CFN ranks Top 150 All Time College Football Season Champions

[BobPSU92]

Of course technology and weight have increased. But you are comparing 2019 lsu vs 1901 Yale when they had no helmets instead of comparing 2019 vs 2019 teams and 1969 teams vs 1969 teams. The comparison you make it silly.

1994 psu or Nebraska pound for pound would have been right there with any team across the board!

F*ck nebby every year, but especially f*ck ‘94 nebby.

 

[Bkmtnittany1]

F*ck nebby every year, but especially f*ck ‘94 nebby.

Ever been to Lincoln? Really a great college town...to bad Nebraska plays there!

 

[TiogaLion]

Of course technology and weight have increased. But you are comparing 2019 lsu vs 1901 Yale when they had no helmets instead of comparing 2019 vs 2019 teams and 1969 teams vs 1969 teams. The comparison you make it silly.

1994 psu or Nebraska pound for pound would have been right there with any team across the board!

Thank you! Although I suspect @Owenarndt still isn't going to get it.

 

[Lacklions]

Of course technology and weight have increased. But you are comparing 2019 lsu vs 1901 Yale when they had no helmets instead of comparing 2019 vs 2019 teams and 1969 teams vs 1969 teams. The comparison you make it silly.

1994 psu or Nebraska pound for pound would have been right there with any team across the board!

The whole poll is ranking teams from all different years not comparing teams from the same year. If you want to say 94 psu was better than all the other teams that year, more so than Georgia was better than all the teams this year then that’s fair. But some of you actually think teams in the 80’s would win against todays best teams they would not. Are you ranking teams based on how good they were for their year or are we ranking who the best teams of all time actually are based on who would win in a giant playoff.

 

[Lacklions]

Our 1969 team didn't have a single player who weighed more than 250. IIRC Mike Reid was the biggest guy on the team at somewhere around 240-245 lbs.

Just proves how far football and athletes in general have come.

 

[Lacklions]

Thank you! Although I suspect @Owenarndt still isn't going to get it.

@razpsu said there were too many team from the last 20 years in the top 30. If we’re ranking teams based on who would beat each other the newer teams would win. Just stating facts. If we’re saying who was the best for their era then sure older teams should make appearance near the top. Sorry you think 69 psu and 86 psu would compete with todays teams, they would not.

 

[TiogaLion]

@razpsu said there were too many team from the last 20 years in the top 30. If we’re ranking teams based on who would beat each other the newer teams would win. Just stating facts. If we’re saying who was the best for their era then sure older teams should make appearance near the top. Sorry you think 69 psu and 86 psu would compete with todays teams, they would not.

You still don't get it. smh

 

[Lacklions]

You still don't get it. smh

Then tell me what I don’t get. Are you ranking teams compared to how dominant they were in their era? Or are we making a list of the best teams based on who would win?

 

[razpsu]

Then tell me what I don’t get. Are you ranking teams compared to how dominant they were in their era? Or are we making a list of the best teams based on who would win?

Pound for pound. For all that is holy man!!!!

 

[Lacklions]

Pound for pound. For all that is holy man!!!!

Fair enough then we’re ranking teams relative to their competition. For which I would agree there are too many newer teams on the list.

 

[razpsu]

Amen