1984. They get a bunch of bonus points and increase in the ratings when they may have not even been a top 10 team in 1984. Maybe not even a top 20 team (they did not play a ranked team the entire season). B. AU in 1983. Best record against toughest schedule, named NC by the majority of selectors but not the AP/UP so loss of 35 points.

I could probably come up with 20-30 examples of where the AP/Coaches poll was a poor indicator of a mythical champion in college football history. Then you throw in the selective bowls they use and the conference tie ins through most of college football, and it is obvious their formula is extremely subjective and a bit of a joke.

Use winning percentage and SOS and move on.