Interest Decline in College Football?

[Thiefery]

Well if you go off National Titles alone, here is the 1990s:

1990: Colorado and Georgia Tech
1991: Miami and Washington
1992: Alabama
1993: Florida State (Auburn was unbeaten but on probation)
1994: Nebraska, Penn State
1995: Nebraska
1996: Florida
1997: Nebraska and Michigan
1998: Tennessee
1999: Florida State
2000: Oklahoma

That is 12 different teams (13 if you count unbeaten Auburn. Also Ohio State was regularly in contention and Kansas State and UCLA were in contention in 1998 so you could argue up to 16 teams)

Far greater parity than today.

it would be the same today had there also not have been a CFP in today's game. Look at 1997.. BiG wasn't even part of the BCS process. What you should remember was everyone wishing the top 2 or 3 schools had faced each other rather than go to a specific Bowl game

 

[Red_Alert]

When I first started watching Football (1990s), that wasn't true.

You had Nebraska, Tennessee, Florida, Florida State, Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Miami, Notre Dame, Alabama, Auburn, Kansas State, and others that were very good. Heck, the Pac12 tended to have a different power each year with USC, UCLA, the Arizona Schools, Washington, and Oregon all taking turns.

Georgia Tech and even Syracuse had decent teams as well. The only programs that were majorly down during that period were LSU, Oklahoma, and Texas but even they had some success.

Sometimes it seems you argue just to argue. A lot of that is because you're narrow minded, don't do your homework and just shoot from the hip with convoluted BS.

For starters.... "Decent" or "Very good" does not = "Dominant"
A "Decade" does not = a "Generation".
A "Generation" could span across 15 years in places like Tennessee when it comes to making babies. There are a lot of 45 year old grandma's there, right?
There are plenty of "decent teams" now. They just aren't winning national titles. They are not "dominant" in a "generation".

If you want to lock in a decade as being a "generation" (i.e. the '90s) that's fine, so let's do that then.
Again....."Decent teams" does not = "Dominant"
There were "decent teams" in the 90's just like there are "decent teams" now. An occasional "decent team" for a year or two does not = a 'dominant program'.

Top 5 AP finishes in the 90's

1990 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Colorado (39)	Big 8	11-1-1	1475	W 10-9 N #6 Notre Dame (Orange)
2	< 2	Georgia Tech (20)	ACC	11-0-1	1441
3	< 4	Miami (FL) (1)	Ind	10-2	1388
4	< 6	Florida State	Ind	10-2	1303
5	< 8	Washington	Pac-10	10-2	1246

1991 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Miami (FL) (32)	Big East	12-0	1472	W 22-0 H #11 Nebraska (Orange)
2	< 2	Washington (28)	Pac-10	12-0	1468
3	< 6	Penn State	Ind	11-2	1342
4	< 5	Florida State	Ind	11-2	1310
5	< 8	Alabama	SEC	11-1	1216

1992 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 2	Alabama (62)	SEC	13-0	1550	W 34-13 H #1 Miami (FL) (Sugar)
2	< 3	Florida State	ACC	11-1	1470
3	< 1	Miami (FL)	Big East	11-1	1410	L 34-13 N #2 Alabama (Sugar)
4	< 5	Notre Dame	Ind	10-1-1	1375
5	< 7	Michigan	Big Ten	9-0-3	1266

1993 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Florida State (46)	ACC	12-1	1532	W 18-16 N #2 Nebraska (Orange)
2	< 4	Notre Dame (12)	Ind	11-1	1478
3	< 2	Nebraska	Big 8	11-1	1418	L 18-16 N #1 Florida State (Orange)
4	< 5	Auburn (4)	SEC	11-0	1375
5	< 8	Florida	SEC	11-2	1307

1994 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Nebraska (51.5)	Big 8	13-0	1539.5	W 24-17 A #3 Miami (FL) (Orange)
2	< 2	Penn State (10.5)	Big Ten	12-0	1497.5
3	< 4	Colorado	Big 8	11-1	1410
4	< 7	Florida State	ACC	10-1-1	1320
5	< 6	Alabama	SEC	12-1	1312

1995 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Nebraska (62)	Big 8	12-0	1550	W 62-24 N #2 Florida (Fiesta)
2	< 2	Florida	SEC	12-1	1474	L 62-24 N #1 Nebraska (Fiesta)
3	< 4	Tennessee	SEC	11-1	1428
4	< 8	Florida State	ACC	10-2	1311
5	< 7	Colorado	Big 8	10-2	1309

1996 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 3	Florida (65.5)	SEC	12-1	1673.5	W 52-20 N #1 Florida State (Sugar)
2	< 4	Ohio State (1.5)	Big Ten	11-1	1585.5
3	< 1	Florida State	ACC	11-1	1529	L 52-20 N #3 Florida (Sugar)
4	< 2	Arizona State	Pac-10	11-1	1486
5	< 5	BYU	WAC	14-1	1360

1997 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Michigan (51.5)	Big Ten	12-0	1731.5	W 21-16 N #8 Washington State (Rose)
2	< 2	Nebraska (18.5)	Big 12	13-0	1698.5
3	< 4	Florida State	ACC	11-1	1599
4	< 6	Florida	SEC	10-2	1455
5	< 5	UCLA	Pac-10	10-2	1413

1998 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Tennessee (70)	SEC	13-0	1750	W 23-16 N #2 Florida State (BCS NC/Fiesta)
2	< 3	Ohio State	Big Ten	11-1	1673
3	< 2	Florida State	ACC	11-2	1574	L 23-16 N #1 Tennessee (BCS/Fiesta)
4	< 5	Arizona	Pac-10	12-1	1535	W 23-20 N Nebraska (Holiday)
5	< 7	Florida	SEC	10-2	1463

1999 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Florida State (70)	ACC	12-0	1750	W 46-29 N #2 Virginia Tech (BCS NC/Sugar)
2	< 2	Virginia Tech	Big East	11-1	1647	L 46-29 N #1 Florida State (BCS/Sugar)
3	< 3	Nebraska	Big 12	12-1	1634
4	< 4	Wisconsin	Big Ten	10-2	1519
5	< 8	Michigan	Big Ten	10-2	1406

1) Florida St: 109-13-1 (.890 winning percentage)
10 Top 5 AP finishes. 2 National titles.
2) Nebraska: 108-16-1 (.868 winning percentage)
5 Top 5 AP finishes. 2 National titles.
3) Florida: 102-22-1 (.820 winning percentage)
5 Top 5 AP finishes. 1 National title
.
.
4) Tennessee: 99-22-2 (.813 winning percentage)
2 Top 5 AP finishes. 1 National title.
5) Penn St: 97-26-0 (.789 winning percentage)
2 AP Top 5 finishes. No Natties
6) Michigan: 93-26-3 (.775 winning percentage)
3 AP Top 5 finishes. 1 National Title
7) Miami, FL: 92-27-0 (.773 wining percentage)
3 AP Top 5 finishes. 1 National title
8) Texas A&M: 94-28-2 (.766 winning percentage)
0 AP Top 5 finishes. No Natties
9) Ohio St: 91-29-3 (.752 winning percentage)
2 AP Top 5 finishes. No Natties
10) Colorado: 87-29-4 (.742 winning percentage)
3 AP Top 5 finishes. 1 National title.

I used the term "Dominant"
You passed of "Decent" and "Very good" implying they were the same as "Dominant".

Now going by the list of teams you provided and tried to pass off as some kind of an argument to my "Dominant" point of only 4-5 teams in every generation.
Florida St, Nebraska, and Florida were the only teams that would meet the "Dominant" criteria in the 90's. They separated themselves from the rest in winning percentage and Top 5 finishes.

Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Miami, Notre Dame, Alabama, Auburn, Kansas St, USC, UCLA, the Arizona Schools, Washington, Oregon, Georgia Tech, Syracuse were one or two year flash in the pan teams, but not "Dominant". Not regulars in the Top 5.

If you want Top 10 finishes in the 90's
Florida St: 10 Top 10 AP finishes
Nebraska: 6 Top 10 AP finishes
Florida: 6 Top 10 AP finishes.
.
.
Your list
Penn St: 4 Top 10 finishes
Ohio St: 3 Top 10 finishes
Michigan: 5 Top 10 finishes
Miami: 4 Top 10 finishes
Notre Dame: 3 Top 10 finishes
Alabama: 4 Top 10 finishes
Auburn: 2 Top 10 finishes
Kansas St: 4 Top 10 finishes
USC: ZERO Top 10 finishes
UCLA: 2 Top 10 finishes
Arizona: 2 Top 10 finishes
Arizona St: 1 Top 10 finishes
Washington: 2 Top 10 finishes
Oregon: ZERO Top 10 finishes
Georgia Tech: 2 Top 10 finishes
Colorado: 4 Top 10 finishes
Syracuse: 1 Top 10 finishes

Your list of 17 argument couldn't even match Florida St, Nebraska, and Florida's Top 5 finishes.

 

[fordman84]

Sometimes it seems you argue just to argue. A lot of that is because you're narrow minded, don't do your homework and just shoot from the hip with convoluted BS.

For starters.... "Decent" or "Very good" does not = "Dominant"
A "Decade" does not = a "Generation".
A "Generation" could span across 15 years in places like Tennessee when it comes to making babies. There are a lot of 45 year old grandma's there, right?
There are plenty of "decent teams" now. They just aren't winning national titles. They are not "dominant" in a "generation".

If you want to lock in a decade as being a "generation" (i.e. the '90s) that's fine, so let's do that then.
Again....."Decent teams" does not = "Dominant"
There were "decent teams" in the 90's just like there are "decent teams" now. An occasional "decent team" for a year or two does not = a 'dominant program'.

Top 5 AP finishes in the 90's

1990 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Colorado (39)	Big 8	11-1-1	1475	W 10-9 N #6 Notre Dame (Orange)
2	< 2	Georgia Tech (20)	ACC	11-0-1	1441
3	< 4	Miami (FL) (1)	Ind	10-2	1388
4	< 6	Florida State	Ind	10-2	1303
5	< 8	Washington	Pac-10	10-2	1246

1991 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Miami (FL) (32)	Big East	12-0	1472	W 22-0 H #11 Nebraska (Orange)
2	< 2	Washington (28)	Pac-10	12-0	1468
3	< 6	Penn State	Ind	11-2	1342
4	< 5	Florida State	Ind	11-2	1310
5	< 8	Alabama	SEC	11-1	1216

1992 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 2	Alabama (62)	SEC	13-0	1550	W 34-13 H #1 Miami (FL) (Sugar)
2	< 3	Florida State	ACC	11-1	1470
3	< 1	Miami (FL)	Big East	11-1	1410	L 34-13 N #2 Alabama (Sugar)
4	< 5	Notre Dame	Ind	10-1-1	1375
5	< 7	Michigan	Big Ten	9-0-3	1266

1993 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Florida State (46)	ACC	12-1	1532	W 18-16 N #2 Nebraska (Orange)
2	< 4	Notre Dame (12)	Ind	11-1	1478
3	< 2	Nebraska	Big 8	11-1	1418	L 18-16 N #1 Florida State (Orange)
4	< 5	Auburn (4)	SEC	11-0	1375
5	< 8	Florida	SEC	11-2	1307

1994 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Nebraska (51.5)	Big 8	13-0	1539.5	W 24-17 A #3 Miami (FL) (Orange)
2	< 2	Penn State (10.5)	Big Ten	12-0	1497.5
3	< 4	Colorado	Big 8	11-1	1410
4	< 7	Florida State	ACC	10-1-1	1320
5	< 6	Alabama	SEC	12-1	1312

1995 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Nebraska (62)	Big 8	12-0	1550	W 62-24 N #2 Florida (Fiesta)
2	< 2	Florida	SEC	12-1	1474	L 62-24 N #1 Nebraska (Fiesta)
3	< 4	Tennessee	SEC	11-1	1428
4	< 8	Florida State	ACC	10-2	1311
5	< 7	Colorado	Big 8	10-2	1309

1996 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 3	Florida (65.5)	SEC	12-1	1673.5	W 52-20 N #1 Florida State (Sugar)
2	< 4	Ohio State (1.5)	Big Ten	11-1	1585.5
3	< 1	Florida State	ACC	11-1	1529	L 52-20 N #3 Florida (Sugar)
4	< 2	Arizona State	Pac-10	11-1	1486
5	< 5	BYU	WAC	14-1	1360

1997 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Michigan (51.5)	Big Ten	12-0	1731.5	W 21-16 N #8 Washington State (Rose)
2	< 2	Nebraska (18.5)	Big 12	13-0	1698.5
3	< 4	Florida State	ACC	11-1	1599
4	< 6	Florida	SEC	10-2	1455
5	< 5	UCLA	Pac-10	10-2	1413

1998 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Tennessee (70)	SEC	13-0	1750	W 23-16 N #2 Florida State (BCS NC/Fiesta)
2	< 3	Ohio State	Big Ten	11-1	1673
3	< 2	Florida State	ACC	11-2	1574	L 23-16 N #1 Tennessee (BCS/Fiesta)
4	< 5	Arizona	Pac-10	12-1	1535	W 23-20 N Nebraska (Holiday)
5	< 7	Florida	SEC	10-2	1463

1999 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Florida State (70)	ACC	12-0	1750	W 46-29 N #2 Virginia Tech (BCS NC/Sugar)
2	< 2	Virginia Tech	Big East	11-1	1647	L 46-29 N #1 Florida State (BCS/Sugar)
3	< 3	Nebraska	Big 12	12-1	1634
4	< 4	Wisconsin	Big Ten	10-2	1519
5	< 8	Michigan	Big Ten	10-2	1406

1) Florida St: 109-13-1 (.890 winning percentage)
10 Top 5 AP finishes. 2 National titles.
2) Nebraska: 108-16-1 (.868 winning percentage)
5 Top 5 AP finishes. 2 National titles.
3) Florida: 102-22-1 (.820 winning percentage)
5 Top 5 AP finishes. 1 National title
.
.
4) Tennessee: 99-22-2 (.813 winning percentage)
2 Top 5 AP finishes. 1 National title.
5) Penn St: 97-26-0 (.789 winning percentage)
2 AP Top 5 finishes. No Natties
6) Michigan: 93-26-3 (.775 winning percentage)
3 AP Top 5 finishes. 1 National Title
7) Miami, FL: 92-27-0 (.773 wining percentage)
3 AP Top 5 finishes. 1 National title
8) Texas A&M: 94-28-2 (.766 winning percentage)
0 AP Top 5 finishes. No Natties
9) Ohio St: 91-29-3 (.752 winning percentage)
2 AP Top 5 finishes. No Natties
10) Colorado: 87-29-4 (.742 winning percentage)
3 AP Top 5 finishes. 1 National title.

I used the term "Dominant"
You passed of "Decent" and "Very good" implying they were the same as "Dominant".

Now going by the list of teams you provided and tried to pass off as some kind of an argument to my "Dominant" point of only 4-5 teams in every generation.
Florida St, Nebraska, and Florida were the only teams that would meet the "Dominant" criteria in the 90's. They separated themselves from the rest in winning percentage and Top 5 finishes.

Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Miami, Notre Dame, Alabama, Auburn, Kansas St, USC, UCLA, the Arizona Schools, Washington, Oregon, Georgia Tech, Syracuse were one or two year flash in the pan teams, but not "Dominant". Not regulars in the Top 5.

If you want Top 10 finishes in the 90's
Florida St: 10 Top 10 AP finishes
Nebraska: 6 Top 10 AP finishes
Florida: 6 Top 10 AP finishes.
.
.
Your list
Penn St: 4 Top 10 finishes
Ohio St: 3 Top 10 finishes
Michigan: 5 Top 10 finishes
Miami: 4 Top 10 finishes
Notre Dame: 3 Top 10 finishes
Alabama: 4 Top 10 finishes
Auburn: 2 Top 10 finishes
Kansas St: 4 Top 10 finishes
USC: ZERO Top 10 finishes
UCLA: 2 Top 10 finishes
Arizona: 2 Top 10 finishes
Arizona St: 1 Top 10 finishes
Washington: 2 Top 10 finishes
Oregon: ZERO Top 10 finishes
Georgia Tech: 2 Top 10 finishes
Colorado: 4 Top 10 finishes
Syracuse: 1 Top 10 finishes

Your list of 17 argument couldn't even match Florida St, Nebraska, and Florida's Top 5 finishes.

Now this is a nice concise post that gets to the point. @WhosYourDawggy could learn a thing or two from RA

 

[Red_Alert]

gonna need your definition of dominant and very good with those teams u listed

Right?

Volbound just throws shit at the wall to see what sticks.
He doesn't do his homework and hopes nobody else will to prove he's an ignorant idiot.

 

[Red_Alert]

Well if you go off National Titles alone, here is the 1990s:

1990: Colorado and Georgia Tech
1991: Miami and Washington
1992: Alabama
1993: Florida State (Auburn was unbeaten but on probation)
1994: Nebraska, Penn State
1995: Nebraska
1996: Florida
1997: Nebraska and Michigan
1998: Tennessee
1999: Florida State
2000: Oklahoma

That is 12 different teams (13 if you count unbeaten Auburn. Also Ohio State was regularly in contention and Kansas State and UCLA were in contention in 1998 so you could argue up to 16 teams)

Far greater parity than today.

It goes a lot deeper than that to consider someone "Dominant" for a "generation" or even a "decade".

 

[Goldbug]

it would be the same today had there also not have been a CFP in today's game. Look at 1997.. BiG wasn't even part of the BCS process. What you should remember was everyone wishing the top 2 or 3 schools had faced each other rather than go to a specific Bowl game

Why can't these conference commissioners and university presidents just get off their backsides and expand the playoff to at least 8 teams and be done with it? I'd prefer 12 teams myself with the top 4 seeds getting an advantage for being ranked that high but 8 is certainly better than 4. And start the expanded playoff immediately. I'm sooooo tired of hearing about Notre Dame, or the damn Rose Bowl or someone with a tiny little ax to grind gumming up the works. It's situations like this that make people yearn for a new governing organization that can enforce rules, crack down on cheaters and make some decisions.

 

[Red_Alert]

LOL at trying to pass off USC and Oregon as "dominant" teams in the 90's when they had ZERO Top 10 finishes.
LOL at trying to pass off Arizona St and Syracuse as "dominant teams in the 90's when they had just 1 Top 10 finish each.

That's 'throw shit at a wall and hope it sticks' stuff there.

 

[OlyDuck]

LOL at trying to pass off USC and Oregon as "dominant" teams in the 90's when they had ZERO Top 10 finishes.
LOL at trying to pass off Arizona St and Syracuse as "dominant teams in the 90's when they had just 1 Top 10 finish each.

That's 'throw shit at a wall and hope it sticks' stuff there.

thats on him. Oregon and USC fans never made such a claim. Oregon started coming up after that same with USC

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Why can't these conference commissioners and university presidents just get off their backsides and expand the playoff to at least 8 teams and be done with it? I'd prefer 12 teams myself with the top 4 seeds getting an advantage for being ranked that high but 8 is certainly better than 4. And start the expanded playoff immediately. I'm sooooo tired of hearing about Notre Dame, or the damn Rose Bowl or someone with a tiny little ax to grind gumming up the works. It's situations like this that make people yearn for a new governing organization that can enforce rules, crack down on cheaters and make some decisions.

At this point they missed the deadline to do it before the contract ends. Now it makes sense to play it out for the new contract period. It will be 12, with 5+1 conf champs. The Rose Bowl will get some special treatment, but not all they want. Multiple networks will be involved. There will be no limits on how many teams a conference can have. The first round will be home games. I think that is the checklist ...

 

[Red_Alert]

thats on him. Oregon and USC fans never made such a claim. Oregon started coming up after that same with USC

Yep.

No shots fired at USC/Oregon fans.

My point stands that every generation only has 4 or 5 teams (at best) that can be considered dominant for that generation.
Same as there is now.

If we were to take the 50's, 60's, 70s, 80s, and 2000s it would be much the same as 2010-2020. 4 or 5 teams (at best) would stand out as "Dominant". i.e. National titles and consistent Top 5 rankings. i.e. Alabama, Clemson.

Things don't change, just the teams do. It's what makes for "elite" coaches.

 

[Thiefery]

At this point they missed the deadline to do it before the contract ends. Now it makes sense to play it out for the new contract period. It will be 12, with 5+1 conf champs. The Rose Bowl will get some special treatment, but not all they want. Multiple networks will be involved. There will be no limits on how many teams a conference can have. The first round will be home games. I think that is the checklist ...

it's going to happen..bowlsby interview mentions it as well.. they have to vote on it within the year because the 4 school playoff expires and there isn't anything that keeps it going.

 

[Volbound1700]

Yep.

No shots fired at USC/Oregon fans.

My point stands that every generation only has 4 or 5 teams (at best) that can be considered dominant for that generation.
Same as there is now.

If we were to take the 50's, 60's, 70s, 80s, and 2000s it would be much the same as 2010-2020. 4 or 5 teams (at best) would stand out as "Dominant". i.e. National titles and consistent Top 5 rankings. i.e. Alabama, Clemson.

Things don't change, just the teams do. It's what makes for "elite" coaches.

The 1990s had far more parity than now. Your hate for me missed my entire point and all you are looking is to troll/argue instead of actually reading and understanding my point. This is why you are a shitty poster overall. You also think that I am just arguing with people all of the time because I simple "Reply" to them when most of the time I am agreeing or adding to their point.

Alabama, Ohio State, and Clemson have pretty much dominated since 2000s with some small runs by LSU, Georgia, and Florida State.

Take the 1990s where only two teams had more than one National Titles (FSU and Nebraska). Even assuming you crown only one Champion a year and Nebraska wins in 1994 and 1997, you still have 9 Different Champions:

1990 Colorado
1991 Miami
1992 Alabama
1993 FSU
1994 Nebraska
1995 Nebraska
1996 Florida
1997 Nebraska
1998 Tennessee
1999 FSU
2000 Oklahoma

That is very different from 2011-2021 span where you only 4 instances without Alabama or Clemson winning it (Ohio State in 2014, FSU in 2013, LSU in 2019 and Georgia this past season). Far less parity. You also have every conference represented and winning a title in the 1990s something you don't have now. With the exception of Nebraska, you really cannot argue that anyone dominated the 1990s

It isn't just National, the SEC has been dominated by Alabama, B1G by Ohio State, and ACC by Clemson in modern era.

Going off Pac12 argument.

Also I think Oregon finished in the top 10 in 2000 which is in the time span listed in my post. USC finished in the top 10 in 1995/1996 (well #11 in one poll). Pac12 had 7 out of 10 different teams win the Conference. That is parity.

 

[Goldbug]

At this point they missed the deadline to do it before the contract ends. Now it makes sense to play it out for the new contract period. It will be 12, with 5+1 conf champs. The Rose Bowl will get some special treatment, but not all they want. Multiple networks will be involved. There will be no limits on how many teams a conference can have. The first round will be home games. I think that is the checklist ...

Maybe. Until Notre Dame (which hasn't won a NC in THIRTY FOUR years starts whimpering about something or the PAC 12 gets its undies in a knot over something. I have no faith it will be a smooth transition. At some point it is better to call someone's bluff and just tell them to kick rocks if they don't want to go along with the majority. But some people will shout "OMG" if Notre Dame is left out......the same school that hasn't won it since the year Ronald Reagan beat Walter Mondale for Prez, Aids was identified and Michael Jackson's hair caught on fire.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

it's going to happen..bowlsby interview mentions it as well.. they have to vote on it within the year because the 4 school playoff expires and there isn't anything that keeps it going.

The first year it can come into play is 2026-27, so I don't know how much of a hurry they are in. Guessing it happens in 2023, not 2022. The Alliance wants to work through NIL and portal first, LOL.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Maybe. Until Notre Dame (which hasn't won a NC in THIRTY FOUR years starts whimpering about something or the PAC 12 gets its undies in a knot over something. I have no faith it will be a smooth transition. At some point it is better to call someone's bluff and just tell them to kick rocks if they don't want to go along with the majority. But some people will shout "OMG" if Notre Dame is left out......the same school that hasn't won it since the year Ronald Reagan beat Walter Mondale for Prez, Aids was identified and Michael Jackson's hair caught on fire.

ND isn't the problem with the CFP expansion. Maybe I misread what you are saying, but they aren't the issue.

 

[Red_Alert]

The 1990s had far more parity than now. Your hate for me missed my entire point and all you are looking is to troll/argue instead of actually reading and understanding my point. This is why you are a shitty poster overall. You also think that I am just arguing with people all of the time because I simple "Reply" to them when most of the time I am agreeing or adding to their point.

Alabama, Ohio State, and Clemson have pretty much dominated since 2000s with some small runs by LSU, Georgia, and Florida State.

Take the 1990s where only two teams had more than one National Titles (FSU and Nebraska). Even assuming you crown only one Champion a year and Nebraska wins in 1994 and 1997, you still have 9 Different Champions:

1990 Colorado
1991 Miami
1992 Alabama
1993 FSU
1994 Nebraska
1995 Nebraska
1996 Florida
1997 Nebraska
1998 Tennessee
1999 FSU
2000 Oklahoma

That is very different from 2011-2021 span where you only 4 instances without Alabama or Clemson winning it (Ohio State in 2014, FSU in 2013, LSU in 2019 and Georgia this past season). Far less parity. You also have every conference represented and winning a title in the 1990s something you don't have now. With the exception of Nebraska, you really cannot argue that anyone dominated the 1990s

It isn't just National, the SEC has been dominated by Alabama, B1G by Ohio State, and ACC by Clemson in modern era.

Going off Pac12 argument.

Also I think Oregon finished in the top 10 in 2000 which is in the time span listed in my post. USC finished in the top 10 in 1995/1996 (well #11 in one poll). Pac12 had 7 out of 10 different teams win the Conference. That is parity.

Your dumbfuckery knows no bounds.

I was clearly referring to AP polls. In that I only credited Nebraska with 2 national titles (94/95) instead of 3.
Michigan won the AP in 1997.

USC finished #12 in the 1995 final AP poll.
USC finished UNRANKED in the 1996 AP poll.

You still don't know what the word "dominant" means.
Hence the replies to you by others.

 

[Tharvot]

Sometimes it seems you argue just to argue. A lot of that is because you're narrow minded, don't do your homework and just shoot from the hip with convoluted BS.

For starters.... "Decent" or "Very good" does not = "Dominant"
A "Decade" does not = a "Generation".
A "Generation" could span across 15 years in places like Tennessee when it comes to making babies. There are a lot of 45 year old grandma's there, right?
There are plenty of "decent teams" now. They just aren't winning national titles. They are not "dominant" in a "generation".

If you want to lock in a decade as being a "generation" (i.e. the '90s) that's fine, so let's do that then.
Again....."Decent teams" does not = "Dominant"
There were "decent teams" in the 90's just like there are "decent teams" now. An occasional "decent team" for a year or two does not = a 'dominant program'.

Top 5 AP finishes in the 90's

1990 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Colorado (39)	Big 8	11-1-1	1475	W 10-9 N #6 Notre Dame (Orange)
2	< 2	Georgia Tech (20)	ACC	11-0-1	1441
3	< 4	Miami (FL) (1)	Ind	10-2	1388
4	< 6	Florida State	Ind	10-2	1303
5	< 8	Washington	Pac-10	10-2	1246

1991 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Miami (FL) (32)	Big East	12-0	1472	W 22-0 H #11 Nebraska (Orange)
2	< 2	Washington (28)	Pac-10	12-0	1468
3	< 6	Penn State	Ind	11-2	1342
4	< 5	Florida State	Ind	11-2	1310
5	< 8	Alabama	SEC	11-1	1216

1992 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 2	Alabama (62)	SEC	13-0	1550	W 34-13 H #1 Miami (FL) (Sugar)
2	< 3	Florida State	ACC	11-1	1470
3	< 1	Miami (FL)	Big East	11-1	1410	L 34-13 N #2 Alabama (Sugar)
4	< 5	Notre Dame	Ind	10-1-1	1375
5	< 7	Michigan	Big Ten	9-0-3	1266

1993 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Florida State (46)	ACC	12-1	1532	W 18-16 N #2 Nebraska (Orange)
2	< 4	Notre Dame (12)	Ind	11-1	1478
3	< 2	Nebraska	Big 8	11-1	1418	L 18-16 N #1 Florida State (Orange)
4	< 5	Auburn (4)	SEC	11-0	1375
5	< 8	Florida	SEC	11-2	1307

1994 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Nebraska (51.5)	Big 8	13-0	1539.5	W 24-17 A #3 Miami (FL) (Orange)
2	< 2	Penn State (10.5)	Big Ten	12-0	1497.5
3	< 4	Colorado	Big 8	11-1	1410
4	< 7	Florida State	ACC	10-1-1	1320
5	< 6	Alabama	SEC	12-1	1312

1995 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Nebraska (62)	Big 8	12-0	1550	W 62-24 N #2 Florida (Fiesta)
2	< 2	Florida	SEC	12-1	1474	L 62-24 N #1 Nebraska (Fiesta)
3	< 4	Tennessee	SEC	11-1	1428
4	< 8	Florida State	ACC	10-2	1311
5	< 7	Colorado	Big 8	10-2	1309

1996 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 3	Florida (65.5)	SEC	12-1	1673.5	W 52-20 N #1 Florida State (Sugar)
2	< 4	Ohio State (1.5)	Big Ten	11-1	1585.5
3	< 1	Florida State	ACC	11-1	1529	L 52-20 N #3 Florida (Sugar)
4	< 2	Arizona State	Pac-10	11-1	1486
5	< 5	BYU	WAC	14-1	1360

1997 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Michigan (51.5)	Big Ten	12-0	1731.5	W 21-16 N #8 Washington State (Rose)
2	< 2	Nebraska (18.5)	Big 12	13-0	1698.5
3	< 4	Florida State	ACC	11-1	1599
4	< 6	Florida	SEC	10-2	1455
5	< 5	UCLA	Pac-10	10-2	1413

1998 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Tennessee (70)	SEC	13-0	1750	W 23-16 N #2 Florida State (BCS NC/Fiesta)
2	< 3	Ohio State	Big Ten	11-1	1673
3	< 2	Florida State	ACC	11-2	1574	L 23-16 N #1 Tennessee (BCS/Fiesta)
4	< 5	Arizona	Pac-10	12-1	1535	W 23-20 N Nebraska (Holiday)
5	< 7	Florida	SEC	10-2	1463

1999 Final AP Football Poll​

Rank	Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Florida State (70)	ACC	12-0	1750	W 46-29 N #2 Virginia Tech (BCS NC/Sugar)
2	< 2	Virginia Tech	Big East	11-1	1647	L 46-29 N #1 Florida State (BCS/Sugar)
3	< 3	Nebraska	Big 12	12-1	1634
4	< 4	Wisconsin	Big Ten	10-2	1519
5	< 8	Michigan	Big Ten	10-2	1406

1) Florida St: 109-13-1 (.890 winning percentage)
10 Top 5 AP finishes. 2 National titles.
2) Nebraska: 108-16-1 (.868 winning percentage)
5 Top 5 AP finishes. 2 National titles.
3) Florida: 102-22-1 (.820 winning percentage)
5 Top 5 AP finishes. 1 National title
.
.
4) Tennessee: 99-22-2 (.813 winning percentage)
2 Top 5 AP finishes. 1 National title.
5) Penn St: 97-26-0 (.789 winning percentage)
2 AP Top 5 finishes. No Natties
6) Michigan: 93-26-3 (.775 winning percentage)
3 AP Top 5 finishes. 1 National Title
7) Miami, FL: 92-27-0 (.773 wining percentage)
3 AP Top 5 finishes. 1 National title
8) Texas A&M: 94-28-2 (.766 winning percentage)
0 AP Top 5 finishes. No Natties
9) Ohio St: 91-29-3 (.752 winning percentage)
2 AP Top 5 finishes. No Natties
10) Colorado: 87-29-4 (.742 winning percentage)
3 AP Top 5 finishes. 1 National title.

I used the term "Dominant"
You passed of "Decent" and "Very good" implying they were the same as "Dominant".

Now going by the list of teams you provided and tried to pass off as some kind of an argument to my "Dominant" point of only 4-5 teams in every generation.
Florida St, Nebraska, and Florida were the only teams that would meet the "Dominant" criteria in the 90's. They separated themselves from the rest in winning percentage and Top 5 finishes.

Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Miami, Notre Dame, Alabama, Auburn, Kansas St, USC, UCLA, the Arizona Schools, Washington, Oregon, Georgia Tech, Syracuse were one or two year flash in the pan teams, but not "Dominant". Not regulars in the Top 5.

If you want Top 10 finishes in the 90's
Florida St: 10 Top 10 AP finishes
Nebraska: 6 Top 10 AP finishes
Florida: 6 Top 10 AP finishes.
.
.
Your list
Penn St: 4 Top 10 finishes
Ohio St: 3 Top 10 finishes
Michigan: 5 Top 10 finishes
Miami: 4 Top 10 finishes
Notre Dame: 3 Top 10 finishes
Alabama: 4 Top 10 finishes
Auburn: 2 Top 10 finishes
Kansas St: 4 Top 10 finishes
USC: ZERO Top 10 finishes
UCLA: 2 Top 10 finishes
Arizona: 2 Top 10 finishes
Arizona St: 1 Top 10 finishes
Washington: 2 Top 10 finishes
Oregon: ZERO Top 10 finishes
Georgia Tech: 2 Top 10 finishes
Colorado: 4 Top 10 finishes
Syracuse: 1 Top 10 finishes

Your list of 17 argument couldn't even match Florida St, Nebraska, and Florida's Top 5 finishes.

Good to see this matches with my vague recollection of the sport at the time. When I think 90s CFB, I think of the florida schools, penn st, and Notre Dame....and Ohio State always losing to Michigan.

For whatever reason, Nebraska never came to mind...probably because where i lived they weren't on as much.

 

[CoalTrain]

It’s where Tennessee has been down. Fear not though UT will be back soon and save CFB.

 

[Volbound1700]

Your dumbfuckery knows no bounds.

I was clearly referring to AP polls. In that I only credited Nebraska with 2 national titles (94/95) instead of 3.
Michigan won the AP in 1997.

USC finished #12 in the 1995 final AP poll.
USC finished UNRANKED in the 1996 AP poll.

You still don't know what the word "dominant" means.
Hence the replies to you by others.

Apparently you do not. Dominant is Alabama 2011-2021 or Clemson in that span as well since they won over 50% of the titles between the two. No one was dominate like they are in the 1990s, you had parity. Even Nebraska wasn't winning the Big12 every year. In the last 10 years, I could pick Alabama to win the SEC, Ohio State to win the B1G, Oklahoma to win Big12, and Clemson to win the ACC and I would be correct 80% of the time. Only the Pac12 had some semblance of parity in this period.

You clearly cannot have a normal conversation without resorting to name calling and arguing you are correct. Did I just shoot from my hip about Oregon and USC, yes. I am going off memory and not reading internet stats all of the time because I have a life and I am engaging in a conversation like men would at a sports bar and not a spoiled, entitled asshole. Even then, once I looked it up, I see my logic. USC made a Rose Bowl and won the Pac12 so it was fair to assume they would be in the top 10 (was wrong there). Oregon first started winning the Pac12 and made Rose Bowls in the 1990s/early 2000s. I remember because I had a Football Game in Highschool with Joey Harrington on the cover.

I pity you get a life. I am done with this conversation. Go make 5-10 posts showing how you are correct and pull a bunch of stats because you have no life and HAVE to be correct. It is clear you cannot have a conversation like a normal human being. High School must have been rough for you.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

It’s where Tennessee has been down. Fear not though UT will be back soon and save CFB.

I assure you, were aren't fearing UTjr.