Started By
Message
11 greatest dynasties in the SEC
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:16 pm
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
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 on 3/2/11 at 5:18 pm to Crompdaddy8
Sucks that we're a middle-tier program all time.
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:22 pm to Crompdaddy8
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 on 3/2/11 at 5:23 pm to Crompdaddy8
quote:
1) Alabama 1971-1980
8 SEC titles in 10 years - must be # 1
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:24 pm to bigpapamac
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 on 3/2/11 at 5:25 pm to 87BAMAGRAD
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 on 3/2/11 at 5:25 pm to Crompdaddy8
I don't think having 2 SEC titles in 10 years counts as a dynasty, brah.
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:26 pm to Crompdaddy8
quote:
as for which dynasty was better it's certainly debatable.
4 every 5 years > 1 every 5 years
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:26 pm to diddydirtyAubie
So if 81-9-6 over a 10 year period isn't a dynasty, what is?
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:27 pm to volfan30
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 on 3/2/11 at 5:28 pm to Crompdaddy8
#1- 2010 Auburn. A dynasty in itself.
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:28 pm to volfan30
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 on 3/2/11 at 5:30 pm to volfan30
'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 on 3/2/11 at 5:31 pm to Volmanac
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 on 3/2/11 at 5:31 pm to Volmanac
..gets out Houndstooth sock and bottle of Jergens lotion...
"Hai guys is this where the Bama circle jerk is about to be....
"Hai guys is this where the Bama circle jerk is about to be....
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:32 pm to Crompdaddy8
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'.
81-9-6 < 107-13
If we count ties as a half loss then UT drops to .675
Just sayin'.
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:32 pm to Crompdaddy8
ive never seen this before
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:33 pm to Whereisomaha
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 on 3/2/11 at 5:33 pm to Teague
If you count them as half loss, you have to count them as half win as well. Just saying.
Posted on 3/2/11 at 5:33 pm to TBama93k
was going to argue UGA for the 1980s. but then i did the math. frickin a
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News