50 Years of CFB National Championships

[LafayetteBear]

Last night's NCG result prompted me to go back and look at a list of national championship winners in college football for the last fifty years (i.e., going back to 1967), in part to see how many different schools are included in that list. My source was Wikipedia's list of champions, and I included both teams when it was a split between the AP Poll, on the one hand, and the Coaches' Poll (either UPI's or USA Today/CNN's version of that Poll), on the other. Here is the link to that site, in case you want to peruse it for yourself:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_football_national_championships_in_NCAA_Division_I_FBS

It turns out that the last fifty national championships have been won by a total of 22 schools. Four of them (Pittsburgh in 1976, BYU in 1984, and Colorado and Georgia Tech, which split the title in 1990) I would consider outliers, in that they each won once and are very unlikely to win it again at any time in the foreseeable future. So it essentially comes down to the following 18 schools, with the number of titles since 1967 appearing in parentheses after the school's name):

Alabama (9)
USC (6)
Nebraska (5)
Miami (5)
Texas (3)
Ohio State (3)
Florida (3)
Florida State (3)
Notre Dame (3)
Oklahoma (3)
Clemson (2)
Penn State (2)
LSU (2)
Auburn
Washington
Georgia
Michigan
Tennessee

Who knows if Nebraska, Michigan or Tennessee can return to their former powerhouse status? If not, the list dwindles to 15 teams.

I'm not sure what this data suggests to you. To me, it highlights: (1) how long the odds are of any "newcomer" team actually winning a National Championship; and (2) that winning the National Championship is not as big an accomplishment as it may seem, given that only fifteen or so teams have any realistic shot at contending for it in the first place.

 

[psuro]

You. Play. To. Win. The. Game.

 

[JWB389]

Interesting that half were won by 4 teams.

 

[LionDeNittany]

You. Play. To. Win. The. Game.

That is it in a nutshell.

Most schools are very happy collecting the revenue and spending it.

Some schools demand winning.

This same distribution exists in most professional sports: Most owners are happy making a buck. Takes a lot of extra effort to win.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Super_Bowl_champions

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NBA_champions

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_football_champions

LdN

 

[Ranger Dan]

I would add that until 3 or 4 years ago, I would have said that Clemson was an outlier as well and the likelihood of Nebraska ever winning one again isn't great.

 

[LafayetteBear]

When your "championship" is determined in a manner akin to 1970's and 1980's Olympic Figure Skating, you are almost fated to having a very limited pool of "champions".


The data will become more relevant when there actually IS a CFB championship.

The next time that happens will be "Year One".

Even if you expanded the CFB Playoffs to a field of 16 teams, it is likely that the 16 team field would be composed almost entirely of the schools listed in the OP. If that is the case, the pool of champions will not expand at all.

While I certainly would not take issue with the notion that championships should be based on merit (actual on the field competition), the data on championships over the last fifty years demonstrates that the same 15 or so schools are the only schools with a realistic shot at winning a National Championship in any given year.

If you look at the list of schools, it suggests that very few newcomers ever break into the group. Clemson managed the task in the last few years. Miami managed the task, beginning in the mid to late eighties. And PSU managed the task, beginning in the late sixties. I am heartened that PSU is among those schools, since my alma mater never will be, and it gives me a rooting interest when the end of the regular season arrives.

 

[sunshinedynomite]

I Mr would be interesting to see the same data set in

NCAA men's basketball

 

[anon_1eeb2b426hv3y]

By quick scan of NCAA men’s BB champion history over the past 50 (didn’t write down names), I counted 20 different national champs out of a much bigger pool of teams and a much larger “playoff.” Even if my count is slightly off, the results under all these unjust CFB championship systems isn’t actually too far off from the NCAA BB tournament, which may be regarded as the epitome of just systems.

 

[anon_1eeb2b426hv3y]

I Mr would be interesting to see the same data set in

NCAA men's basketball

Ha. Funny you should mention that...

 

[ejb25]

College Football is Cyclical. Before there was Bama, there was USC. Before there was USC, there was Miami. Before USC, there was Nebraska. I never thought that USC, Miami, or Nebraska would ever end their run. One day Bama won't continue this run....

 

[LionDeNittany]

College Football is Cyclical. Before there was Bama, there was USC. Before there was USC, there was Miami. Before USC, there was Nebraska. I never thought that USC, Miami, or Nebraska would ever end their run. One day Bama won't continue this run....

Wait, was Nebraska before USC or was Miami before USC?

So confused now.

LdN

 

[ejb25]

I'm talking about programs that many thought would never fall off or have down years. Those are just examples. You can easily plug other programs. Alabama won't be at the top forever. Everything is cyclical given enough time.

Wait, was Nebraska before USC or was Miami before USC?

So confused now.

LdN

 

[LionDeNittany]

I'm talking about programs that many thought would never fall off or have down years. Those are just examples. You can easily plug other programs. Alabama won't be at the top forever. Everything is cyclical given enough time.

I know. It was a joke because of your typo.

LdN

 

[Woodpecker]

That is it in a nutshell.

Most schools are very happy collecting the revenue and spending it.

Some schools demand winning.

This same distribution exists in most professional sports: Most owners are happy making a buck. Takes a lot of extra effort to win.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NFL_champions_(1920–69)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NBA_champions

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_football_champions

LdN

FIFY

 

[Ian]

Florida Schools and Nebraska pretty much dominated the 80’s/90’s then it switched to USC in 2002 then to Bama in 2008. O$U and Oklahoma have been the chasers over the last 15 years.

 

[WDLion]

Last night's NCG result prompted me to go back and look at a list of national championship winners in college football for the last fifty years (i.e., going back to 1967), in part to see how many different schools are included in that list. My source was Wikipedia's list of champions, and I included both teams when it was a split between the AP Poll, on the one hand, and the Coaches' Poll (either UPI's or USA Today/CNN's version of that Poll), on the other. Here is the link to that site, in case you want to peruse it for yourself:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_football_national_championships_in_NCAA_Division_I_FBS

It turns out that the last fifty national championships have been won by a total of 22 schools. Four of them (Pittsburgh in 1976, BYU in 1984, and Colorado and Georgia Tech, which split the title in 1990) I would consider outliers, in that they each won once and are very unlikely to win it again at any time in the foreseeable future. So it essentially comes down to the following 18 schools, with the number of titles since 1967 appearing in parentheses after the school's name):

Alabama (9)
USC (6)
Nebraska (5)
Miami (5)
Texas (3)
Ohio State (3)
Florida (3)
Florida State (3)
Notre Dame (3)
Oklahoma (3)
Clemson (2)
Penn State (2)
LSU (2)
Auburn
Washington
Georgia
Michigan
Tennessee

Who knows if Nebraska, Michigan or Tennessee can return to their former powerhouse status? If not, the list dwindles to 15 teams.

I'm not sure what this data suggests to you. To me, it highlights: (1) how long the odds are of any "newcomer" team actually winning a National Championship; and (2) that winning the National Championship is not as big an accomplishment as it may seem, given that only fifteen or so teams have any realistic shot at contending for it in the first place.

BYU, GaTech, Colorado and Pitt have won National Championships during that period.

 

[LafayetteBear]

I'm talking about programs that many thought would never fall off or have down years. Those are just examples. You can easily plug other programs. Alabama won't be at the top forever. Everything is cyclical given enough time.

Everything is cyclical for the group of 15-20 schools that continues to win CFB titles. For the other 110 FBS teams, it is not. They will never win a title, and I say that knowing "never" is a very long time. I'm just stating a fact, not trying to make a value judgment. I acclimated myself long ago to the notion that Cal is among those 110 FBS teams. You should indeed feel fortunate, as a PSU fan, that your team is one of the relatively few teams that has a realistic shot at winning it all.

 

[LafayetteBear]

BYU, GaTech, Colorado and Pitt have won National Championships during that period.

All four are mentioned in the second full paragraph of my OP.

 

[WDLion]

All four are mentioned in the second full paragraph of my OP.

Sorry missed that. I read only the list.

 

[LafayetteBear]

Sorry missed that. I read only the list.

No sweat. Do you agree with my characterizing them as outliers? No need to answer with respect to Pitt.

 

[WDLion]

No sweat. Do you agree with my characterizing them as outliers? No need to answer with respect to Pitt.

Yep!

 

[harbest]

If your data goes back to the old poll system before the playoff, you have to take into account that there will be some "popularity contests" involved in the final rankings. (See 1994 for example)

 

[wilbury]

It's not a level playing field and never will be. Stop trying to make it level by creating some crazy playoff system that brings in teams that don't have a shot to win and frankly shouldn't be given a shot.

 

[Helmut]

Wonder what the list looks like if it is for undefeated seasons during that time period?

 

[LafayetteBear]

If your data goes back to the old poll system before the playoff, you have to take into account that there will be some "popularity contests" involved in the final rankings. (See 1994 for example)

Yeah, that final poll still sticks in my craw. No way the Lions were not the best team that year.

 

[trotjx]

Yea, 1968, 69, 73 and 94. Only program I believe with that many undefeated seasons without a NC to show for it. Every time we won a NC I believe we were rated no. 2 going in. Poll System sucked.