In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 2675
Online now 2198 Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)
We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.
Where the madness isn't just in March.
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
"... There is more to life than football...". Not in the South there is not. Radio literally talks on it daily, year round.
This post was edited by Resurgent Vol 20 months ago
Butch Jones. Who???
Are you really that butt hurt over my post? A post in which I recognized USC as being the most dominant program of the 2000's? I mean... what... do you want me to just list USC as the best program each decade? I even recognized Oklahoma in the 70's which you're bitching about.
Some people just can't be pleased. I'm a Michigan St. fan and even I had to recognize UM as being a great program. They had like 40 seasons of bowl games in a row. That's insane. For someone to complain about UM being listed as one of the best dynasties is kind of ridiculous. Keep in mind this is coming from a MSU fan.
Are all Trojan fans like this dude?
USC. Went 6 years without losing a game by more than a single score.
Unbowed, Unbent, Unbroken
USC didn't win a national championship in the 2000s
FSU in the 90's: How many consecutive top 5 finishes?
Bama in the 70's: Averaged 10 wins a year for an entire decade (when they only played 11 or 12 counting bowl games)
Both of those runs crush USC under Pete Carroll. He won a grand total of 1 BCS National Title in that run and took the AP in '03. Bama is poised for a run that can challenge those I mentioned earlier. Time will tell, but I'll take Bama's 2 BSCNCs in 3 years over 2 runs (UM and USC) that had a total of 2 between them. UM had a better run from the 80's into the 90's than the one mentioned.
Back to the OP's point:
1 - USC: did it over 7 years and multiple QBs, even though the only had 1 BCS title
2 - Bama: 2 BCS titles in 3 years and 3 QBs took them to BCS bowls. Humiliated co-Big 10 Champ on NYD bowl in their down year. This is still going and will likely pass 1 and begin to challenge those dynasties that I mentioned above.
3 - Miami: '01 may be the best team, but their run is the shortest, only 1 title and they did it with 1 QB
No LSU love ITT
USC won just as many as NCAA recognized football championships as LSU did in the 2000s.
Now go cover your stuff before it blows away and seriously if you are down there good luck.
Looks like another perfect day.
Nope. OOC wins/losses is the way to measure greatness now.
Not when the titles are not decided on the field.
Some of these people are beyond dumb. It actually pains me to see this much ignorance in one post. if i were to collect ignorance from the rest of the internet and formulate it into one post, it would fall short of the epic fail that this thread has collectively.
You can continue to try and enlighten these people with facts,but at this point I think they are too far down the path of ignorance.
University of Alabama: The high mark of college football since 1892
Dude, I put USC's run under Pete at 1 on the mini-dynasty list. Still the dynasty was in the BCS era and USC has a grand total of 1 BCS title. They took the AP in '03 when the BCS poll lost it and put OU in it after they got beat in their CCG. Bama's current run is on pace to top USC, they already have more BCSNCs and they play in the top league. Have they done it yet? Not on this roll, but they can top USC's run with this one.
All Time Dynasties... Bama in the 70's easily tops the USC run in question here and has to be in the argument for top all time (4 NC and avg 10 wins over 10 years - only pollsters screwed them out of the only 3peat in NCAA in '77).
No. You learned that USC went over 100 games without losing any of them by more than a single score. That is some good info to know. You will very likely never see that again.
Well, the OP asked about the most dominant and that is a bit subjective. I would consider Bama more than halfway there, they have matched your NCAA recognized titles and are already ahead on BCS titles. I consider the titles more than X years of being very good. If Bama wins it all this year (admittedly big if), then they easily pass USC's run with respect to dominance. 3 out of 4 BCS titles would make it the most dominant "mini" dynasty of the BCS era. Similarly over X number of years, I think if LSU were to win 1 of them (and USC didn't), they would surpass USC as far as dominance over the BCS era. I'm not saying they would be tops, I'd have to look up some numbers and think on that one.
Seriously ... 2 National Championships and an amazing W/L record since 2000 but not top 5 this century. OKAY.
Lost is a lost bro. When you brag about losing that's when you know your a west coast hippie
So if USC wins one title in the next two years they are the best BCS team with one BCS trophy. Stupidest thing I've ever heard. Go back to the tree house you came out of. Dynasties are determine by championships. Obvious answer is LSU. 2 nattys, 5 SEC champs, with two years to go
Funny. I can only find a split title by the biASSed media for USC.
Why do you think I am butt hurt?
First of all, you weren't giving Michigan credit for 40 years of excellence
You said them and OSU, along with Oklahoma were the dominant teams of the 70's
I simply disagreed, especially about OSU and UM and I gave you almost irrefutable evidence as to why
USC totally dominated Michigan, were better head to head against the Buckeyes
If they hadn't lost twice to Stanford in the Rose Bowl when they had a chance to win Titles then of course they deserve to be in the discussion
I would love for you to rebut my case as to why USC deserves to be ahead of them
I am also on record on this board as having the opinion that USC, Michigan, Alabama and Oklahoma are all tied for second place behind Notre Dame as the most storied programs in history with OSU just a smidge behind them
So please, if all I did was respectfully disagree with you putting them ahead of USC in THAT decade, why the hostility?
Shoot, historically, we have had way more problem with your Spartans over the years than either UM or OSU
This post has been edited 3 times, most recently by BlemBlam3 20 months ago
I am not sure anyone could list Michigan as one of THE dominant teams for a decade since the 40's or so.
The 2000's belonged to OU and Texas if you look at wins, but you have to look at Florida, LSU, and USC as far as the teams that were more significant.
The 1990's were Nebraska's, with the second tier being Florida and Florida St.
The 1980's were all Miami's, with Nebraska right there, but not being able to break through.
The 1970's belonged to OU and Bama. I'll put USC and Notre Dame right there as well, since they actually brought home some titles as well.
The 1960's belonged to Bama and Texas.
The 1950's belonged to OU and no one can even challenge that.
The 1940's belonged to Notre Dame, with Michigan and Texas right there.
The 1930's is a toss-up with Alabama, TCU, Michigan, Minnesota, Notre Dame and USC all having multiple shared titles.
The 1920's belonged to Notre Dame with 3 undefeated champions, with USC and Alabama both having 2 undefeated champions.
The 1910's belonged to Notre Dame and Washington (who had a 48 game unbeaten streak, with 32 of them beign shutouts)
The 1900's belonged to Michigan.
Before that, college football basically was dominated by Yale and Princeton.
In the 1960's USC won two NC's, Alabama won 2 and Texas won two so USC gets a piece of that pie
In the 1970's USC won 3 NC's and Alabama won three OU had one.
From 1960 to 1980 OU had one title in 1975. They sniffed around the top of the polls almost every year but so did USC.
Bama won 3 in the 60's ('61, '64, '65). I was wrong about 4 in the 70's. I knew Bear won 6, but I thought it was a 2/4 split, not the 3/3 that it was.
Alabama had 3 in the 60's....all AP as well.
I was looking at records and trying to sprinkle in titles when deciding between some if needed. When I add the UPI (which should count since it became the coaches poll), then yes, USC has 3. If you are counting the UPI titles, then you have to give OU 2 as well then though.
It's hard to discount OU when you look at one season with 4 losses, 2 with 2 losses, 5 with 1 loss, and 2 undefeated seasons though. Comare that to USC losing 4 games 4 times in the decade and I think I would give the edge to OU. That's was I saw the diference being.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by BetterOff 20 months ago
Doesn't matter what you think of it. EVERY university counts any AP/UPI titles, regardless of circumstance. It's not some random no name poll.
So you are going to count a UPI title over an AP title one year and then not recognize the UPI title another year. Wonderful work there.
Alabama and USC were 2-2 in the 70's.
Don't to me that your stupid Rose Bowl didn't let you play the #1 team in the nation and let you hide behind playing a B1G team like usual.....in LA.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports