re: When did the "Big 6" come about?

Another interesting stat... based on these rankings, this is when each program hit their pinnacle point in terms of where they stand compared to the rest of the league. I've ordered them in terms of the highest score:

.909- Tennessee in 1951
.890- Alabama in 1992
.684- LSU in 1962
.619- Ole Miss in 1963
.598- Georgia Tech in 1955
.573- Florida in 2008
.543- Auburn in 1963
.507- Georgia in 1994
.447- Tulane in 1940
.345- Texas A&M in 2012
.336- Miss St. in 1942
.306- Arkansas in 2011
.263- Missouri in 2014
.252- Kentucky in 1955
.220- S. Carolina in 2013
.212- Vanderbilt in 1948

Not surprisingly, Tennessee, Alabama, and Florida all hit their peak in years they won a National Title.

Auburn's and LSU's peaks both came within 5 years of a National Title which also included several high AP Poll finishes in the years that soon followed.

Ole Miss' peak came in 1963 which was also a year in which they finished in the AP Top 5.

Georgia's peak in 1994 is a head-scratcher to me, but it comes exactly 15 years after the 1980 title. A total of 20% of the formula is weighted to "Recent Success" which takes into account the previous 15 seasons. I think the reason Georgia's peak comes out at the end of the 15 year period is because the '80 title was followed by a very strong decade of football for Georgia in the 1980s, and prior to that UGA really struggled a bit at times in the '70s.

For all those young people who don't understand the reverence to Tennessee football.... look for no further evidence beyond the fact that in 1951 under Coach Neyland, UT Football was as dominant of a program as the SEC had ever and to this point still has ever seen.

In '51 Tennessee brought home the first official National Championship Trophy for the SEC. This was at the tail-end of a 14-year run in which the Vols had an 82% SEC win% and five AP Top 5 finishes... the entire rest of the SEC (12 other teams) combined for just 6 AP Top 5 finishes during the same span.

I think the reason Tennessee's 1951 score is higher than where Alabama scored under either Bryant or Saban is the fact the SEC had other programs performing well during those eras. UT in the 1940s and 1950s was really just quite dominant and no other teams were doing anything else significant in comparison.

quote:

---

From 1902 to 1932 Bama was Independent then Southern Conf. In those 30 years Bama played in three Rose Bowls (2-1)

---

I think Bama fans often put way too much stock into their ancient Rose Bowl appearances. In those days, bowls were exhibitions and it took teams weeks to travel to and from the South to California by train.... A lot of solid East Coast programs just didn't choose to make the trip. Had programs known back then what the prestige of the Rose Bowl would one day turn into, they probably would have figured out a way to go.

It's not like the modern day where if a team gets selected to a top bowl, they automatically go without even thinking twice.

Vanderbilt was the actual first relevant National program from the South no matter how hard Bama fans try to re-write history and pretend that their train ride to California was somehow the birth of college football in the Deep South.

From 1893-1930, Vanderbilt had a 76.3% winning percentage compared to Alabama's 69.0%... and they played a much more difficult schedule.

In those early days, the real powerhouses of the sport were Yale, Harvard, Princeton, Penn... along with Notre Dame and Michigan... and also Texas

Between 1902 and 1930, Vanderbilt played 19 games against these CFB Elites (Michigan 9x, Texas 8x, Yale and Harvard each once) while Alabama played just 4 such games.... playing Texas 3x and Penn once.

Not to mention the fact that Vanderbilt had a record of 8-3-1 against Alabama during this period.

Yes, Alabama has an early football pedigree that preceded the birth of the SEC. But when Bama fans try to pretend they were truly the first Southern powerhouse, that's absolutely false.

Vanderbilt was the first Nationally prominent program from the Deep South, and Texas and even Texas A&M were both probably stronger than Bama in those days if you want to expand the geography.