Started By
Message
re: College Football Historical Relevancy Rankings
Posted on 4/23/24 at 12:59 pm to AUTiger789
Posted on 4/23/24 at 12:59 pm to AUTiger789
quote:
Does a 7-5 Ohio State or Alabama finish ranked no matter what?
quote:
It’s happened 20 times since the 1990s.
And none of those were Alabama or Ohio State.
0
Posted on 4/23/24 at 1:05 pm to AUTiger789
quote:You do good work.
AUTiger789
Posted on 4/23/24 at 1:07 pm to RT1941
OP is like the Auburn SummerofGeorge.
Bizarro George
Bizarro George
Posted on 4/23/24 at 1:42 pm to AUTiger789
Interesting results, even if the definition of relevancy is questionable. Hypothetically, a team that finished #25 in every final poll would be considered the most relevant team in college football history while a team that finished #26 in every final poll would be considered the least relevant team in college football history.
This post was edited on 4/23/24 at 1:43 pm
Posted on 4/23/24 at 2:04 pm to TideCPA
quote:
Interesting results, even if the definition of relevancy is questionable. Hypothetically, a team that finished #25 in every final poll would be considered the most relevant team in college football history while a team that finished #26 in every final poll would be considered the least relevant team in college football history.
Valid point..
Top 10 = 1 point
Top 15 = 3/4 point
Top 20 = 1/2 point
Top 25 = 1/4 point
Maybe something like this would help resolve those differences..
This post was edited on 4/23/24 at 2:06 pm
Posted on 4/23/24 at 2:04 pm to AUTiger789
To be fair, as much as it pains me, Arkansas benefits from a monster run from the 60s to the early 80s. We've had good, even great, seasons since then but that was our high water mark.
Great coaches tend to have great teams and we had three great coaches (Hatfield was great here, maybe not elsewhere) in a row. We've been hit or miss, and more often than not miss, since then.
Great coaches tend to have great teams and we had three great coaches (Hatfield was great here, maybe not elsewhere) in a row. We've been hit or miss, and more often than not miss, since then.
Posted on 4/23/24 at 2:06 pm to AUTiger789
Interesting thread OP. A new and different way to look at things.
This post was edited on 4/23/24 at 2:09 pm
Posted on 4/23/24 at 3:49 pm to AUTiger789
It’s interesting that of the 26 most historically relevant programs dating back to 1936, the SEC and BIG10 are obviously dominating.
The new SEC will have the #2, #5, #7, #9, #10, #11, #12, #15, #19, #21, #23, and #24 teams. That’s 12/16 ranking in the Top 24.
The BIG10 will have the #1, #3, #6, #8, #13, #14, #17, #18, and #26. That’s 9/18 in the Top 26.
Only five programs in the Top 26 historically have not been sucked into a power conference:
#4 Notre Dame
#16 Clemson
#20 Georgia Tech
#22 Miami
#25 Stanford
GT and Stanford are more or less relics that have fallen off in recent years, and due to very strict academic standards I’m not sure they’re really built to compete.
IMO, Notre Dame is the only big fish left for the expansion-minded leagues with Clemson being second. new money FSU and Miami are close behind.
The new SEC will have the #2, #5, #7, #9, #10, #11, #12, #15, #19, #21, #23, and #24 teams. That’s 12/16 ranking in the Top 24.
The BIG10 will have the #1, #3, #6, #8, #13, #14, #17, #18, and #26. That’s 9/18 in the Top 26.
Only five programs in the Top 26 historically have not been sucked into a power conference:
#4 Notre Dame
#16 Clemson
#20 Georgia Tech
#22 Miami
#25 Stanford
GT and Stanford are more or less relics that have fallen off in recent years, and due to very strict academic standards I’m not sure they’re really built to compete.
IMO, Notre Dame is the only big fish left for the expansion-minded leagues with Clemson being second. new money FSU and Miami are close behind.
Posted on 4/23/24 at 4:48 pm to elposter
quote:
OP is like the Auburn SummerofGeorge.
Speaking of him, I don’t think I’ve seen SOG in a while?
Posted on 4/23/24 at 4:50 pm to AUTiger789
It would be highly appreciated. Thank you
Posted on 4/23/24 at 5:39 pm to AUTiger789
I would put Oklahoma top 3 but most of it seems accurate
Posted on 4/23/24 at 5:42 pm to AUTiger789
Excellent!
Posted on 4/23/24 at 5:43 pm to Leto II
quote:
Speaking of him, I don’t think I’ve seen SOG in a while?
He was banned from this site for talking about another sports talk forum.
This post was edited on 4/23/24 at 5:45 pm
Posted on 4/23/24 at 5:51 pm to AUTiger789
Grading based on a team’s floor rather than its ceiling is an odd way to rank “historical relevance”. Would you consider Michigan State a more “relevant” CFB program than Florida? Or, UCLA’s legacy as more storied than Nebraska?
Page 3 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News