50 best programs over 150 years

[GT_05]

I think most people are looking purely at national titles. Winning Percentage is the biggest overall contributor here - criteria copied in below. 2 of our national titles fall before the "poll Era" and are discounted by 50%. As I said, it's subjective criteria applied objectively to all teams. And no, I wouldn't include random facts like "first team to attend and win all 4 major bowls" as part of the criteria.

"
Dominance, 20% -- number of national championships
Peak strength, 20% -- winning percentage for best 50 seasons in program history
Since integration, 30% -- winning percentage over the past 50 seasons (1969-2018)
Early modern, 20% -- winning percentage over the middle 50 seasons (1919-1968). Mostly pre-integration and included some games against non-college teams
Pre-modern, 10% -- winning percentage over the first 50 seasons (1869-1918) *mostly pre-standardization of current rules and many games against non-college teams

Adjustments
National championships below the FBS level count at 50%
National championships before the poll era (1936) count at 50%
Winning percentages when a team was not in Division I are reduced by 10%
"

Yes, I read all of the criteria for their model. Just because you know all of the ingredients in the soup, it doesn’t mean it’s good soup.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[knoxjacket]

All college divisions are composed of college athletes so putting Mount Union over Miami is asinine. Why should a team be artificially boosted because they play in a lower division?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What Mount Union has done is far more impressive than what Miami has. They aren’t artificially boosted. They are more successful against their peers than Miami is against theirs.

 

[GT_05]

What Mount Union has done is far more impressive than what Miami has. They aren’t artificially boosted. They are more successful against their peers than Miami is against theirs.

Their peers are other college athletes, including Miami. How do you think MU would’ve held up against UM?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GT99]

Yes, I read all of the criteria for their model. Just because you know all of the ingredients in the soup, it doesn’t mean it’s good soup.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree. But many people in this thread don't seem to have read them. And there are some suggestions in this thread that are less rational than their approach - more the homer "I don't like where we're rated" response than rational. Their criteria is far from perfect, but it's pretty rational at a base level (using primarily winning percentage, with National championships as factor). Personally, I wouldn't consider lower level teams (doesn't make sense to compare Mt. Union with Alabama, etc), and I probably would only consider the last 100 years - before that, it wasn't really even the same game. But that's just my opinion.

 

[knoxjacket]

Their peers are other college athletes, including Miami. How do you think MU would’ve held up against UM?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Their peers are other programs with non-scholarship true student-athletes and they dominate them.

 

[GTRX7]

Their peers are other programs with non-scholarship true student-athletes and they dominate them.

Why not rank schools with only club teams that play against schools with only club teams? I played some really competitive water polo matches while at Tech against Auburn and the like! Where does it stop?

 

[takethepoints]

It came out in 2011, but I like this one better:

https://bleacherreport.com/articles...nking-the-top-50-programs-of-all-time#slide31

Tech comes in at 20. I think that's about right, when the overall record is considered.

And, btw, where is Sewanee in the ratings? We should get a shout out for the 1899 season alone. The Tigers also have two members in the National Football Hall of Fame. Which, I might add, is one more then North Dakota State.

I mean fair is fair here.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Even in that one, I think Georgia and Miami are ranked too high, possibly Florida too, and Bama is not ranked high enough. In some cases it seems to put too much weight on recent years rather than overall history.

 

[GT_05]

Their peers are other programs with non-scholarship true student-athletes and they dominate them.

So you’d be okay if you saw Doug Flutie listed as the best pro QB of all time? I mean, this is absolutely true...if you’re talking about the CFL. If you throw him in with NFL QBs, he wouldn’t even make the top 25.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bke1984]

So you’d be okay if you saw Doug Flutie listed as the best pro QB of all time? I mean, this is absolutely true...if you’re talking about the CFL. If you throw him in with NFL QBs, he wouldn’t even make the top 25.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why stop there. Grambling is probably better than Green Bay based on this dude’s criteria.

 

[GT_05]

Why stop there. Grambling is probably better than Green Bay based on this dude’s criteria.

[emoji1696]POTD. [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk