How does Bama's current run compare to other dynasties in their prime?

Prepare 3 straight years of embarassing ooc bowl losses. SEC as a whole sucked arse this year and Bama capitalized on it.

2009: Credit to Bama. Well deserved championship season
2010: Disappointing 3 losses with stacked 2 deep
2011: Rematch after losing the do or die game. Are you fricking kidding me?
2012: Both Oregon and Kansas State miraculously loses. Backdoor champ U
2013: Kick 6 and Chokelahoma LOL
2014: Corch kicked the shite out of them

This isn't a dynasty according to VerlanderBeast, this is what you call a "historic run" in his parlance. Not enough undefeated seasons to qualify as a dynasty.

quote:

---

14andCounting

---

Bama's current run is very strong. First off, here is what I would consider a "Dynasty"

#1 Must include at least 2 National Titles during the run
#2 Has to be at least 4 seasons in length
#3 Cannot include consecutive seasons ranked outside the Final AP Top 20
#4 Average Final Rank in AP Poll must be at least Top 10
#5 At least 50% of the seasons must include a Top 5 AP Finishs
#6 Overall winning percentage must be at least 82%

Using this criteria, there have been 5 dynasties during the modern era (1980-present). Here they are listed in chronological order:

MIAMI
Years: 1983-2003 (21 total)
National Titles: 5
Top 5 Finishes: 12 (57%)
Avg. AP Rank: #8.0
Total Record: 212-42-0 (83.5%)
**Produced 2 Heisman Trophy winners

FLORIDA STATE
Years: 1987-2000 (14 years)
National Titles: 2
Top 5 Finishes: 14 (100%)
Avg. AP Rank: #2.6
Total Record: 152-19-1 (88.7%)
*Produced 2 Heisman Trophy winners

USC
Years: 2002-2008 (7 years)
National Titles: 2
Top 5 Finishes: 7 (100%)
Avg. AP Rank: #4.3
Total Record: 68-9 (88.3%)
*Produced 3 Heisman Trophy winners (though Reggie Bush later vacated his)

FLORIDA
Years: 2006-2009 (4 years)
National Titles: 2
Top 5 Finishes: 3 (75%)
Avg. AP Rank: #4.5
Total Record: 48-7 (87.3%)
*Produced 1 Heisman Trophy winner

ALABAMA
Years: 2008-present (currently 8 years)
National Titles: 3
Top 5 Finishes: 4 or 5 (50-62.5% depending on this year)
Avg. AP Rank: #4.3
Total Record: 96-12 (88.9%)
*Produced 2 Heisman Trophy winners

***Ohio State only needs one more title in the coming years to be able to say they have been in a dynasty dating back to 2012.


In my opinion, Miami's dynasty is most impressive... simply because it spanned 2+ decades and claimed 5 National Titles.

The fact that Florida State finished in the AP Top 5 in 14 consecutive seasons is a feat that will likely never be equaled. I also think that makes that dynasty extra special.

If Bama were to lose in the playoff and sputter out over the next few seasons, I would say that the Saban dynasty would rank #3 in the modern era behind Miami's and Florida State's. To me, FSU's 14-consecutive seasons in the Top 5 + 2 MNCs would trump Bama's 3 MNC's in 9 years with just 4 Top 5 fnishes.

If Bama were to win the Title this season, then it would be a for-sure #2 best dynasty of the modern era, and they'd be well on their way to equaling Miami's impressive dynasty.

This is a quality post. I'm flabbergasted someone around here actually took the time to carefully consider a question and provide an objective, data-supported answer. I am buying this man a virtual drink.

quote:

---

If Bama were to win the Title this season, then it would be a for-sure #2 best dynasty of the modern era, and they'd be well on their way to equaling Miami's impressive dynasty.

---

Miami's dynasty runs 20 freaking years even with major rebuilding in between? And Bama won a Natty in that period...against Miami. So, can our dynasty go back to '92? Or back to Bear? I don't see why not

quote:

---

I actually think Miami had two separate dynasties. I'd like to see their rankings during the 90's to early 2000s

---

You can certainly make that argument.

In that case, Miami from 1983-1994 would be "Dynasty #1" and Miami 2000-2003 would be "Dynasty #2. The problem is that second set of years only includes 1 National Title (but two #2 finishes) so it would not be a dynasty by my definition.

While there was a definite break in dominance, its not like Miami completely fell off the map for very long.

1994: #6 finish
1995: #20 finish (start of the drop-off)
1996: #14 finish
1997: Unranked
1998: #20 finish
1999: #15 finish
2000: #2 finish (back to dominance)

So from 1996-1999, there were 5 years of relative struggle. Still, the fact that Miami finished in the Top 20 in 4 of their 5 "down years" sandwiched between 2 sets of absolute dominance... I don't think Miami was ever "down" enough to say the dynasty totally ended. There was certainly some rebuilding that went on in the middle, but it was never so bad for long enough to say it totally ended, IMO.

Its really strong, but its not a Miami Dynasty.