Started By
Message
locked post

11 greatest dynasties in the SEC

Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:16 pm
Posted by Crompdaddy8
Jimmy Rustler
Member since Nov 2009
10569 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:16 pm
first of all I didn't write this. some other member on SEC rant wrote it (I forget his name)
but I saved the text.
the following are SEC dynasties who had a .800 or higher winning percentage over a 10 year period.

1) Tennessee 1925-1934
81-9-6 (.900)
2 Conference titles (1927; 1932)
5 undefeated seasons (1927 8-0-1; 1928 9-0-1; 1929 9-0-1; 1931 9-0-1; 1932 9-0-1)
(Note: Tennessee had three straight undefeated seasons from 1927-1929 -though all three years had ties- and had a period from 1926-1932 where they only lost 2 football games)

2) Alabama 1971-1980
107-13 (.892)
8 Conference titles (1971; 1972; 1973; 1974; 1975; 1977; 1978; 1979)
3 national titles (1973; 1978; 1979)
1 Perfect Season (1979 12-0)

3) Alabama 1959-1968
91-13-6 (.875)
4 Conference Titles (1961; 1964; 1965; 1966)
3 National Titles (1961; 1964; 1965)
2 Perfect Seasons (1961 11-0; 1966 11-0)

4) Ole Miss 1954-1963
91-13-4 (.875)
5 Conference Titles (1954; 1955; 1960; 1962 1963)
1 Perfect Season (1962 10-0)
1 Undefeated Season (1960 10-0-1)
(Note: While neither the Coaches nor AP awarded these teams any titles, various other services did award titles in 1959, 1960, & 1962)

5) Tennessee 1936-1946
84-14-4 (.857)
4 Conference Titles (1938; 1939; 1940; 1946)
1 National Title (1938)
1 Perfect Season (1938 11-0)
(Note: Like many colleges, Tennessee did not field a team in 1943 due to war; thus the period covers 11 years but 10 football seasons).

6) Alabama 1925-1934
80-14-3 (.851)
5 Conference Titles (1925; 1926; 1930; 1933; 1934)
4 National Titles (1925; 1926; 1930; 1934)
3 Perfect Seasons (1925 10-0; 1930 10-0; 1934 10-0)
1 Undefeated Season (1926 9-0-1)

7) Alabama 1936-1945
74-16-7 (.822)
2 Conference Titles (1937; 1945)
1 Perfect Season (1945 10-0)
1 Undefeated Season (1936 8-0-1)
(Note: Thoough this period encompasees 11 years, it only encompasses 10 seasons as Alabama, like most colleges, did not field a team in 1943 due to World War II. by the end of 1945, bama had 20 straight years of of winning more than 80% of their games).

8) Florida 1991-2001
113-25-1 (.819)
6 Conference Titles (1991; 1993; 1994; 1995; 1996; 2000)
1 National Title (1996)
(Note: I'm aware I'm over by a year on this team, but both their 1991 and 2001 teams were 10-2, so it didn't matter which year I included for their decade).

9) Tennessee 1994-2004
111-25 (.816)
2 Conference Titles (1997; 1998)
1 National Title (1998)
1 Perfect Season (1998 13-0)

10) Alabama 1985-1994
98-24-2 (.803)
2 Conference titles (1989; 1992)
1 National Title (1992)
1 Perfect Season (1992 13-0)

11) Tennessee 1965-1974
88-22-5 (.800)
2 Conference Titles (1967; 1969)


5 Alabama
4 Tennessee
1 Florida under Spurrier (Urban Meyer years soon to follow)
1 Ole Miss under John Vaught
Posted by volfan30
Member since Jun 2010
40949 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:18 pm to
Sucks that we're a middle-tier program all time.
Posted by bigpapamac
Mobile, AL
Member since Oct 2007
22375 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:22 pm to
Alabama's eight titles in the 70s is far greater than UT's two from 25-34, I don't care if UTs win percentage was a whole .008 better
Posted by 87BAMAGRAD
Atlanta
Member since Sep 2009
949 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:23 pm to
quote:

1) Alabama 1971-1980

8 SEC titles in 10 years - must be # 1
Posted by Crompdaddy8
Jimmy Rustler
Member since Nov 2009
10569 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:24 pm to
agreed. but I'm sure the guy who wrote it lined up #1-#11 based on winning% because it's easier that way. as for which dynasty was better it's certainly debatable.
Posted by m2pro
Member since Nov 2008
28595 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:25 pm to
quote:

8 SEC titles in 10 years - must be # 1




agreed.

5 undefeated seasons is impressive, but it's not nearly as impressive for a time period when the game was only becoming established. Bama's 71'-80' run is far more impressive IMO.

that's all opinion though :P

don't worry, UT will find a way back. you have your Mike Shula for now. who knows, it could work out for u. Chizik has somehow worked out for the shiturds.
This post was edited on 3/2/11 at 5:26 pm
Posted by diddydirtyAubie
Bozeman
Member since Dec 2010
39829 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:25 pm to
I don't think having 2 SEC titles in 10 years counts as a dynasty, brah.
Posted by 87BAMAGRAD
Atlanta
Member since Sep 2009
949 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:26 pm to
quote:

as for which dynasty was better it's certainly debatable.


4 every 5 years > 1 every 5 years
Posted by volfan30
Member since Jun 2010
40949 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:26 pm to
So if 81-9-6 over a 10 year period isn't a dynasty, what is?
Posted by diddydirtyAubie
Bozeman
Member since Dec 2010
39829 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:27 pm to
quote:

So if 81-9-6 over a 10 year period isn't a dynasty, what is?


Winning Championships, brah...This thread smells like Appalachian homers.
Posted by auzach91
Marietta, GA
Member since Jan 2009
40250 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:28 pm to
#1- 2010 Auburn. A dynasty in itself.
Posted by Volmanac
Nashville, TN
Member since May 2009
7733 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:28 pm to
That was an era when you had unbalanced scheduling and the Southern Conference was like 20 teams...so it's not quite a fair comparison.
Posted by 87BAMAGRAD
Atlanta
Member since Sep 2009
949 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:30 pm to
'70's Bama first team to win 100 games in a decade, if I'm not mistaken. Tennessee impressive, and a dynasty, but not #1 dynasty.

Posted by Whereisomaha
Member since Feb 2010
17939 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:31 pm to
quote:

Note: While neither the Coaches nor AP awarded these teams any titles, various other services did award titles in 1959, 1960, & 1962

Such bullshite. The 1959 team went down as the greatest team of the 20th century, yet people arent recognizing them as NC.
Posted by JoshuaChamberlain
Member since Sep 2010
5258 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:31 pm to
..gets out Houndstooth sock and bottle of Jergens lotion...
"Hai guys is this where the Bama circle jerk is about to be....
Posted by Teague
The Shoals, AL
Member since Aug 2007
21671 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:32 pm to
I'm not going to argue over which is best, but the .900 for UT conveniently doesn't factor in the ties.

81-9-6 < 107-13

If we count ties as a half loss then UT drops to .675

Just sayin'.
Posted by TBama93k
Member since Nov 2010
8056 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:32 pm to
ive never seen this before
Posted by diddydirtyAubie
Bozeman
Member since Dec 2010
39829 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:33 pm to
quote:

Such bullshite. The 1959 team went down as the greatest team of the 20th century


This post was edited on 3/2/11 at 5:34 pm
Posted by Volmanac
Nashville, TN
Member since May 2009
7733 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:33 pm to
If you count them as half loss, you have to count them as half win as well. Just saying.
Posted by Damn Good Dawg
Member since Feb 2011
47325 posts
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:33 pm to
was going to argue UGA for the 1980s. but then i did the math. frickin a
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 8Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter