Top 10 College Football (Division 1) Wins of All-Time

[futurecoach]

I'm not saying the past doesn't matter, ND and Michigan have a tradition and history. But their history doesn't matter anymore. Sports are a what have you done for me lately proposition and that is how I look at it. The majority of the players on ND and Michigan can't remember a time when their program was dominating college football. I have never once talked about all time. I'm talking about my reality and the way I see the world of college football. In my lifetime of college football its Ohio State, Alabama, LSU, FSU, and USC. That is the class of college football to me. Like I told UKMF, you take the all time wins and I'll take recent dominance and National Championships because that is the current reality of college football. To say Ohio State hasn't been dominant is simply false. They have been national championship relevant basically every year since the turn of the millennium. 11 out of 15 years they have been national championship relevant. If that isn't dominance I don't know what is.

 

I guess that is there the delusion for you OSU fans for you come in thinking you been dominant 11 out of 15 years and national championship relevant. As I pointed out even the 2 title losses OSU probably shouldn't have been in those games based off the results like you all say about the Notre Dame title game.

 

Out of these 15 years I do not see true national title contenders 11 out of those 15 years as you claim. That is more you seeing it through your OSU shades. Besides the 2002 title year, none of the Tresses years did I view OSU as even a top 5 type team. Now even last year OSU couldn't even make the playoffs. So I don't know how you consider that dominant.

 

Shoot even the 2 title years it's hard to call them dominant. The 2002 was a team that could have very easily lost 5 games, but credit to them they made plays at end of games to win including the title win over Miami. Then 2 years ago they were far from a dominant team, however did get hot at the right time of the year. Most of the year they weren't even in discussion.

 

Has OSU been a solid program since 2000, we're they ever dominant, no. The majority of the years since 2000 OSU did not show to be a true team that could compete for the title, especially 11 out of the 15 years. That is seeing it through your OSU glasses, and qualifies under delusional as you say.

 

Right now since Urban Meyer took over, OSU has now become a top more so than I ever saw them during Tresses years. However yet again they slipped up and lost to a team they shouldn't have. So depending how the rest of this year goes, this year's team may not fall in the dominant national title relevant either.

[kypride]

Wins since 2000

1 Boise State 0.84615 176

2 Oklahoma 0.80751 172

3 Louisiana State 0.76923 160

4 Ohio State 0.81026 158

5 Oregon 0.75728 156

6 Georgia 0.73684 154

7 Texas Christian 0.76119 153

8 Texas 0.73659 151

9 Virginia Tech 0.71090 150

10 Florida 0.71014 147

[GrantNKY]

I guess that is there the delusion for you OSU fans for you come in thinking you been dominant 11 out of 15 years and national championship relevant. As I pointed out even the 2 title losses OSU probably shouldn't have been in those games based off the results like you all say about the Notre Dame title game.

 

Out of these 15 years I do not see true national title contenders 11 out of those 15 years as you claim. That is more you seeing it through your OSU shades. Besides the 2002 title year, none of the Tresses years did I view OSU as even a top 5 type team. Now even last year OSU couldn't even make the playoffs. So I don't know how you consider that dominant.

 

Shoot even the 2 title years it's hard to call them dominant. The 2002 was a team that could have very easily lost 5 games, but credit to them they made plays at end of games to win including the title win over Miami. Then 2 years ago they were far from a dominant team, however did get hot at the right time of the year. Most of the year they weren't even in discussion.

 

Has OSU been a solid program since 2000, we're they ever dominant, no. The majority of the years since 2000 OSU did not show to be a true team that could compete for the title, especially 11 out of the 15 years. That is seeing it through your OSU glasses, and qualifies under delusional as you say.

 

Right now since Urban Meyer took over, OSU has now become a top more so than I ever saw them during Tresses years. However yet again they slipped up and lost to a team they shouldn't have. So depending how the rest of this year goes, this year's team may not fall in the dominant national title relevant either.

You so clearly have an anti-OSU bias. You honestly think OSU shouldn't have been the in title games against Florida and LSU? They played horribly both of those games, but give me someone outside of Alabama who has consistently had the success OSU has since 2000? If you're argument is that OSU only has 2 National Championships since 2000, then that only furthers my opinions on ND and Michigan. To not call them dominant last year because they had one absolutely HORRIBLE game, is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

[GrantNKY]

Wins since 2000

1 Boise State 0.84615 176

2 Oklahoma 0.80751 172

3 Louisiana State 0.76923 160

4 Ohio State 0.81026 158

5 Oregon 0.75728 156

6 Georgia 0.73684 154

7 Texas Christian 0.76119 153

8 Texas 0.73659 151

9 Virginia Tech 0.71090 150

10 Florida 0.71014 147

To be fair if you add in Alabama's 3 vacated seasons it puts them at 151 tied for 8th with Texas. If you add in Ohio State's vacated season it puts them at 170 and in 3rd place behind Boise State and Oklahoma.

[futurecoach]

You so clearly have an anti-OSU bias. You honestly think OSU shouldn't have been the in title games against Florida and LSU? They played horribly both of those games, but give me someone outside of Alabama who has consistently had the success OSU has since 2000? If you're argument is that OSU only has 2 National Championships since 2000, then that only furthers my opinions on ND and Michigan. To not call them dominant last year because they had one absolutely HORRIBLE game, is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

 

You clearly have a OSU bias, and a bias and an anti Notre Dame and Michigan bias too. That is why its funny when you claim Notre Dame and Michigan fans are delusional, but act like OSU fans are not. Your statements of acting like OSU fans are not shows it, with your OSU bias. It shows it with your statements that you have said in the past that Notre Dame shouldn't have been in that title game and use the result of the game as proof. However apparently claim OSU should have been in that title game, even though they got there against a very weak Big 10 back then and then got embarrassed in those title games too.

 

Would you agree one of the best ways to tell what people, and specifically players feel about programs is by looking at recruiting? Usually when a team goes on a dominant run, those teams usually always seem to dominant the recruiting rankings during those runs after it. Just like now Bama basically dominanates it every year.

 

You claim though OSU was a dominant team from 2000 on most of those years correct? Yet from 2003 to 2009 Notre Dame had better recruiting classes, and Notre Dame was pretty darn bad those years, yet Notre Dame was still consistently had top 15 classes, and a few top 5 and even the number 1 class. While OSU during that time period was usually behind them, and also had a few classes where they were even lower than 50th in the recruiting rankings. It wasn't until 2009 when OSU finally jumped Notre Dame in the rankings and only by a few spots.

 

Even today while Urban Meyer is there, they now are like a top 5 recruiting classes. Which is really darn good, and yet even though Notre Dame as you said haven't done much. They still are able to land top 15 recruiting classes most years. That speaks for itself. The fact that Notre Dame really hasn't had as much success over the last 20 years as other schools, yet they still recruit right up there with the same schools who are having the current success.

 

That still shows players still view Notre Dame as a top program, and when players have a chance to go to Notre Dame most of them still jump on it. The program of Notre Dame still sells itself and gets the players because of the name. However where Notre Dame has failed is not getting that top 5 Elite Coach. It took OSU getting that top 5 elite coach in Urban Meyer, to get them to this point now where I admit they do look like they will stay around and truly be in contention for titles every year.

 

So right now OSU is the better program, and if a player had a choice between the two obviously they would chose OSU. However even without the recent success the recruit rankings shows how highly players still think of Notre Dame. Just to think what would happen if Notre Dame could find that next top 5 Elite Coach. Which I think Kelly is one of the better coaches in college football but I admit he is no Urban or Saban.

[GrantNKY]

You clearly have a OSU bias, and a bias and an anti Notre Dame and Michigan bias too. That is why its funny when you claim Notre Dame and Michigan fans are delusional, but act like OSU fans are not. Your statements of acting like OSU fans are not shows it, with your OSU bias. It shows it with your statements that you have said in the past that Notre Dame shouldn't have been in that title game and use the result of the game as proof. However apparently claim OSU should have been in that title game, even though they got there against a very weak Big 10 back then and then got embarrassed in those title games too.

 

Would you agree one of the best ways to tell what people, and specifically players feel about programs is by looking at recruiting? Usually when a team goes on a dominant run, those teams usually always seem to dominant the recruiting rankings during those runs after it. Just like now Bama basically dominanates it every year.

 

You claim though OSU was a dominant team from 2000 on most of those years correct? Yet from 2003 to 2009 Notre Dame had better recruiting classes, and Notre Dame was pretty darn bad those years, yet Notre Dame was still consistently had top 15 classes, and a few top 5 and even the number 1 class. While OSU during that time period was usually behind them, and also had a few classes where they were even lower than 50th in the recruiting rankings. It wasn't until 2009 when OSU finally jumped Notre Dame in the rankings and only by a few spots.

 

Even today while Urban Meyer is there, they now are like a top 5 recruiting classes. Which is really darn good, and yet even though Notre Dame as you said haven't done much. They still are able to land top 15 recruiting classes most years. That speaks for itself. The fact that Notre Dame really hasn't had as much success over the last 20 years as other schools, yet they still recruit right up there with the same schools who are having the current success.

 

That still shows players still view Notre Dame as a top program, and when players have a chance to go to Notre Dame most of them still jump on it. The program of Notre Dame still sells itself and gets the players because of the name. However where Notre Dame has failed is not getting that top 5 Elite Coach. It took OSU getting that top 5 elite coach in Urban Meyer, to get them to this point now where I admit they do look like they will stay around and truly be in contention for titles every year.

 

So right now OSU is the better program, and if a player had a choice between the two obviously they would chose OSU. However even without the recent success the recruit rankings shows how highly players still think of Notre Dame. Just to think what would happen if Notre Dame could find that next top 5 Elite Coach. Which I think Kelly is one of the better coaches in college football but I admit he is no Urban or Saban.

Tell me when I said Notre Dame shouldn't have been in the title game against Bama? I've actually said quite the opposite. I even got into a discussion with someone on here, I think it was UKMustangFan, about it last week I think. You can go do the research on it if you want. But an undefeated team deserves to be in the title game. Period. In 2006 the main competition to be in the title game besides Florida was Michigan who Ohio State just beat. To say they shouldn't have been in that game because they lost is ridiculous.

[NKYknowitall]

I'll take the National Championships and the relevance this millennium over dominance in a time before I was even born. Literally the only people that care about this are Michigan and Notre Dame fans. Funny how this coincides with the 3 most delusional fan bases in all of sports.

 

You forgot to add BBN so I fixed it for you

[GrantNKY]

You forgot to add BBN so I fixed it for you

UK is a top 2 college basketball program. BBN has recent history to back up their talk.

[kypride]

To be fair if you add in Alabama's 3 vacated seasons it puts them at 151 tied for 8th with Texas. If you add in Ohio State's vacated season it puts them at 170 and in 3rd place behind Boise State and Oklahoma.

 

To be fair, don't do stuff to get seasons vacated?

[NKYknowitall]

UK is a top 2 college basketball program. BBN has recent history to back up their talk.

 

Talking delusional fan bases, they're right there. 1 title, should have 2-3 but that's just my opinion.

[GrantNKY]

To be fair, don't do stuff to get seasons vacated?

I agree. But I figured it was only a matter of time before someone questioned where Bama was in that.

[futurecoach]

Tell me when I said Notre Dame shouldn't have been in the title game against Bama? I've actually said quite the opposite. I even got into a discussion with someone on here, I think it was UKMustangFan, about it last week I think. You can go do the research on it if you want. But an undefeated team deserves to be in the title game. Period. In 2006 the main competition to be in the title game besides Florida was Michigan who Ohio State just beat. To say they shouldn't have been in that game because they lost is ridiculous.

 

To be fair maybe you're right and you didn't and I am thinking of the wrong OSU fans. My point is you claim Notre Dame fans are delusional in thinking they are still a top program. Yet the ones that matter most is players and by the recruiting rankings it doesn't back up your statements. Notre Dame since 2000 has been an annual top 15 recruiting class and some top 10 and 5 and even a top recruiting class. You don't see teams who haven't had much success recently still recruit with the top teams and be a constant top 15 to 10 recruiting class. Obviously players also still view Notre Dame as a top program and it doesn't even matter about recent success. So just imagine what would happen with more consistent success.

 

Ohio State, Notre Dame, Bama, Michigan. All are top programs still are and are the schools the players still want to go to and will attend in a heart beat when those teams come calling.

[GrantNKY]

To be fair maybe you're right and you didn't and I am thinking of the wrong OSU fans. My point is you claim Notre Dame fans are delusional in thinking they are still a top program. Yet the ones that matter most is players and by the recruiting rankings it doesn't back up your statements. Notre Dame since 2000 has been an annual top 15 recruiting class and some top 10 and 5 and even a top recruiting class. You don't see teams who haven't had much success recently still recruit with the top teams and be a constant top 15 to 10 recruiting class. Obviously players also still view Notre Dame as a top program and it doesn't even matter about recent success. So just imagine what would happen with more consistent success.

 

Ohio State, Notre Dame, Bama, Michigan. All are top programs still are and are the schools the players still want to go to and will attend in a heart beat when those teams come calling.

Yeah ND and Michigan have still been top 15 programs in college football. I don't think that was ever in question. You don't just completely fall off the face of the earth with names like Notre Dame and Michigan there is too much money and fan support at both of those schools for that to happen. All I was saying is that they haven't been top programs, meaning national title relevant, outside of a couple outlier years. Nothing like they used to be. Neither has been a top program in basically 15 years. Michigan seems to be back now and Notre Dame we thought was back but they seem to have regressed. Their fans have still thought through all of these past 15 years that they are dominant programs with the likes of Alabama, USC, Ohio State, LSU, and FSU (This is also the order I would put these schools in dominance since 2000). But nothing wrong with thinking that but I just think its funny.

[futurecoach]

Yeah ND and Michigan have still been top 15 programs in college football. I don't think that was ever in question. You don't just completely fall off the face of the earth with names like Notre Dame and Michigan there is too much money and fan support at both of those schools for that to happen. All I was saying is that they haven't been top programs, meaning national title relevant, outside of a couple outlier years. Nothing like they used to be. Neither has been a top program in basically 15 years. Michigan seems to be back now and Notre Dame we thought was back but they seem to have regressed. Their fans have still thought through all of these past 15 years that they are dominant programs with the likes of Alabama, USC, Ohio State, LSU, and FSU (This is also the order I would put these schools in dominance since 2000). But nothing wrong with thinking that but I just think its funny.

 

This is where once again you delusional OSU fan, anti Notre Dame bias comes into play. Please tell me what Notre Dame fans has claimed Notre Dame is or has been recently a top dominant program with the likes of Bama or USC during their.dominant runs?

 

Yes Notre Dame fans consider Notre Dame to still be one of the top programs in the country still. Which it is, and that shoes by how people still want to go there no matter what their record is.

 

As i mentioned OSU didn't win a title from 1970 till 2002, and I bet you, you wouldn't have said they are no longer a top program. We're they dominant no, we're they still a top program and just needed that right Coach to get them back, yes.

 

Is Notre Dame a top program still, yes. Are they a dominant program recently, no and not sure which Notre Dame would say dominant.

[GrantNKY]

I adjusted the list to account for how many seasons the school has been playing football. Wins divided by years playing football to get average wins per year.

 

1. Texas 123 years: 7.2

2. Oklahoma 121 years: 7.16

3. Nebraska 126 years: 7.04

4. Alabama 124 years: 7.03

5. Ohio State 126 years: 7.01

6. Notre Dame 129 years: 6.9

7. Michigan 137 years: 6.8

8. Penn State 129 years: 6.7

9. Tennessee 125 years: 6.6

10. Southern Cal 128 years: 6.4