Famous NCAA Dynasties

Say it all here
Forum rules
NOTICE: Please be sure to check the CFP Message Board Rules and Regulations and the Read Me page before posting.
User avatar
Spence
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 20970
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:52 pm
Location: Chillicothe, Ohio (Ohio's First Capital)
Contact:

Postby Spence » Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:07 am

I will also say that I thought once Miami, VT, and BC got to the ACC, that FSU would not see a BCS game for a while. But they made it this year, by beating Miami early on. But inexcusably losing some other games.


Florida State is an elite program, no question about that, it is just that they had an easy way to the top until know. They will still get their share of BCS wins.
"History doesn't always repeat itself but it often rhymes." - Mark Twain

ktffan
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1054
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:51 pm
Contact:

Postby ktffan » Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:18 am

Spence wrote:
Some streaks I'll never see again in my lifetime...


Fourteen straight years end ranked Top 5

Fourteen straight bowl games without a loss

Fourteen straight ten win seasons (when you only had 11 games)

Two National Championships

Nineteen straight years in a January Bowl


I'll give Florida State credit for having some very good teams that last 20 years. Some really great teams, but a lot of the things you are refering to has to do with Florida St playing in a weak ACC. If you are the only elite team in a conference you can build some pretty good stats. Lets see how the 'Noles do in the next 20 with some big time competition.


Florida State played a weak schedule through their run:

MYTH

This run started in 1987 and ending in the year 2000. Florida State was not even playing in the ACC for 1/3 of the run. Let's compare schedule of the I-A teams over that period.

Florida State played 172 games from 1987 to 2000. Their .887 winning percentage is about 3 percentage points better than the second place team.

Florida State played 35 teams that finished in the top 10. That's 20.3% of their games and a higher percentage than all but 2 teams.

Florida State played 67 teams that finished ranked. That's 39.0% of their games and a higher percentage than all but 3 teams.

Florida State played 104 teams that finished with a winning record. That's 60.5% of their games and a higher percentage than all but 1 team.

Florida State played 90 teams that went to bowls. That's 52.3% of their games and a higher percentage than all but 3 teams.

Florida State's opponents combined for a winning percentage of .595, which is easily a higher percentage than any other team.

If there's a hole or two to punch in Florida State's opponents, only 80.8% of them would have been considered a "major" program and they played 5 I-AA schools. Other than that, there's no reason to knock Florida State for who they played.

billybud
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 10727
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:25 pm

Actually FSU played a very tough schedule

Postby billybud » Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:48 am

During FSU's Dynasty...they played the toughest of schedules...teams play SCHEDULES, not conferences. FSU's SOS was far above Ohio State's, for example. FSU played in two conferences every year, the ACC and the Big Florida. Miami and Florida were more than the equivalent of playing Ohio State and Michigan every year. SOS is always influenced by people's perception. But, using the Sagarin SOS available ('98 forward) for FSU in the pre-expansion ACC, FSU's SOS was ranked much tougher than Ohio State's. FSU, during the dynasty run, always had one of the nation's tougher schedules...


Year.....................FSU..............................OSU

'98.......................#5..................................#25

'99.......................#11................................#5

'00.......................#12.................................#26

'01.......................#2...................................#37

'02.......................#3...................................#30

"03.......................#2...................................#15

FSU was the winningest team of the 90's...and interestingly, played two of the Top four winningest teams of the 90's every year (Fla and Miami)...no team in the SEC beat the SEC champ in the 90's as much as Florida State did, and FSU was not even in the conference. FSU also beat Nebraska in four bowls (while Nebraska was the #2 winningest team of the 90's).

So...unless someone has other than personal opinion to back up a hint of schedule weakness...Nuff said.

billybud
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 10727
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:25 pm

Perception

Postby billybud » Thu Apr 13, 2006 11:24 am

Big Ten guys always play down the ACC and think of the Big Ten as "the Be All- End All"...but as an ACC guy, I have a different perspective.

FSU has played Ohio State three times...twice in the Shoe and once in the Sugar Bowl....double digit victories for FSU.

FSU went up to Michigan in '91 (when Michigan ran undefeated through the Big Ten) and pasted 51 points on the Wolverines in the Big House. Double digit victory for FSU. The Michigan AD immediately cancelled the scheduled return game in Tallahassee..."no mas". FSU went up to Michigan State twice in the dynasty run...beat the Spartans silly (30-7, 31-3) . Double digit victories.

This last year the worst FSU team in 24 years, playing 27 freshman (the youngest in IA) with a patched up thin O line, missing 12 starters, and playing with the team's #1 tackler and star LB suspended, played the senior laden, heavily favored 10-1 Big Ten Champs....

Even playing without an offense (and with one hand behind their back, metaphorically speaking) FSU gave Penn State all they wanted in triple OT. Robinson was sacked 6 times (something Ohio State didn't do), knocked wobbily, runs were stuffed at the LOS, screens were pulled down from behind...the Lion's offensive line was being collaapsed back into the pocket by the stronger FSU D line. By the third quarter, Robinson was screaming to the sideline on every play with wild eyed Noles on his tail. I think, that PSU, playing in the ACC, might have lost a few more games. The defenses are tougher in the ACC.

Poor Ole Wake, who rarely breaks .500 in conference is still tough...heck, in 1996 Wake won only one ACC game, but went up "nawth" and beat the Big Ten Champ...that's a fact. Wake beat Purdue in 2002 and played a nine win Purdue to a 10-6 score in 2003. The Big Ten does not have a winning record against Poor Ole Wake.

Last season, Virginia, a 3-5 ACC team, played Minnesota with it's NCAA ranked #5 rushing offense...I expected an ACC loss but the Cavs held Minnesota's run yards to 2/3 of their average and won the game

As a southerner, Bama born, Florida bred, I have watched the Ohio State (my least favorite team,LOL) play the SEC....Ohio State has played the SEC in eight bowl games...and lost every one of 'em.

One's view point is always a function of one's vantage point....

mountainman

Postby mountainman » Thu Apr 13, 2006 11:51 am

Hey, billybud.

How is that a southerner, Bama born and Florida bred takes on the perspective of a Michigan Wolverine? :lol:

By the way, "always" is a finite term. :?

I think you'll fine the Big Ten guys, currently around here anyway, pretty open-minded when it comes to their thoughts and perspectives. Maybe your vantage point might change. :wink:

ktffan
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1054
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Actually FSU played a very tough schedule

Postby ktffan » Thu Apr 13, 2006 12:06 pm

billybud wrote: During FSU's Dynasty...they played the toughest of schedules


That's an exageration.

billybud wrote: SOS is always influenced by people's perception. But, using the Sagarin SOS available ('98 forward) for FSU in the pre-expansion ACC, FSU's SOS was ranked much tougher than Ohio State's. FSU, during the dynasty run, always had one of the nation's tougher schedules...


Year.....................FSU..............................OSU

'98.......................#5..................................#25

'99.......................#11................................#5

'00.......................#12.................................#26

'01.......................#2...................................#37

'02.......................#3...................................#30

"03.......................#2...................................#15

FSU was the winningest team of the 90's...and interestingly, played two of the Top four winningest teams of the 90's every year (Fla and Miami)...no team in the SEC beat the SEC champ in the 90's as much as Florida State did, and FSU was not even in the conference. FSU also beat Nebraska in four bowls (while Nebraska was the #2 winningest team of the 90's).

So...unless someone has other than personal opinion to back up a hint of schedule weakness...Nuff said.


Sagarins system sucks. It sucks so bad that he even changed his system so I wouldn't go there.

ktffan
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1054
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Perception

Postby ktffan » Thu Apr 13, 2006 12:11 pm

billybud wrote:Big Ten guys always play down the ACC and think of the Big Ten as "the Be All- End All"...but as an ACC guy, I have a different perspective.


The Big Ten is a far better conference than the ACC was. If your perspective is different, is says little about your perspective. Anybody can pick and choose their stats.


FSU went up to Michigan in '91 (when Michigan ran undefeated through the Big Ten) and pasted 51 points on the Wolverines in the Big House. Double digit victory for FSU. The Michigan AD immediately cancelled the scheduled return game in Tallahassee..."no mas".


Michigan was never scheduled for a return game at Florida State.

billybud
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 10727
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:25 pm

LOL

Postby billybud » Thu Apr 13, 2006 12:12 pm

Actually, I am a Michigan fan...

1...because they hate Ohio State

2...my Dad was a Mich grad who despised OSU and I had to be a Michigan fan (although I went to FSU). Dad has now passed on but watching the Maize and Blue during the season renews that bond that death really doesn't diminish. I miss the old man especially in the fall.

mountainman

Postby mountainman » Thu Apr 13, 2006 12:17 pm

I thought I was seeing a little maze and blue mixed in with that maroon and gold. :lol:

billybud
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 10727
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:25 pm

I like intelligent conversation

Postby billybud » Thu Apr 13, 2006 12:59 pm

KTFAN...you offer nothing but personal opinion and smack...nothing much worthy of engaging.

I stated that FSU's SCHEDULE was tough...and backed it up...and that the ACC is tougher than you think....Also that FSU played Miami and Fla every year in the dynasty run...(both of whom were winningest teams of the 90's)...FSU, Miami, and Florida (in the 14 year dynasty run)...accounted for seven national championships....FSU either was the NC or played the NC in 10 of the 14 dynasty years. FSU played the team end ranked AP #2 in another four of those years.

ktffan
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1054
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: I like intelligent conversation

Postby ktffan » Thu Apr 13, 2006 1:18 pm

billybud wrote:KTFAN...you offer nothing but personal opinion and smack...nothing much worthy of engaging.

I stated that FSU's SCHEDULE was tough...and backed it up...and that the ACC is tougher than you think....Also that FSU played Miami and Fla every year in the dynasty run...(both of whom were winningest teams of the 90's)...FSU, Miami, and Florida (in the 14 year dynasty run)...accounted for seven national championships....FSU either was the NC or played the NC in 10 of the 14 dynasty years. FSU played the team end ranked AP #2 in another four of those years.



Give me a break. I know exactly how tough the ACC was. From 1990-2000, the Big Ten has won a higher percentage of their non-conference games playing a tougher schedule, won a greater percentage of their games against "major" teams, won a greater percentage of their games against teams that went to bowl, won a greater percentage of their bowl games, won more games "head-to-head" against the ACC, and had way more teams ranked. I'm fully aware that the ACC is not given the credit it deserves, but the ACC was NOT better than the Big Ten.
Last edited by ktffan on Thu Apr 13, 2006 1:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ktffan
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1054
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: I like intelligent conversation

Postby ktffan » Thu Apr 13, 2006 1:20 pm

billybud wrote:I stated that FSU's SCHEDULE was tough...and backed it up...


I stated the same thing before you did, in case you missed it.

billybud
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 10727
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:25 pm

REALLY?

Postby billybud » Thu Apr 13, 2006 4:20 pm

"From 1990-2000, the Big Ten has won a higher percentage of their non-conference games playing a tougher schedule, won a greater percentage of their games against "major" teams, won a greater percentage of their games against teams that went to bowl, won a greater percentage of their bowl games, won more games "head-to-head" against the ACC, and had way more teams ranked. "


1. The Big Ten absolutely DID NOT WIN more head to head games with the ACC from 1990-2000...there were 26 games played, the split was 13-13...of course the Big Ten scheduled Duke seven times.

2. While it is hard to compare a 10 member Big 10 (11 after '93 conference expansion) with a nine member conference that plays round robin, the ACC looks pretty good in final AP teams ranked 1990-2000. In six of the 11 years covered, the ACC had the same or more teams end ranked as the 11 member Big Ten...

....But, because the Big Ten didn't actually play all their ranked conference foes, an ACC team may actually play as many ranked conference teams...for instance, Michigan played 22 ranked conference opponents 1990-2000...FSU, if playing against the ACC in the same period , would have played 21 ranked conference opponents...not much difference, my friends.
Last edited by billybud on Thu Apr 13, 2006 4:45 pm, edited 2 times in total.

billybud
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 10727
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:25 pm

Making stuff up..

Postby billybud » Thu Apr 13, 2006 4:22 pm

Give me any data or any link backing up your Percentage of Bowl teams played...etc...yada yada

ktffan
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1054
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: REALLY?

Postby ktffan » Thu Apr 13, 2006 4:51 pm

billybud wrote:1. The Big Ten absolutely DID NOT WIN more head to head games with the ACC from 1990-2000...there were 26 games played, the split was 13-13...of course the Big Ten scheduled Duke seven times.


The Big Ten won 13, the ACC won 12. If there are 13, then name them. Regardless, 13-12 tells us little.

2. While it is hard to compare a 10 member Big 10 (11 after '93 conference expansion) with a nine member conference that plays round robin, the ACC looks pretty good in final AP teams ranked 1990-2000. In six of the 11 years covered, the ACC had the same or more teams end ranked as the 11 member Big Ten...


The ACC had as many or more ranked teams only 4 of the years. The Big Ten had, what, 9? Overall the Big Ten had 47 teams ranked over the period to the ACC's 27. As difficult as it is to compare conference with a different number of members, it's pretty easy to compare 47 to 27.

....But, because the Big Ten didn't actually play all their ranked conference foes, an ACC team may actually play as many ranked conference teams...for instance, Michigan played 22 ranked conference opponents 1990-2000...FSU, if playing against the ACC in the same period (didn't join until 1992), would have played 21 ranked conference opponents...not much difference, my friends.



Michigan played way more than 22 ranked conference opponents from 1990-2000. Way more.


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 53 guests