Started By
Message
College Football Historical Relevancy Rankings
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:23 am
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:23 am
This is not a ranking of the “Best” or “Most Accomplished” programs. This is a ranking of how common it is for a program to be relevant at any given point since the inception of the AP Poll (1936).
A team is considered relevant for each season if they finished ranked in the last AP Poll.
The below methodology is based on the standard deviation of season streaks of finishing outside the Final Poll.
For example: a team with a score of 2.5 means that the standard deviation of streaks in which they finish outside the Top 25 is at 2.5 years. This means it’s pretty common for that program to finish unranked every two years, but once they go up to 3 years of finishing unranked, it becomes uncommon or rare for them to have gone that long without a season of being relevant and finishing in the Top 25.
College Football Historical Relevancy Rankings:
1. Ohio State- 0.75
2. Alabama- 0.87
These are the only two programs that have a score of less than one. In other words, if Ohio State or Bama finish outside the Top 25 for one season, it’s incredibly rare and outside the standard deviation.
This does not mean Ohio State is more accomplished, it just means they are slightly more likely to be relevant every season. The difference comes basically from Bama’s struggles in the 1950s when they failed to finished ranked for five seasons from 1954-1958. Ohio State has never had a streak of finishing unranked longer than three years.
3. Michigan- 1.02
4. Notre Dame- 1.05
5. Oklahoma- 1.09
6. USC- 1.13
7. Texas- 1.28
8. Penn State- 1.53
9. Auburn- 1.75
10. Georgia- 1.79
11. Tennessee- 1.91
12. LSU- 1.94
These 10 programs commonly might have a streak of 1 or maybe 2 seasons of finishing unranked, but once a streak goes to 3 seasons it becomes outside the norm.
LSU fans will likely bristle at being #12, but they are penalized by several long struggle stretches during their history… finishing unranked for seven seasons or longer on four different occasions (8 seasons from 1950-1957…. 8 seasons from 1974-1981…. 7 seasons from 1938-1944… and 7 seasons from 1989-1995).
Meanwhile Auburn and Georgia each have just one streak of finishing unranked that lasted longer than six seasons (Auburn 10 seasons from 1943-1952 and Georgia 10 seasons from 1949-1958).
13. UCLA- 2.06
14. Nebraska- 2.43
15. Arkansas- 2.50
16. Clemson- 2.74
17. Washington- 2.79
18. Michigan State- 2.80
19. Florida- 2.94
This is a fascinating group. The data shows Nebraska… a program with five national titles and one that’s often mentioned as a “Blue Blood” behind UCLA. Again, this doesn’t mean UCLA is more accomplished or a better program than the Huskers, but it does show that the Bruins are slightly more likely to avoid long stretches of irrelevancy.
Nebraska gets hammered by their current stretch of 11 seasons of finishing unranked (2013-present) but they also had a 9-year streak from 1941-1949 and a 12-year streak from 1951-1962. Those are some incredibly long streaks of irrelevancy.
Meanwhile UCLA has had only one streak ever of finishing unranked that lasted longer than seven seasons (9 years from 1956-1964).
Arkansas over Florida will draw some attention as well. While the Gators are the more accomplished program with 3 national titles, they’ve been historically more prone to long droughts of irrelevancy… particularly hampered by a 16-season stretch of finishing unranked from 1936-1951.
The relevancy rankings expose new money programs.
Arkansas on the other hand has never had a streak of finishing unranked go longer than 9 seasons.
20. Georgia Tech- 3.01
21. Ole Miss- 3.15
22. Miami- 3.25
23. Missouri- 3.55
24. Texas A&M- 3.62
25. Stanford- 3.77
26. Iowa- 3.82
It’s standard for these teams to have 3-year stretches of finishing unranked. Once they start getting up above four it becomes outside the norm.
Notably missing from the list is Florida State. They are the shiniest of the new money programs and have a standard deviation of 6.27. That’s what happens when you go 42 seasons after the inception of the AP poll before finishing ranked.
A team is considered relevant for each season if they finished ranked in the last AP Poll.
The below methodology is based on the standard deviation of season streaks of finishing outside the Final Poll.
For example: a team with a score of 2.5 means that the standard deviation of streaks in which they finish outside the Top 25 is at 2.5 years. This means it’s pretty common for that program to finish unranked every two years, but once they go up to 3 years of finishing unranked, it becomes uncommon or rare for them to have gone that long without a season of being relevant and finishing in the Top 25.
College Football Historical Relevancy Rankings:
1. Ohio State- 0.75
2. Alabama- 0.87
These are the only two programs that have a score of less than one. In other words, if Ohio State or Bama finish outside the Top 25 for one season, it’s incredibly rare and outside the standard deviation.
This does not mean Ohio State is more accomplished, it just means they are slightly more likely to be relevant every season. The difference comes basically from Bama’s struggles in the 1950s when they failed to finished ranked for five seasons from 1954-1958. Ohio State has never had a streak of finishing unranked longer than three years.
3. Michigan- 1.02
4. Notre Dame- 1.05
5. Oklahoma- 1.09
6. USC- 1.13
7. Texas- 1.28
8. Penn State- 1.53
9. Auburn- 1.75
10. Georgia- 1.79
11. Tennessee- 1.91
12. LSU- 1.94
These 10 programs commonly might have a streak of 1 or maybe 2 seasons of finishing unranked, but once a streak goes to 3 seasons it becomes outside the norm.
LSU fans will likely bristle at being #12, but they are penalized by several long struggle stretches during their history… finishing unranked for seven seasons or longer on four different occasions (8 seasons from 1950-1957…. 8 seasons from 1974-1981…. 7 seasons from 1938-1944… and 7 seasons from 1989-1995).
Meanwhile Auburn and Georgia each have just one streak of finishing unranked that lasted longer than six seasons (Auburn 10 seasons from 1943-1952 and Georgia 10 seasons from 1949-1958).
13. UCLA- 2.06
14. Nebraska- 2.43
15. Arkansas- 2.50
16. Clemson- 2.74
17. Washington- 2.79
18. Michigan State- 2.80
19. Florida- 2.94
This is a fascinating group. The data shows Nebraska… a program with five national titles and one that’s often mentioned as a “Blue Blood” behind UCLA. Again, this doesn’t mean UCLA is more accomplished or a better program than the Huskers, but it does show that the Bruins are slightly more likely to avoid long stretches of irrelevancy.
Nebraska gets hammered by their current stretch of 11 seasons of finishing unranked (2013-present) but they also had a 9-year streak from 1941-1949 and a 12-year streak from 1951-1962. Those are some incredibly long streaks of irrelevancy.
Meanwhile UCLA has had only one streak ever of finishing unranked that lasted longer than seven seasons (9 years from 1956-1964).
Arkansas over Florida will draw some attention as well. While the Gators are the more accomplished program with 3 national titles, they’ve been historically more prone to long droughts of irrelevancy… particularly hampered by a 16-season stretch of finishing unranked from 1936-1951.
The relevancy rankings expose new money programs.
Arkansas on the other hand has never had a streak of finishing unranked go longer than 9 seasons.
20. Georgia Tech- 3.01
21. Ole Miss- 3.15
22. Miami- 3.25
23. Missouri- 3.55
24. Texas A&M- 3.62
25. Stanford- 3.77
26. Iowa- 3.82
It’s standard for these teams to have 3-year stretches of finishing unranked. Once they start getting up above four it becomes outside the norm.
Notably missing from the list is Florida State. They are the shiniest of the new money programs and have a standard deviation of 6.27. That’s what happens when you go 42 seasons after the inception of the AP poll before finishing ranked.
This post was edited on 4/23/24 at 11:42 am
21
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:25 am to AUTiger789
I like your posts. They're always interesting.
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:25 am to AUTiger789
quote:
8. Penn State- 1.53
WAY too high,
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:25 am to AUTiger789
I predict this one will go over well 
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:26 am to AUTiger789
Really interesting. Thanks for this.
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:27 am to Leto II
quote:
I predict this one will go over well
So who is going to ask THE question?
Which programs are perma-prone to going 8-4?
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:30 am to dstone12
You aren't wrong
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:33 am to Nate Forrest
quote:
WAY too high,
It’s literal data. If you don’t like the numbers, you don’t like historical facts.
Penn State has never gone longer than six seasons of finishing unranked. The only other programs that can say that are Alabama, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, and USC…. Not even Michigan can claim that.
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:34 am to AUTiger789
I would put LSU ahead of TN. Other than that, it looks pretty accurate
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:37 am to dstone12
quote:
Which programs are perma-prone to going 8-4?
I'd like to know the answer to this. I know for sure it's not my team, because we went 10-2 in 2012...
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:37 am to AUTiger789
quote:
The difference comes basically from Bama’s struggles in the 1950s when they failed to finished ranked for five seasons from 1954-1958.
Thank you JB "Ears" Whitworth. His 4 total wins in 3 seasons anchored that era. It's hard to overstate just how bad he was during his time at Alabama.
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:39 am to dstone12
quote:
Which programs are perma-prone to going 8-4?
Yeah there is a lot of this probably in these numbers. Take this past season: #1 Michigan and #25 Liberty both are deemed relevant by finishing ranked. Does this mean Liberty is equal to Michigan? No. But Liberty was certainly relevant in the fact that they won 13 games, were ranked the final six weeks of the season, and played in a NY6 bowl.
Most fans would take being relevant every few years over suffering through a miserable multi-decade streak of irrelevancy.
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:41 am to AUTiger789
quote:
3. Michigan- 1.02
4. Notre Dame- 1.05
5. Oklahoma- 1.09
6. USC- 1.13
7. Texas- 1.28
8. Penn State- 1.53
9. Auburn- 1.75
10. Georgia- 1.79
11. Tennessee- 1.91
12. LSU- 1.94
This is just hard to understand/justify your definition of relevancy. I think you need to rework your formula or adjust definition because it's pretty damn hogwash if it has Auburn ahead of LSU.
All time head to head: LSU up 33-24-1
Other things LSU leads Auburn in:
- All time overall winning percentage
- # of National Titles
- # of Conference Titles
- # of Bowl Games
- Number of total wins
- Bowl game winning %
- # of consensus All Americans
- # of NFL draft picks
- # of 1st round NFL draft picks
- # of weeks in AP poll
- # of weeks at #1 in AP Poll
Things Auburn leads in:
- Nothing
Tied:
- # of Heisman winners
This post was edited on 4/23/24 at 12:46 pm
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:42 am to GambitAUfan
quote:
I would put LSU ahead of TN. Other than that, it looks pretty accurate
UT owns LSU 21-10-3
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:42 am to AUTiger789
I think there could be some nuance to these rankings considering rankings are subjective based on perception.
Does a 7-5 Ohio State or Alabama finish ranked no matter what? Does a 7-5 Ole Miss get the same evaluation?
Does a 7-5 Ohio State or Alabama finish ranked no matter what? Does a 7-5 Ole Miss get the same evaluation?
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:42 am to AUTiger789
quote:
Notably missing from the list is Florida State. They are the shiniest of the new money programs and have a standard deviation of 6.27. That’s what happens when you go 42 seasons after the inception of the AP poll before finishing ranked.
This should probably be adjusted. FSU didn't field a football team until 11 years after the inception of the AP poll. It's hard to be relevant before you even exist.
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:42 am to AUTiger789
quote:
It’s literal data. If you don’t like the numbers, you don’t like historical facts.
It's data put into a formula that was designed by you. That is different.
ETA:
The big issue is level of success each season isn't properly represented and your definition of "relevance" is pretty subjective.
This post was edited on 4/23/24 at 11:46 am
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:44 am to CatfishJohn
quote:
This is just hard to understand. I think you need to rework your formula because it's pretty damn hogwash if it has Auburn ahead of LSU.
It's not hard to understand. LSU has benefited from being a significant program since Saban got there. Before Saban, LSU had numerous stretches of irrelevancy and failed to finish in the top 25. More so than Auburn.
OP's method is to evaluate stretches of time where teams have finished ranked (thus relevant to the storyline of a season).
Sorry that hurts your feelings.
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:45 am to Evolved Simian
quote:
It's hard to be relevant before you even exist.
That's the point though. Perhaps they can have an asterisk, but the purpose is to evaluate teams that have been historically relevant as a ranked team. Florida State had a long stretch of not being ranked because they didn't exist. Therefore, they weren't relevant for a chunk of CFB history.
Posted on 4/23/24 at 11:45 am to CatfishJohn
quote:
Things Auburn leads in:
Cigar Celebrations
Page 1 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News