re: GOAT CFB programs, according to the AP Poll

quote:

---

So? There's no such thing as an anti-NC. Either you win the championship or you don't. Differing grades of not winning it don't matter nearly as much as the gap between the winner and everyone else. The gap between #1 and #2 is qualitatively different and larger than the gap between #2 and any unranked team you care to choose in terms of how successful their season was.

---

The methodology when using the AP poll also gave no points if a team failed to be rated on the final poll. So it does unless you want a poll over who won the most natties. But nobody needs a poll for that so what would be the point?

quote:

---

So when taking only rankings into account OU is first, Bama is second, and OSU is third, but after adding in some arbitrary amount for NCs OSU passes both OU and Bama, two programs that each have more NCs than the Buckeyes? I am confused even more now.

---

When they added the natties to the AP poll Ohio State was a huge surprise to me too. If it you makes you feel any better I have admitted countless times on this board Bama is at the top of the food chain and Saban is the GOAT. And I think any reasonable fan of any program would agree with me but media polls have always raised eyebrows,

I'm not arguing the rankings of the straight-poll-finishes methodology - I mean, it's just math so it really can't be argued with - but rather what those rankings mean. Rather than "greatest programs of all time" I'd contend it measures "most consistent programs of all time," and when termed that way I have no problem with OU's place at number one.

I think broadly you can lump the top ten college programs of all time into two categories:

"Feast or Famine" category: When these teams win they win big, but if they aren't winning big they are likely not doing much winning at all. Of course, feasts outweigh famines for programs at this level, but there's no denying they vanish from the national scene from time to time. Programs that fit this mold are:

-Alabama
-Southern Cal
-Tennessee
-Nebraska(*)

"Always Good, Rarely Great" category: Programs in this category are consistent contenders most years, but for whatever reason don't seem to be able to close the deal that often. You rarely see them have a truly bad season, but on the whole they don't win the whole thing as often as you'd expect. Programs in this category:

-Oklahoma
-Ohio State
-Notre Dame
-Michigan
-Texas
-Penn State

If you wanted to extend it down to include 11 and 12, LSU is a "Feast or Famine" team while UGA is "Always Good, Rarely Great."

(*) - I don't really know what to do with Nebraska. They have collapsed so hard that they may not fit either mold anymore and just be has-beens. I'm not ready to lump Tennessee into that same category just yet but it won't be long.

quote:

---

I'm not arguing the rankings of the straight-poll-finishes methodology - I mean, it's just math so it really can't be argued with - but rather what those rankings mean. Rather than "greatest programs of all time" I'd contend it measures "most consistent programs of all time," and when termed that way I have no problem with OU's place at number one.

---

Well thought out post but I think you are being overly harsh on OU merely because of the number of Natties they have. The only teams on either of your lists that have more Natties than OU are Bama and ND.( at least by my memory which is suspect at times )

The SEC has dominated this century so losing to the Bulldogs in the playoffs in overtime or losing a close game to the Gators for the Nattie does not mean they didn't have a great team. Either The SEC dominates or they don't, you cannot have it both ways. Only one team can win it all and the bit about teams choking when they lose in the playoffs cannot hold water in a close game regardless of which school it is.

Obviously, I agree they have dominated this century, and adding Texas and OU is a bigger splash than adding the Tigers and aggies. The SEC will be even better and I am fully aware OU will not be winning conference titles at anything close to the same level in the Big 12.

But, in a 12 team playoff, the new SEC would or will get 2 to 3 teams in the playoffs every year. Some years they might get 4 or 5 and that is a ton of publicity and money driving the gap even more. Which will help the Horns and Sooners too.

If Vandy and Kentucky can make a huge jump forward with the money and prestige of the SEC so can a couple of storied schools. This is why the SEC jumped at a chance to grab them. They would have grabbed them over the aggies and Tigers if the Horns would not have fallen in love with the Texas network. Nobody in the SEC was afraid Texas would control the SEC, but it made for some great smack.

The Alliance doesn't know what to do. The BIG doesn't need more money, the ACC is top-heavy, and the PAC has failed in their recent postseasons. The only common issue they have is falling further behind the SEC so they punted,

TOSU deserves to be on the first list as well imo.