Ranking the top programs right now...

[MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan]

Since this is the 10th year of the BCS system, a friend and I got into a discussion of how to rank the best programs right now. The criteria we came up with is pretty obvious: how teams have performed in the BCS era (MNCs, title game appearances, BCS wins, BCS appearances). More consideration was given to teams with more recent success. Here's the rankings we came up with as of right now...


1. USC (2 MNCs, 4-1 record in BCS bowls)
2. OSU (1 MNC, 4-1)
3a. Oklahoma (1 MNC, 2-3)
3b. LSU (1 MNC, 3-0)
5a. Florida (1 MNC, 3-1)
5b. Texas (1 MNC, 2-0)
7a. Miami (1 MNC, 3-1)
7b. FSU (1 MNC, 1-5)
9. Tennessee (1 MNC, 1-1)
10a. Auburn (0 MNCs, 1-0)
10b. Michigan (0 MNCs, 1-3)

The top two teams seem pretty clear cut. Even if you don't consider USC's AP MNC a "true" MNC (kind of ironic, considering the "M" stands for "mythical" in the first place), I think that's still enough to put them ahead of OSU. They've both played in two BCSCGs and won one, and SC's was more recent.

OU vs. LSU is the first interesting debate. LSU's BCS record is much better than OU's, but OU has played in more BCSCGs than any team. You could also argue that LSU's MNC is slightly less prestigious, due to the USC controversy. Then again, if you're taking H2H records into account, LSU beat OU in their only BCS matchup.

Florida vs. Texas is also tough to call. Florida has played in twice as many BCS games as Texas, but only one in the past 5 years. If Texas makes it to and wins a BCS bowl this year, that might be enough to move them up.

Miami vs. FSU. What have you done for me lately? Miami has a better BCS record, but FSU has the most BCS appearances of any team. Then again, they've only won one. Both teams are in danger of dropping, especially if a team like WVU, Kansas, or Mizzou cracks this list after this season.

Tennessee seems to be the clear choice for #9. They're the only other team with an MNC and they won it the longest ago.

Auburn vs. Michigan. Are Michigan's 4 BCS appearances a better indicator of consistent success, or should Auburn's undefeated non-MNC season be enough to rank them ahead of the Wolverines?

So what do you guys think? Does this ranking look pretty accurate? OSU and LSU both have the chance to jump up to #1 after this season is over. Some other shuffling could go on, depending on how this season's BCS games shake out.

[The Seer]

You forgot to factor in the soon to be forfeited "championships" of SuC....

It's Florida's world.

[GreginPG]

There was no split national championship in 2003. LSU won the national championship, period. Yes, USC was ranked #1 by the AP, but that is not a national championship, at least not since the BCS era started. USC had a great season that year, but LSU won the championship.

Also, LSU should be ranked ahead of Oklahoma. In addition to beating them heads up, LSU has a better record in BCS games.

Holy shit.

[campinfool]

Plus we all know USC would have gone 7-5 playing in the SEC.

[GreginPG]

True. That SEC is a meat grinder.

[BlindRef]

Since this is the 10th year of the BCS system, a friend and I got into a discussion of how to rank the best programs right now. The criteria we came up with is pretty obvious: how teams have performed in the BCS era (MNCs, title game appearances, BCS wins, BCS appearances). More consideration was given to teams with more recent success. Here's the rankings we came up with as of right now...


1. USC (2 MNCs, 4-1 record in BCS bowls)
2. OSU (1 MNC, 4-1)
3a. Oklahoma (1 MNC, 2-3)
3b. LSU (1 MNC, 4-1)
5a. Florida (1 MNC, 3-1)
5b. Texas (1 MNC, 2-0)
7a. Miami (1 MNC, 3-1)
7b. FSU (1 MNC, 1-5)
9. Tennessee (1 MNC, 1-1)
10a. Auburn (0 MNCs, 1-0)
10b. Michigan (0 MNCs, 1-3)

The top two teams seem pretty clear cut. Even if you don't consider USC's AP MNC a "true" MNC (kind of ironic, considering the "M" stands for "mythical" in the first place), I think that's still enough to put them ahead of OSU. They've both played in two BCSCGs and won one, and SC's was more recent.

OU vs. LSU is the first interesting debate. LSU's BCS record is much better than OU's, but OU has played in more BCSCGs than any team. You could also argue that LSU's MNC is slightly less prestigious, due to the USC controversy. Then again, if you're taking H2H records into account, LSU beat OU in their only BCS matchup.

Florida vs. Texas is also tough to call. Florida has played in twice as many BCS games as Texas, but only one in the past 5 years. If Texas makes it to and wins a BCS bowl this year, that might be enough to move them up.

Miami vs. FSU. What have you done for me lately? Miami has a better BCS record, but FSU has the most BCS appearances of any team. Then again, they've only won one. Both teams are in danger of dropping, especially if a team like WVU, Kansas, or Mizzou cracks this list after this season.

Tennessee seems to be the clear choice for #9. They're the only other team with an MNC and they won it the longest ago.

Auburn vs. Michigan. Are Michigan's 4 BCS appearances a better indicator of consistent success, or should Auburn's undefeated non-MNC season be enough to rank them ahead of the Wolverines?

So what do you guys think? Does this ranking look pretty accurate? OSU and LSU both have the chance to jump up to #1 after this season is over. Some other shuffling could go on, depending on how this season's BCS games shake out.

I don't think Texas is that much higher than Michigan. The programs are very similar in their level of success. Albeit Texas' championship has come sooner they are very much alike in my opinion.

[peter dragon]

I guess OU would probably have a better record in BCS games if we'd have had the foresight to get one located in Oklahoma City.

RACK!

[peter dragon]

fuck that. If we add a 5th BCS game.. lets put it in Toledo, Ohio.

Call it the Clinger, (sp) Bowl!

then maby OSU wouldnt have to ever leave the state to play its games.

then we could call the B10 a meat grinder

[WolverineSteve]

^^ I see you working. (BTW I believe it's Klinger)

How about the SUV Bowl at Ford Field. January 7th pitting a midwestern school vs. an SEC or Pac10 opponent*. I'd love to see UF, LSU, Bama (because they're back), UGA etc. come on up to Motown in January. Or the Surfers from SoCal, the fellas from the desert.

*Not including Oregon, who has proven to this poster at least to be more than capable of coming accross the land and winning.

[Nolesy]

The SEC minus Vandy and Ole Miss.

[M Club]

you mean in climate-controlled ford field?

[WolverineSteve]

Yes.

The travel here is the issue.

If you want it in the BigHouse in January you go right ahead. I think that the location is more the issue than the climate, see the KatrinaDome.

[M Club]

travel's one issue. i'd just like to see a team that doesn't bother to order long-sleeved undershirts for its players have a game in flurries, or its fans watch a game where they need more than bourbon to keep from hypothermia.

[SoCalTrjn]

^^ I see you working. (BTW I believe it's Klinger)

How about the SUV Bowl at Ford Field. January 7th pitting a midwestern school vs. an SEC or Pac10 opponent*. I'd love to see UF, LSU, Bama (because they're back), UGA etc. come on up to Motown in January. Or the Surfers from SoCal, the fellas from the desert.

*Not including Oregon, who has proven to this poster at least to be more than capable of coming accross the land and winning.

USC hasnt traveled?
2007 49-31 @ Nebraska, 38-0 @ Notre Dame
2006 50-14 @ Arkansas
2005 63-17 @ Hawaii, 34-31 @ Notre Dame
2004 24-13 vs Va Tech in Maryland
2003 23-0 @ Auburn, 45-14 @ Notre Dame
2002 40-3 @ Colorado

all of those games are more than 1,000 miles from campus, many are over 2,000 miles, USC is also 2-0 in BCS Bowls greater than 2500 miles away

[SoCalTrjn]

travel's one issue. i'd just like to see a team that doesn't bother to order long-sleeved undershirts for its players have a game in flurries, or its fans watch a game where they need more than bourbon to keep from hypothermia.

I agree, Auburn hosetd Washington State last August when the Cougars would be at the greatest weather disadvantage to the Tigers due to the local heat and humidity. I think Auburn should have had a return trip to Pullman in late November

[Dinsdale]

I agree, Auburn hosetd Washington State last August when the Cougars would be at the greatest weather disadvantage to the Tigers due to the local heat and humidity.

While I'll agree that the humidity could be an issue for Wazzu...

But the heat?

It's hot as fuck in Eastern WA in August. Matter of fact, it's pretty hot in a lot of places in August.

[SoCalTrjn]

dry heat is no big deal, you can go outside in dry heat, look at Havasu when its 120, when its hot and humid, you dont want to do shit but sit in front of the AC

[WolverineSteve]

Atually it's more like playing a bowl game virtually at home (actually at home for ucla in the RB). LSU in the Superdome filling it with 80% vs a team from another region. SC or Ucla in Pasadena, Miami in the Orange Bowl (UF or FSU for that matter). Warm weather schools have always had the regional edge. When the fans of one team have only to go across town for a day trip there's a definate advantage. When other teams fans have to fork out for 4-7 day trips across the country, there is a healthy disadvantage.

[SoCalTrjn]

USC has out scored Iowa and Oklahoma 93-36 in the Orange bowl that is 2700 miles away from home

Every Rose Bowl I have been to has had as many fans of the other team in the stadium as there were USC fans in there.
Are fans of teams in the Mid Eastern part of the country really that upset of taking a vacation in the dead of winter to Southern California.... seems that millions come here every year without the bowl games

[WolverineSteve]

Good for you. Neither example shows one team having a virtual home game, but thanks for playing.

[SoCalTrjn]

then just play in Michigan based bowl games

[WolverineSteve]

^^ dude let it go. It started as tongue in cheek sarcasm, let it go.

[Mikey]

If you changed MNC to INC (imaginary) then I'm pretty sure Cal would have to have the top spot.

[MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan]

Since this is the 10th year of the BCS system, a friend and I got into a discussion of how to rank the best programs right now. The criteria we came up with is pretty obvious: how teams have performed in the BCS era (MNCs, title game appearances, BCS wins, BCS appearances). More consideration was given to teams with more recent success. Here's the rankings we came up with as of right now...


1. USC (2 MNCs, 4-1 record in BCS bowls)
2. OSU (1 MNC, 4-1)
3a. Oklahoma (1 MNC, 2-3)
3b. LSU (1 MNC, 4-1)
5a. Florida (1 MNC, 3-1)
5b. Texas (1 MNC, 2-0)
7a. Miami (1 MNC, 3-1)
7b. FSU (1 MNC, 1-5)
9. Tennessee (1 MNC, 1-1)
10a. Auburn (0 MNCs, 1-0)
10b. Michigan (0 MNCs, 1-3)

The top two teams seem pretty clear cut. Even if you don't consider USC's AP MNC a "true" MNC (kind of ironic, considering the "M" stands for "mythical" in the first place), I think that's still enough to put them ahead of OSU. They've both played in two BCSCGs and won one, and SC's was more recent.

OU vs. LSU is the first interesting debate. LSU's BCS record is much better than OU's, but OU has played in more BCSCGs than any team. You could also argue that LSU's MNC is slightly less prestigious, due to the USC controversy. Then again, if you're taking H2H records into account, LSU beat OU in their only BCS matchup.

Florida vs. Texas is also tough to call. Florida has played in twice as many BCS games as Texas, but only one in the past 5 years. If Texas makes it to and wins a BCS bowl this year, that might be enough to move them up.

Miami vs. FSU. What have you done for me lately? Miami has a better BCS record, but FSU has the most BCS appearances of any team. Then again, they've only won one. Both teams are in danger of dropping, especially if a team like WVU, Kansas, or Mizzou cracks this list after this season.

Tennessee seems to be the clear choice for #9. They're the only other team with an MNC and they won it the longest ago.

Auburn vs. Michigan. Are Michigan's 4 BCS appearances a better indicator of consistent success, or should Auburn's undefeated non-MNC season be enough to rank them ahead of the Wolverines?

So what do you guys think? Does this ranking look pretty accurate? OSU and LSU both have the chance to jump up to #1 after this season is over. Some other shuffling could go on, depending on how this season's BCS games shake out.

Just wanted to revisit this, since the BCS bowls are set.

It looks like the winner of the BCS CG will move into the top spot with USC a solid #2. The BCS CG loser should be at #3 with Oklahoma at #4, regardless of whether they win or lose.

None of the other teams on the list made it to BCS bowls this season, but having won an MNC in the last 10 years is enough to keep #5-#9 unchanged. However, with wins, Georgia, Va. Tech and WVU could all make a case for the #10 spot.

[GreginPG]

Since this is the 10th year of the BCS system, a friend and I got into a discussion of how to rank the best programs right now. The criteria we came up with is pretty obvious: how teams have performed in the BCS era (MNCs, title game appearances, BCS wins, BCS appearances). More consideration was given to teams with more recent success. Here's the rankings we came up with as of right now...


1. USC (2 MNCs, 4-1 record in BCS bowls)

This ranking is based upon the BCS years, yet you have USC with 2 championships. For BCS purposes, USC has one.

Let's also take a look at this list after the bowl season.

Holy shit.

[Adelpiero]

the next BCS bowl will be the Cotton

When it moves to the Jerry Jones dome, i believe he has a deal with Cotton and CFB that it becomes the next BCS bowl

[Mr T]

Holy shit.

It is a BCS era discussion.

After this year, I got to put FSU last on the list and dropping fast.

[SoCalTrjn]

LSU won the computer ranking championship. USC was #1 in both the AP and Coaches Poll until the coaches were contractually obligated to vote for LSU (if its contractually obligated, is it still a poll?)
The computers put LSU in that game, programmers with an agenda able to pass off their biases by saying the computer did it.

USC was number 1 in both polls, LSU won the Mickey Mouse Computer title

[SoCalTrjn]

what other teams were #1 in both Polls on Jan 1st, won their bowl game convincingly and then had to listen to a bunch of coonasses say that they're the real champs because the "puters" said so?

[SoCalTrjn]

LSU won the BCS title and USC won the AP.

[GreginPG]

I understand that LSU fan is pissed that there was a split national championship that year. I really do.
As long as the AP is still around the possibility will always exist, BCS or not. The only way it goes away
(I think) is with a playoff and that's just not gonna happen any time soon.

[Killian]

And I understand that USC is upset that they didn't win the national championship, so much so that they now choose to ignore the rules that were established before the season began.

When playing a poker game, and USC fan doesn't like how the game turns out, does USC fan change the rules so that a straight beats a full house?

In your analogy, the people who run the Poker game are the ones that changed the rules so that a straight beats a full house. In 2003, USC had the full house and LSU was the one holding the straight.

[MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan]

Since this is the 10th year of the BCS system, a friend and I got into a discussion of how to rank the best programs right now. The criteria we came up with is pretty obvious: how teams have performed in the BCS era (MNCs, title game appearances, BCS wins, BCS appearances). More consideration was given to teams with more recent success. Here's the rankings we came up with as of right now...


1. USC (2 MNCs, 4-1 record in BCS bowls)

This ranking is based upon the BCS years, yet you have USC with 2 championships. For BCS purposes, USC has one.

Let's also take a look at this list after the bowl season.

I know you're just stirring up shit, but I clearly listed all the NCs as MNCs, not BCS NCs. The AP NC is no more or less mythical than the BCS NC. Assuming both win, even if you want to argue that the BCS NC carries more weight, I think you could still make a case for USC as "mythical team of the decade" based on their BCS record. I had LSU's BCS record wrong on the original list; they're actually 3-0. If Ohio St. wins, they're a clear #1. But if USC and LSU both win, I think a 5-1 record in six consecutive BCS games and two MNCs (one BCS, one AP) could be considered "better" than a 4-0 record with two MNC (both awarded by the BCS). What was LSU doing in those couple years when USC was winning 11 games and the Rose Bowl? I seem to recall a loss to Iowa in the Outback or some other middle-tier bowl...

[MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan]

And I understand that USC is upset that they didn't win the national championship, so much so that they now choose to ignore the rules that were established before the season began.

When playing a poker game, and USC fan doesn't like how the game turns out, does USC fan change the rules so that a straight beats a full house?

Any chance you could link to these "rules" that all teams agreed to that somehow completely invalidate the AP poll despite its having provided an MNC for the past 40some years? Your instant dismissal of a decades-long football establishment just reeks of homerism. Are all the AP All-Americans who played at LSU over the past 30 or 40 years not "real" All-Americans?

[Sky]

Ohio State has a glass football from the NCAA sanctioned BCS. If OSU had two glass footballs, they would have won two NC. But since they only have one, they must have only one won NC. How many glass footballs does USC have? Or is this more of that three-peat shit we had to listen to before superman showed up?

The big 6 agreed to the BCS so we could/would have a NC game. To say that that some other ranking holds weight because some poll populated by sports writers when each of our conference commissioners agreed to the BCS is hogwash. And don't we routinely bash the AP on this board. Don't we cite the fallacy of the polls quite often.

This sounds a lot like TRIXIEs blather regarding "LSU is a better team because they beat a lot of ranked teams. However, OSU is not really #1 even though the same voters that ranked LSU's opponents ranked tOSU #1." Yeah, that makes sense.

[T REX]

I see you trying to work here but OSU is number more by default then anything else. Do you disagree?

If so, it will be worked out for you....right there on the field.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

I see you trying to work here but OSU is number more by default then anything else.

This is a horseshit argument. Their ranking is justified in accordance with the criteria used by the BCS system. If you disagree with the criteria used to establish the rankings, well that's an entirely different discussion. They aren't #1 by "default" any more or less than LSU, or OU, or Georgia, or USC would be if they were #1.

[Mr T]

but I clearly listed all the NCs as MNCs, not BCS NCs. The AP NC is no more or less mythical than the BCS NC.

Then Auburn gets one for 2004....if all MNCs count.

[Sky]

Then Auburn gets one for 2004....if all MNCs count.

Yup

[MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan]

but I clearly listed all the NCs as MNCs, not BCS NCs. The AP NC is no more or less mythical than the BCS NC.

Then Auburn gets one for 2004....if all MNCs count.

Maybe in their own minds, but I don't remember them ending the season at the top of any poll that year, let alone the two that carry the most weight.

Look, I know we bash the AP poll in here, and I'm sure there's some regional bias involved in the voting. And I know we all hate giving USC their due. But to claim that the formation of the BCS makes the AP poll irrelevant or obsolete is fucking ridiculous. The AP was never officially affiliated with the BCS, they just let them use their poll for a few years until it became evident what a huge fraud the BCS was/is. The AP has been crowning national champions for more than 40 years and nobody in the college football world had a problem with acknowledging that champion. Most of the time their choice is in agreement with the coaches' poll/BCS, but occasionally it isn't. That doesn't mean it's not a national championship.

And seriously, if we're going to compare polls, I'd still put a lot more faith in a poll created by sportswriters whose job it is to watch football every Saturday than a poll of college coaches who maybe, maybe watch one other game on a given Saturday besides their own. Not to mention, the coaches' poll has just as much regional bias as the AP poll. Didn't Schnellenberger rank USC 23rd in his final poll? Fucking 23rd??? Yeah, that's a poll I'd put a lot of credence in...