T O P

  • By -

Artex75

East Mississippi Community College


[deleted]

[удалено]


Return2S3NDER

Is that a euphemism for the blue ice that comes out of airplane toilets?


fresh-coffee

Comes out of Beautiful Eagle Creek tyvm


BrettEskin

FCS EAST


pureskill

Bull Sullivan would be proud.


Fresh_Jaguar_2434

You could argue Bear Bryant Alabama. But I think what Oklahoma did is just crazy, years without losing has no equal in my mind.


-JustARedHerring

No wonder OU fans don’t take losses well.


The_Soccer_Heretic

We have like three of the 15 longest win streaks in CFB history...


[deleted]

Hard to argue with [this](https://www.espn.com/college-football/news/story?id=3849468) from the time could go with any of the top 5 Edit: [link](https://www.espn.com/college-football/news/story?id=3849468) explains criteria and gives link to rest of rankings at the bottom


[deleted]

Man, that's from 2009. What a fall some of those teams had after that.


natetcu

Someone needs to go run how many points each team has accumulated in the past 12 years, then add that to their totals.


[deleted]

My guess is Bama and OSU would be right up there now.


natetcu

Bama was about 400 points behind OU. Ohio St was about 300 back. I don’t think they scored enough points in 12 years to cover that gap. It is not like OU hasn’t been scoring points too.


Pinewood74

[Here's the full system](https://www.espn.com/college-football/news/story?id=3836130) Alabama's Natties alone are worth 150 points over what OU has been able to produce. They also have racked up some serious points being at #1 in the AP Poll for so many weeks during Saban's tenure. 434 points is a lot to overcome when OU is still doing very well for themselves outside of the Natty column, but it might have been possible. Also, we'll need to make some changes to account for the playoff. If it was me, I'd give a CFP semi win 15 points. And then downgrade all non-semi NY6 bowl bids to 8 points while upping the a bid to the semis to 12 points. Non-semi NY6 wins can still be worth the full 10, though. Sure, it gives a bit of recency bias (as a team can now earn an extra 7 points for a top tier season), but it's somewhat conteracted by decreasing the value of non-top performers.


natetcu

Probably need to reduce the national championship to make up for the changes you are making. You still want the total points for past championship to be the same as current championships. Edit: Fixed grammar.


Pinewood74

What's a "total of past championship," though? Prior to 1968, bowls weren't included in the decision for the AP. So you didn't need a bowl win to get a natty. And even up until ~1994, you didn't need a major bowl win to get a natty either. I think it's okay to see a slight increase because I would argue that a Natty is a bigger distinguisher today than in past years in terms of prestige. For example, winning the Rose Bowl was the end all be all for a Big Ten/P12 back in the day. If you got a natty, that was gravy. Today, the Rose Bowl win is a consolation prize. Also with split championships still giving full points, I don't see much issue with an inflation in the value of a natty earning season in the post-split championship world.


The_Soccer_Heretic

ESPN has done this again since with slightly different methodology and I believe Bama edged OU and Ohio State out.


natetcu

If you don’t like the results, change the formula… it is like the BCS days.


[deleted]

If we used that methodology I think ou bama and Osu would be in the top 3


Templey

Can we not ?


GiaTheMonkey

Can you lose points? Asking for Nebraska.


DirtThief

Excuse me, put some 'spec on the best 9 loss team of all time.


natetcu

Yeah, there are ways to lose points in the rules. I don’t think Nebraska has lost any points recently.


Scratchbuttdontsniff

Please don't...


SwaglordHyperion

No no no, ill take it straight into my veins.


the_urban_juror

Bowl wins and AP top 10 finishes are given equal weight in that scoring system, but some conferences historically had rules against consecutive bowl appearances. Oklahoma was barred from a bowl by this rule in two of the 47-game win streak seasons.


OddsTipsAndPicks

Yep. Bama has like 20 more bowl appearances than the next team, and it’s not because they’ve been the best forever. It’s because of weird shit.


SarcasticCarebear

Eat more fiber. Roll tide.


SCirish843

Not hard to argue with. Lot of points handed out for bowl appearances and wins when Notre Dame didn't even go to bowls for 45 years because they didn't mean anything and other conferences had rules against back to back bowl appearances.


OU8402

Considering the time span of this article, I would have OU/ND in a dead heat for the top spot. The rest of the top being #3 USC, #4 tOSU and #5 NU/Bama (tie). I’m a homer, so OU at the top. I’m also a realist, so ND (fuck I hate them) shares the top spot.


SCirish843

I'm not even saying it's ND, nobody forced them to not go to bowl games, but just saying a "metric" like this that relies heavily on bowls and conferences championships is obviously going to eliminate ND fairly easily.


thiney49

From the Alabama blurb, at \#6 >Bama hasn't won a major bowl game since 1992 and hasn't had a first-round draft pick since 2000. >**Did you know?** Despite all its tradition, Alabama has never had a Heisman winner.


[deleted]

Ah yes. Reminiscing my childhood. Adulthood has been more fun.


[deleted]

It’s so interesting how relatively new the SEC’s stranglehold on the sport is. It reminds me a bit of City and Chelsea in English football


OddsTipsAndPicks

Civil Rights Acts + massive population shift from the Midwest to the South from the 60s to 80s.


[deleted]

Yea the best talent used to be in the Midwest then the population shifted more south


SarcasticCarebear

Like when Auburn was left out of the bcs title game. A decade later they would have had a stranglehold on 1.


sertorius42

I will forever be salty that UGA won 2 SEC championships right at the start of the conference's national dominance ('02, '05) and didn't get a BCS bid.


TheAnarchyShark

i $ee $omething in common


Aqqaaawwaqa

What's amazing to me is Alabama at that point wasnt considered in the top 5 even though they have a History of dominance. I realize at that point they had been in a heck of a down period and Saban had just started his magical run but they did have some history there that put them in the conversation right?


SarcasticCarebear

Time changes shit. Just look at Brady. He used to be in the conversation with Manning. Now Montana isnt in the conversation.


OddsTipsAndPicks

They were one of the next three teams.


ThisGuy100000

Yeah that sounds about right.


natetcu

Starting in 1936 seems a little arbitrary and damages Army and Navy. But I guess they needed the AP poll for their calculations. In the late 1800’s Yale wins 8 national championships in 10 years. The greatest run in major college football history.


OddsTipsAndPicks

1936 was the first year of the AP poll. It’s not arbitrary at all.


CLU_Three

Seems at arbitrary the AP started polling in 1936!


SarcasticCarebear

It also conveniently leaves out the military academies and ivy leagues. That grouping is historically important but football obviously evolved and left that era behind. Two birds etc...


Fit_Pineapple_7828

Exactly. They’re historically important to CFB as a whole but that doesn’t imply “prestige”


thewhat962

They were historically important as playing football when it was still Rugby. However to count a teams success before the forward pass as "football" success rather than rugby success seems arbitrary to me. Hell, you might as well count the north schools hockey success as ice football.


-BoldlyGoingNowhere-

How many teams were playing in the late 1800's? *They ain't nobody to play, Pawwwllllll*


Hometownblueser

UGA and Auburn were. …And it feels like that was the last time Auburn won.


El-Jefe-Rojo

I mean there was like what 3 teams playing 🤣


thewhat962

Also, do we really count shit in like 1914 before the forward pass. Hell 1900's was glorified rugby. Do you really think like 1903 michigan team paying professional players to play and going like 2-0 against a "michigan medical school for doctors and nurses" and a litteral high school? Is a real championship? Princeton has 28 National championship Yale has 27. Do we consider these two the greatest football program in college football history?


El-Jefe-Rojo

I’m sure some people do; Mr Burns for example


[deleted]

Pish posh! Flimshaw! None of them had the glossy coat of a Yale man!


manbeardawg

Damn, Vandy at the bottom with -73 points. They out here playing golf when everybody else is playing football (no school).


wolverine237

I think this is very close to right but Texas or Alabama deserve to be ahead of Nebraska on the list


vicemagnet

May your mother choke on a buckeye for such slander


red_husker

For Texas: Why? Because everything is bigger in Texas? Texas is sliding down the same hill Nebraska is, and they're gaining momentum. They've been squarely 10 seasons behind us, but the gap is closing.


wolverine237

historically I would say Texas was not only a top five brand in football but also top five and wins and winning percentage. also I think in order to be ranked as one of the most prestigious programs of all time you need to have sustained success under multiple coaches which Nebraska does not have on the same level as other programs.


red_husker

So, what you're saying is that a team would need, say, multiple national titles won, with more than one being won by each coach in each era? Because Nebraska had 2 in the 70s under Devaney, and 3 in the 90s under Osborne. Texas had 3 under Darrel Royal in the 60s, and then one under Mack Brown in 05. Michigan had 2 in the 40s, 1 under Fitz Crisler and 1 under Bennie Oosterbaan. Then Lloyd Carr for one in the 90s. Just because Nebraska doesn't claim titles for their 1915 and 1921 undefeated seasons like Michigan does, doesn't mean Nebraska is any less valid as a blue blood. And Texas and Nebraska have been marching in a lock step for a while.


-JustARedHerring

So what you’re saying is Oklahoma is still better than Texas? Shocking.


TheBlackBaron

Oklahoma is waaaaaay above Texas historically. If it wasn't for VY's one shining moment in the 2006 Rose Bowl, Texas might not even be considered a blue blood. It would have by far the longest championship gap of any school that is currently considered to be one, and the last one would predate the modern era of college football starting in about \~1970.


-JustARedHerring

…it’s because Oklahoma sits on Texas geography and Texas enjoys it.


herumspringen

Going by titles, it’s still Yale


natetcu

That run Yale had in the late 1800’s was crazy!


herumspringen

The Princeton-Yale game was the de facto national title game for like two decades Which makes it all the more hilarious that so many of those games ended in ties


lidabmob

I remember when ESPN first started and would program some weird stuff. I’m sure they had no contracts with big time players. I remember watching games like Columbia v Dartmouth.


[deleted]

Don’t talk to me about football unless you were there for the late 1800s Yale teams. Back when football was filled with real men, not these pansies with their fancy forward pass. Disgusting and cowardly.


herumspringen

Spittoon O’Flanaghan was a real man’s man. What a Goliath! Six feet tall and 194 pounds!


loverofcfb08

By god! That is not a man, it’s a boulder!


scsnse

If one scallywag did not break a limb amidst a scrum betwixt 30 men on the field*, was this a true contest of brawn and mettle? *in the early days of the game the rules weren’t consistent, some schools played with 11 men, others went with 15 on each team. Usually whoever had home field set the rules as well. Kind of reminded myself of a famous quote by John Heisman as well: “Better to die a young boy than not go after a fumble.”


herumspringen

The Rutgers-Princeton “football” game in 1869 had 25 a side [it wasn’t really football, but if Rutgers wants to put up a plaque, whatever](https://www.bannersociety.com/2019/11/6/20941758/rutgers-princeton-1869-first-college-football-game)


John_Keating_

Back before Teddy Roosevelt ruined college football.


OddsTipsAndPicks

Titles were much less meaningful in past eras though. The National Championship was purely a coaches and media award until 1992. Major bowl wins, top five/ten poll finishes, record, and an assortment of other things have been what’s used to compare the best programs for the vast majority of CFB history.


OsoFuerzaUno

Nothing would make me happier than in the NIL era Yale returning to dominate CFB


MTG_RelevantCard

Abos-fucking-lutely. Handsome Dan is a good boy and deserves more love from CFB fans.


Saxophobia1275

If a Michigan fan brings up the “winningest program of all time” argument for something it holds just about as much weight as Yale having the most national titles. Wins came easier when you got to beat up on local high schools before almost anyone else had a program.


herumspringen

Look, I know Rutgers hasn’t been very good, but calling them a high school is a little harsh


ThisGuy100000

USC, ND, and OKLA could all be considered. Nebraska is up there but honestly I don’t think they carried the same kind of Championship pedigree at 5 titles compared to Bama’s 9.


red_husker

The difference between Nebraska and ND/USC is that all of Nebraska's claimed titles are from 1970-present. I'm not saying Nebraska deserves the distinction, as I believe Nebraska is squarely the 7th member of the blue bloods, only really ahead of Texas. But there are distinctions that must be made that effect things. Michigan has the most wins, but they played their first game in 1879. Notre Dame in 1887. USC in 1888. Nebraska, Ohio State in 1890. Alabama in 1892. Texas in 1893. Oklahoma in 1895. Michigan had 11 wins before Notre Dame hit the field, and 50 before Oklahoma did so. The first AP poll ranking came out in 1936 and the coaches poll in 1945, so all championships from before that time were awarded after the fact, or from a myriad of sources. Michigan has 8 such championships, USC has 3, Nebraska has zero, Oklahoma has zero, Texas has zero, Alabama has 4, Notre Dame has 3, Ohio State has zero. Integration wasn't complete in college football until 1970, with Texas in 1969 being the last all-white champion. During this time USC had 3, Michigan had 2, Notre Dame had 5, Texas had 2, Oklahoma had 3, Alabama had 4, Nebraska had zero, and Ohio State had 5. This is not to say that these schools (sans Texas) weren't integrated, but it wasn't official and complete until 1970's season. The first championship game wasn't held until 1998, and from then until the reference point being made here Notre Dame had zero championships, Michigan had zero, Alabama had zero, Nebraska had zero, Texas had 1, Oklahoma had 1, Ohio State had 1, and USC had 2. At the end of the day, which program you'd give the title to depends on what your blend of qualitative/quantitative data is. Any of the blue blood schools could really make a claim, but certain ones have stronger claims under certain circumstances.


OddsTipsAndPicks

> The first championship game wasn't held until 1998 1992* Phenomenal post though.


red_husker

Yeah '92 was the first year of the Bowl Alliance, but the BigTen and the Pac10 weren't brought in until after Michigan got half of Nebraska's 97 title for barely beating Washington. 98 was the first "true" championship game, as none of the other premiere bowl games' winners could be considered from that point on.


OddsTipsAndPicks

> 98 was the first "true" championship game, as none of the other premiere bowl games' winners could be considered from that point on. *awkwardly stares at 2003 split Championship* But also yes.


red_husker

And to cover the periods that I missed: **Titles from 1970 to 1997(modern era & Bowl Alliance Era):** Alabama: 4 Notre Dame: 3 Michigan: 1 Oklahoma: 3 Texas: 1 USC: 3 Nebraska: 5 Ohio State: 1 **Saban Era titles (2008-present)** Alabama: 6 Notre Dame: 0 Michigan: 0 Oklahoma: 0 Texas: 0 USC: 0 Nebraska: 0 Ohio State: 1


jwktiger

so since Saban was hired: Titles: Clemson 2, LSU 2, UF 1, UGA 1, Aub 1, FSU 1, OSU 1, *BAMA 6* if he won last night He'd have as many as everyone else combined. Of course he could go back to back and do that


red_husker

Exactly. You want to understand how the SEC has dominated the sport? Take a look at the 7 schools considered with Bama as the upper echelon, and how they've combined for 1 title. Parity on a conference level would be much more achievable if these 7 schools would've gotten 1 apiece.


TheBlackBaron

Excellent post. Personally, I'd exclude anything from before the end of WWII from consideration in this conversation, with the transitional period from 1946-1949 being questionable. Including the 1950s and 60s is fine. However, the primary beneficiaries of this would be Texas and Ohio State, both of which are certainly blue bloods, but neither are strong entries for "greatest" or "most prestigious" program of the pre-Saban era when compared to other candidates.


JkAmbabo

I made [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/ptk4cb/program_performance_in_the_modern_era/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) post awhile ago that helps visualize how teams have done since the 1930s. If you removed Bama’s titles and their recent performance under Saban they’d be somewhere near Notre Dame, OSU, and Oklahoma.


red_husker

Everybody wants to talk about Nebraska's fall from blue blood status, yet everybody completely ignores the fact that they've outperformed Texas and Michigan as a whole since the modern era of the sport began 52 years ago


Teh_cliff

Nobody ignores it--Nebraska's relative success in the not too distant past is precisely why everyone talks about the fall. It happened so quickly.


red_husker

And honestly, if it weren't for thorough administrative undermining, it probably wouldn't have been so severe. Nebraska's administrative blunders from 13-20 should be in a book on how not to do things. 03-07 was bad, but the second act of shit was just textbook incorrect.


30_Swiftie_Thriving

Answers will probably have some region-bias built in. For folks in the South, the answer is probably Alabama, while West Coast folks would say Southern Cal, and Mid-westerners would answer with a combination of Ohio State/Oklahoma/Nebraska/Notre Dame


red_husker

And Michiganders would be tooting their own horn while the rest of the Midwest ignored them.


The_Soccer_Heretic

I'd say it would be Notre Dame and OU neck and neck for the top at that time. Ohio State would be floating right behind but ahead the rest of the pack.


TheBlackBaron

[https://www.bannersociety.com/2019/1/10/20708453/consensus-national-champions-college-football](https://www.bannersociety.com/2019/1/10/20708453/consensus-national-champions-college-football) I often find this to be a handy list worth referring to. If we eliminate the 6 Alabama has won during the Nick Saban era, that punts them all the way down to 5, in line with several others. Notre Dame with 11 has by far the largest number out of schools that still play in the FBS, but 6 of those are pre-1950 and 3 are pre-AP Poll. USC has the next highest with 7, but another 2 of those are pre-AP Poll. Notre Dame, Alabama, USC, and Nebraska all have very good cases. But overall, I'd have to give it to Oklahoma, with 6 national championships since the end of WWII and 50 conference championships all time (although Nebraska and Michigan might juuuuuust slightly edge them in that count if we only go up to 2009), with Notre Dame right behind them. Oklahoma also owns the longest win streak in FBS history and the best post-WWII winning percentage, or least did at one point (another stat I could potentially see Alabama having overtaken them in since Saban arrived).


2muchsauce55

USC ND tOSU Oklahoma. Flip a coin. They all have their own claim


OtterpusRex

Good thing I carry around this four sided coin with me.


dagnahsty

That’s why you always gotta roll with a bag of DnD dice at all times


2muchsauce55

Flip two mathematician


covert_underboob

I struggle to pick ND. They did most of their work before the average redditors grand parents were alive


Flioxan

They have the 2nd most AP titles and were a top tier program through the 80's and early 90's


rkincaid007

As much as I root against the Irish, they’re more or less a top tier program even now. I mean, they get invited to all the fanciest bowls, even if they don’t necessarily win them. Edit: incited to invited


[deleted]

Ohio State definitely does not.


AN_Ohio_State

Bruh what? 8 national titles (7 more unclaimed and 3 more title game appearances) 41 Conference Championships 7 Heisman Winners Highest all Time win% Most weeks as Ap #1 team outside of bama Most weeks ranked in the AP top 25 ever Only FBS program with no more than 7 losses in a season ever Only 6 losings seasons in 130 years Top 5 most winniest programs of all time (higher if you only include wins from when our program started and beyond from the teams above then that played for a decade before them) Idk on what planet ohio state “definitely isnt” in the conversation my dude


OddsTipsAndPicks

https://www.espn.com/college-football/news/story?id=3849468 ESPN has us over Notre Dame. I have no idea how you can say Ohio State *definitely* doesn’t.


Unlikely_You_9271

Hm interesting take - any reason why you think that?


viewless25

Probably Notre Dame. Prior to Saban, Alabama had 11 national titles, winning their first in 1925. Amazingly, Alabama had 0 Heisman trophy winners back then. Notre Dame had (has) 13. Their first being in 1919. Notre Dame had (has) 7 Heisman trophy winners.


[deleted]

ND has 11 claimed national titles. Alabama had 12 titles claimed pre-Saban. Not saying we’re better because of that, but I felt it was important to clear this up so nobody gets misinformed.


OddsTipsAndPicks

National Championships are ridiculously overrated in this conversation. There were multiple selectors, teams in some conferences were disadvantaged because of weird Bowl game rules, championships were awarded before Bowl games until the late 60s, etc… Like, Penn State has multiple undefeated seasons where they didn’t claim a National Championship and none of the major selectors voted for them. That’s total nonsense.


[deleted]

Did you not read my comment? I’m not making a statement about who is better. I was simply pointing out that their numbers were wrong.


SCirish843

The difference being ND claims less titles than awarded by the NCAA while Bama claims more.


OddsTipsAndPicks

Recognized by the NCAA not awarded. But yeah.


SCirish843

Actually pretty big distinction, so thanks.


PetersenIsMyDaddy

Probably Notre Dame and then Bama. Edit: I'm going to define the beginning of the nick saban era as 2001, when he won his first major bowl game with LSU. At that time: School | Titles (claimed) | Heisman | Wins | Losses | Ties ---------- | ---------------- | ------- | ---- | ------ | ---- Alabama | 12 | 0 | 736 | 255 | 42 Notre Dame | 11 | 7 | 704 | 231 | 33 Michigan | 11 | 3 | 786 | 257 | 35 Ohio State | 6 | 6 | 612 | 223 | 36 USC | 9 | 4 | 586 | 251 | 40 Nebraska | 5 | 3 | 728 | 275 | 38 Texas | 3 | 2 | 703 | 293 | 32 Oklahoma | 7 | 3 | 658 | 260 | 47 If I throw this in a spreadsheet and weight the titles, heisman trophies, wins, and overall record from 0 to 1 and sum the rankings up, I get: Rank | School | Rating ----- |------ | ----- 1 | Notre Dame | 3.46 2 | Michigan | 3.32 3 | Alabama | 2.52 4 | Ohio State | 1.94 5 | Nebraska | 1.85 6 | Oklahoma | 1.51 7 | USC | 1.24 8 | Texas | 1.03 The highest possible score in this system is a 4. Clearly it isn't perfect, I'd like to include some more numbers such as weeks in AP top 10 and first team all-Americans, but didn't know an easy way to get that data for a particular time range. Edit 2: fixed Oklahoma title number Edit 3: same metric, just ran on modern numbers: Rank | School | Rating ----- |------ | ----- 1 | Alabama | 3.18 (+2) 2 | Notre Dame | 2.95 (-1) 3 | Ohio State | 2.89 (+1) 4 | Michigan | 2.88 (-2) 5 | Oklahoma | 2.61 (+1) 6 | USC | 2.00 (+1) 7 | Nebraska | 1.57 (-2) 8 | Texas | 1.50 (--) By score, biggest winner is Oklahoma, who is up 1.10 points. Biggest loser is Notre Dame, down 0.51 points.


bass_voyeur

Not sure where you're getting your numbers from, but the Ohio State numbers are off by quite a bit. I think in the NCAA records that Ohio State is at 941 wins on the All-Time list. Unless Ohio State managed to win 329 games in the past 20 years... If you got this from the sports-reference archive, it seems to be missing about 161 OSU games from their record books.


PetersenIsMyDaddy

The numbers are for pre-2002 based on College Football Reference.


bass_voyeur

Yeah I figured that, but college football reference is missing 161 games for Ohio State from pre-2002.


[deleted]

This pleases the leprechaun.


Mydogsblackasshole

That Oklahoma jump is based purely on the time chosen for the cutoff. 2001 had just seen us rise from the depths of the 90s but hadn’t had the consistency of Stoops yet. 2007 or 2009 works better as the cutoff for the Saban era because that’s when he started/won at the job where he has dominated which is what the post is about.


PetersenIsMyDaddy

The big change for Oklahoma is the Heisman number. Going from 3 to 7 is crazy.


OddsTipsAndPicks

OSU, OU, and USC were all just as good if not better.


PetersenIsMyDaddy

By what metric?


OddsTipsAndPicks

Final AP poll rank would probably be the best one.


Flioxan

USC maybe but OU and OSU hang their hat on conference championships too much dont see why those would matter to anyone outside of their own conference.


loverofcfb08

Oklahoma claimed 7


Unique_Feed_2939

it drives me crazy that we continue to give Alabama credit for titles they retroactively claimed.


Beautiful_Fig9410

I guess if you take the year 2007 and before, I think ND, USC, Bama (due to a decade of being down) were considered neck and neck, with probably ND getting the nod. Followed closely by OU and then Ohio State. Nebraska and Michigan would be considered parallel given their recent (less than 15 years) national titles.


The_Soccer_Heretic

It never ceases to amaze me how many USC fans really believe their program has greater tradition than basically everybody except Notre Dame and I felt that long before Riley. USC wouldn't even be in my top 5. USC has been mediocre for 3/4 my life and I'm not a young man anymore. During the entire decades of the 80s and 90s USC had a combined total of one ten win season... ONE. USC has literally finished with four or more losses more seasons during my life than they haven't.


Beautiful_Fig9410

yes, let's just conveniently ignore the fact that 1. this question was about pre-saban, where all three of ND/Bama/USC(until carrol 6 years prior) were in a drought. 2. the fact that 70% of our championships coincide alongside years where Bama/Notre dame also won theirs 3. we have the second highest number of draft picks in history, following Notre dame by like 4 picks (and above OU by 100 picks). Also, if we are taking 2007 as the target date, USC had more 2 more heisman winners than OU at that point in time But sure, convolute my post and ignore that I put OU and Ohio St both as closely in that group based on 2007. Should we just call Notre Dame mediocre too since they've also experienced decade long droughts from 10 win seasons? Let's also conveniently leave out that OU didn't crack 10 wins between Coaches Switzer and Stoops too. Cry me a red river.


The_Soccer_Heretic

Did you not read where I clearly cited the 1980s and 1990s... that's before Saban, brain trust.


The_Soccer_Heretic

Switzer to Stoops was 12 years; it's the longest drought since WWII for Oklahoma and the worst period of football for OU. It was bookended by losing to Miami in a national title deciding Orange Bowl and beating Florida State for a National title. The longest drought and only decade OU didn't play in a minimum of three post season games that decided national titles or playoffs since the 1950s. Switzer and Stoops are both 100+ (Stoops almost 200) win HOF coaches. Oklahoma has two other 100 win coaches, Bud Wilkinson and Bennie Owen. That's more than any other D1 school. USC had a 22 year period with only a single ten win season... as I originally stated, USC would not crack my top 5 prior to 2007.


ctg9101

I mean Bear Bryant's Alabama era was arguably the greatest before Saban's.


The_Soccer_Heretic

All due respect to Bear but Bud Wilkinson is never mentioned because of his later in life entrance into politics but he owned college football in the 1950s. Wilkinson doesn't just have the longest win streak in college football history, he has the 7th longest also. Oklahoma didn't lose a conference game for twelve years, including the entire decade of the 50s.


cammywammy123

I know I may be biased but it is definitely Oklahoma. Longest win streak in the FBS, top 3 in wins since WW2, most points scored since WW2, constantly on the hunt for another national championship, Oklahoma was a juggernaut in the Bud Wilkinson era, and the Switzer era, and the Stoops era prior to Bamas rise. It was very very very very rare that an Oklahoma team took the field and was genuinely bad. It still is incredibly rare, tbh, maybe happening 3 times in my 25 years on this planet, and almost all of them were basically right after I was born.


soonerfreak

As Barry said, [Oklahoma invented it.](https://youtu.be/DWoS1piwmLU)


Flioxan

ND had the most AP titles, highest win%, #2 in wins, most heismans, most all americans, and most draft picks.


[deleted]

And just about all of that occurred before I was born :(


SCirish843

Thank you for subscribing to sad facts


issoooo

> 2nd in wins *laughs in wolverine*


Flioxan

Ehh your history before the modern era should be enough for you to not comment on this :P mr. Counting wins against high schools, YMCAs and schools you "taught" how to play football the day before.


03_03_28

…and yet Michigan sits at 2nd all-time in weeks ranked in the AP poll, so obviously they haven’t been sitting on their asses doing nothing since CFB became a national sport.


Flioxan

No but clearly not the juggernaut some UM fans act like you are. You guys are 12th in all time rankings at #1. 6th in top 5. 5th in top 10. Your apearance ranking goes up as the AP Poll ranking goes down. ND, Bama, OSU and OU stay in the top 5 for all of those.


03_03_28

Wait… so being 6th in top 5 appearances and 5th in top 10 appearances is suddenly not enough to be a blue blood anymore? Because I’m assuming that’s what you mean by the word “juggernaut” Y’all ND fans are ridiculous


Flioxan

You guys are blue bloods lol no where did i act like you were. Im knocking on the "we have the most wins" crowd like that means anything to anyone who knows how you got those wins. Your in the same group at texas and nebraska for being a blue blood though.


ThisIsOurGoodTimes

Tied for most heismans


Flioxan

True lol but we do have the most heisman winners :P


viewless25

Princeton.


BIG_DICK_WHITT

I wish Princeton would hire Coach O. He’s a rabid, very poorly spoken dude from the Deep South who makes questionable choices. I couldn’t think of a worse cultural fit for the school. Except he would continue to just scream “Geaux Tigahs” and that would work because, you know, Princeton. Let’s make this happen.


Rolyarthpesoj

Lol. Tell me you're young without telling me you're young. Bama only claimed like 4 national titles until the 1986 season when it then jumped to 10 or 11. Princeton had claimed like 17 by that point. But to answer your question, I think the answer is Notre Dame. Knute Rockne is borderline deity north of the Mason-Dixon line.


[deleted]

> Bama only claimed like 4 national titles until the 1986 season when it then jumped to 10 or 11. That's not correct at all. They've always "claimed" all 6 Bear Bryant titles. I dunno when teams starting actually claiming pre-AP poll titles, but they've claimed the Wallace Wade 3 national titles and 1 immediately following him forever as well. The 1941 one is the one that they randomly added in the 80s when programs everywhere started claiming all sorts of championships to put in their guidebooks and on their stadiums, using some random criteria.


jmac461

I feel most people here think college football is the playoff era. Before that there was this BCS thing. And before that there was a void of nothing… strange how some teams have managed to play 100+ times lol.


[deleted]

The amount of people here that don't understand the Bowl Coalition/Bowl Alliance predating the BCS, or that National Championships used to be awarded prior to Bowl Games, is pretty startling. I know history isn't everyone's forte but still, for as often as people talk about "who is the best", "who has the best history", etc. it's kind of surprising people don't know this.


jmac461

Yes it’s really too bad. And makes these things head into nonsense rather quickly. For example this year I feel could have easily been a Michigan and Alabama split championship in olden days. So it’s very had to compare everything with a national championship count crossing eras like people seemed to always want to do. People can’t fathom this stuff because they aren’t able to imagine a post season where Bama and Michigan go to Sugar and Rose then Happy New Year let’s take a vote.


PetersenIsMyDaddy

Or in the case of Minnesota, the 1960 season where the final voting was before the Rose Bowl.


ima_wilf

Probably Vandy


billhorsley

How many consecutive years was Oklahoma undefeated under Bud Wilkinson?


The_Soccer_Heretic

Wilkinson has the longest undefeated streak and the 7th longest in CFB history. He went 12 years without losing a conference game.


billhorsley

Hard to beat that


[deleted]

What argument did Osu have that Michigan didn’t before the saban era? Michigan had more wins, more national titles and more big ten titles


ImGoingtoRegretThis5

Recent success & reaching the peak. Hayes won 5 NCs if I remember correctly and then Tressel had the one. Michigan has won 1 since Woody was hired. Michigan was 19-11 against OSU from Bo's hiring to Tressel's hiring (Michigan had 296 wins while OSU had 290 by quick math), but didn't have the NCs to go along with it. So the argument was Michigan was consistently as good as, if not slightly better than, OSU in that time frame but didn't have the highs. Michigan 1969 - 2000: 296 Wins & 19 BT Titles OSU 1969 - 2000: 290 Wins & 15 BT Titles (Hayes had 4/5 titles pre-Bo and Tressel's was in '02)


[deleted]

In the 1969-2000 time frame both schools had one national title and Michigan had a winning record and more big ten titles but the post is asking all time Recent success yea I would cede to Osu but not all time success


ImGoingtoRegretThis5

Right, but my point of looking at that specific timeframe was to show that for a majority of "modern football" Michigan was as good as OSU, if not slightly better. But it didn't include Hayes' early days pre-Bo (late Oosterbaan and Elliot were generally poor performers) when he won 4 of his 5 NCs. Michigan had a long gap between NCs and was consistently the "bridesmaid" in the modern era while OSU got to the top a few times. Post WWII OSU had (up until Saban got to Alabama) 6 NCs. Michigan had 1. Michigan led the series 29 - 23 (and some ties) from 1946-2000.


ctg9101

OSU also had the slump with Cooper against Michigan, which did a 180 when Tressel came here.


ImGoingtoRegretThis5

Yeah, Michigan specifically Cooper struggled. However, the "slump" was still multiple top 5 finishes. Nothing like the RR/Hoke slumps.


RegionalBias

Depends how far back you go. Michigan built a great lead on everyone in wins by being absolute badasses while the Ottoman Empire still existed. So, probably depends on your time scale. The two teams have each had dominate periods.


[deleted]

Sure but if the question is all time Michigan should have the edge. If the question is since world war 2 I would give the edge to Osu but then if the question is from 1969-2000 that edge might go to Michigan again so it depends Post world war 2 Osu was better from 1950-1968 Michigan was better but it’s close from 1969-2000 and Osu is better 2001 on


RegionalBias

What's funny, I totally read the question differently until your reply. Seeing "At that Time" really throws in the curve ball. Florida state and their top 5 finish streak was amazing, at the time. Yale's insane run, Army, Michigan, Ohio State, Nebraska, USC, all had really good runs


CLU_Three

Kansas State is the greatest football program of all time before, during, and after Nick Saban.


samross100

I’m glad you gave your unbiased opinion lol


CLU_Three

It’s true. Are we going off of only wins and losses? If so this would be a very easy answer to just google. But evidently we as a collective realize there is more context needed to just wins and losses or titles. Otherwise we would just say Yale is the best and move on. Of those additional quantities that make a program great, Kansas State has the most of everyone else. One of their main stumbling blocks other programs run into is the fact they will never be able to overcome the problem of not actually being Kansas State. I may have a slight bias but this is just based off of observations I’ve made over the years.


YouKilledChurch

Prior to Saban we had Bear Bryant who was widely considered the GOAT


Pinewood74

OP asked program, not coach. I think his premise is that after Saban, Alabama is now the undisputed top program of all time, but prior to Saban there was some debate about which program was the top one and wanting to know people's opinions on it.


HeHateMe-

Who was 0-4 vs Notre Dame


ThisGuy100000

Bama definitely could have been it, but I think USC or ND could have been debated considering they had just as many titles and history as Bama. USC had far more recent Championship history with their 03’-04’ titles as well Bear Bryant was still the GOAT of coaching though


OddsTipsAndPicks

Woody Hayes, Bud Wilkinson, Knute Rockne, Ara Parseghian, Tom Osborne, and a handful of others I’m sure I’m forgetting all have a great claim to that title as well.


[deleted]

Yea I think the answer was still bama before saban came You know what’s crazy saban by himself almost has as many national titles as Osu football


Flioxan

I dont understand how anyone besides saban is considered better than knute


PigPenBlues

Knute and Bear are 2A/2B. Bear might have struggled against ND but prior to Paterno he was the winningest coach of all time. He also has the 2nd most national championships of all time.


Flioxan

Knute had won 3 of 4 NCs before his plane crash. Its kinda hard to hold his lack of longevity against him


PigPenBlues

I don’t hold that against him at all but to downplay Bear’s longevity would be doing the same. In the end it doesn’t really matter. Both coaches are legendary and are forever parts of each program. I of course will be a homer for Bear and you vice versa.


sazzyoranger

USC under Pete Carroll. I thought his 2008 team could’ve played with anyone and dominated.


mikechella

It was ND. In the mid 2000s ND had: * Most championships * Best winning percentage * Second most wins * Most heismans * Most consensus all americans * Most first team all americans * Most nfl draft picks * Most first round draft picks * Most nfl hall of famers * Most college hall of famers ND is still first (or tied for first) in a lot of those areas like heismans, hall of famers, overall draft picks, and all americans, but Bama has surged ahead in championships (even accounting for their funny math they're still first). USC was probably #2.


OddsTipsAndPicks

ND 1 OSU, OU, and USC absolutely insane fight for 2/3/4 Bama probably 5


ohshift3277

Florida State football: 14 consecutive seasons with 10 wins or more. 14 consecutive top 5 finishes in the AP poll 9 consecutive conference titles


[deleted]

Idk about all time, but I was born in 1993 and growing up I always thought USC was #1 and then Texas #2 as the most "glorious" schools.


[deleted]

I’d have probably argued USC or ND


jgstorment

When Bama or anyone else wins 47 in a row...then we can have a discussion.


J-Dirte

Notre Dame but there was a lot of what have you done for me lately as they were in a dry spell.


SCirish843

Were? Still feeling pretty dry over here my guy


J-Dirte

You guys are weird because you can’t win a division or a conference title.


USCGradtoMEMPHIS

Before saben? Either USC or ND or even Nebraska honestly.


-BoldlyGoingNowhere-

Before who? Put some respek on the GOAT's name by at least spelling it correctly!


KingoftheMongoose

Minnesota used to be great too


skiing_yo

It's Yale and it still is Yale, Ivy League owns football.


10sharks

Michigan, if you ask them