At least college football wise by ESPN. I thought Noles considered their 2013 team the most dominant ever?
http://es.pn/2GJOK5Q
http://es.pn/2GJOK5Q
2008 Gators considered most dominant team
- Thread starter GatorsFanYeah
- Start date
I agree, considering even INCLUDING the 1 point loss to Ole Miss, our average margin of victory on the season was 31 points in 14 games and 30 points in 9 SEC conference games (8 regular season plus 1 conference champ game).
Oh, and didn't we have the #1 ranked SOS that year too? Crazy!
In the words of Insta,
Oh, and didn't we have the #1 ranked SOS that year too? Crazy!
In the words of Insta,
Considering OU was the most prolific offense in NCAA history (they had that string of like 5 games in a row with 60+ points) and we beat them soundly, I'd say "most dominant" sounds about right.
Three out of four years undefeated national titles. And they stomped the holy hell out of mid-90s Gators and Peyton Manning's Vols.
I think the 2001 Miami Hurricanes are the best team I have seen in my lifetime, I wasn't an avid follower till the late 90's so the '95 Huskers are out of my timeline.
Yuck, I'm gonna go pour a whole bottle of Listerine in my mouth now.
It still pisses me off that we didn't go undefeated that year. Ole Piss.
Yuck, I'm gonna go pour a whole bottle of Listerine in my mouth now.
It still pisses me off that we didn't go undefeated that year. Ole Piss.
I dont rhink anyone believes the 08 gators were the most dominant...i mean, they lost a game which completely excludes them from being the most dominate. I personally believe Miami and Nebraska have had the most dominant teams. Fsu's 13 team was very dominate, i would put them top 4.
The gator 08 team was very good, a top 10 team of all time but the most dominant and having a loss just contradicts itself
The gator 08 team was very good, a top 10 team of all time but the most dominant and having a loss just contradicts itself
The article was most dominant teams the last 20 years. Otherwise 95 Nebraska would be it
Yep, 2001 Canes is another one. Seems like 'Bama should have one in there. Maybe 2009 or whatever year they almost killed Colt McCoy.
Top five in order (my opinion of course)
1. 2001 Hurricanes
2. 2004 Trojans
3. 2008 Gators
4. 2012 Crimson Tide
5. 2013 Seminoles
The 2014 Buckeyes might have rivaled our 2008 run, looking at how much talent they returned the next year I would call their 2015 team the biggest underachievers in my lifetime.
My top five underachievers would be:
1. 2015 Buckeyes
2. 2009 Gators
3. 2014 Seminoles
4. 2002 Hurricanes
5. 2005 Trojans
I realize all of these teams only had one loss, but look at their preseason projections. They brought back a ton of talent from National Title teams and lost to what I believe were inferior opponents.
2015 MSU Spartans who got blown out by Alabama.
2009 Tide, the most debatable of the bunch. We had more talent than that team, this was the burnt out Meyer led team.
2014 Ducks, they got blown out by Ohio State and lost to Arizona.
2002 Buckeyes, this team was nowhere close to Miami. Look at their season and who they almost lost to. Took a miracle to beat Purdue. A
Next week they almost lost to Illinois.
2005 Longhorns, good but not great team.
1. 2001 Hurricanes
2. 2004 Trojans
3. 2008 Gators
4. 2012 Crimson Tide
5. 2013 Seminoles
The 2014 Buckeyes might have rivaled our 2008 run, looking at how much talent they returned the next year I would call their 2015 team the biggest underachievers in my lifetime.
My top five underachievers would be:
1. 2015 Buckeyes
2. 2009 Gators
3. 2014 Seminoles
4. 2002 Hurricanes
5. 2005 Trojans
I realize all of these teams only had one loss, but look at their preseason projections. They brought back a ton of talent from National Title teams and lost to what I believe were inferior opponents.
2015 MSU Spartans who got blown out by Alabama.
2009 Tide, the most debatable of the bunch. We had more talent than that team, this was the burnt out Meyer led team.
2014 Ducks, they got blown out by Ohio State and lost to Arizona.
2002 Buckeyes, this team was nowhere close to Miami. Look at their season and who they almost lost to. Took a miracle to beat Purdue. A
Next week they almost lost to Illinois.
2005 Longhorns, good but not great team.
not when a team is so dominant a plaque and statue forever remains from the one miracle hiccup
The most dominant team has to be a team without a loss. Canes, Nebraska, Usc, Noles have to be above when talking most dominant. Im not debating who would win, im saying based off the definition of dominant, losses matter.
This makes no sense. Using this logic a team that goes 14-0 barely squeaking by each week is more 'dominant' than a team that goes 13-1 with 13 blowout wins and a close loss. All teams don't take the same path to get to a title game. If a team plays multiple top 5 teams in a year and during that stretch barely loses a game while blowing out everybody else that doesn't make them any less dominant because they have a loss to an equal team. When two heavyweights face off someone has to lose.
By contrast you have 2013 FSU team top 4 all-time and prior to their game against Auburn they had the worst strength of schedule for a championship game participant in the BCS era. More than half the opponents had 7 or more losses. So plenty of championship teams could have looked 'dominant' against that schedule. A teams dominance is every bit as much about their opponents as it is them, some of the most dominant championship teams of all time either either had a loss or games where they barely hung on against inferior opponents. Even juggernauts like 01' Miami who should have lost to BC and almost lost to VT as well. Doesn't make them any less dominant.
1 loss and that loss in overtime to the number two team on one of the most famous bad calls of all time on a team that lost a boatload of kids to the NFL one of the most underachieving teams?
Cannot agree with the 2002 Miami team being epically underachieving, or really underachieving.
Let alone the 2009 Gators who went 13-1 with that one loss being to the undefeated national champion. Was that team perhaps the best in the nation therefor finishing 2 or 3 means under achieving? Perhaps. But one of the most underachieving teams?
Cmon.
Cannot agree with the 2002 Miami team being epically underachieving, or really underachieving.
Let alone the 2009 Gators who went 13-1 with that one loss being to the undefeated national champion. Was that team perhaps the best in the nation therefor finishing 2 or 3 means under achieving? Perhaps. But one of the most underachieving teams?
Cmon.
sadgator has absolutely no stats to back it up, but he remembers the ‘95 reg season Gators as being the best Gator team he ever saw. That team just blew teams off the field, up until Nebraska of course. And as a consequence, it never gets the credit it deserves.
And that speaks to what I was saying earlier. 95 UF beat the shit out of everybody, they just so happened to run into an even more dominant team in Nebraska who turned around and beat the hell out of them. That doesn't somehow make 95 UF less dominant though.
Be careful ooz...sadgator could use this logic to argue for expansion of the playoffs to multi-loss teams...which he fully supports...
Last edited:
Dominant and loss are contradictions. Also, its absoolutely impossible to tell strength of scheduel. Its a made up stat based on rankings from the beginning of the yr. The 13 FSU team played some good teams and walked the dog on them. I would agree the SEC was much stronger in 08 but i dont rhink the Gators 08 team goes undefeated against our 13 schedule. Its not as if you lost to a top team, it was Ole Miss who was not close in talent. Im in no way saying that the gators were not a top 5 overall talented team but the top dominant teams dont lose games in football. Our Fsu team in 13 had almost every starter on an Nfl contract longer than 1 or 2 yrs. Ww set the NCAA record for points scored in a season. We were dominant. The 08 Gators were extremely dominant until the ole miss game and then were still dominant but you cannot under any corcumstances be considered the "most" dominant when you lost when other p5 teams didnt.
Look at the other people this guy has on his list and it should give it away.
They lost to a top 15 team that won the Cotton Bowl beating the other team that was in the national title hunt. That’s as dumb of an argument as when we get made fun of for losing to a Wake Forest team that won 11 games and made it to the Orange Bowl. Historically bad programs can have great seasons. It happens and part of those great seasons is beating historically great teams even in their peak years. Only simpletons look at shallow metrics like a team’s name and the difference between one loss and zero and make a blanket statement. Not all schedules are created equal and if it’s too difficult for you to think about that you should probably stop typing and embarrassing our fanbase.
Ole Miss was super good that year, they went 9-4 and beat a really good Texas Tech team in the Cotton Bowl. All four of their losses were by 6 points or less, and one of those was @ #2 Alabama by four points. So they almost beat both UF and Alabama that season.
Meyer could have also attempted a long FG to try and win it but instead opted to go for it on 4th down and got stuffed. If Florida makes that FG, they win.
Meyer could have also attempted a long FG to try and win it but instead opted to go for it on 4th down and got stuffed. If Florida makes that FG, they win.
Houston Nutt was a good coach. Had Arky winning the West Division going to Atlanta 3 times and had Ole Miss beating top ranked teams. Both schools were dumb for getting rid of him. He was a 3 time SEC coach of the year.
not in football
that was ole miss best team ive seen, better than the one that just won a Sugar Bowl a few years ago. They had NFL talent on that team, so happens to be the ones that won the game for them with two plays in particular.
Ole Miss lost to four teams including Vandy. Not a top team.
Dominant and loss would be a contradiction in a one game scenario because the dominant team shouldn't lose. Its not a contradiction over a season where there are multiple games, unless you expect a team to be on their A+ game every week which never happens. And again schedule matters. Using this logic a championship team in FCS is more 'dominant' than a 1-loss team in a Power 5 conference. A team without a loss isn't automatically better than a team with a loss especially when teams play vastly different schedules. And no that isn't an SEC argument either because I don't think SEC teams always have a tough schedule, I thought our 09' schedule was weak for example.
And you're crazy if you think 08' UF wouldn't have walked FSU's 2013 regular season schedule. These are the records of the teams you played:
Pitt: 7-6
Nevada: 4-8
Bethune-Cookman (FCS): 10-3
BC: 7-6
Maryland: 7-6
Clemson: 11-2
NC St: 3-9
Miami: 9-4
Wake: 4-8
Syracuse: 7-6
Idaho: 1-11
Florida: 4-8
9 of 12 teams with 6 or more losses. Two others lost 3 or more. Literally one good team all year. UF wouldn't have walked that schedule? Lmao. As already shown UF played a #1 ranked schedule including beating a #1 ranked team and #2 ranked team by double digits in consecutive weeks just to win the title. FSU played Duke in their conference championship.
And like I said before that's not a knock on FSU's talent, on talent alone they deserve to be in the discussion for best team ever. I only brought up the schedule to show that it affects how 'dominant' you are.
Put another way I'm 'OK' at basketball, pretty good in most people's eyes. If I play someone my equal we probably split 5-5 in a best of 10. But if I play some middle school kid I probably sweep 10-0 and look dominant while doing it. My skill level didn't change I just looked more dominant because of my opponent.
Put another way I'm 'OK' at basketball, pretty good in most people's eyes. If I play someone my equal we probably split 5-5 in a best of 10. But if I play some middle school kid I probably sweep 10-0 and look dominant while doing it. My skill level didn't change I just looked more dominant because of my opponent.
Dude had a lot of mediocre seasons and rarely jumped on the chance to get out of state quality recruits.
I only remember him going to Atlanta twice. 02 and 06. Winning the west back then wasn't as impressive as it currently is. Bama hadn't found Saban, Auburn was up and down with Tubberville, MSU was usually down, Ole Miss was average, A&M was still Big 12.
He only had one ten win season at Arkansas.
At Ole Miss he had some impressive wins with Coach O's players but he had some losses to mediocre teams. Don't forget his last two seasons he was 4-8 and 2-10.
Both Arkansas and Ole Miss got impressive coaches after Nutt with Petrino and Freeze but off field issues took those guys out. Guess you face troubles following Houston Nutt.
I guess there is a good argument if you ignore the loss but that 2001 Miami team I think was the best team of the last 20 years. Passing defense was crazy good and it seemed any team that even tried to open it up much started getting intercepted like crazy.
Our 08 offense was better however and we had a great defense in 08 also.
Our 08 offense was better however and we had a great defense in 08 also.
Part of the reason '13 FSU's schedule was so weak is because they beat the ever loving piss out of people. Maryland, Clemson, Miami, & Duke were a combined 27-2 before playing FSU and a combined 10-14 after.
This has got to be one of the most laughable pieces of reasoning I have read in some time. And I am kind to even use the word reasoning.
Lmfao, so they fell apart because FSU beat them so bad. Hahaha, or they sucked, but had an easy early schedule
2001 Miami was ridiculously dominant at home, but got challenged a couple times on the road.
They needed a VT WR to drop an easy 2 pt conversion to avoid OT vs an 8-4 team. And 8-4 BC was driving late, and inside the Miami 25 late, until an int that was returned for a TD to win 18-7
That team beat an 11-1 UT team by 25, 10-2 FSU by 11, and won the SECCG by 31. Which goes to show how good 95 NU was, Gators didn't look like they belonged on the same field
LMAO bruh...
Like I've said repeatedly FSU's talent on that team speaks for itself and I do believe they'd have been just as successful with a tougher road but there's no sugar coating how bad that schedule was. Worst SOS for a championship game participant in the BCS era entering the title game.
Schedule got harder? Maryland, Clemson, and Miami had 7 losses to unranked teams after losing to FSU. Maryland and Miami were decimated by injuries against FSU.
What?? Do you know how stupid that sounds? Some Noles are just dumb.
Their schedule sucked. Period.
Similar threads
