Best of the Best Part II

Today I’m looking at two more categories for my top 17 teams in the modern era of college football (post 1969). You can see the list here.

Head to Head Overall Wins

This is one of the few categories that reward a team for playing tough schedules. Here’s the list.

FLORIDA 121
ALABAMA 109
AUBURN 96
NOTRE DAME 79
TENNESSEE 71
USC 68
FLORIDA STATE 64
GEORGIA 61
LSU 61
MIAMI 60
OKLAHOMA 55
MICHIGAN 53
NEBRASKA 50
PENN STATE 45
OHIO STATE 41
TEXAS 37
UCLA 35

The bottom feeders on this list will greatly benefit in future categories when conference strength / weakness takes effect.

National Championships

This one gets triple points, because, let’s face it, this is what it’s all about. In ranking from 1-17, I’m giving a consensus MNC 10 points and a split title 7. I dunno where I came up with those numbers, but it sounds fair to me. Any USC fans that want to scream for a split title in 2003, sorry, you’re a BCS member and an agreement has been made that the MNC is the winner of the BCS Title game.

MIAMI 4 CONSENSUS, 1 SPLIT, 47 POINTS
NEBRASKA 3 CONSENSUS, 2 SPLIT, 44 POINTS
OKLAHOMA 3 CONSENSUS, 1 SPLIT, 37 POINTS
ALABAMA 2 CONSENSUS, 2 SPLIT, 34 POINTS
USC 2 CONSENSUS, 2 SPLIT, 34 POINTS
NOTRE DAME 2 CONSENSUS, 1 SPLIT, 27 POINTS
FLORIDA 2 CONSENSUS, 20 POINTS
FLORIDA STATE 2 CONSENSUS, 20 POINTS
LSU 2 CONSENSUS, 20 POINTS
PENN STATE 2 CONSENSUS, 20 POINTS
TEXAS 1 CONSENSUS, 1 SPLIT, 17 POINTS
GEORGIA 1 CONSENSUS, 10 POINTS
OHIO STATE 1 CONSENSUS, 10 POINTS
TENNESSEE 1 CONSENSUS, 10 POINTS
MICHIGAN 1 SPLIT, 7 POINTS
AUBURN 0
UCLA 0

Coming soon.....conference championships

Best of the Best

I realize that I didn’t post yesterday, but I wasn’t exactly goofing off. Here's a post of T. Kyle King proportion. (UPDATE, 6:00 PM; I just read this.....I'm not worthy. Mr. King has just earned double billing over in the sidebar>>>>>>>>>>>>>)

A couple of weeks ago, I started a series of posts on the top 16 programs in college football history. You can check those out here, just remember that the bottom of the page is first.

I’m gonna rank ‘em again, but this time only using numbers accumulated during the modern era, post 1969. Is that relevant? I think it is. Integration began sweeping college football and the NCAA actually started to impose scholarship limits. The screwed up system that awarded MNC’s was starting to stabilize a little. As a point of reference, I’ll list the MNC’s for the top 10 programs pre 1969. These are all taken from the NCAA’s website.

1. Princeton 18
2. Yale 17
3. Michigan 9
4. Harvard 8
4. Notre Dame 8
6. Minnesota 6
7. Alabama 5
8. Army 4
8. Ohio State 4
8. USC 4

Even into the 60’s, MNC’s were awarded before the bowl games and often a team had the trophy in hand and lost their bowl game. The system was also heavily biased, often using the Tom Lemming ranking system (does anyone need a heads-up on that definition?). As screwed up as our system is today, it’s the best that it’s ever been.

I’m also going to include a 17th team this time around. UCLA has posted some pretty good numbers across the board. If not for the 2 MNC’s in the last 5 years, LSU would definitely be OFF the list. For any GA TECH fans, sorry, but the overall 44% win pct in the head to head numbers went to 29% in the modern era. That don’t cut it. The only other team that was close was Texas A&M, and the numbers weren’t quite strong enough.

THE TEAMS
ALABAMA
AUBURN
FLORIDA
FLORIDA STATE
GEORGIA
LSU
MIAMI
MICHIGAN
NEBRASKA
NOTRE DAME
OHIO STATE
OKLAHOMA
PENN STATE
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UCLA
USC


Here are the criteria that will be scored, in no particular order. The top team in each gets 17 points in each category, 2nd gets 16, ……etc.

Head to head games played
Head to head win pct
Head to head overall wins
National Championships
Conference championships
Conference win pct
BCS opponents overall games played
BCS opponents win pct
Overall number of wins
Overall win pct
OOC BCS opponents games played – higher is better
OOC BCS opponents win pct
OOC Non BCS opponents games played – lower is better

Ok, time for the first round. When these teams have played head to head, here are the winning percentages.

USC .581
ALABAMA .565
OKLAHOMA .556
FLORIDA .548
NOTRE DAME .537
NEBRASKA .526
MICHIGAN .525
AUBURN .503
TEXAS .500
FLORIDA STATE .492
GEORGIA .480
MIAMI .465
TENNESSEE .461
OHIO STATE .456
PENN STATE .441
UCLA .407
LSU .399

Of all of the stats that you’ll see posted, this is the one that I feel is the most important. Once there is a sufficient number of games played, there’s really no spin that can be put on pure winning percentages. The best playing the best, and USC wins round 1.

Every other category is heavily influenced by strength of conference, even MNC’s. If anyone has doubts on conference strengths, I’ll post this for reference. Here are the winning percentages versus these 17 teams for each BCS Conference.

The ACC
FLORIDA STATE .492
MIAMI .465
CLEMSON .328
VIRGINIA TECH .293
GA TECH .289
VIRGINIA .275
BOSTON COLLEGE .272
NC STATE .255
UNC .222
WAKE FOREST .154
MARYLAND .129
DUKE .116

Analysis
Coaching issues at Miami and FSU have them struggling recently. When they get it straightened out, and I think it will be soon, look for this to be a two horse race again. They simply have too much talent. The rest of the conference, historically, has been weak.

The BIG TWELVE
OKLAHOMA .556
NEBRASKA .526
TEXAS .500
TEXAS A&M .381
COLORADO .298
TEXAS TECH .244
KANSAS ST .211
BAYLOR .200
MISSOURI .184
KANSAS .134
OKLAHOMA ST .129
IOWA ST .086

Analysis
Since the merger of the Big 8 and SWC, this conference has 3 good teams at the top with Texas A&M lurking in the shadows. Before the merger, there were two very weak conferences. Since…….still pretty crappy, the bottom is horrid, but the top is strong.

The BIG EAST
PITTSBURGH .282
SYRACUSE .246
SOUTH FLORIDA .200
WEST VIRGINIA .164
LOUISVILLE .111
RUTGERS .049
CINCINNATI .027
UCONN .000

Analysis
This conference gets an automatic BCS bid each year. Go figure.

The BIG TEN
MICHIGAN .525
OHIO STATE .456
PENN STATE .441
WISCONSIN .284
MICHIGAN ST .254
IOWA .243
PURDUE .197
ILLINOIS .177
NORTHWESTERN .115
MINNESOTA .113
INDIANA .047

Analysis
Not to hard to see how a conference can consistently produce 12 game winners when 8 games are automatics every year. With 5 teams under 20%, that almost counts as 5 bye weeks during the season.

The PAC TEN
USC .581
UCLA .407
WASHINGTON .381
ARIZONA ST .329
STANFORD .325
OREGON .300
ARIZONA .292
CAL .260
WASHINGTON ST .226
OREGON ST .138

Analysis
I’m actually quite surprised. Of course USC is heads and shoulders above the rest, but through #6 there’s not a dog in that bunch. Far and away the 2nd strongest conference top to bottom. When I put together my original top teams list, I just shot from the hip and it just so happens to match the top 17 teams when using this stat. How far out are the PAC TEN’S 3-6? WASSOU 19th, ARIZONA ST 20th, STANFORD 22nd, and OREGON 23rd.

The SEC
ALABAMA .565
FLORIDA .548
AUBURN .503
GEORGIA .480
TENNESSEE .461
LSU .399
ARKANSAS .294
MSU .279
OLE MISS .242
SOUTH CAROLINA .209
KENTUCKY .168
VANDY .075

Analysis
The 6th place team is dominating the college football landscape. Enuf said.

As I’ve often said, it doesn’t matter how many wins you get versus Vandy, Indiana, Duke, Iowa St, or any Big East team, it’s how you do against the big boys that matter. To USC……kudos.


OOC NON-BCS OPPONENTS

Since the SEC takes a lot of heat for this subject, let’s see the numbers.
Here’s a list that doesn’t get scored, but it bears mentioning.
Division 1-AA (or FCS since well enough can’t be left alone) opponents scheduled by each team.
MIAMI 14
AUBURN 13
GEORGIA 9
FLORIDA 8
FSU 8
NEBRASKA 6
ALABAMA 5
LSU 4
TEXAS 4
OKLAHOMA 3
PENN STATE 3
TENNESSEE 2
MICHIGAN 1 and probably the last
OHIO STATE 1
NOTRE DAME 0
UCLA 0
USC 0

Sometimes when you play with fire, you get burned. 3 times as a matter of fact. Here’s the list of Division 1-AA losses by our illustrious 17.

10/16/1970; Tampa 31 Miami 14
10/6/1979; FAMU 16 Miami 13
9/1/2007; Appalachian St 34 Michigan 32

Ok, the SEC is guilty of scheduling more of these schools than the other big boys. But…..some of these 1-AA schools are better than your conference bottom dwellers, that’s for sure. Just ask Michigan.

Now for the official list of out of conference games played versus non-BCS conference members. These are the automatics that teams schedule. Many considerations have to be made for Notre Dame and the fact that they are not a member of a conference. No consideration is given in the patsy scheduling department. Texas suffers the most here because half of their SWC games got wiped out with the Big 12 merger. Remember, less is better.

The List

USC 32
MICHIGAN 39
OHIO STATE 42
OKLAHOMA 43
GEORGIA 46
UCLA 54
NEBRASKA 57
FLORIDA 74
TENNESSEE 75
PENN STATE 76
AUBURN 79
ALABAMA 87
FLORIDA STATE 87
LSU 92
NOTRE DAME 94
MIAMI 102
TEXAS 142

Once again, USC is on top. As a Georgia fan, I can defend our position on this board rather easily. The SEC as a whole is middle of the pack and should make efforts to upgrade the level of competition in the future.

Here’s the last category of the day. Head to head total games played with these 17 teams, otherwise known as opposite of the previous list. More is better.



FLORIDA 224
AUBURN 195
ALABAMA 195
TENNESSEE 159
LSU 157
NOTRE DAME 147
FLORIDA STATE 132
GEORGIA 130
MIAMI 129
USC 121
OKLAHOMA 103
PENN STATE 102
MICHIGAN 101
NEBRASKA 97
OHIO STATE 92
UCLA 90
TEXAS 77

Hah…..USC is not #1. Ok, does banging heads with the big boys make up for some softer OOC scheduling? Maybe a little. You make the call.

For those keeping score at home, after 3 of the 13 criteria, USC has the early lead.

More to come……….

Sweet 16 - Final Edition

Ok, this is the last edition on the top 16 teams in college football history. I’m going to rank the teams 1-16 (and the nation eagerly awaits) based on the following criteria.

• All time wins – it matters


• MNC’s – 3x bonus for legitimate national championships


• Conference championships – Gotta have ‘em


• Wins vs Sweet 16 – tougher games count more


• Win pct vs Sweet 16 – win the tough ones


• Games played vs Sweet 16 – will affect overall win totals and pct drastically


• Win pct in conference – sets the tone for the entire season


• Games played OOC vs BCS – more is better


• Win pct vs OOC BCS opponents – pretty important


• Games vs Non BCS opponents – less is better, once again affecting overall wins and pct


• Overall win pct – it’s why we keep score

Let me preface this with the Notre Dame factor. They get totally shut out of conference championships and conference win %. Also, they obviously were at the top of Non-Conference BCS games played. I don’t know of a “fair” way to handle this, but since they ended up close to the top of this list, I gave them the average points in those columns of the other 2 programs that were heads and shoulders above the rest. The Florida State results are largely due to the fact that the program didn’t start until 1954. The other programs had a huge head start to rack up numbers, but I did not feel that there was any basis for adjustment. Texas suffers a huge blow with the dissolving of the SWC and loses all of those BCS games played. Penn St suffers in the conference title category due to their being independent for so long. Ditto with Miami and FSU, however they racked up some pretty nice totals playing in their very weak conferences since the early 90’s.

The rules. 16 points for leading a category thru 1 point for being last. As noted, legitimate MNC’s get a 3x bonus (it may be worth more, and may have shaken the order up a little). End of rules.

The List

NUMERO UNO

1. MICHIGAN 163


2. ALABAMA 160


3. NOTRE DAME 159


4. OKLAHOMA 134


5. USC 133


6. NEBRASKA 128


7. TEXAS 115


8. OHIO STATE 114


9. TENNESSEE 112


10. GEORGIA 107


11. FLORIDA 89


12. MIAMI 88


13. AUBURN 85


14. PENN STATE 79


15. FLORIDA STATE 77


16. LSU 76

I think that the criteria used for this list is fair. How did my final rankings end up as compared to the Billingsley List?

1. MICHIGAN +1


2. ALABAMA +2


3. NOTRE DAME -2


4. OKLAHOMA +3


5. USC =


6. NEBRASKA +2


7. TEXAS -1


8. OHIO STATE -5


9. TENNESSEE =


10. GEORGIA +2


11. FLORIDA +8


12. MIAMI +3


13. AUBURN +1


14. PENN STATE -3


15. FLORIDA STATE -5


16. LSU -3

That’s not too far off. And no, I didn’t jack any team’s numbers. I did start knowing that Notre Dame, Michigan, and Alabama would be the top 3. That didn’t take any rocket science, but I was pretty sure that Alabama would end up on top. Didn’t happen.

Other numbers that I didn’t jack up (or down as the case might be) that should be taken into consideration.

• Ohio St and Michigan sharing 74 Big 10 titles…….weak conference


• Nebraska and Oklahoma sharing 74 Big 8 titles…..another weak conference


• Texas racking up 27 SWC conference titles vs the likes of TCU, Houston, SMU, Rice, and Baylor….......need I say more?


• FSU winning 12 out of 14 ACC titles from 1992-2005…..no resistance at all


• FSU winning 83 of 88 conference games 94.3% from 1992-2002......8 gimme wins per year

All of this will be discussed in an upcoming post on winning national championships.

This post has been based on opinion. The rest of the series has been all fact, numbers that anyone can look up. Feel free to leave a comment with your opinion of the criteria that I’ve used, the relative importance thereof, or just your opinion of my opinions.

Since it’s going to be a long offseason, I’ll probably put together the stats and do this all again starting with the “modern era” commonly recognized as from 1970. Those numbers will probably take at least a week to put together. Will any new players reach the top 16? How will the rankings change? I’m sure that the 3 Florida schools will jump to the top, but the rest will have to wait.

But as for the Sweet 16…….that’s a wrap.

Sweet 16 - Best of the Rest

Don't ya just love the offseason. About a week ago I started this series by picking the top 16 programs in college football history. This is the 4th in the series, and you can get caught up by clicking here or over on the Sweet 16 label thingy over there >>>>>.

I'm going to re-print one of the charts that I find to be the most important, the winning percentages when these 16 have played head to head.

1. MICHIGAN 58%
1. TEXAS 58% (tie with identical records)
3. ALABAMA 57.8%
4. NOTRE DAME 55.7%
5. USC 52%
6. AUBURN 51.3%
7. TENNESSEE 50.4%
8. FLORIDA 48.7%
9. GEORGIA 48.2%
10. NEBRASKA 47.3%
11. OKLAHOMA 46.8%
12. PENN STATE 46.3%
13. MIAMI 44.8%
14. FSU 44.4%
15. OHIO ST 43.1%
16. LSU 42.8%

In other words, I don't care if a team has an 85% winning pct against Kentucky, North Carolina, or Duke (unless it's in basketball)

Now for the best of the rest. The winning percentages versus the 16 teams on the list and the total number of games played.

1. GEORGIA TECH 44.5%, 424 GAMES
2. UCLA 40.1%, 152
3. PITTSBURGH 39%, 277
4. SYRACUSE 37.4%, 154
5. TEXAS A&M 34.8%, 241
6. MICHIGAN STATE 34.5%, 262
7. NORTH CAROLINA 34%, 155
8. WASHINGTON 33.3%, 131
9. STANFORD 32.4%, 141
10. ARIZONA ST 31.9%, 47
11. MISSISSIPPI 31.7%, 324
12. MINNESOTA 31.5%, 220
13. COLORADO 31.1%, 182
14. MISSOURI 31.0%, 251
15. MISSISSIPPI ST 30.5%, 409

Not exactly, but not too shabby

That's a wrap of all of the teams that have a 30% or higher win pct. As much as I hate to say it, Georgia Tech should have made the original list. If not for LSU and Florida's recent mega-success, they would have. Tech has an all time winning record vs. Florida, LSU, and Miami. Tech has 2 undisputed MNC's (1917, 1928) and a split title in 1990 with Colorado. Adding Tech would also put UGA's winning pct at 50.9, but a list is a list, and I'm not changin' it (and whoever heard of the Sweet 17....it just don't sound right).

UCLA is the only other team on the planet to break 40%. USC casts a mighty big shadow in LA.

Anyway, here's the rest of the BCS schools in order of win pct against the top 16. When I run across a name that's made a splash recently, I'll put up their win pct and games played for reference.

• ARKANSAS


• VIRGINIA TECH 29.7%, 93


• CALIFORNIA 29.4%, 141


• VANDERBILT


• CLEMSON


• DUKE


• IOWA 28.2%, 222


• PURDUE


• VIRGINIA


• WISCONSIN 26.5%, 190


• BOSTON COLLEGE 25.9%, 112


• ILLINOIS 25.7%, 238


• NC STATE


• OREGON 24.7%, 96


• KENTUCKY


• KANSAS 23.6%, 247


• MARYLAND


• TEXAS TECH


• BAYLOR


• ARIZONA


• NORTHWESTERN


• SOUTH CAROLINA


• WAKE FOREST 20.6%, 69


• KANSAS STATE


• SOUTH FLORIDA


• INDIANA


• WEST VIRGINIA 18.2%, 101


• OKLAHOMA ST


• OREGON ST


• WASHINGTON ST


• IOWA ST


• CINCINNATI


• LOUISVILLE 11.6%, 44


• RUTGERS 7.8%, 52


• UCONN

I hope that all of these numbers will give a little perspective to how these programs have performed.

Anyway, I'm sorting through all of these stats and building up to my official ranking of the top 16. Right now, the Billingsley List is the most reputable that I can find since they've had a poll since 1869. I'm sure that mine won't look quite like that (hint....UGA #1...jk).

To be continued..........

Poll results

About 2 weeks ago, I started a poll to see which OOC team(s) the dawgnation would like to see a home & home with. My personal preferences in order were:

1. OKLAHOMA
2. USC
3. MICHIGAN
4. NOTRE DAME
5. TEXAS
6. OHIO STATE
7. PENN STATE
8. NEBRASKA
9. MIAMI
10. FSU

Dawg fans don’t necessarily agree with me, dropping the Sooners down to #6 on the wish list. Thanks for voting. Here are the results and the number of votes.

1. USC (94)
2. NOTRE DAME (64)
3. MICHIGAN (58)
4. TEXAS (50)
5. OHIO STATE (49)
6. OKLAHOMA (31)
7. PENN STATE (16)
8. FLORIDA STATE (15)
9. MIAMI (13)
10. NEBRASKA (10)
11. OTHER (8)

Sweet 16 III

I started this series by taking what I considered the top 16 programs in College Football history and tracking their all time records, just to see how UGA stacked up. The answer has been “quite well” but there’s a ton of information to sift through. To get caught up you can find part 1 here, and part 2 right about.........here.

Today, I’m going to post the records of the top 16 programs vs. each of the BCS Conferences. Keep in mind that I’m using the current conference alignments when calculating these stats. Here they are in alphabetical order.

ALABAMA
ACC 74-34-4, .694
BIG TWELVE 14-16-2, .467
BIG EAST 11-2-0, .846
BIG TEN 13-9-0, .591
PAC TEN 13-5-1, .722
SEC 413-185-28, .691

AUBURN
ACC 119-75-8, .613
BIG TWELVE 11-15-1, .423
BIG EAST 5-2-1, .714
BIG TEN 6-3-2, .667
PAC TEN 5-3-0, .625
SEC 309-233-22, .570

FLORIDA
ACC 108-93-11, .537
BIG TWELVE 5-6-1, .455
BIG EAST 7-3-2, .700
BIG TEN 9-5-0, .643
PAC TEN 6-4-1, .600
SEC 274-210-15, .566

FLORIDA STATE
ACC 173-74-4, .700
BIG TWELVE 30-13-0, .698
BIG EAST 28-8-0, .778
BIG TEN 8-2-1, .800
PAC TEN 6-1-0, .857
SEC 59-65-6, .476

GEORGIA
ACC 161-91-18, .624
BIG TWELVE 11-7-0, .611
BIG EAST 2-5-0, .286
BIG TEN 7-2-0, .778
PAC TEN 8-4-1, .667
SEC 342-222-24, .606

LSU
ACC 31-28-0, .525
BIG TWELVE 52-40-5, .565
BIG EAST 1-3-0, .250
BIG TEN 7-4-1, .636
PAC TEN 12-3-0, .800
SEC 313-235-25, .571

MIAMI
ACC 109-70-1, .609
BIG TWELVE 32-20-0, .615
BIG EAST 84-21-2, .800
BIG TEN 26-15-0, .634
PAC TEN 9-8-0, .529
SEC 65-82-3, .442

MICHIGAN
ACC 23-4-0, .852
BIG TWELVE 16-8-1, .667
BIG EAST 9-5-1, .643
BIG TEN 500-174-23, .742
PAC TEN 44-22-1, .667
SEC 20-5-1, .800

NEBRASKA
ACC 14-14-0, .500
BIG TWELVE 457-170-17, .729
BIG EAST 14-22-0, .389
BIG TEN 79-73-10, .520
PAC TEN 33-20-3, .623
SEC 19-6-1, .760

NOTRE DAME
ACC 75-29-2, .721
BIG TWELVE 37-18-2, .673
BIG EAST 56-20-1, .737
BIG TEN 216-111-15, .661
PAC TEN 78-41-6, .655
SEC 21-13-0, .618

OHIO STATE
ACC 14-7-0, .667
BIG TWELVE 28-4-1, .875
BIG EAST 42-11-1, .792
BIG TEN 433-186-26, .700
PAC TEN 50-23-2, .685
SEC 7-11-2, .389

OKLAHOMA
ACC 28-5-0, .848
BIG TWELVE 511-213-34, .706
BIG EAST 18-3-1, .857
BIG TEN 10-6-0, .625
PAC TEN 22-15-1, .595
SEC 19-9-3, .679

PENN STATE
ACC 89-21-2, .809
BIG TWELVE 22-13-0, .629
BIG EAST 171-77-11, .690
BIG TEN 89-64-2, .582
PAC TEN 22-11-0, .667
SEC 16-16-0, .500

TENNESSEE
ACC 100-60-7, .625
BIG TWELVE 9-8-1, .529
BIG EAST 15-4-0, .789
BIG TEN 10-5-0, .667
PAC TEN 14-11-2, .560
SEC 361-200-34, .643

TEXAS
ACC 17-9-0, .654
BIG TWELVE 313-137-15, .696
BIG EAST 6-4-0, .600
BIG TEN 11-7-0, .611
PAC TEN 22-11-0, .667
SEC 94-45-4, .676

USC
ACC 11-5-0, .688
BIG TWELVE 29-9-2, .763
BIG EAST 9-4-0, .692
BIG TEN 65-27-2, .707
PAC TEN 397-157-29, .717
SEC 17-10-1, .630

When you look at these numbers, please note that they reflect the conferences as they are today. Here are the recent major conference changes that don’t get truly reflected in these numbers.

In 1996, the Southwest conference was dissolved, with Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, and Baylor joining the Big 8, thus creating the Big 12. Left out of the mix for these teams were traditional SWC rivals Houston, Rice, SMU, and TCU, all of which are now members of non-BCS conferences.

In 1993, Penn State’s athletic teams became part of the Big 10 conference. Prior to then, Penn State had been an independent.

In 1991, FSU gave up their independent status to join the ACC. Also in 1991, Miami and Virginia Tech joined the Big East. Miami and Virginia Tech then switched to the ACC in 2004, followed by Boston College in 2005, being replaced in the Big East by Cincinnati, Louisville, and South Florida.

In 1991, the SEC expanded to 12 teams by taking Arkansas from the SWC, and South Carolina from the independent ranks.

To be continued……..

The Sweet 16

My conference is better than yours. My OOC schedule is tougher than yours. Your school sucks. My team is the bestest. That's the stuff that fills up college football tv coverage, newspapers, & weblogs. Of course all of this discussion is heavily biased, depending on the network or the area of the country. Thankfully, somebody (me) has put together some numbers that will bring closure to these discussions, once and for all.

It all begins with the "Sweet 16". That's my list of the top 16 programs in NCAA history. I came up with my list, and it matches this one with the exception of Florida taking the place of Washington, and I don't agree with the actual ranking order. Anyway, I'd challenge anyone to present a valid argument that would replace any of the teams on this list......anyone?......no?.......ok, we agree.

In alphabetical order, here's the 16:

1. ALABAMA
2. AUBURN
3. FLORIDA
4. FLORIDA STATE
5. GEORGIA - The bestest team in the world. All of the other teams on this list suck. We play the toughest OOC schedule on the planet and play in the best conference in college football, the SEC.
6. LSU
7. MIAMI
8. MICHIGAN
9. NEBRASKA
10. NOTRE DAME
11. OHIO STATE
12. OKLAHOMA
13. PENN STATE
14. TENNESSEE
15. TEXAS
16. USC

That's the list of the "cream of the crop" of college football.

During the course of the next week, I'm going to compare how this Sweet 16 has fared against the various BCS conferences. But today, I'm taking a page out of the NASCAR book and having the SuperBowl first. Forget how many times the win totals have been padded by beating up on the Iowa States, Vanderbilts, or Stanford's of the world. Let's compare these 16 teams heads up.

First, let's look at the total games played, which will obviously be weighted towards the SEC. However, this also says alot about the strength of schedule that these teams historically face.

1. FLORIDA 409
2. AUBURN 407
3. ALABAMA 400
4. GEORGIA 359
5. LSU 285
6. TENNESSEE 274
7. NOTRE DAME 228
8. OKLAHOMA 228
9. MIAMI 223
10. MICHIGAN 184
11. TEXAS 184
12. FLORIDA STATE 177
13. OHIO STATE 176
14. NEBRASKA 174
15. USC 161
16. PENN STATE 123

There can be no sane, rational, logical, or reasonable argument presented that doesn't point to the SEC having the highest strength of schedule, and these numbers show that it really isn't close.

What about winning percentages. When the best play the best, you're not going to find any of these ridiculous 80% numbers. In reality, any thing over 50 would be considered outstanding. Here's the list.

1. MICHIGAN 58%
2. TEXAS 58% (tie with identical records)
3. ALABAMA 57.8%
4. NOTRE DAME 55.7%
5. USC 52%
6. AUBURN 51.3%
7. TENNESSEE 50.4%
8. FLORIDA 48.7%
9. GEORGIA 48.2%
10. NEBRASKA 47.3%
11. OKLAHOMA 46.8%
12. PENN STATE 46.3%
13. MIAMI 44.8%
14. FSU 44.4%
15. OHIO ST 43.1%
16. LSU 42.8%

Our most recent participants in the BCS Championship Game don't fare too well historically when they play the big boys.

Finally, a list of the overall head to head records, sorted by most wins. When you look at the all-time win totals of these programs, you'll know that these were the tough ones.

1. ALABAMA 219-160-21
2. AUBURN 200-190-17
3. FLORIDA 194-204-11
4. GEORGIA 164-176-19
5. TENNESSEE 130-128-16
6. NOTRE DAME 122-97-9
7. LSU 115-154-16
8. MICHIGAN 102-74-8
9. TEXAS 102-74-8
10. OKLAHOMA 102-116-10
11. MIAMI 99-122-2
12. USC 79-73-9
13. NEBRASKA 79-88-7
14. FSU 76-95-6
15. OHIO STATE 72-95-9
16. PENN STATE 56-65-2

There's alot to read into these numbers. I guess it depends on what you're looking for. If anything jumps out in particular, leave a message in the comments section.

Rising to the Top - Part II

Yesterday I posted the top 20 schools as they rated in signing 4 & 5 star recruits since 2003, which would have made them 5th year seniors in 2007. Now I've thrown away the 2003 class and counted 2008 and the numbers look like this.
(1) USC 79
(2) FLORIDA 77
(3) FSU 75
(4) LSU 71
(5) OKLAHOMA 66
(6) GEORGIA 63
(7) TEXAS 62
(7) MIAMI 62
(9) MICHIGAN 59
(10) OHIO ST. 54
(10) ALABAMA 54
(12) TENNESSEE 52
(13) NOTRE DAME 49
(14) AUBURN 46
(15) CLEMSON 37
(16) S. CAROLINA 36
(17) PENN ST. 35
(17) CALIFORNIA 35
(19) NEBRASKA 34
(20) TEXAS A&M 33

As a point of reference, I'll include these teams that finished in the top 10 on the field; Missouri 14, WVA 7, Kansas 5.

I'll say it again, these are not the numbers on the actual rosters. Some have graduated, jumped to the NFL, and some never made it to school. UGA for example has 51 of the 63 players on it's 2008 roster. 11 of the missing players have used their eligibility and 1 never made it to campus. Maybe I'll track down the actual players on each team's roster in the future, cuz it's gonna be a boring summer.

There's several ways of breaking down the information on this list. Do you need a ton of highly rated recruits to compete? What does it mean when the super talented teams under perform? Why don't the top 10 on the list equal the top 10 in the rankings? I'm just going to look at one for right now - How many good players does a team need to compete at the highest level?

To get a handle on that question, let's look at the number of players that actually see the field in an important, hard-fought game....no blowouts......special teams don't count.....just offense and defense.....and make it a conference game, just to make sure that no holds are barred.

My three models from 2007 are UGA vs Florida, USC vs Oregon, and LSU vs Auburn.
UGA used 52 players
Florida 51
USC 53
Oregon 47
Auburn 49
LSU 48

45 looks like a good solid number to slug it out with the big boys. These don't have to be 4 or 5 star players (although that doesn't hurt), just solid D-1A players. Having more than that doesn't seem to matter, since only 50 or so are going to play. Having less.....you may be in trouble.

Tomorrow, I'll try to put out the list of UGA players that will likely have legitimate playing time in the close ones.

Does the Cream Rise to the Top?

A couple of weeks ago, SMQ posted this article showing that percentage wise, recruiting services have a pretty good eye for talent. It also shows that they can't pick out every diamond in the rough, but when they label a kid as a 5 star or 4 star recruit, that player will definitely have the measurables that would allow them to succeed on the collegiate level.

Early in the 2007 season, several message boards were started regarding talent levels at different schools. Out of curiosity, I went on rivals and started counting 4 and 5 star commits to most of the D-1A programs since 2003, which would have made them 5th year seniors. I didn't count the players that weren't on the 2007 roster, that's not really necessary for this comparison. It simply shows which schools are gathering the most talent. Anybody want to guess in the blind what the list looks like?.....

Here ya go, 5 & 4 star commits to these universities since 2003

1. LSU 76
1. USC 76
3, Florida 75
4. Florida St. 69
5. Oklahoma 67
6. Texas 62
7. Georgia 58
7. Miami 58
9. Tennessee 56
10. Michigan 55
11. Ohio St. 48
12. Auburn 47
13. Notre Dame 38
14. Alabama 36
15. Nebraska 35
15. Penn St. 35
15. South Carolina 35
18. California 34
19. Texas A&M 32
20. Oregon 29

And for quick reference, the final Coaches Poll top 10 with the number of 5 & 4 star commits:

1. LSU 76
2. USC 76
3. GEORGIA 58
4. OHIO ST 48
5. MISSOURI 15
6. WEST VIRGINIA 7
7. KANSAS 5
8. OKLAHOMA 67
9. VA TECH 23
10. TEXAS 62

Looks to me like Kansas, WVU, Missouri, and to some extent Va Tech are being "coached-up" pretty well. On the flip side, Miami and FSU are.....uhhhhh.....mmmm.......sucking? I'll have the numbers for the 2008 5th year senior class sorted out in the next couple of days.

Men of Troy

USC rules the college football world. At least that's the general consensus by 99% of the national media and coaches. Pete Carroll took over the reins of a program that didn't have a top 10 finish in over a decade and has turned them into a powerhouse.

Carroll has basically locked down the borders when recruiting in the talent rich state of California. He also has done quite well recruiting on a national level, picking up selected 5 & 4 star recruits at will. All-Americans and NFL 1st rounders are flying out of there by the dozens. Pre-season #1 rankings are a given. USC has it all. 6 straight national championships.........wait a second, according to this, they have ONE? How could that happen. They certainly have more talent than anyone on their schedule. The coaching staff is solid. The schedule itself isn't brutal.

Of course if you ask any USC fan, they'll tell you that they have 2 MNC's in that span. I've done the research.....USC is a member of the BCS. The BCS members have agreed to recognize the winner of the BCS Championship game as the MNC. USC has 1. I'm certainly not going to belittle the significance of winning one, just pointing out that the facts often are overshadowed by the general impression presented by the media.

The moral of the story.

UGA may enter the 2008 season as #1. They certainly have as much or more talent than anyone. The coaching staff is solid. The schedule IS brutal. Along with the usual SEC suspects, we pick up a pretty good ASU team at their house. I see comments all too often stating "UGA always seems to lose a game that they shouldn't". Fact is, you could insert any elite team into that statement. I like our chances this season, but finishing #1 is much more difficult than starting there. Just ask the Men of Troy.

Knockin at the Door

Chasing the crystal ball. There's a handful of teams that can realistically expect to have a shot at the trophy at the beginning of every college football season. It requires hard work, dedication, a negotiable schedule, a veteran team in most instances, a "fortunate" bounce (or two), and on occasion it just falls into the hands of our knowledgeable and unbiased cfb media personnel.

For the last 6 years, UGA has been hangin around the top 10 and doesn't have the hardware that they need to complete this team's resume. UGA has 5 top 10 finishes in the last 6 years. I thought that I'd check out other top programs to see how the Dawgs compare.

Everybody's got six shots, here's the list, crystal ball owners are highlighted.

6 - USC
5 - OHIO ST, GEORGIA
4 - LSU (2), TEXAS , OKLAHOMA
3 - IOWA, MICHIGAN, VIRGINIA TECH, WEST VIRGINIA
2 - AUBURN, LOUISVILLE, MIAMI, WASHINGTON ST
1 - FLORIDA, ALABAMA, BOISE ST, CALIFORNIA, FSU, KANSAS, KANSAS ST, MISSOURI, PENN ST, TCU, UTAH, WISCONSIN

Analysis
Just pencil USC in every list until further notice.
UGA is sticking out like a sore thumb at the top of the list.
Iowa has fallen like a rock.
Mike Price is a pretty good coach with an excellent eye for talent. (nsfw, maybe)
Florida got the most bang for their buck.
Nebraska, Tennessee, and Notre Dame, oh wherefore art thou?

How finicky is college football......the ten years prior to this list, Nebraska would have 8 appearances to USC's.......zero.

We've been knockin at the door for 6 years. As Bum Phillips would say "It's time to kick the damn thing in".

Just Because

I wanted to see how UGA stacked up in the win column this decade vs. the rest of the SEC. I wasn't shocked to see where we are on the list, but there were a few suprises overall.

WINS THIS DECADE

1. LSU 82
2. UGA 80
3. AUB 75
4. UF 74
5. UT 71
6. ARK 58
7. USC 54
8. UA 53
9. UM 42
10. MSU 33
11. UK 32
12. VAN 25

I guess Alabama being in 8th is the biggest shocker for me. Now we've just gotta bump LSU out of that top spot. GATA

As a footnote, here's how we stack up against the rest of the BCS

WINS THIS DECADE

1. OKLAHOMA 90
2. TEXAS 85
3. LSU 82
4. USC81
5. OHIO ST 81
6. GEORGIA 80
7. VA TECH 79
8. MIAMI 76
9. AUBURN 75
10. FLORIDA 74
11. LOUISVILLE 74
12. MICHIGAN 73
13. TENNESSEE 71
14. FSU 69
15. WISCONSIN 69
16. BOSTON COLLEGE 69
17. WEST VA 67
18. OREGON 66
19. NEBRASKA 65
20. CLEMSON 63

Recruiting 101.........or is it 151?

I'm still waiting for my offer


Ok, so I'm a month behind, but crap like this interests me, so you've gotta suffer through it too.

I was looking through some recruiting numbers and noticed that UGA offered 60 scholarships this year and signed 23. That made me a little curious to see how many scholly's were offered by other schools. Quite an eye-opening experience. Before long, I had poured through the top 25 recruiting classes as listed by Scout.com and found a very wide range from top to bottom.

The most shocking number was the 151 offers made by Florida while signing 23. Are you kiddin' me? Talk about putting out feelers. If a kid has a pulse, he has a UF scholly offer. I'm a little pissed that I didn't get one.

On the flip side, Texas offered only 33 while signing 20. UT definitely has a lock on the State of Texas.

This is not a list that ranks the recruiting classes. It simply shows how many scholarships that the schools offered this year. Also, there's a couple that are not top 25 classes (i.e. North Avenue Trade School & "the other USC"), I was just curious.

1. Florida............................151
2. Nebraska.......................145
3. LSU................................137
4. Tennessee......................125
5. South Carolina...............120
6. Alabama.........................119
7. Auburn...........................113
8. Michigan........................111
9. Oregon...........................110
10. Clemson.......................106
11. Arizona State................104
12. FSU..............................100
13. Miami............................95
13. Arkansas........................95
15. Illinois............................91
16. Georgia Tech.................88
16. Oklahoma......................88
18. Boston College.............. 84
19. Virginia Tech.................68
19. Washington....................68
19. Texas A&M.....................68
22. Georgia...........................60
23. UCLA..............................59
24. PITT...............................58
25. USC................................55
26. Notre Dame................... 53
26. Ohio State......................53
28. Texas..............................33

Looking at the numbers, it seems that there's alot of competition for recruits in the southeast (go figure), with the SEC taking 6 of the top 7 spots. However, it also shows that there is more than one successful recruiting philosophy.

The Florida approach - Throw out a huge net and see what we catch. I don't prefer that method because it seems like they aren't targeting specific needs. However, it seems to be successful for them.

The Texas approach - Identify your needs, interview the prospects, decide their level of interest, make the offer. This method requires an excellent eye for talent by the coaches, and again, has been successful.

The USC method - #### it, we're USC. Make the offer, they will come. Very successful.

The Notre Dame method - Magic. There's no other explanation for a recruit wanting to play there at this point in time.

The Auburn method - Lower your standards because Saban grabbed all of the top local talent. Preach to the media that recruiting services don't know what kind of heart your recruits have.

Different strokes for different folks. There's no 1 "right" way to recruit. The proof is 3-5 years down the road.