Poll: Alabama's Dynasty v. Nebraska Dynasty

sanjosecrimson

Hall of Fame
May 18, 2007
5,838
3,839
187
San Jose, California
.
Nebraska's strongest teams were essentially the same team. Players did not leave early for the NFL in the same way because the rookie scale was not in place yet. This means that for Alabama to accomplish the feat in this era is more challenging because of the turnover of players, making Bama the moe impressive Dynasty.
excellent point that is often overlooked.
 

Rolltide_PA

1st Team
Jul 31, 2011
918
0
0
i'm more impressed with our 5 year run but no single team can match the '95 Huskers. They had 27 players out of 85 on NFL rosters and another handful that played in other league (world league or cfl)...darn close to half their squad went pro!
 

BamaJama17

Hall of Fame
Sep 17, 2006
16,365
8
47
34
Hoover, AL
i'm more impressed with our 5 year run but no single team can match the '95 Huskers. They had 27 players out of 85 on NFL rosters and another handful that played in other league (world league or cfl)...darn close to half their squad went pro!
2001 Miami would be the closest.
 
Last edited:

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,499
46,842
187
i'm more impressed with our 5 year run but no single team can match the '95 Huskers. They had 27 players out of 85 on NFL rosters and another handful that played in other league (world league or cfl)...darn close to half their squad went pro!
1997 Michigan team had 31, I believe.
 

1958againbear

1st Team
Jan 27, 2011
693
0
0
1997 Michigan team had 31, I believe.
It took that many for Lloyd Carr to ever win a championship.
I'm more into results than NFL draftees. Had we rightfully gotten the number one vote in '66 then you could say '64-'66 was a dynasty with Nebraska providing two of our huge bowl wins. But with the media prejudice against us and for the domers they never would've called us that just as they wouldn't vote us number 1 when they could ND. But things began to slide in '67. '78-'79 looked like it had potential, especially with the long undefeated streak, but '80 brought the end to that. And as much respect as I had for Nebraska in the 90s they weren't unanimous number 1 each year and weren't as impressive over the four year stretch as we have been IMO.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
the more i think about it. i think nebraska is lucky they didnt face Michigan that year, cuz in 1994 they were playing a declining Erickson team, in 1995 they were playing a young inexperienced florida, and 1997 they played Fulmer. They lucked out in the bowl matchups in that they got up and coming teams (florida would win in 96, and Tennessee would in 98) and a declining Miami. I feel that the USC vs LSU03 talk and USC vs Auburn 04 holds more weight in that both teams could win than 97 Nebraska vs Michigan does
 

snake plissken

1st Team
Apr 13, 2011
578
35
47
Birmingham
I think 95 Nebraska is the best college football team in my lifetime. They punished everyone on their schedule and then destroyed one of Spurrier's best teams at Florida. That Florida team was undefeated and crushed everyone in the SEC that season, but could not stay on the field with Nebraska. I think that was the same Florida team that had Manning's Tennessee team down 35-0 at their place during the half.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
Let me just say I think it's classy of Osborne to respond the way he did. I also thought it took a lot of courage for Grant Wistrom to say that perhaps they would not beat us. My opinion of the guys on those Husker teams just went up.*


* - Lawrence Phillips excepted.
 

OreBama

All-American
Sep 26, 2005
3,349
5
57
Portland, OR
I don't understand all the incessant need to compare teams of different eras. Why can't we just agree that both programs were great and dominant for their respective eras?

I remember watching those Husker teams as a teenager with a great amount of awe. I never rooted for them as they were not SEC, but I certainly respected them. Now, as a man, I have the same awe for Saban and what his Alabama teams have accomplished.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
I really thought 95 Huskers were the best team in the 90s, but I think in 97 they were the second best in the nation and heres why. in the 96 outback bowl we played Michigan with a very good offense and a decent defense. their defense was young but they were hard hitters and ball hawkers. we only won that game because of dwayne rudd taking to the house cuz they totally shut down shaun,curtis,riddle, and everyone on our offense. in 97 they fixed their problems on offense and were the most dominant team that year, wheras nebraska struggled mightly against a very down Big 12.

As for comparing our 09 and 12 teams... I dont know what some of yall are seeing besides our oline and maybe McCarron, but I honestly think 09 was far better since we had Ingram and Richardson at running back, barron/Mcclain/Arenas/cody/Kareem/Darius/and Kirk on defense, Heap/Maze/ and julio at reciever. I know Amari is great but hes not Julio.....yet:wink:
 

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
63,414
67,193
462
crimsonaudio.net
As for comparing our 09 and 12 teams... I dont know what some of yall are seeing besides our oline and maybe McCarron, but I honestly think 09 was far better since we had Ingram and Richardson at running back, barron/Mcclain/Arenas/cody/Kareem/Darius/and Kirk on defense, Heap/Maze/ and julio at reciever. I know Amari is great but hes not Julio.....yet:wink:
I'm not arguing either way, but the numbers are interesting...
Code:
                2009    2012
Scoring O:      32.07   [B]38.71[/B]
Rushing O:      215.07  [B]227.50[/B]
Passing O:      187.93  [B]218.00[/B]
Total O:        403.00  [B]445.50[/B]

Scoring D:      11.71   [B]10.93[/B]
Rushing D:      78.14   [B]76.36[/B]
Passing D:      [B]166.00[/B]  173.64
Total D:        [B]244.14 [/B] 250.00
I know MI and TR were amazing, but we had ~6% more rushing yards in 2012 than we did in 2009. Defensive numbers are comparable, if not better in most areas. If the two teams played, not sure what would happen, honestly.
 
I'm not arguing either way, but the numbers are interesting...
Code:
                2009    2012
Scoring O:      32.07   [B]38.71[/B]
Rushing O:      215.07  [B]227.50[/B]
Passing O:      187.93  [B]218.00[/B]
Total O:        403.00  [B]445.50[/B]

Scoring D:      11.71   [B]10.93[/B]
Rushing D:      78.14   [B]76.36[/B]
Passing D:      [B]166.00[/B]  173.64
Total D:        [B]244.14 [/B] 250.00
I know MI and TR were amazing, but we had ~6% more rushing yards in 2012 than we did in 2009. Defensive numbers are comparable, if not better in most areas. If the two teams played, not sure what would happen, honestly.
Yeah it would be a good one. I think 2012 is better than most people want to give it credit for. The A&M game was an anomaly much like LSU last year, but not quite as much as LSU.


Sent from Jay's iPhone
 

Mystical

All-American
Sep 28, 2009
4,052
458
107
Fairhope, Alabama
I say if you line them up year by year our best to their best we destroy them. They were an option running team. What do we do best. Thats right stop the run.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
I'm not arguing either way, but the numbers are interesting...
Code:
                2009    2012
Scoring O:      32.07   [B]38.71[/B]
Rushing O:      215.07  [B]227.50[/B]
Passing O:      187.93  [B]218.00[/B]
Total O:        403.00  [B]445.50[/B]

Scoring D:      11.71   [B]10.93[/B]
Rushing D:      78.14   [B]76.36[/B]
Passing D:      [B]166.00[/B]  173.64
Total D:        [B]244.14 [/B] 250.00
I know MI and TR were amazing, but we had ~6% more rushing yards in 2012 than we did in 2009. Defensive numbers are comparable, if not better in most areas. If the two teams played, not sure what would happen, honestly.
But you have to look beneath the numbers (just playing devil's advocate here to arrive at a conclusion).

1) The 2009 schedule was MUCH tougher (#2 in difficulty) - and that team went unbeaten.
2) Despite the tougher schedule, they basically allowed one ppg more
3) One can easily argue that because of the easier schedule:
a) we ran the ball more to run out the clock and not run up the scores
b) other teams were passing in desperation to get back into the game (that would explain both the better run and worse pass numbers on the 2012 D).
4) The O-line this year was MUCH more experienced than that year.
5) McElroy was a rookie QB while McCarron came into the year having already won a championship.


The 2012 offense is better.....but against easier competition.
 

Rasputin

Suspended
Apr 15, 2008
5,686
1
0
I'm not arguing either way, but the numbers are interesting...
Code:
                2009    2012
Scoring O:      32.07   [B]38.71[/B]
Rushing O:      215.07  [B]227.50[/B]
Passing O:      187.93  [B]218.00[/B]
Total O:        403.00  [B]445.50[/B]

Scoring D:      11.71   [B]10.93[/B]
Rushing D:      78.14   [B]76.36[/B]
Passing D:      [B]166.00[/B]  173.64
Total D:        [B]244.14 [/B] 250.00
I know MI and TR were amazing, but we had ~6% more rushing yards in 2012 than we did in 2009. Defensive numbers are comparable, if not better in most areas. If the two teams played, not sure what would happen, honestly.
I do...the world would explode!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.