(08-06-2015 03:06 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(08-05-2015 10:20 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  Sure times change, but since when was the year 2000 referred to as the beginning of the modern era? Why not mark the first year of the BCS as the modern era?

I think of the modern era of college football as starting in the 80s. That was when you started seeing upstart Miami and Florida speed challenging some of the more traditional offensive schemes like Oklahoma's wishbone attack

By the 90s you had the pre-cursor of the BCS with the Bowl Alliance, and then the BCS finally broke the lock on the Rose Bowl and we had a championship game.

I think the 80s to the end of the BCS can be seen as an era....the evolution of speed in the game, the evolution of the post-season into a single championship game, and the evolution of the 12-team super conference with a conference championship game.

The new college football playoff is a whole new era now, and TV markets direct expansion....

Also with the new era, we've reached the age of uniform insanity....

What started out as something gimmicky by Oregon has swept across college football....it's everywhere now. It's an industry

(08-05-2015 10:20 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  Sure times change, but since when was the year 2000 referred to as the beginning of the modern era? Why not mark the first year of the BCS as the modern era?

15 years are recent years, hence 'modern' era. I believe BCS started in 1998 so not much difference.

My point is FSU has not been consistently good the past 15 years. They were a flawed team last year. Yet their fans and other people act like they are a dominant program.

FSU will talk trash about a big win at Clemson a couple of years ago but don't want to talk about 6-6 against the past 12 years, and lucked out to win at least 2 of those. Good chance they lose this year at Clemson. If they are a dominant program why has Clemson beat them. The excuse will be they weren't any good back then but Clemson isn't allowed that same excuse when they lose to FSU. FSU never played Clemson in the 80's when Clemson was a top 10 program.

(08-08-2015 02:56 PM)ClemVegas Wrote:  

(08-05-2015 10:20 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  Sure times change, but since when was the year 2000 referred to as the beginning of the modern era? Why not mark the first year of the BCS as the modern era?

.

FSU fans and other people act like they are a dominant program.

Because FSU is.

Alabama has had down years during the bcs era. So has usc, and Florida, and auburn, and Texas.

I'd say lsu, Oklahoma and Ohio State have been the most consistent teams during the last ~15 years, but FSU has more national titles during the bcs (and in the last 25 years) than Oklahoma and just as many as Ohio state and lsu.

Your opinion is wrong.

"15 years are recent years, hence 'modern' era"


15 years ago.....FSU won a national title.


FSU also won a national title about a year and a half ago.

It's hard for me to describe FSU as anything but a dominant team in recent years. With just a quick and dirty count, the following are the win totals for most of the top teams in the past 20 years (roughly coinciding with the Bowl Alliance and successors).

Ohio State.......207 (1)
Florida State....198 (2)
Boise State......197 (40 of which were in FCS)
Virginia Tech....190
Florida.............191 (3)
Nebraska.........188 (1)
Oregon............187
Texas..............186 (1)
Oklahoma........185 (1)
LSU.................183 (1)
Wisconsin.........177
Alabama...........176 (3)
Georgia............172
USC.................167 (2)
Auburn.............167 (1)
TCU.................167
Miami...............167 (1)
Clemson...........158

I may have left some teams out that would have made the top 15. But that doesn't change the obvious fact that FSU was one of the most dominant teams in the recent past. If they weren't "dominant", then who was?

Edited to add Va Tech, Nebraska and Miami

Edited to add (national championships) during the period

(08-10-2015 11:11 AM)ken d Wrote:  It's hard for me to describe FSU as anything but a dominant team in recent years. With just a quick and dirty count, the following are the win totals for most of the top teams in the past 20 years (roughly coinciding with the Bowl Alliance and successors).

Ohio State.......207
Florida State....198
Boise State......197 (40 of which were in FCS)
Virginia Tech....190
Florida.............191
Nebraska.........188
Oregon............187
Texas..............186
Oklahoma........185
LSU.................183
Wisconsin.........177
Alabama...........176
Georgia............172
USC.................167
Auburn.............167
TCU.................167
Miami...............167
Clemson...........158

I may have left some teams out that would have made the top 15. But that doesn't change the obvious fact that FSU was one of the most dominant teams in the recent past. If they weren't "dominant", then who was?

Edited to add Va Tech, Nebraska and Miami

Surprising how high VT ranks on lists like this. Prior to the last 3 years, the Hokies were also pretty dominant.

I think many fans would think of Alabama as being a dominant program (maybe the dominant program) in recent years. They have been one of the top programs in college football for a century, after all.

But in this case, emphasis has to be put on the word recent. Half of their wins in the past 20 seasons came in the past 7 seasons, during which they averaged 12 wins/year. In the 13 seasons before that, they only averaged 6.4 wins.

Perception counts for a lot, even when the perception is invalid.

(08-10-2015 12:44 PM)ken d Wrote:  I think many fans would think of Alabama as being a dominant program (maybe the dominant program) in recent years. They have been one of the top programs in college football for a century, after all.

But in this case, emphasis has to be put on the word recent. Half of their wins in the past 20 seasons came in the past 7 seasons, during which they averaged 12 wins/year. In the 13 seasons before that, they only averaged 6.4 wins.

Good point. Perhaps when folks say "dominant" they really mean "consistent" or "enduring"

(08-10-2015 12:55 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-10-2015 12:44 PM)ken d Wrote:  I think many fans would think of Alabama as being a dominant program (maybe the dominant program) in recent years. They have been one of the top programs in college football for a century, after all.

But in this case, emphasis has to be put on the word recent. Half of their wins in the past 20 seasons came in the past 7 seasons, during which they averaged 12 wins/year. In the 13 seasons before that, they only averaged 6.4 wins.

Good point. Perhaps when folks say "dominant" they really mean "consistent" or "enduring"

I like "enduring". For example, I think it explains Notre Dame's unique position in college football better than "consistent". They've had some great teams for more than a century, and they've had good teams in every decade. But they've also had some periods of extended mediocrity throughout that time as well. Yet their national following doesn't seem to dwell on the lows - just the highs.

With most other programs, if they have an extended drought, they have to work hard to win their fans back over time. The Irish only seem to need one year.

No, when people say dominant they mean a team that wins a lot. Longevity is a separate issue altogether. This vegas clown is saying "recent" dominance which is where a timeframe/longevity then comes into play.

FSU is a dominant program...who underachieved during a stretch there in the mid-Aught's.