Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Put a period after .com and before the slash, and you'll get in.

https://theathletic.com./3361576/2022/06/14/alabama-georgia-emperors-kings-barons/

Can one use this manuever on all the open sesamees?

I'd say there are like 15 teams, with 3 a cut above the rest....

The triumvirate:
Bama
OSU
Georgia

those 3 run shit right now, basically land whoever they want in recruiting, have sustained high level success for the past decade and a half.

If you look at 247's team talent composite
247's team talent composite you find this.  

Here are the top-15:

• 1,015 Bama
• 978 UGA
• 975 tOSU
• 926 aTm
• 918 Clemson
• 913 Texas
• 899 LSU
• 896 USC
• 885 Oklahoma
• 875 Oregon
• 871 Notre Dame
• 860 Miami
• 858 Penn State
• 850 Michigan
• 845 Florida

I said in another thread that talent creates a ceiling but not a floor.  Florida has enough talent that they should EASILY be a top-25 team but they looked like a G5 also-ran in their opener.  It happens.  

The talent composite confirms your ranking.  Note that while Ohio State is third they are closer (40 points) to #1 Bama than they are to #4 aTm (49 points).  And note that the gap between tOSU and aTm is bigger (49 points) than the gap between #4 aTm and #9 Oklahoma (41 points).  

Here is what I think this all means.  As I see it, the Tide, Bulldogs, and Buckeyes are realistic threats to win the NC in ANY given year.  A lot of us thought preseason that Bama had issues at QB.  A lot of people think based on tOSU's performance in their opener that the Buckeyes have issues at Oline and QB.  Those things could be true but there is enough talent in Tuscaloosa and Columbus that those questions could plausibly be worked out and Alabama or Ohio State could win the NC this year.  I'm not saying that they will, or even that they'll be contenders.  Maybe those are serious issues for one or both of them, I'm just saying that it is plausible for either of them to contend or win the NC this year.  

For the next group, IMHO they have enough talent to potentially win an NC in what I would call a "peak year".  2023 appears to be a "peak year" for Michigan.  They could plausibly win the NC this year but then after this year they'll lose a ton of experience and they are NOT, IMHO, a plausible or realistic threat to win the NC in 2024 because next year is NOT a peak year for them.  The same can be said for the entire group from #4 aTm down through #15 UF and possibly a little beyond.  

Then there are teams like the next few B1G teams on the list, #21 UNL, #27 MSU, and #30 UW.  These teams have enough talent to potentially knock off any team above them and potentially even to win their league if everything breaks right for them but they aren't going to win back-to-back CFP games.  

If you look at 247's team talent composite
247's team talent composite you find this. 

Here are the top-15:

• 1,015 Bama
• 978 UGA
• 975 tOSU
• 926 aTm
• 918 Clemson
• 913 Texas
• 899 LSU
• 896 USC
• 885 Oklahoma
• 875 Oregon
• 871 Notre Dame
• 860 Miami
• 858 Penn State
• 850 Michigan
• 845 Florida

I said in another thread that talent creates a ceiling but not a floor.  Florida has enough talent that they should EASILY be a top-25 team but they looked like a G5 also-ran in their opener.  It happens. 

The talent composite confirms your ranking.  Note that while Ohio State is third they are closer (40 points) to #1 Bama than they are to #4 aTm (49 points).  And note that the gap between tOSU and aTm is bigger (49 points) than the gap between #4 aTm and #9 Oklahoma (41 points). 

Here is what I think this all means.  As I see it, the Tide, Bulldogs, and Buckeyes are realistic threats to win the NC in ANY given year.  A lot of us thought preseason that Bama had issues at QB.  A lot of people think based on tOSU's performance in their opener that the Buckeyes have issues at Oline and QB.  Those things could be true but there is enough talent in Tuscaloosa and Columbus that those questions could plausibly be worked out and Alabama or Ohio State could win the NC this year.  I'm not saying that they will, or even that they'll be contenders.  Maybe those are serious issues for one or both of them, I'm just saying that it is plausible for either of them to contend or win the NC this year. 

For the next group, IMHO they have enough talent to potentially win an NC in what I would call a "peak year".  2023 appears to be a "peak year" for Michigan.  They could plausibly win the NC this year but then after this year they'll lose a ton of experience and they are NOT, IMHO, a plausible or realistic threat to win the NC in 2024 because next year is NOT a peak year for them.  The same can be said for the entire group from #4 aTm down through #15 UF and possibly a little beyond. 

Then there are teams like the next few B1G teams on the list, #21 UNL, #27 MSU, and #30 UW.  These teams have enough talent to potentially knock off any team above them and potentially even to win their league if everything breaks right for them but they aren't going to win back-to-back CFP games. 

Yeah, I like that list because if "the right guy" comes in as HC, they don't have to wait around to recruit "their guys," they can win a NC with the guys already on campus.
I don't think helmetosity matters unless that's the case. 
As long as you have a high-enough % of hombres on the roster to beat 10 opponents on talent and the great HC to navigate past another 1-2, you're a legit program.

I think everytime this comes up most people--including on this site--try to take far too logical approach to it. How dominant is x-program. In my mind that's not what a helmet program really is. A helmet program is one that gets a huge amount of respect, publicity, and attention not because of how dominant it is right now, but because of...wait for it...the HELMET they wear. Now, this is impacted by the program's dominance, but it's more its historical and cultural dominance, than it is the actual wins and losses.

So Alabama is a helmet school because (1) it has an easily recogonizable helmet, the basics of which will not change because that crimson helmet with a single white stripe and the nubers is a brand identity that Alabama fans would lose their minds over if someone suggested changing it; and (2) Alabama built that brand identity through decades of impressive football results. That's really what this is about: brand identity as expressed through helmets.

Other helmet teams: Notre Dame (sure, they change the shade of gold, but the helmet retains its brand identity, regardless of the shade); Ohio State--grey, red, and buckeye stickers; Michigan (stolen from Princeton or something?), Oklahoma, Univ. of Southern California, Penn State. These are teams that have recognizable brand identity, based on their helmet design (notwithstanding tweaks they may make), and an association with historic wins.

Others: Nebraska. Notwithstanding the last decade, people still recognize that plain N on a white background with a red stripe, and they think: college football royalty. On hard times? Sure, but still part of the brand. Texas. People just want to believe Texas is great. Florida State and Miami. I think because they were so strong as TV rights and CFB were coming of age. Actual helmets with brand identity that is associated with college football dominance, even if it isn't especially current. 

I think those are the true helmets. Do others deserve to be discussed? Probably.

In the conversation: LSU, Tennessee, Florida, aTm (even the way I write that suggets the strong helmet brand identity), UCLA, Washington. Lingering around: Oregon, Wisconsin, Auburn, maybe Tennessee (surely it included Tennessee a while ago, but that brand has waned a little)...

I'm sure there are others, but that's my hot take.

I'm sure there are others, but that's my hot take.

Good take.

lol to me it’s a team consistently over rated

A helmet team will get ranked early at say 8 when a TCU would be 20th with the same team

Absolutely. The lingering halo effect of branding, is one of the main identifiers of a helmet team.

Related to that, and @SFBadger96 's post touches on this is something @ELA said years ago in one of these discussions which is that "Helmet" teams can quickly recover from a period of sucking.

Texas has generally sucked for a while but a big reason that I consider them a helmet is that if they get the right coach (they might already have him), they are back.

Michigan generally sucked for the better part of two decades from 1951-1968, hired Bo in 1969, and played a RB for the NC in 1971.

Alabama went through a lot of irrelevance between Stallings and Saban and look at them now.

And even the wrong coach can do some damage.  Anyone care to guess who was the last non-SEC team to beat the mighty Georgia Bulldogs?