Athlon Ranks the AP-Era Dynasties; 1990s Nebraska #2

[Count 'Bility]

I know it's hard to accept, but the sports media isn't cheerleading for the SEC, they're reporting the story.

Excuse me sir, but what the hell century are you living in? How many decades has it been since any media simply "reported the story". The SEC may be the best right now, but again, the gap is nowhere near as large as this high integrity media you speak of want us to believe. ESPN has huge interest in the SEC. Moreso than probably any other conference. I just dont understand how the bias is anything but completely obvious.

I know I ramble on here a lot about my "espn hates Nebraska" theories and such. In all honesty, I dont really believe that. It's more of a sarcastic type of talking point that I like to use to try to get a laugh out of folks. I do believe espn favors the SEC in everything they do however. It's just too repetitive.

 

[Hoosker]

I think there is no doubt what they've done is impressive as hell. If they win it all again this year, I'd put them at #1, but only until the sanctions come out and they get wins vacated. We all know it's going to happen.

Nothing is going to top what we did in the 90s.

Honest and respectful.

Osborne > Saban.

 

[walksalone]

'Bama has had a hell of a run, and thats tough to deny.

But when you get down to brass tacks, none of their teams from this stretch would beat the best team from those 90's championship teams...

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

If there's one thing which can be said about these Alabama teams, it is that they know how to take advantage of getting a second chance.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

I know it's hard to accept, but the sports media isn't cheerleading for the SEC, they're reporting the story.

Excuse me sir, but what the hell century are you living in? How many decades has it been since any media simply "reported the story". The SEC may be the best right now, but again, the gap is nowhere near as large as this high integrity media you speak of want us to believe. ESPN has huge interest in the SEC. Moreso than probably any other conference. I just dont understand how the bias is anything but completely obvious.

I know I ramble on here a lot about my "espn hates Nebraska" theories and such. In all honesty, I dont really believe that. It's more of a sarcastic type of talking point that I like to use to try to get a laugh out of folks. I do believe espn favors the SEC in everything they do however. It's just too repetitive.

I'm not claiming the media is a bastion of integrity. They care about ratings and they care about stories and for the last few years the SEC and Tim Tebow and Urban Meyer and Nick Saban and the Honey Badger, etc. have been good stories. They also report when there are scandals and meltdowns in the SEC because those are good stories, too. That's really the cheerleading reference I was making: I don't think the media tries to pretty up the SEC or make them something they're not. They don't need to do that. The SEC gives them big games and big names, but as soon as a better story comes along, they'll jump on that, too. Boise State, Appalachian State, Oregon, Kansas State, Northern Illinois, and Loisville got good coverage when they became good stories, and some folks here will begrudge them for coming from lesser conferences.

I've lived long enough to remember when the Big 8, Big 10, Pac 10 and Notre Dame dominated the college football conversation because the SEC had fallen off.

I'm just making the "goes around, comes around" case. The media bias argument doesn't hold up very well, and appears to change immediately when the underdog proves it on the field.

 

[Saunders]

If ESPN and other national pundits talk up the strength of the Big 10, do you think it's favoritism?

Well they don't talk up the Big 10 because the Big 10 is down at the moment.

The SEC is up at the moment. They've earned it on the field. Their 4th and 5th best teams beat Nebraska the past two bowl games. Their best team dismantled an undefeated Notre Dame. Maybe an Alabama rematch with A&M would have been the better NC game.

I know it's hard to accept, but the sports media isn't cheerleading for the SEC, they're reporting the story. The SEC has never NOT been a story in college football. The SEC is good for college football. You can admit that while still rooting for other teams to come in and totally kick the SEC's a$$.

1. UGA was one play from playing for (and probably winning) a national title last year. We were every step their equal for 3.5 quarters until we ran out of gas. Our our defense sucked balls.

2. Uh, you mean the same sports media that just signed a billion dollar TV contract to promote the SEC? Thinking ESPN doesn't influence CFB with their SEC shilling is lols....

 

[EZ-E]

Didn't Barry Sweatshirt get OU put on probation multiple times???? If so, there is no way you can rank a known cheater on this list. Anywhere. That's my honest opinion. It isn't like Saint Saban has done some shady sh#t as well.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Oklahoma's 47 game winning streak came a couple decades before Barry Switzer showed up.

 

[Count 'Bility]

Oklahoma's 47 game winning streak came a couple decades before Barry Switzer showed up.

Correct. That streak took place in the 50's under Wilkinson. Switzer's issues mostly came in the 80's.

 

[EZ-E]

Oklahoma's 47 game winning streak came a couple decades before Barry Switzer showed up.

Correct. That streak took place in the 50's under Wilkinson. Switzer's issues mostly came in the 80's.

Gotcha

 

[HuskerThor]

Alabama at #2 for me, with the '90s Huskers at #1. The 60-3 and us winning our divisions says enough. Sure you can say they won vs a tough schedule, but many forget how dominant the Big 8/12 was back then. We were the "SEC".

As it has been said before, we played our asses off, and beat everyone in front of us. We didn't get any breaks, or tragedies to other teams to help our course. Its all part of the game, but you can't turn a blind eye to the obvious.

If Alabama is to win this year, they will be #1 in many people's eyes, and its quite obvious why, I just wish they had LSU's schedule to see how good they really are. They schedule, just like every other year is a joke, and is set up for success. IIRC, the guy who makes the schedules for the SEC is an Alabama Alumni. They play two "tough games... TAMU and LSU. LSU plays Alabama, Florida, Georgia, TAMU and TCU being their toughest non conference game.

This is a joke, right? Playing in the Chick-Fil-A Classic almost every year (Nebraska played in it once in that span), playing in the SEC championship most years (Nebraska won the Big XII champ game once in that span), an SEC West Schedule (LSU, Auburn, A&M, Arkansas)....give me a break. I will say that they get a break THIS year due to the rotation (UT and UK), but they always get stuck with the West, usually a decent East team, and the championship game. Consider who was good in the Big 8/12 in the mid-90s time. OU was the worst that they have ever been, Texas was pretty bad, A&M was okay, CU was pretty good, KSU was JUST starting to come around (still not great), KU had their second best team ever in '95....and that's about it. Who was the best team that we played OOC during that span? ASU in '96...and we lost.

1997 Washington #2, we won.

 

[HuskerTrucker]

The 71-72 Huskers were dominate. The only team that could even play with them was Oklahoma at the time. I still believe that they were the best team that Nebraska ever put on a field, except MAYBE for the 97 Huskers. Long live Jerry Tagge and Johnny Rogers!

Most of the people on this board were probably not even alive in the early 70's, so I am not expecting much support.

 

[beanman]

The 71-72 Huskers were dominate. The only team that could even play with them was Oklahoma at the time. I still believe that they were the best team that Nebraska ever put on a field, except MAYBE for the 97 Huskers. Long live Jerry Tagge and Johnny Rogers!

Most of the people on this board were probably not even alive in the early 70's, so I am not expecting much support.

Not sure if serious.

 

[Count 'Bility]

The 71-72 Huskers were dominate. The only team that could even play with them was Oklahoma at the time. I still believe that they were the best team that Nebraska ever put on a field, except MAYBE for the 97 Huskers. Long live Jerry Tagge and Johnny Rogers!

Most of the people on this board were probably not even alive in the early 70's, so I am not expecting much support.

Not sure if serious.

He must mean 95. He must.

 

[T_O_Bull]

So Athlon ranked the college football dynasties of the Associated Press Era (1934-present), the teams that put together massive win streaks marked by utter dominance and the lamentation of their opponents.

It's a pretty tough thing to rank; how do you say Nebraska's five-year 90s run of 60 wins to three losses is "better" than #3 Miami's seven-year run from 86-92 of 78 wins and six losses? They have their explanation and everyone will have their varying opinions.

Oklahoma's dominating run from the late 40s to the late 50s leads their ranking at #1, followed by the 90s Huskers:

2. Nebraska Cornhuskers (1993-97): 60-3Is winning more than 95 percent of your games a good thing? That is what Tom Osbourne did at Nebraska over his final five seasons. Led by arguably the greatest college quarterback of all-time in Tommie Frazier, the Big Red posted four unbeaten regular seasons, all of which culminated in a trip to the national championship game. One loss to Florida State in the ’93 Orange Bowl is the only thing that kept the Huskers from four national championships in five seasons. A huge upset in the inaugural Big 12 title game to Texas was one of just three losses during this stretch. This Nebraska run produced the 19th longest winning streak in NCAA history with 26 straight wins from 1994-96.

LINK

The Huskers of the early 70s make an appearance later in the rankings (#23).

Perhaps the most intriguing ranking is Alabama (2008-present) at #4. If they win an unprecedented third straight BCS National Championship, and fourth in five years, how far up this ranking would you move them? Ahead of #3 Miami? Ahead of #2 Nebraska? All the way to #1?

I can't give 'Bama a lot of credit because I think they are worthy of an NCAA investigation.