CFB51 College Football Fan Community

The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: OrangeAfroMan on July 26, 2018, 08:38:17 PM

Title: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on July 26, 2018, 08:38:17 PM
20 years, 21 champs (03 split), ranked by ESPN.  At least they used statistics instead of talking heads.  Here's their ranking.  Discuss.

1.  '05 Texas
2.  '08 Florida
3.  '01 Miami
4.  '13 FSU
5.  '04 USC
6.  '11 Alabama
7.  '12 Alabama
8.  '15 Alabama
9.  '09 Alabama
10.'99 FSU
11.'17 Alabama
12.'16 Clemson
13.'00 Oklahoma
14.'14 Ohio St
15.'10 Auburn
16.'03 USC
17.'03 LSU
18.'98 Tennessee
19.'07 LSU
20.'06 Florida
21.'02 Ohio St

Some notes, to help distinguish between the Alabama teams:
09 - First Bama title since '92, Mark Ingram Heisman year
11 - Defense was #1 in all 4 major categories - rematch winner over LSU
12 - Lost to JFF, blew out ND in NCG.  Lacy/Yeldon at RB.
15 - Derrick Henry 2000+ yds, beat Clemson in NCG.
17 - last year, duh
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on July 26, 2018, 08:46:11 PM
Personal thoughts:
'02 Ohio St will look bad using stats, we all know that.  But they stood toe-to-toe with the '02 Canes, who may have been better than '01.


'11 Bama's pass D might've been the best of all time.


'99 FSU's defense wasn't great, but they blew out Vicks' VT team - who was #1 in both scoring O and scoring D that season.


To those who blindly say "'01 Miami was the best" - again, this is COLLEGE ONLY.  NFL draft and career does not matter.


'14 OSU is probably too low.  Their defense wasn't great, but what they did on the field in the playoff was legit.


Both '03 teams might be too low.  LSU's D was special and USC's run D was nuts.  USC would have been better if they gave Bush more than 90 carries and/or let him handle punt returns that season.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: Brutus Buckeye on July 26, 2018, 08:46:58 PM
(https://www.cfb51.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftse2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.l9NtKmWbEq4nknTF5IHgwgHaE8&hash=21a44842a8adbc8c05c1964d23ec878e)
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: MaximumSam on July 26, 2018, 08:47:01 PM
I thought that Texas team was really good, though that was peak read option time and they had peak read option QB Vince Young.  Defenses are more prepared now.

Think last year's Bammer team was their weakest in a while and much too high on this list.  I'd probably put them last.

Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on July 26, 2018, 09:07:14 PM
I agree they weren't great compared to the other Bama squads, but I wouldn't put them last (don't forget, there's a 2-loss team in there).  I think they simply played 'boring' football on purpose, to mitigate errors and let their talent/depth win out.

2017 Bama was a lot like Lennox Lewis when he was the champ.  Not a lot of exciting rounds, but no one able to beat him, either.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: Brutus Buckeye on July 26, 2018, 09:51:48 PM
I love that the 2002 OSU team is last. That team came out of nowhere, and defied all odds. 

2014 is the one that is truly getting the shaft. That team was unbelievable, the way they stormed through the post season with a third string QB that no one had ever heard of. 

With Jones at the helm they stormed back against Ttun, smoked Wisconsin, put a pretty good whopping on Bama, and then subjected Oregon to a rather mean feather plucking. 
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: ELA on July 26, 2018, 10:30:32 PM
'04 USC seems too low.  I would have liked to see '01 Miami I a year with a valid contender.  Tough to say how good they were in a year with no strong #2.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on July 26, 2018, 11:08:01 PM
I'd have 07 LSU, 98 Tennessee, 99 FSU, and '00 OU lower.  Looking at the Bama's, Max, I think you're right, they'd be nearer the bottom of the list for me, too.  

06 Florida I look at sort of like 14 OSU....maybe not as sexy a regular season as you'd want, but peaked in the postseason (1 game for UF, 3 for OSU).  Those Gators also had a bunch of close calls like 02 OSU.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on July 26, 2018, 11:11:13 PM
I always wonder if 2005 USC was too impressed with itself in the game vs Texas and Vince Young.  They were being gouged by VY's scrambling all game long.  He didn't have any TD passes in the game.  The Trojans thought they were good enough to win just doing what they'd done all year, and they weren't.  They didn't put in some DEs to replace DTs.  If a LB spy would be too slow, then have a safety commit to him, etc.  They just kept playing normal defense and giving up huge swaths of yards to Young.  It was odd.  

A team on a long win streak gets built up too much.  They're not necessarily better at win #30 in a row than they were at win #17, ya know?
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: ELA on July 26, 2018, 11:41:43 PM
I think I'd pick 2012 as the best Bama team
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: bayareabadger on July 27, 2018, 12:40:36 AM

Quote from: Brutus Buckeye on July 26, 2018, 09:51:48 PM
I love that the 2002 OSU team is last. That team came out of nowhere, and defied all odds.

2014 is the one that is truly getting the shaft. That team was unbelievable, the way they stormed through the post season with a third string QB that no one had ever heard of.

With Jones at the helm they stormed back against Ttun, smoked Wisconsin, put a pretty good whopping on Bama, and then subjected Oregon to a rather mean feather plucking.
It's interesting, that run was truly unreal. That team up to that point might be only pretty good. 
They beat two teams with fewer than five losses, MSU and Cincinnati, and lost to a 6-6 team. Murdering a slightly overrated Wisconsin team helped, but they also needed the gods to help with the Big 12 mess. 
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on July 27, 2018, 05:29:34 AM
Quote from: ELA on July 26, 2018, 11:41:43 PM
I think I'd pick 2012 as the best Bama team
McCarron definiely picked it up from '11 to '12.  '12 definitely has more 'star power', but with most everything else being equal, the pass D of '11 sets it apart, imo.

And the 21-0 NCG win over LSU was 'better' than the drubbing over ND, in that LSU was far better than the Irish and the utter dominance...I don't think LSU crossed the 50 yard line until halfway through the 4th quarter.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: ELA on July 27, 2018, 07:44:19 AM
Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on July 27, 2018, 05:29:34 AM
McCarron definiely picked it up from '11 to '12.  '12 definitely has more 'star power', but with most everything else being equal, the pass D of '11 sets it apart, imo.

And the 21-0 NCG win over LSU was 'better' than the drubbing over ND, in that LSU was far better than the Irish and the utter dominance...I don't think LSU crossed the 50 yard line until halfway through the 4th quarter.
Yeah, it wasn't based on that game alone.  I agree the '11 defense was a half step ahead of the '12 defense, but I think the '12 offense was a full step ahead.  Splitting hairs though, because, why not.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: ELA on July 27, 2018, 07:55:59 AM
Just for another point of comparison because I know his data goes back that far, and gives a rating that can be compared year to year, Sagarin's ranking.  I also put in parenthesis where that team finished in his rankings that year if they weren't #1

1. '05 Texas - 106.93
2. '01 Miami - 106.36
3. '16 Clemson - 105.35
4. '11 Alabama - 104.17
5. '04 USC - 103.37
6. '99 Florida State - 102.07
7. '13 Florida State - 101.90
8. '00 Oklahoma - 101.63
9. '17 Alabama - 101.18
10. '15 Alabama - 100.92
11. '14 Ohio State - 100.81
12. '09 Alabama - 100.25
13. '12 Alabama - 99.40
14. '08 Florida - 98.74
15. '98 Tennessee - 98.49 (#2)
16. '10 Auburn - 98.06
17. '03 LSU - 97.43
18. '06 Florida - 96.18
19. '03 USC - 95.54 (#2)
20. '07 LSU - 93.39
21. '02 Ohio State - 93.26 (#3)
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: rolltidefan on July 27, 2018, 10:03:24 AM
Quote from: ELA on July 27, 2018, 07:44:19 AM
Yeah, it wasn't based on that game alone.  I agree the '11 defense was a half step ahead of the '12 defense, but I think the '12 offense was a full step ahead.  Splitting hairs though, because, why not.
11 and 12 are close.
i go back and forth on them, but right now i'm leaning 12 is slightly better than 11.
11 offense was slightly less productive, but mainly because coaches were letting mccarron ease into his role.
12 d was slightly less suffocating, but only allowed more than 2 tds 3 times: @ lsu (17) who finished top 15, aTm (29) the week following lsu and finished top 5, and uga (21) in sec title game and finished top 5.
11 had 1 score more than 2 tds, ga southern (21) using wishbone. but they also didn't face any offenses as good as aTm and uga were the following year.
as for overall list, i'd drop 08 us 3-5 spots, drop 13 fsu about 10-12 spots, raise clemson 3-4, raise 02 osu 5-6 spots, raise 10 au 3-4, and drop bama 17 a few spots.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: utee94 on July 27, 2018, 10:57:42 AM
i'd definitely put the 2002 Buckeyes higher up the list.  A 2-loss champion is going to have to be last place for me.

Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on July 28, 2018, 12:23:26 AM
I like what Sagarin does or tries to do, but having seen them and what happened with them, I can't swallow any list that has '98 Tennessee anywhere far from the bottom.  

Good running game, QB that avoided screw-ups, and a decent defense, sure.  But the game @ Syracuse should've been a loss, the game vs Arkansas was literally handed to them, and they faced FSU with its backup QB.  None of those would show up in a statistical analysis, but are definitely part of the context of the team season.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: FearlessF on July 28, 2018, 03:56:19 PM
agreed on 98 Vols

probably not any better than 97 Vols
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: ohio1317 on July 28, 2018, 04:14:18 PM
A loy of this depends on what you are ranking.  I think this is seasons as a whole (which is the approach I prefer), but lists looks very different depending on whether looking how team was at end of the year vs.  how they were throughout.  14 OSU for instance not all thay great for much of the season but progressed and then hit another level for last 3 games.  Ranking just how they were at end would put them much higher to me than simply taking a kind of season average (but championships are earned over a year and not a game).
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: TyphonInc on July 29, 2018, 12:06:52 AM
'02 OSU versus '02 Miami Championship game: I recall there was a report before the '06 title game with ESPN saying something along the lines of, "people claiming that OSU was a weak champion should know, there were more players drafted to the NFL who played in that game than any other championship game. And perhaps it was really was an epic battle between to Titans and not the a David vs Goliath upset.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on July 29, 2018, 02:12:00 AM
The difficulty is taking regular seasons like 2002 Ohio State and 2012 Notre Dame, and determining which is actually the fraud and which could or does measure up to their record.  Everyone and their mother knew ND was going to get spanked by Bama that year - and at least 4-5 other teams would've been favored over the undefeated Irish.  But while OSU had some verrrrry unimpressive wins, 13-0 in the Big Ten is a major feat.  

I'm not saying 02 OSU should've been picked to beat Miami by anyone, either, but there has to be something different between the 02 Buckeyes and the 12 Irish we can learn from, no?
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: ELA on July 29, 2018, 12:01:13 PM
Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on July 28, 2018, 12:23:26 AM
I like what Sagarin does or tries to do, but having seen them and what happened with them, I can't swallow any list that has '98 Tennessee anywhere far from the bottom.  

Good running game, QB that avoided screw-ups, and a decent defense, sure.  But the game @ Syracuse should've been a loss, the game vs Arkansas was literally handed to them, and they faced FSU with its backup QB.  None of those would show up in a statistical analysis, but are definitely part of the context of the team season.
In fairness, he only has one rating listed for his older stuff, and I think it's his MOV removed, BCS rating
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: TyphonInc on July 29, 2018, 04:50:36 PM
Quote from: TyphonInc on July 29, 2018, 12:06:52 AM
'02 OSU versus '02 Miami Championship game: I recall there was a report before the '06 title game with ESPN saying something along the lines of, "people claiming that OSU was a weak champion should know, there were more players drafted to the NFL who played in that game than any other championship game. And perhaps it was really was an epic battle between to Titans and not the a David vs Goliath upset.
I'm having trouble finding the proper numbers to use for comparison purposes. 
my best guesstimate is to just take the 3 drafts after the game.
Miami '02-'04 had 29 people drafted.
OSU '02-'04 had 28 drafted.
That's a pretty impressive 3 year span for each school. 
That stat I can no longer find was was concerning players who actually played in the championship game. So some of those drafted players may have been on the bench, or a super freshman may have played the game, but didn't declare until their 4th year. And again we are now talking about 12 year old fuzzy memory, but I thought the total was 49 players got drafted who played in that game, and just grabbing the 3 drafts adds up 57 so not quite right.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: Brutus Buckeye on July 29, 2018, 05:01:17 PM
Weird how both OSU NCs were hybrid rosters recruited by two different coaches. 

Both were chock full of upperclassmen recruited by a previous administration that had been criticized for the slipping of their recruiting in their later years; sprinkled with some stud underclassmen that were recruited by the new coaching staff. 

Neither coach was able to win another NC, once they had an entire roster of their own creation. 
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: bayareabadger on July 29, 2018, 05:44:09 PM
Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on July 28, 2018, 12:23:26 AM
I like what Sagarin does or tries to do, but having seen them and what happened with them, I can't swallow any list that has '98 Tennessee anywhere far from the bottom.  

Good running game, QB that avoided screw-ups, and a decent defense, sure.  But the game @ Syracuse should've been a loss, the game vs Arkansas was literally handed to them, and they faced FSU with its backup QB.  None of those would show up in a statistical analysis, but are definitely part of the context of the team season.
I mean, only some of that would show up in numbers, unfortunately. 
I do find it interesting because a national title team is as much a narrative and story as it is a statistical season. A Tennessee fan will see the other parts, and I imagine you could give a similar hole-poking treatment to many of the teams ranked behind them. 
Bill Connolly did a sort of hybrid of his rankings working off points per game. This is how everyone shook out (I think it's in points above average though he also uses percentiles, and after 2005 is a slightly different formula).
2005 Texas 29.3 (No. 2)
2012 Bama 28.5 
2015 Bama 27.8
2011 Bama 27.5 (No. 2)
2001 Miami 27 (Maybe a hint worse than the year before)
2016 Clemson 26.9 (No. 2, behind a tremendous Bama team)
2014 OSU 26.2
2013 FSU 25.6 
2008 Florida 25.0
1999 FSU 24.6
2004 USC 24.4
2009 Bama 24.0 (No. 2)
2010 Auburn 23.9 (No. 2)
2003 LSU 23.4
2000 Oklahoma 22.9 (No. 3)
2003 USC 22.6 (No. 2)
2007 LSU 22.6 (No. 2)
2006 Florida 22.1
2017 Bama 20 (No. 2)
1998 Tennessee +18.3 No.4 nationally (two-ish points worse that 1997 Vols)
2002 Ohio State 17.6 (No.6)
I think the one that irks the most folks is 2001 Miami, which gets hurt by a Big East schedule and a few non-conference opponents faltering. It's interesting to see that another metric also like Texas that high. 
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on July 29, 2018, 07:57:33 PM
The Miami argument is more talent than 'traditional' scores/stats measures.  For me, when ranking 'best' college teams of all time, I have no idea what draft picks has to do with it.  I don't care what potential an NFL GM sees in a college player.

Take a first round pick like Ed Reed.  When discussing the '01 Canes, what Reed did on the field made him a great member of the team, not the fact that he was a first round pick.  

Did the 2001 Cornhuskers stink because they had a 3rd round WR under center?  Of course not.  They had the Heisman trophy winner at QB.....THAT'S what matters.



So back to Miami.  They had a great pass D.  Only allowed a 45% completion %, only 140 yards per game, and picked off 2.5 passes per game!  That's great.  But why in the hell did they allow 135 yards rushing per game?!?  And if you assume it's teams running out the clock because the Canes are way ahead, why did Miami give up 3.1 yards per carry?  That's merely good for a given season, but comparing it with other national champions, it's not very good.  



If superstar NFL Miami was that great, they'd have shut down the run along with the pass.  They were ballhawks and led the country in turnovers, but they could've been better against the run.  The 2002 Canes were even softer vs the run.  They were just as stingy vs the pass, but their problem was where did the turnovers go???  Less than half as many caused by the defense.  


The talent level didn't really fall off from 01 to 02, because the incoming talent was as good as the outgoing talent.  But they win the ring in 2001 and not in 2002.  Both squads led by the same QB who the NFL largely ignored.  But because one of their players had 9 ints one year and that position didn't have 9 ints the next year, we're to cite the NFL draft picks of the champs and remain silent about the other that didn't win.  
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: bayareabadger on July 29, 2018, 09:44:11 PM
Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on July 29, 2018, 07:57:33 PM
The Miami argument is more talent than 'traditional' scores/stats measures.  For me, when ranking 'best' college teams of all time, I have no idea what draft picks has to do with it.  I don't care what potential an NFL GM sees in a college player.

....

So back to Miami.  They had a great pass D.  Only allowed a 45% completion %, only 140 yards per game, and picked off 2.5 passes per game!  That's great.  But why in the hell did they allow 135 yards rushing per game?!?  And if you assume it's teams running out the clock because the Canes are way ahead, why did Miami give up 3.1 yards per carry?  That's merely good for a given season, but comparing it with other national champions, it's not very good.  
To the first part, they did average winning by 32.9 points a game, with only two opponents coming within 22 points (a Va. Tech team that pushed them and BC for some reason). The did legitimately kick the hell out of most everyone. 
The last part sent me down a weird rabbit hole because on the one hand, the per carry number is probably around the 33rd percentile of national title teams. What's very weird about it is opponents ran against them 42.5 times a game. That was 85th that year, despite the fact they were just trampling most teams.
Now those stats are often noisy with sacks counted in and draw plays in the fourth quarter of blowouts. From watching the competitive parts of the FSU game, their tackling seemed to come and go, and draws/QB scrambles proved to be problematic. Still, some of these numbers are odd.
FSU ran 48 times in a 49-27 loss. 140 came in the first half when Miami went up 21-0 and FSU made it 21-13, but then Miami went up 35-13. 
VT ran a logical 39 times (to 16 passes) in a close loss
Pitt ran 42 times in a 43-21 loss, when they were down a lot much of the game
WVU ran 55 times to 21 passes in a 45-3 loss. 
Syracuse ran 46 times to 20 passes in a 59-0 loss
Washington ran 45 times to 36 passes in a 65-7 loss
Temple and Troy each had 40 carries and lost 38-0 and 38-7
My gut is that's more a statistical quirk than anything. It's interesting. They were blowing folks away, and yet only were thrown on 38.3 percent of the time. 
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: FearlessF on July 29, 2018, 10:58:54 PM
in Pasadena the Huskers ran on the canes 49 times for 197 yards

after the canes 27 point 2nd quarter and a 34 point deficit at the half, the Huskers knew the game was over and simply wanted to run clock and get the game over

perhaps that was part of the equation for other teams that season?
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on July 30, 2018, 01:32:21 AM
When your WRs are blanketed and Ed Reed is picking off everything in the middle, you tend not to put the ball in the air a lot.

Miami was only tied for 17th in the country in yards per rush allowed.  That's not elite.  VT, in a close game, threw as many completions as INTs.  Buchanan, Reed, and Rumph were all first rounders, and a backup CB, Rolle, was too.  




One thing I've learned, by studying all the good teams from the past 40 years for the game I made, is that it's VERY difficult to be super-elite at both run and pass D.  Not one team allowed 2 or fewer yards per rush AND 4.5 yards per pass.  
I think generically, most defenses try to key on the run to make teams one-dimensional.  I guess 01 Miami went the other way on that.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: medinabuckeye1 on July 30, 2018, 09:20:17 AM
Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on July 26, 2018, 11:08:01 PM
06 Florida I look at sort of like 14 OSU....maybe not as sexy a regular season as you'd want, but peaked in the postseason (1 game for UF, 3 for OSU).  Those Gators also had a bunch of close calls like 02 OSU.
One thing about this is that in the CFP era we will have a much better idea of whether a team improved and peaked in the postseason or not.  
What I mean is that 2014 Ohio State played three postseason games and all three were incredible performances:

Most playoff champions will finish with three consecutive impressive wins.  Florida in 06 is harder to read.  The 41-14 win over previously undefeated Ohio State is obviously impressive but it is only one game.  That makes it hard to know whether it was a case of Florida improving or of Ohio State regressing or simply a random fluke.  

FWIW:  I think it was a matter of Florida eliminating their mistakes.  From what I saw of Florida in 2006 prior to the Ohio State game they would look like an unstoppable powerhouse for a while then make some boneheaded mistake and give away what they had accomplished over the previous 10 minutes.  Before the BCSNCG I was concerned that if they limited their mistakes they would be a powerhouse.  
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on July 30, 2018, 10:48:08 AM
Well one unique aspect for Florida is that every successful season ends with 3 "tough" games, FSU-SECCG-bowl, so there's that.  

UF had never (since '92) won all 3 in that stretch until 2006.  Then again in 2008.  You could say the same of FSU, Ohio St, Michigan, etc.......for OSU to beat Michigan, B10CG, Semifinal-final is nuts....but they did it.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: FearlessF on July 30, 2018, 10:59:04 AM
similar scenario for OU/NU in the Big 8 and then in the Big 12 with Colorado, Big 12 champ, and BCS bowl

ya gotta earn it
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: medinabuckeye1 on July 30, 2018, 10:59:47 AM
Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on July 30, 2018, 10:48:08 AM
Well one unique aspect for Florida is that every successful season ends with 3 "tough" games, FSU-SECCG-bowl, so there's that.  

UF had never (since '92) won all 3 in that stretch until 2006.  Then again in 2008.  You could say the same of FSU, Ohio St, Michigan, etc.......for OSU to beat Michigan, B10CG, Semifinal-final is nuts....but they did it.
Both Florida (06) and Ohio State (14) had a little bit of help in that regard.  Michigan went 5-7 in 2014 and FSU went 7-6 in 2006.  
I think that Florida's situation is a lot less unique now than it used to be.  Back when only the SEC then only the SEC and B12 had CG's Florida was fairly rare in ending championship level seasons with:

In the current era that isn't all that unusual.  A lot of teams finish with a tough rival and then, if they are having a great season, head to a CG followed by CFP semi-final, CFP Championship.  
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: ELA on July 30, 2018, 11:20:45 AM
Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on July 30, 2018, 10:59:47 AM
Both Florida (06) and Ohio State (14) had a little bit of help in that regard.  Michigan went 5-7 in 2014 and FSU went 7-6 in 2006.  
I think that Florida's situation is a lot less unique now than it used to be.  Back when only the SEC then only the SEC and B12 had CG's Florida was fairly rare in ending championship level seasons with:
  • Tough rivalry game against a typically very good opponent
  • CCG against a typically very good opponent
  • Bowl against a typically very good opponent.  

In the current era that isn't all that unusual.  A lot of teams finish with a tough rival and then, if they are having a great season, head to a CG followed by CFP semi-final, CFP Championship.  
Yeah, I was thinking in compiling those ratings that I'm guessing the more recent champions are going to universally be higher because they will always finish with a pair of top 5 victories, and most likely three top 10 (at worst) victories to close...unless you are Alabama.
For comparison, the 1990 Georgia Tech title team closed with three unranked teams (two of which had losing records) then beat #19 Nebraska in the Citrus Bowl to claim their title.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: FearlessF on July 30, 2018, 11:29:47 AM
shudder to think of the BYU title team's brutal end of the season run
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: 847badgerfan on July 30, 2018, 11:39:07 AM
Quote from: FearlessF on July 30, 2018, 11:29:47 AM
shudder to think of the BYU title team's brutal end of the season run
This is why you never want to include G5 teams in a list with P5 teams.
9/1@Pittsburgh (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Pittsburgh.htm#1984) (3-7-1)W2014
9/8vs.Baylor (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Baylor.htm#1984) (5-6)W4713
9/15vs.Tulsa (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Tulsa.htm#1984) (6-5)W3815
9/22@*Hawaii (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Hawaii.htm#1984) (7-4)W1813
10/6@*Colorado State (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/ColoradoState.htm#1984) (3-8)W529
10/13vs.*Wyoming (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Wyoming.htm#1984) (6-6)W4138
10/20@*Air Force (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/AirForce.htm#1984) (8-4)W3025
10/25@*New Mexico (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/NewMexico.htm#1984) (4-8)W480
11/3vs.*Texas-El Paso (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Texas-ElPaso.htm#1984) (2-9)W429
11/10vs.*San Diego State (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/SanDiegoState.htm#1984) (4-7-1)W343
11/17@*Utah (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Utah.htm#1984) (6-5-1)W2414
11/24vs.Utah State (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/UtahState.htm#1984) (1-10)W3813
12/21vs.Michigan (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Michigan.htm#1984) (6-6)W2417
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: rolltidefan on July 30, 2018, 11:46:02 AM
Quote from: TyphonInc on July 29, 2018, 04:50:36 PM
I'm having trouble finding the proper numbers to use for comparison purposes.
my best guesstimate is to just take the 3 drafts after the game.
Miami '02-'04 had 29 people drafted.
OSU '02-'04 had 28 drafted.
That's a pretty impressive 3 year span for each school.
That stat I can no longer find was was concerning players who actually played in the championship game. So some of those drafted players may have been on the bench, or a super freshman may have played the game, but didn't declare until their 4th year. And again we are now talking about 12 year old fuzzy memory, but I thought the total was 49 players got drafted who played in that game, and just grabbing the 3 drafts adds up 57 so not quite right.
i remember people saying similar about bama/lsu game in '11.
couple of different articles (link (https://www.al.com/alabamafootball/index.ssf/2015/05/alabama_lsu_2011_draft_picks.html) , link2 (http://www.espn.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/83193/back-to-the-future-alabama-vs-lsu)) say osu/miami had more draft picks from the roster (52 total vs 48) but one mentions that some of those players didn't play in the game.
link 2 above says bama/lsu had 42 actually play in the game (28 on defense). that article compares them to the 00 miami/fsu game (41 total, 16 d), and mentions osu/miami, but does give total played in game for some reason.
this final link3 (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/nfl-draftees-from-2011-alabama-lsu-second-only-to-ohio-state-miami/) says bama/lsu had 45 play in game, with 52 from osu/miami.

my guess, it's
#1 - 52 for osu/miami 2002
#2 - 45-48 bama/lsu 2011
#3 - 41 fsu/miami 2000
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: rolltidefan on July 30, 2018, 11:49:57 AM
Quote from: ELA on July 30, 2018, 11:20:45 AM
Yeah, I was thinking in compiling those ratings that I'm guessing the more recent champions are going to universally be higher because they will always finish with a pair of top 5 victories, and most likely three top 10 (at worst) victories to close...unless you are Alabama.
For comparison, the 1990 Georgia Tech title team closed with three unranked teams (two of which had losing records) then beat #19 Nebraska in the Citrus Bowl to claim their title.
they didn't win it, but osu had the same opportunity. this isn't exclusive to bama or sec.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: FearlessF on July 30, 2018, 11:51:52 AM
Quote from: 847badgerfan on July 30, 2018, 11:39:07 AM
This is why you never want to include G5 teams in a list with P5 teams.












9/1@Pittsburgh (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Pittsburgh.htm#1984) (3-7-1)W2014
9/8vs.Baylor (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Baylor.htm#1984) (5-6)W4713
9/15vs.Tulsa (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Tulsa.htm#1984) (6-5)W3815
9/22@*Hawaii (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Hawaii.htm#1984) (7-4)W1813
10/6@*Colorado State (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/ColoradoState.htm#1984) (3-8)W529
10/13vs.*Wyoming (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Wyoming.htm#1984) (6-6)W4138
10/20@*Air Force (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/AirForce.htm#1984) (8-4)W3025
10/25@*New Mexico (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/NewMexico.htm#1984) (4-8)W480
11/3vs.*Texas-El Paso (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Texas-ElPaso.htm#1984) (2-9)W429
11/10vs.*San Diego State (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/SanDiegoState.htm#1984) (4-7-1)W343
11/17@*Utah (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Utah.htm#1984) (6-5-1)W2414
11/24vs.Utah State (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/UtahState.htm#1984) (1-10)W3813
12/21vs.Michigan (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Michigan.htm#1984) (6-6)W2417

I knew it was a weak schedule, but didn't remember that they didn't play one team that finished ranked
1984 was weird.
Then you have a little runt like Doug Flutie winning the hypesman
Huskers had only themselves to blame - huge upset early to Syracuse and then the home loss to #6 Sooners while ranked #1
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: medinabuckeye1 on July 30, 2018, 11:55:49 AM
Quote from: rolltidefan on July 30, 2018, 11:46:02 AM
my guess, it's
#1 - 52 for osu/miami 2002
#2 - 45-48 bama/lsu 2011
#3 - 41 fsu/miami 2000
Most people understand that those early 2000's Miami teams were loaded but think of Ohio State's 2002 team as a bunch of nobodies.  They are wrong.  
I think the main reason that this is such an enduring misconception is that neither fanbase really has a motivation to correct it.  Generally:
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: medinabuckeye1 on July 30, 2018, 12:19:07 PM
BYU's 1984 title is a joke.  They beat the worst team of Bo's tenure in their bowl by a TD.  If that was good for a NC in 1984 then all of the following teams should also have gotten one:

How and why BYU won the NC in 1984:
BYU took over the top spot with the 11/20/84 poll.  Here are the other ranked teams with less than two losses at that point and what happened to them:
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: ELA on July 30, 2018, 12:27:24 PM
Quote from: rolltidefan on July 30, 2018, 11:49:57 AM
they didn't win it, but osu had the same opportunity. this isn't exclusive to bama or sec.
Huh?  I simply meant Alabama didn't close that way last year with 3 big wins (CCG, Semi, NCG).  They lost their finale, then didn't even play in their CCG.  That's the second time in 7ish years they won a national title without playing in their CCG.  So I was just pointing out that it isn't universally the case.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: ELA on July 30, 2018, 12:30:03 PM
Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on July 30, 2018, 11:55:49 AM
Most people understand that those early 2000's Miami teams were loaded but think of Ohio State's 2002 team as a bunch of nobodies.  They are wrong.  
I think the main reason that this is such an enduring misconception is that neither fanbase really has a motivation to correct it.  Generally:
  • Miami fans (and tOSU haters) think/argue that '02 Miami was loaded with stars and was robbed of a title by the Refs.  
  • Ohio State fans (and Miami haters) think/argue that '02 Ohio State just had a magical season and was the "David" to Miami's "Goliath".

I think it's also that Miami was bludgeoning teams all year, while OSU had a lot of nailbiters, some against some not great teams.  Plus expectations are formed in the preseason, and Miami was coming off a national title, while OSU was coming off an Outback Bowl.  Looking back, we now know all of the OSU names, but we didn't at the time.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: bayareabadger on July 30, 2018, 12:51:53 PM
Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on July 30, 2018, 11:55:49 AM
Most people understand that those early 2000's Miami teams were loaded but think of Ohio State's 2002 team as a bunch of nobodies.  They are wrong.  
I think the main reason that this is such an enduring misconception is that neither fanbase really has a motivation to correct it.  Generally:
  • Miami fans (and tOSU haters) think/argue that '02 Miami was loaded with stars and was robbed of a title by the Refs.  
  • Ohio State fans (and Miami haters) think/argue that '02 Ohio State just had a magical season and was the "David" to Miami's "Goliath".

I thought that team had some names. I recall Doss, Jenkins and Wilhelm having college level hype coming in, maybe a few other defenders. Clarett and Gamble quickly became things. 
But considering all that talent, OSU didn’t make it easy. 
Down to start the fourth vs mediocre UW with a backup WB, needing a 88-yard drive to take the lead and then letting UW get inside the 30.
Slipping past PSU 13-7 after trailing the first half.
Needed a 4th and 1 conversion with 1:36 left to edge Purdue.
Needed OT to beat Illinois 
Needed a rather impressive late drive to edge Michigan, and had a chance to lose in the final seconds. 

OSU might’ve had all that talent, but it spent the second half of the season not playing like it. 
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: fezzador on July 30, 2018, 01:02:03 PM
Both OSU and Miami were lucky they didn't play USC in January that season.  They lost a couple of early games IIRC but were a machine by November.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: ELA on July 30, 2018, 01:13:35 PM
Quote from: fezzador on July 30, 2018, 01:02:03 PM
Both OSU and Miami were lucky they didn't play USC in January that season.  They lost a couple of early games IIRC but were a machine by November.
When we went over how the four team CFP would have retroactively changed things, that was the example most quickly pointed to.  I think USC would have won the thing, and possibly convincingly.  I still think Michigan would have given FSU a better game in '99 than VT did.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: rolltidefan on July 30, 2018, 02:21:40 PM
Quote from: ELA on July 30, 2018, 12:27:24 PM
Huh?  I simply meant Alabama didn't close that way last year with 3 big wins (CCG, Semi, NCG).  They lost their finale, then didn't even play in their CCG.  That's the second time in 7ish years they won a national title without playing in their CCG.  So I was just pointing out that it isn't universally the case.
you said in the previous post that the new champs would have (paraphrasing) 3 top 10 wins to close season (ccg + 2 cfp games)... except bama, hinting at bama not having to play in ccg to get into playoffs.
i was simply pointing out that bama isn't the only one to get that benefit in cfp, nor were they in the bcs. nor were they the first for either (neb missing the bigxii title game in 01 and playing for bcs, and the aforementioned osu in cfp)
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: ELA on July 30, 2018, 02:39:03 PM
Yeah, we were just discussing a comparative ranking of national champs.  I said I thought all of the more recent ones, and going forward were naturally going to be higher because they all faced that 3 game gauntlet starting with the CCG, except for Alabama.  Unless I'm forgetting someone, nobody in the BCS/CFP era except Alabama has won a national championship while not playing in their own CCG, right?  So they would be the lone exception in these rankings.  The Nebraska and OSU teams you brought up didn't win a national title, so they wouldn't be in these rankings, so I'm not sure how that's relevant?
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: rolltidefan on July 30, 2018, 02:58:37 PM
yeah, as we've both pointed out, neither won the titles in the years they got in without playing in ccg. i read it as meaning future winners would need to beat 3 top 10 teams to end season... except bama. just pointing out bama wasn't only one to get that opportunity. if i misread, my apologies.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: medinabuckeye1 on July 30, 2018, 03:08:25 PM
Quote from: ELA on July 30, 2018, 01:13:35 PM
When we went over how the four team CFP would have retroactively changed things, that was the example most quickly pointed to.  I think USC would have won the thing, and possibly convincingly.  I still think Michigan would have given FSU a better game in '99 than VT did.
I'm not completely convinced that USC would have gotten into a four-team playoff.  The pre-bowl AP poll was as follows:
I think we can all agree that the first three teams in the playoff would have been Miami, Ohio State, and Georgia.  After that it gets really messy.  OU and WSU both had championships to hold over USC while KSU and WSU both had H2H wins.  Iowa, like USC was a co-Champ but the Hawkeyes had a better record.  I don't think Texas or Penn State would have had a good case but the argument among the other five teams (IA, USC, KSU, WSU, OU) for that last playoff spot would have been epic.  

That said, if they had managed to get into the playoff they would have had a very good chance.  That was Pete Carroll's first great USC team.  The year before the Trojans had gone 6-6 with a bowl loss to Utah in Pete Carroll's first year.  

USC started pretty slow in 2002:
None of the above results are terribly impressive, then they hit their stride:
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on July 30, 2018, 08:27:48 PM
In '84, they should've had Washington play Florida in the Bluebonnet Bowl for the NC.  Pell was gone, UF was undefeated with Hall at the helm (0-1-1 to 9-1-1).  

Gotta love the wisdom of the NCAA penalizing the school and not the offending coach.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on July 30, 2018, 08:29:07 PM
Quote from: ELA on July 30, 2018, 01:13:35 PM
When we went over how the four team CFP would have retroactively changed things, that was the example most quickly pointed to.  I think USC would have won the thing, and possibly convincingly.  I still think Michigan would have given FSU a better game in '99 than VT did.
Oregon, Florida, or Tennessee would've given Miami a tougher game in '01.
A half-dozen teams would've given Bama a better game than ND in '12.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: ELA on July 31, 2018, 12:08:56 AM
You could never count on getting their A game, but I think Tennessee's A game in 2001 was about the only shot to beat the Canes.

What a down year across the map for college football.  Does make for a lot of fun though.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on July 31, 2018, 12:22:39 AM
Florida had the caveat of being 10-0 with its starting RB and 0-2 without him.  He played in the bowl game.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: MarqHusker on July 31, 2018, 12:55:21 AM
Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on July 30, 2018, 12:19:07 PM
BYU's 1984 title is a joke.  They beat the worst team of Bo's tenure in their bowl by a TD.  If that was good for a NC in 1984 then all of the following teams should also have gotten one:
  • Iowa - beat Michigan by 26
  • Ohio State - beat Michigan by 15
  • Michigan State - beat Michigan by 12
  • Washington - beat Michigan by 9

How and why BYU won the NC in 1984:
  • Their season opener against Pittsburgh happened when Pitt was ranked #3.  The Panthers were coming off of a solid 8-3-1 season and expected to be contenders.  Therefore, BYU's upset (at the time) win over them propelled BYU from unranked all the way up to #7.  In retrospect, Pitt was a horrible team that finished 3-7-1.  
  • #1 just kept losing.  
  • preseason #1 Auburn lost the kickoff classic to Miami.  
  • Miami moved to #1 then promptly lost to Michigan.  
  • Nebraska moved to #1 then lost to Syracuse.  
  • Texas moved to #1 then tied Oklahoma.  
  • Washington moved to #1 then lost to USC.  
  • Nebraska moved back to #1 then lost to Oklahoma.  
BYU took over the top spot with the 11/20/84 poll.  Here are the other ranked teams with less than two losses at that point and what happened to them:
  • #2 Oklahoma 8-1-1:  Beat OkSU, lost to Washington, finished 9-2-1 and #6
  • #3 Oklahoma State 9-1:  Lost to OU, beat USCe, finished 10-2 and #7.  
  • #4 Florida 8-1-1:  Beat FSU, finished 9-1-1 and #3.  
  • #5 Washington 10-1:  Beat Oklahoma, finished 11-1 and #2.  
  • #6 Texas 7-1-1:  Lost to Baylor, Lost to aTm, lost to Iowa, finished 7-4-1 and unranked.  
  • #9 USCe 9-1:  Beat Clemson, Lost to OkSU, finished 10-2 and #11.  

This post (either exact, or substantially similar) by either me, you or others has probably appeared on this CFB board, and the old board no fewer than six times.  We've solved the '84 season.
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: Brutus Buckeye on July 31, 2018, 07:30:28 AM
Title looks legit to me. Nobody else wanted it. The other contenders kept losing.

As far as the stretch run, they won two throw out the records rivalry games, and beat Michigan. 
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: medinabuckeye1 on July 31, 2018, 08:07:36 AM
Quote from: ELA on July 30, 2018, 12:30:03 PM
I think it's also that Miami was bludgeoning teams all year, while OSU had a lot of nailbiters, some against some not great teams.  Plus expectations are formed in the preseason, and Miami was coming off a national title, while OSU was coming off an Outback Bowl.  Looking back, we now know all of the OSU names, but we didn't at the time.
I think part of that, and a big reason for Ohio State's win, was that the Big11Ten was extremely good that year.  

The Big11Ten went 5-2 in bowls and the Buckeyes played three of the other four bowl winners along with one bowl loser.  On the schedule Ohio State missed a very good Iowa team but they also missed a pretty bad Michigan State team so it balances out.  Additionally, Ohio State had two solid Major Conference OOC wins:
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: bayareabadger on August 05, 2018, 11:01:39 PM
Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on July 30, 2018, 01:32:21 AM
When your WRs are blanketed and Ed Reed is picking off everything in the middle, you tend not to put the ball in the air a lot.

Miami was only tied for 17th in the country in yards per rush allowed.  That's not elite.  VT, in a close game, threw as many completions as INTs.  Buchanan, Reed, and Rumph were all first rounders, and a backup CB, Rolle, was too.  




One thing I've learned, by studying all the good teams from the past 40 years for the game I made, is that it's VERY difficult to be super-elite at both run and pass D.  Not one team allowed 2 or fewer yards per rush AND 4.5 yards per pass.  
I think generically, most defenses try to key on the run to make teams one-dimensional.  I guess 01 Miami went the other way on that.
So I was wondering, does this matter? Or are many good teams different in many ways? So I was thinking, lets see what each title team had on D (Stats are pre-bowl until the NCAA change because gawd the NCAA is awful).
Tennessee
2.7 YPC (T-7th with a mess of teams) 6.18 YPA (14th) Points 14.4 (9th)
FSU
YPC 2.8 (T-12) 6.29 YPA (T-22nd) Points 15.8 (10th)
Oklahoma
3.2 (28th) 5.16 (2nd) Yards per play 4.1 (7th) Points 16.0 (7th)
Miami
3.1 (22nd) 5.24 (4th) Yards per play 3.9 (3rd) Points 9.8 (1st)
OSU
2.6 (7th) 6.23 (33rd) 4.7 (28th) Points 13.1 (2nd)
LSU
2.3 (3rd) 5.43 (4th) 4.1 (1st) 11.1 (1st)
USC
1.8 (1st) 6.33 (28th) 4.4 (15th) 18.4 (18th)
USC again
2.6 (3rd) 5.69 (8th) 4.3 (8th) 13.0 (3rd)
Texas
3.7 (45th) 5.13 (1st) 4.4 (8th) 16.4 (9th)
Florida
2.7 (6th) 5.59 (4th) 4.3 (8th) 13.5 (6th)
LSU
3.2 (18th) 5.67 (10th) 4.4 (4th) 19.9 (17th)
Florida
3.4 (24th) 5.52 (6th) 4.5 (13th) 12.9 (4th)
Bama
2.8 (7th) 5.18 (2nd) 4.0 (4th) 11.7 (2nd)
Auburn
3.4 (11th) 7.05 (63rd) 5.4 (60th) 24.1 (53rd)
Bama
2.4 (2nd) 4.34 (1st) 3.3 (1st) 8.2 (1st)
Bama
2.4 (1st) 6.12 (19th) 4.2 (2nd) 10.9 (1st)
FSU
3.3 (15th) 5.14 (1st) 4.1 (2nd) 11.1 (2nd)
OSU
3.9 (41st) 6.09 (13th) 5.0 (25th) 22.0 (26th)
Bama
2.4 (2nd) 6.08 (17th) 4.3 (3rd) 15.1 (3rd)
Clemson
3.7 (24th) 5.65 (3rd) 4.6 (4th) 18.0 (10th)
Bama
2.8 (1st) 5.45 (1st) 4.0 (1st) 11.9 (1st)
Title: Re: ESPN's Rating the 21 BCS-to-Now Champs
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on August 05, 2018, 11:56:19 PM
Not a requirement, but certainly a very strong trend.  


I stand by the idea that it's exceedingly rare for a defense to be elite at both run and pass defense.  I don't see any reason to argue otherwise.