Started By
Message
re: It's been almost an entire decade since Alabama football won a legitimate national title
Posted on 8/9/26 at 11:51 pm to Boom33
Posted on 8/9/26 at 11:51 pm to Boom33
quote:
We can talk about how Dabo and Clemson had a better run than Georgia if you want to start slow.
They both have the same amount of national championships and UGA is still the best team in the best conference in the sport. I’d say their run currently is better than Clemson’s best run.
If UGA wins a national title this season (they have the 4th best odds in Vegas) it would mean 3 national titles in 6 years , with 3 SEC titles in between 2021-2026 , and would constitute a dynasty by any standard I believe.
1
Posted on 8/9/26 at 11:54 pm to FireDanMullen
quote:
They both have the same amount of national championships and UGA is still the best team in the best conference in the sport. I’d say their run currently is better than Clemson’s best run.
If UGA wins a national title this season (they have the 4th best odds in Vegas) it would mean 3 national titles in 6 years , with 3 SEC titles in between 2021-2026 , and would constitute a dynasty by any standard I believe.
Clemson beat top Alabama teams.
Georgia's dynasty window ended last year when they went 3 years without a title. And they haven't won a playoff game in years despite being one of the best odds in Vegas every year(because it doesn't mean shite).
Posted on 8/10/26 at 12:06 am to Boom33
quote:
Clemson beat top Alabama teams.
The 2016 and 2018 titles count as 2 titles as does UGA’s 2021 and 2022. They don’t get added weight bc of your opinion, unfortunately.
So what’s left to judge the two school’s “run” is their other measurable metrics; like wins, conference titles, etc which Georgia is maintaining at a higher clip than Clemsons best run.
quote:
Georgia's dynasty window ended last year when they went 3 years without a title. And they haven't won a playoff game in years despite being one of the best odds in Vegas every year(because it doesn't mean shite).
That’s like, your opinion man, but not a fact. Nowhere does it say not winning a national title in 3 years constitutes a non dynasty.
I don’t think they have a dynasty currently bc you need more than 2 in a short period of time to be named a dynasty. However, Georgia currently has the most wins of any program in the last 5 years. Winning another title would mean they’d;
Lead the country in victories in 6 years total
Have the highest win percentage at 94% of every program in the country
Have 3 national titles and 3 (possibly 4) SEC championships in the last 6 years.
Anyone saying that doesn’t constitute a dynasty can’t be reasoned with.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 12:07 am to Scoper
quote:
Oh how the mightve have fallen
quote:
Scoper
quote:
Location: i love hugh freeze
quote:
Interests: # 1 Hugh Freeze fan
quote:
Occupation: loving hugh freeze
quote:
Registered on: 3/30/2021
https://www.secrant.com/users/prof.aspx?u=218744
How is your cult family in Auburn liking your communist head coach?
Better than the charlatan Bible thumper known as Hugh Freeze?
Worse? Or still the same?
This post was edited on 8/10/26 at 1:02 am
Posted on 8/10/26 at 12:20 am to FireDanMullen
quote:
The 2016 and 2018 titles count as 2 titles as does UGA’s 2021 and 2022. They don’t get added weight bc of your opinion, unfortunately.
Yes, they do. It's an opinion and I'm giving reasons for that opinion.
quote:
So what’s left to judge the two school’s “run” is their other measurable metrics; like wins, conference titles, etc which Georgia is maintaining at a higher clip than Clemsons best run.
I'm judging them based on what it took to accomplish those seasons. 2022 was a great season, but 2021 was a much weaker title.
quote:
That’s like, your opinion man, but not a fact. Nowhere does it say not winning a national title in 3 years constitutes a non dynasty.
A dynasty is 3 or more titles in a short window of 5 years or less. That window closed last year.
If there is any argument to be made otherwise, it's that 5 years is too long and it should be 4. 5 is being generous.
Another requirement is there should also be a back-to-back in there, which Georgia did have.
Once a dynasty is established, then things can be a little looser and you can get into extended times.
Instead, their poor results 3 years in a row disqualifies them further. Some leeway might be given if they were in NC games, maybe they got screwed in one, really close epics games, etc. But that's not what happened. They haven't won a playoff game since 2022.
I don't care about the opinions of those with participation trophy mentality that water everything down for hype, clicks and to create moments which cheapens the actual accomplishments of real dynasties.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 12:39 am to Boom33
quote:
A dynasty is 3 or more titles in a short window of 5 years or less. That window closed last year.
So only Osbourne’s Nebraska and Bear and Saban’s Bama are dynasties since WW2? This by your definition excludes Bud Wilkinson’s Sooners in the 50s who had 3 national titles and the longest win streak of all time. They won 3 national titles in 7 years instead of 5.
quote:
Yes, they do. It's an opinion and I'm giving reasons for that opinion.
Yes , it’s an opinion based on no facts. There’s no definition stating you have to have 3 in 5 years other than your own. So , yeah the hill you want to die on is stating your own misguided definition that no one else follows eliminates Bud Wilkinson’s Sooners from being a dynasty, yeah it’s a stupid opinion. As well as eliminating multiple other historic runs.
quote:
I don't care about the opinions of those with participation trophy mentality that water everything down for hype, clicks and to create moments which cheapens the actual accomplishments of real dynasties.
Says the key board warrior discrediting the history of the sport lmao.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 12:55 am to FireDanMullen
quote:
So only Osbourne’s Nebraska and Bear and Saban’s Bama are dynasties since WW2? This by your definition excludes Bud Wilkinson’s Sooners in the 50s who had 3 national titles and the longest win streak of all time. They won 3 national titles in 7 years instead of 5.
Not in the way you are framing it, hell no. But if you were to say it was because they were snubbed in 54 due to the poll system, then it would a valid argument.
They were snubbed because they played weaker schedules and of course the Pac/Big10 bias. But 2 other teams went undefeated that year and Oklahoma was #3. So while you can't claim they won a national championship that year, they were undefeated and certainly capable. The post season format excluded them. And they did go back-to-back after that. For that reason, I would give them a 3 in a row type Dynasty.
And because of that you can start to add in support from other years as extensions. In 1949 they went undefeated also, which was kind of like a back-to-back combined with 50. So while I wouldn't say they triggered the dynasty, I wouldn't take issue with the claim it started then.
That is the real argument. 3 over 7 is not a dynasty.
quote:
Yes , it’s an opinion based on no facts. There’s no definition stating you have to have 3 in 5 years other than your own. So , yeah the hill you want to die on is stating your own misguided definition that no one else follows eliminates Bud Wilkinson’s Sooners from being a dynasty, yeah it’s a stupid opinion. As well as eliminating multiple other historic runs
It's an opinion based on judging the merits of the team. Maybe Georgia can do the above and win 3 in a row and start a legit dynasty, and then say well it started back then. But that ain't what happens and they are currently a 3 titles, aka a dynasty, short.
quote:
Says the key board warrior discrediting the history of the sport lmao.
Feel free to make arguments for Georgia. As I mentioned above, Georgia never started a dynasty and unlike Oklahoma above, they weren't snubbed multiple times due to poll bias. Instead, they haven't won a playoff game since 2022 and didn't even make the playoffs one year or win the conference.
Comparing it to Oklahoma is wrong, they are not the same.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:06 am to Scoper
Mac Jones 464 yards, 80% completion percentage.
Joe Burrow 463 yards, 63.27% completion percentage.
So close, but not so close at the same time.
Joe Burrow 463 yards, 63.27% completion percentage.
So close, but not so close at the same time.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:15 am to Boom33
quote:
But that ain't what happens and they are currently a 3 titles, aka a dynasty, shor
Yeah, I said that. I said they weren’t a dynasty. I said you needed 3 in a short period to constitute dynasty. Your definition constitutes only osbourne’s nebraksas and saban and bear since the 2nd world war.
And I said if they win next year, which would give them 3 in 6 years, they’d be a dynasty. Anyone stating a team having the most wins in college football over a 6 year period, winning 3 national titles and 3 SEC championships isn’t a dynasty — is beyond reasoning with.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:20 am to FireDanMullen
quote:
This by your definition excludes Bud Wilkinson’s Sooners in the 50s who had 3 national titles and the longest win streak of all time. They won 3 national titles in 7 years instead of 5.
The MVC and Big 8 Conferences were a bigger joke than COVID and Fauci.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:23 am to FireDanMullen
quote:
Yeah, I said that. I said they weren’t a dynasty. I said you needed 3 in a short period to constitute dynasty. Your definition constitutes only osbourne’s nebraksas and saban and bear since the 2nd world war.
And I said if they win next year, which would give them 3 in 6 years, they’d be a dynasty. Anyone stating a team having the most wins in college football over a 6 year period, winning 3 national titles and 3 SEC championships isn’t a dynasty — is beyond reasoning with.
No, they need to win 3 more. Then you can extend it back to 2021 as the beginning. But their window on triggering the dynasty based on 2021 is closed.
With their poor performance in the post season since then, it really doesn't make sense. It's not like they have been a real contender in the post season during the past 3 seasons. Like I said earlier, if it was like they were in great games that came down to the final play and anyone could have won, getting snubbed and what not, then I could entertain it. But that's not what they've done. They've performed poorly and that is on them.
And I'll go even further to say the window for an extension is closing fast. It will soon be 2 distinct eras if they were to have a good run now.
It's not like a dynasty is required for something to be significant. back-to-back is a big deal. Even a single NC is a big deal. 1992 was a NC in the middle of 2 droughts and still one of my favorites. Dynasty is another level though.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:24 am to Boom33
quote:
I'm judging them based on what it took to accomplish those seasons. 2022 was a great season, but 2021 was a much weaker title.
Again, just an opinion with no facts.
Georgia’s 2021 season was objectively better than Clemson’s 2016 season. UGA had a tougher strength of schedule. UGA defeated 3 teams that finished ranked in the top 20 in the regular season. Clemson defeated 1 that finished ranked in the top 25. UGA led the country in defensive ppg and yards. UGA’s 1 loss was to CFP #1 Alabama. Clemson’s 1 loss was to 8-5 unranked Pitt at home.
No one is ranking Clemson’s 2016 season better than 2021 UGA.
Georgia’s 2022 and Clemson’s 2018 are both considered top 5 seasons of all time.
Again, Georgia and Clemson have the same number of national titles and Georgia’s current run is objectively more impressive than Clemson’s.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:29 am to Boom33
quote:
No, they need to win 3 more. Then you can extend it back to 2021 as the beginning. But their window on triggering the dynasty based on 2021 is closed. With their poor performance in the post season since then, it really doesn't make sense. It's not like they have been a real contender in the post season during the past 3 seasons. Like I said earlier, if it was like they were in great games that came down to the final play and anyone could have won, getting snubbed and what not, then I could entertain it. But that's not what they've done. They've performed poorly and that is on them. And I'll go even further to say the window for an extension is closing fast. It will soon be 2 distinct eras if they were to have a good run now.
Again, This is an opinion. Feel free to have one. There is no definition behind what you’re saying just because you believe it. Words are words. No one has stated a dynasty is this window except you. No one would argue winning 3 national titles in 6 years and having the highest win percentage in the sport doesn’t constitute a dynasty bc it’s ridiculous. You can keep throwing phrases out there but it doesn’t change the meaning of dynastic. Winning more games than everyone else and winning 1/2 the sports championships in a short window of 6 years defines itself.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:36 am to FireDanMullen
quote:
Georgia’s 2021 season was objectively better than Clemson’s 2016 season. UGA had a tougher strength of schedule. UGA defeated 3 teams that finished ranked in the top 20 in the regular season. Clemson defeated 1 that finished ranked in the top 25. UGA led the country in defensive ppg and yards. UGA’s 1 loss was to CFP #1 Alabama. Clemson’s 1 loss was to 8-5 unranked Pitt at home.
No one is ranking Clemson’s 2016 season better than 2021 UGA.
Georgia’s 2022 and Clemson’s 2018 are both considered top 5 seasons of all time.
Again, Georgia and Clemson have the same number of national titles and Georgia’s current run is objectively more impressive than Clemson’s.
Georgia in 2021 lost the conference championship game and still made the playoffs. They then won the rematch against the team after they had injuries. Valid title, but it's not like it was because they rose up to a higher level. Football happened, they came out on top.
However, Clemson in 2016 beat an extremely good Alabama team to win that title. I'll say going 99 plays without a hold was bullshite and pick play, but I mean that was still a team rising to the occasion.
They also shut out Ohio St in the semifinal that year.
2022 Georgia was a real good season, but not dominate. 2018 Clemson was dominate against Alabama in the NCG and held ND to 3 in the semifinal.
Georgia beat Ohio St by 1 point in the semi-final and then got handed TCU in the NCG. Which was pretty damn funny, but also not exactly the same as beating one of the better teams like Clemson did. That said, I generally treat it as if Ohio St was the real NCG that year.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:46 am to Boom33
quote:
Georgia in 2021 lost the conference championship game and still made the playoffs. They then won the rematch against the team after they had injuries. Valid title, but it's not like it was because they rose up to a higher level. Football happened, they came out on top. However, Clemson in 2016 beat an extremely good Alabama team to win that title. I'll say going 99 plays without a hold was bullshite and pick play, but I mean that was still a team rising to the occasion.
If you’re gonna go into specifics; 2016 Bama beats Clemson like a drum if Sarkisian doesn’t call the game like an armless child. Bama averaged nearly 7 yards a clip running the ball, Bo goes down, and Sarkisian decided to let Jalen hurts throw the ball 30 times when the moment was clearly too big for him and completed 30% of his passes. Clemson needed all 99 plays to win the game with 1 second. If a GA calls the game instead of Sarkisian, bama wins by multiple scores. If you’re gonna go into esoteric specifics, you should include all of them.
quote:
They then won the rematch against the team after they had injuries.
You can say the same thing about Eddie Jackson. The guy was the best safety in the country, hard to believe he wouldn’t have made an impact in a game decided with 1 second left. Only reason it’s not brought up like Bama’s recievers in 2021 is because the talking heads point to statistical yards by receivers as a greater impact, when it’s not. Not having an all American safety is just as impactful. But it’s football, there’s injuries. If you’re gonna count one as a factor you should count the other.
This post was edited on 8/10/26 at 1:57 am
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:53 am to Boom33
quote:
2022 Georgia was a real good season, but not dominate. 2018 Clemson was dominate against Alabama in the NCG and held ND to 3 in the semifinal.
Their regular season was far more dominant than Clemson’s. Clemson played 2 ranked teams in the regular season and beat them by a combined 5 points. Georgia played 3 teams that finished ranked and beat them all by 3 plus scores.
Again, both seasons are considered top 10 seasons all time. Saying one is slightly better than the other doesn’t add any weight to who’s run is better objectively. What does is their other accomplishments; win percentage, conference titles, etc. Georgias is a much better run.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:56 am to FireDanMullen
quote:
Again, This is an opinion. Feel free to have one. There is no definition behind what you’re saying just because you believe it. Words are words. No one has stated a dynasty is this window except you. No one would argue winning 3 national titles in 6 years and having the highest win percentage in the sport doesn’t constitute a dynasty bc it’s ridiculous. You can keep throwing phrases out there but it doesn’t change the meaning of dynastic. Winning more games than everyone else and winning 1/2 the sports championships in a short window of 6 years defines itself.
I am feeling free to have one. You are the one that has a problem with it.
People can say whatever bullshite they want, doesn't mean I'm going to play along with it.
They haven't won a playoff game since 2022. They didn't get snubbed, cheated or anything else. They lost because they weren't good enough.
2023 - failed to make the playoffs. Alabama basically killed their dynasty that year, could have been 3 in a row.
2024 - Lost to #7 Notre Dame in the playoffs, their 3rd loss of the season.
2025 - Lost to #6 Ole Miss in the playoffs, their 2nd loss of the season.
They had a chance and missed.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 2:00 am to Gatorbait2008
I like your taste in movies!
Posted on 8/10/26 at 2:02 am to FireDanMullen
quote:
If you’re gonna go into specifics; 2016 Bama beats Clemson like a drum if Sarkisian doesn’t call the game like an armless child. Bama averaged nearly 7 yards a clip running the ball, Bo goes down, and Sarkisian decided to let Jalen hurts throw the ball 30 times when the moment was clearly too big for him and completed 30% of his passes.
Compared to Alabama in 2021 after injuries and an even worse OC calling the plays.
quote:
You can say the same thing about Eddie Jackson. The guy was the best safety in the country, hard to believe he wouldn’t have made an impact in a game decided with 1 second left. Only reason it’s not brought up like Bama’s recievers in 2021 is because the talking heads point to statistical yards by receivers as a greater impact, when it’s not. Not having an all American safety is just as impactful. But it’s football, there’s injuries. If you’re gonna count one as a factor you should count the other.
It was multiple receivers. That's football. But it's like Alabama in 2009 with Colt. Still a NC, don't give a frick what anyone says. Yet I can't pretend it was as big of a win as it would have been if he was healthy. Still think we win, but he was injured and that's just the fact of it.
Doesn't change it was a NC, but if you are going to compare it against another, then it's a factor.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 2:04 am to Boom33
quote:
2023 - failed to make the playoffs. Alabama basically killed their dynasty that year, could have been 3 in a row. 2024 - Lost to #7 Notre Dame in the playoffs, their 3rd loss of the season. 2025 - Lost to #6 Ole Miss in the playoffs, their 2nd loss of the season.
It’d be a more compelling argument if they were irrelevant. They went 13-1 in the 2023 and won the conference in 2024 and 2025. They lead the country in wins. If they add a 3rd national title in 6 years, along with leading every team in wins over a 6 year period. It’s a dynasty man. Will they? Idk probably not. This is all a hypothetical. But if they do, then yeah. It’s a dynasty. 3 national titles with 3 sec championships in between their last 2 titles and leading the country in wins would constitute that.
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News