College Football Fan Site Area 51 @CFB51; dead nuts accurate

One community smart about college football

Civil discussion, topics, and reading of both original and aggregated news.


Author Topic: Blue Blood Chart  (Read 2095 times)

Online 847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 3986
  • Liked:
Re: Blue Blood Chart
« Reply #30 on: January 19, 2018, 03:24:07 PM »
Franchioni, while admittedly a weird dude, went from Bama to aTm on his own will.

How many times has a guy left a helmet for a non-helmet?

and Hooky.. What about Tennessee? No longer in the club? They were considered a blue blood for a long, long time.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

Offline FearlessF

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 5280
  • Liked:
Re: Blue Blood Chart
« Reply #31 on: January 19, 2018, 03:55:24 PM »
the Vols slid for a long long time

back in the early 80's they were a blue blood

4 decades is long enough for things to change

so, if Wisconsin Badger fans live another 40-50 years, they could make the club
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

Online CharleyHorse46

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1053
  • Liked:
Re: Blue Blood Chart
« Reply #32 on: January 19, 2018, 04:14:03 PM »
URegarding generalities like the one I made about HCs, there are always exceptions.  Bama also had that guy between Bear & Stallings who left for KY.  A move maybe 1 in 300 coaches would make.  

Weird.

As for Tennessee they were closer 20 years ago than they are now.  Sure their wins are close to SC’s and their % is close to Penn St’s but if you include them and make it a top ten they’re at or near the bottom of every statistical category, as if they barely fit, and they blur the distinction between the helmets and this wolfpack clusterEFF of SEC upper echelon parity that dogs the footsteps of the helmets but keeps any one another in the group from ascending into the higher group.

In the general mindset of helmetosity there are the nine bluebloods and two joker faux perception helmets.

One belongs to that cluster and has currently been worn by LSU.  The other is owned by the state of Florida and is shared between really good Gator, Nole and Cane clubs.

The SEC cluster doesn’t have any one team that can escape the monkey’s knot long enough to actually be a legit blue blood and the Florida collection doesn’t have the history to be a blue blood.   But in the collective halfassed perception of America both faux helmet groups fake it pretty well.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2018, 04:15:35 PM by CharleyHorse46 »

Online 847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 3986
  • Liked:
Re: Blue Blood Chart
« Reply #33 on: January 19, 2018, 04:45:14 PM »
ESecPN helps too.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

Offline CWSooner

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
  • Liked:
Re: Blue Blood Chart
« Reply #34 on: January 19, 2018, 08:06:47 PM »
Howard Twilley.  Steve Largent.
Jerry Rhome.
Rhome and Twilley were Heisman runners-up in '64 and '65.

EDIT: I see that Thumper mentioned Jerry Rhome as well.  Good catch, Thumper.   ;)


Hooky: In your assessment that includes Penn State amongst the helmets, what is it that boosts the Nittany Lions above and beyond the Gators and Noles, as opposed to being merely the leader of the pack that also includes the SEC's 2nd tier plus Miami and UCLA?
« Last Edit: January 19, 2018, 08:18:11 PM by CWSooner »

Offline ftbobs

  • Walk On
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • Liked:
Re: Blue Blood Chart
« Reply #35 on: January 19, 2018, 10:20:37 PM »
Are we really surprised that there's a correlation between winning percentage and times ranked?  Rankings #1 factor are wins and losses.  Preseason polls generally factor in previous season results, hence successful teams also have high expectations.  It's no surprise that Notre Dame is more often "overrated", because they've done well.  The most "overrated" teams are also the most successful teams.  So yes, winning teams also are ones that get ranked high and sometimes too high.

Why weekly rating are worthless when view historical success is because end of season ratings are a much better way to see how successful a season was.

In 1984, Texas was ranked in the top 5 10 times.  They finished unranked.

In 1972, Texas was ranked in the top 5 once.  They finished at #3.

Which season was more successful?  Obviously 1972.  How do we know?  Because of the final rank.  If we go by "number of time top 5", we'd say 1984, and be wrong.

Now, maybe Texas looked and played like a top 5 team more often in 1984.  Teams go get better or worse during the season.  Maryland almost climbed into the rankings this year and probably deservedly so, but injuries killed them.  All in all, their season was deserving of a non-ranking, despite the promise they had.  So, while game ranking can be worthwhile, measuring the season as a whole counting up times ranked is pure guesswork, which is unnecessary when you have the final poll.

So, "times ranked" is a worthless measure in terms of yearly success.

Offline ftbobs

  • Walk On
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • Liked:
Re: Blue Blood Chart
« Reply #36 on: January 19, 2018, 10:24:53 PM »
No doubt CW, but some are fading. Fading fast, in some cases.

ND would be the obvious example to me.

Maybe our own FTB-OBS can provide some insight from 1950-present, 1960-present, 1970-present, and so forth, up to 2010-present.
# of top 5 AP finished since 1950:
Oklahoma    29
Ohio St.    24
Alabama    22
USC    18
Texas    18
Florida St.    17
Notre Dame    16
Penn St.    13
Nebraska    13
Miami (FL)    12
Florida    11
Tennessee    10
Michigan    10
Georgia    9
Auburn    9
Michigan St.    9
LSU    8
UCLA    8
Washington    5
Colorado    5
Oregon    5
Georgia Tech    4
Mississippi    4
Navy    4
Clemson    4
Pittsburgh    4
Arkansas    4
Missouri    3
Iowa    3
Arizona St.    3
Maryland    3
Syracuse    2
Illinois    2
Wisconsin    2
Army    2
SMU    2
West Virginia    2
Utah    2
Boise St.    2
Stanford    2
TCU    2
BYU    2
Texas A&M    2
Houston    2
California    1
Oklahoma St.    1
Minnesota    1
Oregon St.    1
Arizona    1
South Carolina    1
Indiana    1
Boston College    1
Virginia Tech    1
Since 1960:
Alabama    22
Oklahoma    21
Ohio St.    21
USC    17
Florida St.    17
Texas    16
Penn St.    13
Notre Dame    13
Nebraska    13
Miami (FL)    12
Florida    11
Michigan    10
Georgia    8
Tennessee    7
Auburn    7
LSU    6
UCLA    5
Colorado    5
Washington    5
Oregon    5
Arkansas    4
Michigan St.    4
Clemson    4
Pittsburgh    4
Mississippi    3
Arizona St.    3
Missouri    3
Boise St.    2
BYU    2
SMU    2
Houston    2
Navy    2
West Virginia    2
Wisconsin    2
Stanford    2
Utah    2
TCU    2
Oklahoma St.    1
Iowa    1
Minnesota    1
Georgia Tech    1
Boston College    1
Texas A&M    1
Virginia Tech    1
Oregon St.    1
South Carolina    1
Illinois    1
Arizona    1
Syracuse    1
Indiana    1

Since 1970:

Oklahoma    20
Ohio St.    18
Florida St.    17
Alabama    17
USC    13
Miami (FL)    12
Nebraska    12
Penn St.    11
Florida    11
Texas    10
Michigan    9
Notre Dame    8
Georgia    7
Tennessee    6
Auburn    6
LSU    5
Washington    5
Oregon    5
Colorado    5
Clemson    4
UCLA    3
Pittsburgh    3
Arizona St.    3
Missouri    2
Stanford    2
TCU    2
Houston    2
West Virginia    2
Michigan St.    2
Utah    2
BYU    2
Arkansas    2
SMU    2
Boise St.    2
Oregon St.    1
Virginia Tech    1
Oklahoma St.    1
Boston College    1
South Carolina    1
Wisconsin    1
Georgia Tech    1
Syracuse    1
Texas A&M    1
Arizona    1

Online CharleyHorse46

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1053
  • Liked:
Re: Blue Blood Chart
« Reply #37 on: January 19, 2018, 10:28:35 PM »
Hey CW.  I would include them b/c in most rankings they would be in the upper cluster ahead of the gap.

Their all-time wins are 6 behind OU, 70 above Georgia, 90 above LSU, 160 ahead of Florida, etc.

In winning % they are within 2% of Texas, Southern Cal and Nebraska but 3% or more ahead of Florida, Georgia and LSU.

Teams like Miami and Minnesota have a lot of NCs, teams like Florida St and Boisie St have good winning percentages, teams like Yale and Harvard have a lot of wins.

But only the 9 helmets bob to at or near the top in just about every category.  Even in the chart at the top of the page Penn State was a nose ahead of the non-helmets.

Someone could argue that somebody like Tennessee deserves to be the 10th helmet but their inclusion would just legitimze Penn State all the more.

I don’t like Penn State but I do like the blind objectivity of corroborating statitstics.



« Last Edit: January 19, 2018, 10:33:45 PM by CharleyHorse46 »

Offline FearlessF

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 5280
  • Liked:
Re: Blue Blood Chart
« Reply #38 on: January 20, 2018, 09:51:01 AM »
# of top 5 AP finished since 1950:
Oklahoma    29
Ohio St.    24
Alabama    22
USC    18
Texas    18
Florida St.    17
Notre Dame    16
Penn St.    13
Nebraska    13
Miami (FL)    12
Florida    11
Tennessee    10
Michigan    10
surprising that Michigan is this far down the list
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

Online 847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 3986
  • Liked:
Re: Blue Blood Chart
« Reply #39 on: January 20, 2018, 12:06:22 PM »
Not surprising to me.

But if you look through these recent "way too early top 25 lists" you'll see that Michigan is ranked in the top 15 in almost all of them, and as high as 10 in one. I read that they were top 5 in some other one I didn't bother to read, and the question is...


Based on WHAT?
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

Offline ftbobs

  • Walk On
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • Liked:
Re: Blue Blood Chart
« Reply #40 on: January 20, 2018, 06:03:34 PM »
surprising that Michigan is this far down the list
Top 5 is bad for Michigan.  6-10 is fantastic.  Ranked is better than anyone.  Problem is, Michigan wets the bed in bowls.

Offline FearlessF

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 5280
  • Liked:
Re: Blue Blood Chart
« Reply #41 on: January 20, 2018, 08:43:01 PM »
some think bowls are meaningless

apparently Michigan falls into this camp

well, since they fall into the "we suck in bowls camp"
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

Online 847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 3986
  • Liked:
Re: Blue Blood Chart
« Reply #42 on: January 21, 2018, 08:06:01 AM »
Top 5 is bad for Michigan.  6-10 is fantastic.  Ranked is better than anyone.  Problem is, Michigan wets the bed in bowls.
Bo was probably one of the worst offenders for this. His Rose Bowl record was :sign0137:
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

Offline rolltidefan

  • Global Moderator
  • Player
  • *****
  • Posts: 802
  • Liked:
Re: Blue Blood Chart
« Reply #43 on: January 24, 2018, 10:51:07 AM »
Franchioni, while admittedly a weird dude, went from Bama to aTm on his own will.

How many times has a guy left a helmet for a non-helmet?

and Hooky.. What about Tennessee? No longer in the club? They were considered a blue blood for a long, long time.
franchione also left bama right after bama got hammer by ncaa in 2002 for issues from the previous staff. and him having no knowledge of it before taking the job. the way he left was a bitch move, but i can't really blame him for leaving. point is, though, that he didn't leave bama for aTm so much as just getting out from under years worth of penalties he didn't cause.

 

Support the Site:
Please Search Amazon from here! No cost to you yet covers some of our expenses!