Caveat: There is zero context between years, so the results must be taken as is


1 2018 Clemson .984
2 2023 Michigan .979
3 1971 Nebraska .978
4 2022 Georgia .969
5 1905 Chicago .967
6 2001 Miami (Florida) .965
7 1932 Southern California .964
8 2009 Alabama .964
9 1938 Tennessee .963
10 1991 Washington .961
11 2005 Texas .961
12 2004 Southern California .959
13 2019 Louisiana State .959
14 1905 Yale .959
15 1995 Nebraska .958
16 1972 Southern California .957
17 1974 Oklahoma .956
18 1991 Miami (Florida) .955
19 2016 Alabama .955
20 1930 Alabama .954
21 1987 Miami (Florida) .954
22 2019 Ohio State .954
23 1958 Louisiana State .952
24 2021 Georgia .952
25 2013 Florida State .952

What are these numbers from and how is 2019 LSU not higher?

(01-09-2024 02:12 PM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  What are these numbers from and how is 2019 LSU not higher?

Computer ratings.

2019 LSU gave up 22 points per game. They come in at #13 out of 14,139 rated teams. That doesn't seem too bad.

LOL that was NOT the second best team of all-time.

(01-09-2024 02:37 PM)JamesHowell Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:12 PM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  What are these numbers from and how is 2019 LSU not higher?

Computer ratings.

2019 LSU gave up 22 points per game. They come in at #13 out of 14,139 rated teams. That doesn't seem too bad.

2019 LSU played SEVEN teams that were in the top 10 at the time of the contest. Auburn wasn't even one of those 7, though they did end up #14 in the final AP poll. They took down the top 2 teams from the SECE and every team from the SECW, plus Texas on the road. They might have had the toughest schedule all time of any Champion. Give 2023 Michigan that schedule and they'd lose 2-3 games.

Disagree with #2 all-time. I had 2023 Michigan at #1 all-time.

(01-09-2024 02:59 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Disagree with #2 all-time. I had 2023 Michigan at #1 all-time.

Can we get a formula that factors in the sign stealing?

(01-09-2024 02:50 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:37 PM)JamesHowell Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:12 PM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  What are these numbers from and how is 2019 LSU not higher?

Computer ratings.

2019 LSU gave up 22 points per game. They come in at #13 out of 14,139 rated teams. That doesn't seem too bad.

2019 LSU played SEVEN teams that were in the top 10 at the time of the contest. Auburn wasn't even one of those 7, though they did end up #14 in the final AP poll. They took down the top 2 teams from the SECE and every team from the SECW, plus Texas on the road. They might have had the toughest schedule all time of any Champion. Give 2023 Michigan that schedule and they'd lose 2-3 games.

"at the time of the contest" is completely meaningless and irrelevant. And, it is not just who you played, but how you played against them (giving up three TDs a game is not good) and the location of the game as well.

The 2019 LSU team was the best of the playoff era and probably the BCS era. 15–0 on that schedule was insane. Burrow had the greatest QB season I’ve ever seen.

(01-09-2024 03:03 PM)JamesHowell Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:50 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:37 PM)JamesHowell Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:12 PM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  What are these numbers from and how is 2019 LSU not higher?

Computer ratings.

2019 LSU gave up 22 points per game. They come in at #13 out of 14,139 rated teams. That doesn't seem too bad.

2019 LSU played SEVEN teams that were in the top 10 at the time of the contest. Auburn wasn't even one of those 7, though they did end up #14 in the final AP poll. They took down the top 2 teams from the SECE and every team from the SECW, plus Texas on the road. They might have had the toughest schedule all time of any Champion. Give 2023 Michigan that schedule and they'd lose 2-3 games.

"at the time of the contest" is completely meaningless and irrelevant. And, it is not just who you played, but how you played against them (giving up three TDs a game is not good) and the location of the game as well.

They played 5 of the top 8 (final poll). The only one that was close was the Bama game but that one was in Tuscaloosa. Who cares how much they gave up? Their offense was unstoppable and they managed almost a 27 point MOV on a BRUTAL schedule.

(01-09-2024 03:03 PM)JamesHowell Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:50 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:37 PM)JamesHowell Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:12 PM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  What are these numbers from and how is 2019 LSU not higher?

Computer ratings.

2019 LSU gave up 22 points per game. They come in at #13 out of 14,139 rated teams. That doesn't seem too bad.

2019 LSU played SEVEN teams that were in the top 10 at the time of the contest. Auburn wasn't even one of those 7, though they did end up #14 in the final AP poll. They took down the top 2 teams from the SECE and every team from the SECW, plus Texas on the road. They might have had the toughest schedule all time of any Champion. Give 2023 Michigan that schedule and they'd lose 2-3 games.

"at the time of the contest" is completely meaningless and irrelevant. And, it is not just who you played, but how you played against them (giving up three TDs a game is not good) and the location of the game as well.

Well, we know this is 100% false; the committee just told us otherwise.

I had the feeling people would be inventing ways to make this Michigan team look better than they are. People have been hungry for a champ outside the Southeast for years, you could hear it in Herpstriet's voice all night.

Let's be real, Michigan didn't even play a meaningful game until November. That's pathetic. They also designed their weak OOC schedules to correspond with the last couple seasons of the 4-team playoff because they knew they could get in with really only a win over OSU and PSU. It just so happened to work this year.

(01-09-2024 02:01 PM)JamesHowell Wrote:  Caveat: There is zero context between years, so the results must be taken as is


1 2018 Clemson .984
2 2023 Michigan .979
3 1971 Nebraska .978
4 2022 Georgia .969
5 1905 Chicago .967
6 2001 Miami (Florida) .965
7 1932 Southern California .964
8 2009 Alabama .964
9 1938 Tennessee .963
10 1991 Washington .961
11 2005 Texas .961
12 2004 Southern California .959
13 2019 Louisiana State .959
14 1905 Yale .959
15 1995 Nebraska .958
16 1972 Southern California .957
17 1974 Oklahoma .956
18 1991 Miami (Florida) .955
19 2016 Alabama .955
20 1930 Alabama .954
21 1987 Miami (Florida) .954
22 2019 Ohio State .954
23 1958 Louisiana State .952
24 2021 Georgia .952
25 2013 Florida State .952

Hooey... Coach Stagg and the Maroons would have ran roughshod over the johnny-come-latelys in your top 4. They shut out 10 of 11 opponents, including UM which was riding a 56 game winning streak going into the 'game of the century'.

(01-09-2024 02:48 PM)esayem Wrote:  LOL that was NOT the second best team of all-time.

If we had a round-robin, Michigan might have been the second best this season.

(01-09-2024 03:32 PM)gwelymernans Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:01 PM)JamesHowell Wrote:  Caveat: There is zero context between years, so the results must be taken as is


1 2018 Clemson .984
2 2023 Michigan .979
3 1971 Nebraska .978
4 2022 Georgia .969
5 1905 Chicago .967
6 2001 Miami (Florida) .965
7 1932 Southern California .964
8 2009 Alabama .964
9 1938 Tennessee .963
10 1991 Washington .961
11 2005 Texas .961
12 2004 Southern California .959
13 2019 Louisiana State .959
14 1905 Yale .959
15 1995 Nebraska .958
16 1972 Southern California .957
17 1974 Oklahoma .956
18 1991 Miami (Florida) .955
19 2016 Alabama .955
20 1930 Alabama .954
21 1987 Miami (Florida) .954
22 2019 Ohio State .954
23 1958 Louisiana State .952
24 2021 Georgia .952
25 2013 Florida State .952

Hooey... Coach Stagg and the Maroons would have ran roughshod over the johnny-come-latelys in your top 4. They shut out 10 of 11 opponents, including UM which was riding a 56 game winning streak going into the 'game of the century'.

1905 also had two top-15 teams of all-time in Chicago and Yale, which none of the other years can say. The quality on the field today pales in comparison to 1905 -- those games were a bloodbath with people (literally) dying on the field.

(01-09-2024 03:30 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 03:03 PM)JamesHowell Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:50 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:37 PM)JamesHowell Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:12 PM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  What are these numbers from and how is 2019 LSU not higher?

Computer ratings.

2019 LSU gave up 22 points per game. They come in at #13 out of 14,139 rated teams. That doesn't seem too bad.

2019 LSU played SEVEN teams that were in the top 10 at the time of the contest. Auburn wasn't even one of those 7, though they did end up #14 in the final AP poll. They took down the top 2 teams from the SECE and every team from the SECW, plus Texas on the road. They might have had the toughest schedule all time of any Champion. Give 2023 Michigan that schedule and they'd lose 2-3 games.

"at the time of the contest" is completely meaningless and irrelevant. And, it is not just who you played, but how you played against them (giving up three TDs a game is not good) and the location of the game as well.

Well, we know this is 100% false; the committee just told us otherwise.

I had the feeling people would be inventing ways to make this Michigan team look better than they are. People have been hungry for a champ outside the Southeast for years, you could hear it in Herpstriet's voice all night.

Let's be real, Michigan didn't even play a meaningful game until November. That's pathetic. They also designed their weak OOC schedules to correspond with the last couple seasons of the 4-team playoff because they knew they could get in with really only a win over OSU and PSU. It just so happened to work this year.

This whole debate is stupid because it really doesn't matter which champion was "better" than a different year's champion. Computers can spit out all sorts of numbers. 2023 Michigan is going to be a computer darling simply because the teams they beat mostly only lost to Michigan or another team that Michigan beat. It's just an feedback loop that favors them.

That said, I don't think it matters at all if Michigan had played UCLA this year and last (apparently this was scheduled but then cancelled during COVID?), or that Michigan State and Nebraska both decided to cliff dive this year. Per last night's broadcast they trailed for something like 40 minutes all year, I think half of that was against Alabama, who they looked dominant against on the lines so it's not like we can say they fluked the win vs Bama.

It is weird that Michigan fans are running around trying to make this bigger than it is though. You just went 15-0, beat your 11-0 rival, beat the SEC champ in the Rose Bowl, beat the undefeated PAC-12 champ, and based on the ESPN win expectancy graphs post I saw on reddit, was never below 50% win expectancy except against Bama. That seems like a pretty awesome season. Take the 15 Ws, the championship, shut up, and enjoy it.

(01-09-2024 03:41 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 03:32 PM)gwelymernans Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:01 PM)JamesHowell Wrote:  Caveat: There is zero context between years, so the results must be taken as is


1 2018 Clemson .984
2 2023 Michigan .979
3 1971 Nebraska .978
4 2022 Georgia .969
5 1905 Chicago .967
6 2001 Miami (Florida) .965
7 1932 Southern California .964
8 2009 Alabama .964
9 1938 Tennessee .963
10 1991 Washington .961
11 2005 Texas .961
12 2004 Southern California .959
13 2019 Louisiana State .959
14 1905 Yale .959
15 1995 Nebraska .958
16 1972 Southern California .957
17 1974 Oklahoma .956
18 1991 Miami (Florida) .955
19 2016 Alabama .955
20 1930 Alabama .954
21 1987 Miami (Florida) .954
22 2019 Ohio State .954
23 1958 Louisiana State .952
24 2021 Georgia .952
25 2013 Florida State .952

Hooey... Coach Stagg and the Maroons would have ran roughshod over the johnny-come-latelys in your top 4. They shut out 10 of 11 opponents, including UM which was riding a 56 game winning streak going into the 'game of the century'.

1905 also had two top-15 teams of all-time in Chicago and Yale, which none of the other years can say. The quality on the field today pales in comparison to 1905 -- those games were a bloodbath.

You should have seen the St. Margarets School in 1905. The Flying Margarets were something to behold!

(01-09-2024 03:32 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:48 PM)esayem Wrote:  LOL that was NOT the second best team of all-time.

If we had a round-robin, Michigan might have been the second best this season.

We did sort of have a round robin - UGA lost to Bama, Ohio State lost to Michigan, and Oregon lost to Washington. All 3 of those were CFP quarterfinal games essentially.

Congrats to Michigan. That was tough for me lol.

(01-09-2024 03:44 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 03:30 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 03:03 PM)JamesHowell Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:50 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(01-09-2024 02:37 PM)JamesHowell Wrote:  Computer ratings.

2019 LSU gave up 22 points per game. They come in at #13 out of 14,139 rated teams. That doesn't seem too bad.

2019 LSU played SEVEN teams that were in the top 10 at the time of the contest. Auburn wasn't even one of those 7, though they did end up #14 in the final AP poll. They took down the top 2 teams from the SECE and every team from the SECW, plus Texas on the road. They might have had the toughest schedule all time of any Champion. Give 2023 Michigan that schedule and they'd lose 2-3 games.

"at the time of the contest" is completely meaningless and irrelevant. And, it is not just who you played, but how you played against them (giving up three TDs a game is not good) and the location of the game as well.

Well, we know this is 100% false; the committee just told us otherwise.

I had the feeling people would be inventing ways to make this Michigan team look better than they are. People have been hungry for a champ outside the Southeast for years, you could hear it in Herpstriet's voice all night.

Let's be real, Michigan didn't even play a meaningful game until November. That's pathetic. They also designed their weak OOC schedules to correspond with the last couple seasons of the 4-team playoff because they knew they could get in with really only a win over OSU and PSU. It just so happened to work this year.

This whole debate is stupid because it really doesn't matter which champion was "better" than a different year's champion. Computers can spit out all sorts of numbers. 2023 Michigan is going to be a computer darling simply because the teams they beat mostly only lost to Michigan or another team that Michigan beat. It's just an feedback loop that favors them.

That said, I don't think it matters at all if Michigan had played UCLA this year and last (apparently this was scheduled but then cancelled during COVID?), or that Michigan State and Nebraska both decided to cliff dive this year. Per last night's broadcast they trailed for something like 40 minutes all year, I think half of that was against Alabama, who they looked dominant against on the lines so it's not like we can say they fluked the win vs Bama.

It is weird that Michigan fans are running around trying to make this bigger than it is though. You just went 15-0, beat your 11-0 rival, beat the SEC champ in the Rose Bowl, beat the undefeated PAC-12 champ, and based on the ESPN win expectancy graphs post I saw on reddit, was never below 50% win expectancy except against Bama. That seems like a pretty awesome season. Take the 15 Ws, the championship, shut up, and enjoy it.

It looks like an SEC inferiority complex. "Our team this year was better than ALL of your champs!"

Funny enough, a lowly ACC squad is supposedly the best of all-time.

(01-09-2024 02:48 PM)esayem Wrote:  LOL that was NOT the second best team of all-time.

Yeah. I don't think Michigan was top 20 in the BCS era. I don't see them beating any other BCS/CFP champ except maybe 2007 LSU, 2001 OU and 2000 FSU. There were lots of strong teams this year but no all time elite teams.