Started By
Message
re: what is your definition of "dynasty" as it relates to college football?
Posted on 4/20/12 at 9:06 pm to CapstoneGrad06
Posted on 4/20/12 at 9:06 pm to CapstoneGrad06
Yeah, but he's not the original. His name is very misleading.
1
Posted on 4/20/12 at 9:07 pm to brickman
quote:
Isnt there a place all you Gumps can go and have a circle jerk with all your titles and dynasties.
I'm not trying to circle jerk, I'm just saying what is true. Almost the exact same things can be said for LSU if Mett pans out.
Posted on 4/20/12 at 9:12 pm to TUSK the original
Ming
Posted on 4/20/12 at 9:13 pm to TUSK the original
Consecutive ten wins seasons Miami, Nebraska, Florida State all had over a decade in a row
Posted on 4/20/12 at 9:13 pm to AllBamaDoesIsWin
Alabama is approaching it at this point. I say a dynasty truly needs six years to develop because it covers two full cycles of recruting classes. Teams that come to are Florida, Nebraska and Fla. State in the 90's, Penn State in the 80s, Alabama in the 60s and 70s and so on.
Posted on 4/20/12 at 9:14 pm to AllBamaDoesIsWin
If Bama does as you say it will be the closest thing to a dynasty since the UCLA BB teams of the 60's and 70's and USC baseball teams of the same period & LSU baseball from 91-00. Arky in track.I think you are right in your assessment if Bama wins it all the next two years and if they do it will be a dynasty. However, those are bif if's. Just say LSU wins it next year and will own 2-SEC titles in a row and then Bama wins it all in 2013. Is this a dynasty?
Posted on 4/20/12 at 9:14 pm to TUSK the original
quote:
TUSK the original
Post less.
Posted on 4/20/12 at 9:28 pm to CatFan81
5 or more MNC's under at least 2 separate coaches. Multigenerational success with rabid fans.
Posted on 4/20/12 at 9:33 pm to TUSK the original
Dynasty is over at least ten years. Just under half the time win the conference, and at least 2 national titles in that time period, probably more. So I'd say that the only dynasty in many years has been USC. Neither LSU, Florida, or Bama have had a dynasty, despite all winning 2 titles within a few years of each other. Florida was probably closest of those under Meyer with two titles, a Heisman, and a season that was one game from another title. Bama's recent success could become a dynasty if they win a third title within the next five years and around 3 SEC titles. I think conference titles are key to a dynasty - you're not a dynasty unless you're the unmistakable top dog in the conference for 9/10 seasons
Posted on 4/20/12 at 9:41 pm to AllBamaDoesIsWin
quote:
AllBamaDoesIsWin
I really dont know...doesnt Bama lose most of their defense from this year? I know the backups probly had a lot of playing time but its still going to be a bunch of new starters. Right?
Posted on 4/20/12 at 9:42 pm to biglego
Five starters back on defense, plus a 2010 starter.
Posted on 4/20/12 at 9:55 pm to TUSK the original
quote:
what is your definition of "dynasty" as it relates to college football?
Bear Bryant is the definition of dynasty. Nobody is close to what he achieved at Alabama. College football went through Tuscaloosa the entire 60's and 70's.
There is a reason the entire fricking world knows who he is. Sinatra, Bob Hope, and John Wayne use to hang out with him. Presidents use to call his office regularly.
If none of you know about Coach Bryant I would suggest reading "The Last Coach", it is a wonderful book.
Posted on 4/20/12 at 10:02 pm to RollTigers
quote:
Dynasty is over at least ten years. Just under half the time win the conference, and at least 2 national titles in that time period, probably more. So I'd say that the only dynasty in many years has been USC. Neither LSU, Florida, or Bama have had a dynasty, despite all winning 2 titles within a few years of each other.
I agree with you about USC being a dynasty and the other three SEC programs falling short because they haven't maintained it long enough. Also out of the three, Bama is the closest thing to a dynasty because they had an undefeated season in one of their title runs. With the way college football is set up, the only possible way to have an undisputed champion is for a team to be undefeated. '09 Bama is the only team with an undisputed, unquestioned national championship out of the six championship teams in my book. LSU really didn't deserve serious consideration to be considered a "dynasty" until this year when they came one game away from a perfect season. If LSU had won it all with an undefeated season in 2011, I would have definitely considered them a dynasty.
Posted on 4/20/12 at 10:09 pm to TUSK the original
Whatever bama does is a "dynasty" and everyone else is just hoping u gumps will notice our runs
Posted on 4/20/12 at 10:09 pm to Unbiased Bama Fan
If Saban coaches another 10 years, IMO highly unlikely, and maintains his current pace he should get another 2-3 titles. That would be 4-5 over 14 years. I would say that's enough to start talking dynasty.
Posted on 4/20/12 at 10:11 pm to TUSK the original
quote:
TUSK the original
Posted on 4/20/12 at 10:11 pm to TideSaint
I'd say we had a pretty good run in the 90's. 5 SEC titles in a 6 year span, including 4 straight from 93-96.
Posted on 4/20/12 at 10:17 pm to USMC Gators
quote:
I'd say we had a pretty good run in the 90's. 5 SEC titles in a 6 year span, including 4 straight from 93-96.
But zero undefeated seasons over that stretch. If the team doesn't have a single undefeated season over the time span, it should automatically take them out of the running to be considered a "dynasty". How can a CFB dynasty not have a single year when they won all their games?
Posted on 4/20/12 at 10:18 pm to Unbiased Bama Fan
I wasn't aware that you get actual hardware for going undefeated.
Posted on 4/20/12 at 10:19 pm to USMC Gators
I guess it all depends on your definition of dynasty then.
Would you consider a team with 8 conference titles in a decade with zero national titles a dynasty, a la Boise State?
Or a team that wins 4 national titles and 3 conference titles over 10 years a dynasty?
IMO, national titles > conference titles.
Would you consider a team with 8 conference titles in a decade with zero national titles a dynasty, a la Boise State?
Or a team that wins 4 national titles and 3 conference titles over 10 years a dynasty?
IMO, national titles > conference titles.
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News