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

quote:

---

How is Nebraska not a dynasty in mid 90s? 3 titles in 4 years and an appearance in the "championship game" the year before that.

---

You make good points. Totally overlooked Nebraska. They were without a doubt a dynasty in the mid '90s.

quote:

---

In my opinion Bama's dynasty started in 2009. If we take it this year, 4 championships in 7 years is better than Miami's 5 in 20 years right? Even 3 in 7 is a better percentage.

Maybe it's a difference in semantics but to me dynasties are when you are on the very top, not when you finished ranked. My 2 cents.

---

Well then by your own semantics, Bama's dynasty is over. Bama has now not won a title since 2012, and failed to reach the Championship Game both of the last two seasons. Here we are in 2015, and while Bama is one of four teams with a shot, they've not spent a single week of the season #1 in the polls.

So by your more narrow definition, Bama's dynasty is already over.

Now I don't believe it is, but your definition says its that.

What happens if Bama wins the Championship this year, but next year fails to make the playoff. And what if Ohio State goes undefeated and wins the National Title.

They'd have the following 5-year record:

2012: 12-0 #3
2013: 12-2 #12
2014: 14-1 #1 (National Champs)
2015: 12-1 #5 (Estimated finish this year)
2016: 15-0 #1 (Hypothetical National Champs)

How could you not say that Ohio State would be in the midst of a dynasty that began AT LEAST in 2014... if not 2012?

But if Bama wins this year's National Title, then you'd be saying Saban's Dynasty ran from 2009-2015.

So even by your definition, dynasties can indeed overlap.

Unless you are only willing to say that a dynasty is only when a team is truly #1 at the end of the season. If that's the case, then Bama's dynasty ended in 2012 and Ohio State's dynasty ended after last season.