Helmet Team Ranking Exercise

[847badgerfan]

Re=post from other board.
Here is my list of Helmets (prestigious teams, modified from Mandel's King list) I believe it is changeable, but it takes a decade of dominance with national titles, or a decade of irrelevancy for change to happen.

1) Alabama SEC
2) Ohio State B1G
3) Texas B12
4) USC P12
5) Oklahoma B12
6) Florida State ACC
7) Michigan B1G
8 ) Florida SEC
9) LSU SEC
10)Penn State B1G
11) Notre Dame Ind

SEC - 3
B1G - 3
B12 - 2
ACC - 1
P12 - 1
Ind - 1

My "On The Cusp" group:
12) Nebraska
13) Clemson
14) Tennessee
15) Oregon
16) Miami

So, what?

[TyphonInc]

Well 1st off, the decade drawn line is not a hard line; it's more of a fuzzy math. And IMHO once your on the helmet list "double digit win" seasons is needed to be consider to perform at helmet level (10 win seasons doesn't get you on the list, but will keep you there.)

Keeping them high on my list even with current non-helmet performances:
Texas - 2 great seasons and a natty in the last decade, if Hermon bombs out they slid on my list.
USC - 4 Rose Bowl Wins in the last decade.

Sliding down on my Prestige list:
7-10 - Helmets in my book, but not performing as well as the teams above them. Meat-chicken under Harbaugh is right there, but not winning against OSU, repeat 3rd place Big Ten East finishes, and losing their only "Big" bowl, says they have not returned to the mountain top.

Notre Dame - Haven't performed at helmet since Lou Holtz circa '93. Personally I think their 2012 season was lucky and getting crushed by Alabama confirmed that for me.

Slipped off my Helmet list:
Nebraska - Solich had a couple great years ... last millennium.
Tennessee - Fulmer won them a natty ... last millennium.
Miami - Amazing 20 year run ... in the Big East, haven't been a contender for 15 years of ACC.

[847badgerfan]

USC and Texas and Michigan just don't carry the same cache to me as they did 10 years ago.

I think USC has the right coach now, but we'll see. Things can change in a hurry out there, as we've seen.

Michigan seems to have the right coach, but can he sustain without burning out himself, his coaches and his players?

I'm not sold on Hermann just yet. He did good things at Houston for sure, but he was also had a foundation built for him when he got there. Sumlin did a good job there too, as did Briles before him. The other guy before Hermann.. not so much. He was not a good coach.

[TyphonInc]

*ich - I think OSU's accession has paralleled skunk-weasel's demise. 
When one side is dominating the rivalry it's hard to apply helmet status to the other.

USC - won the Rose last year, and the early pick to make the playoff this year. That's recent on field success and a helmet ranking for the next year. They had some lean years but they are solid. Also no one in the Pac 12 south has stepped up to displace USC.

Texas - I'll acknowledge I'm giving them  more grace than you are; I want to see how the next 3 years play out before I lower their prestige status.

[847badgerfan]

Your reasoning is more an indication of conference strength than helmet status.

USC is going to be all alone in the South for a while I think. The AZ schools are a mess, and UCLA achieves less with more, than probably any school I can think of over the years. I don't know what the long term looks like for Colorado and Utah.

I think Washington is going to be a beast for a while. Great coach and great school, like Stanford, but better access to talent.

As for the XII.. I don't know what to think anymore. The Oklahoma schools seem to be the pick for the top this season. Baylor is burning at the stake... Texas really needs to make hay this season in my opinion.

[847badgerfan]

Time to move it over here.

So, will Michigan be Minnesota in 37 years?

Minnesota is celebrating 50 years without a conference title.

Michigan is celebrating 13.


Have at it.

[MrNubbz]

Gophs getting ready to spring the trap

[OrangeAfroMan]

Last call on the big, sexy trio....

[Kris61]

Are we doing this here now?

[847badgerfan]

Are we doing this here now?

Why not? The old thread reached its maximum posts and the old place is closing on 7/26 according to CBS.

[Cincydawg]

ND

OSU

OU

I think that is still open.

[medinabuckeye1]

Well 1st off, the decade drawn line is not a hard line; it's more of a fuzzy math. And IMHO once your on the helmet list "double digit win" seasons is needed to be consider to perform at helmet level (10 win seasons doesn't get you on the list, but will keep you there.)

I made this point on the old thread in a discussion with dude.  I think it is why the list appears fairly static.  I worded it somewhat differently:  To maintain helmet status a team needs only to PLAY in big nationally relevant games.  To attain helmet status a team needs to WIN big nationally relevant games. 

Example, Michigan:
In the past 11 years Michigan has played two huge, nationally relevant games with Ohio State (2006&2016) and lost both.  Insofar as Michigan's helmet status is concerned I'm not sure that the fact that they lost both games really matters.  They were already a helmet and getting into games like that affirmed their helmet status.  Now, if Ohio State's opponent in those games had been a school like Indiana then the result would have been enormously important to Indiana.  Indiana isn't a helmet and they can't become a helmet by PLAYING in huge, nationally relevant games.  Indiana could only become a helmet by WINNING huge, nationally relevant games. 

Last 11 Ohio State/Michigan games:

• 2016:  #2 Ohio State v #3 Michigan (tOSU won)
  2015:  #8 Ohio State v #10 Michigan (tOSU won)
  2014:  #6 Ohio State v n/r Michigan (tOSU won)
  2013:  #3 Ohio State v n/r Michigan (tOSU won)
  2012:  n/r (ineligible) Ohio State v #19 Michigan (tOSU won)
  2011:  n/r Ohio State v #15 Michigan (Michigan won)
  2010:  #8 Ohio State v n/r Michigan (tOSU won, subsequently vacated)
  2009:  #10 Ohio State v n/r Michigan (tOSU won)
  2008:  #10 Ohio State v n/r Michigan (tOSU won)
  2007:  #7 Ohio State v n/r Michigan (tOSU won)
  2006:  #1 Ohio State v #2 Michigan (tOSU won)
  

There were three top-10 match-ups in the last 11 years but the 2015 game wasn't really nationally relevant because neither team had a realistic chance at the NC.  The winner (either way) needed Penn State to upset Michigan State to even get to the B1GCG.  The 2016 and 2006 games, however, were huge games.  They were nationally relevant because both teams had a realistic chance at the NC. 

[medinabuckeye1]

Time to move it over here.

So, will Michigan be Minnesota in 37 years?

Minnesota is celebrating 50 years without a conference title.

Michigan is celebrating 13.


Have at it.

The comparison is even better than that.  Minnesota's last conference title (1967) was a co-championship just like Michigan's (2004).  Additionally, both teams won their last NC seven seasons prior to their last conference title (1960 for Minnesota, 1997 for Michigan) and both of those are also claimed by other schools. 

I do not think that Michigan WILL be celebrating the 50th anniversary of their last conference title and the 57th anniversary of their last NC in 2054 but I strongly feel that if they ARE, they will be a non-helmet just like Minnesota is now. 

[847badgerfan]

Yeah, I don't see it happening either. M puts too many resources into the program to let it fall apart.

But I don't think they will ever go on a clip like they used to be, winning conference titles almost every year. The conference is much better/deeper than it was back in those days.

Ohio State is on another level and likely will be for some time.