And I would remind you that coming into the 2000 season they were still tied with Texas at #3 all time in wins all time. They had some bad losses but they also weren't getting 50, (besides the 5 OT with Tennessee) 60, and 70 points hung in them either. Through thick and thin no SEC team caught and/or passed them in conference championships or took a lead in the series against Bama in games played. Alabama's irrelevant period is nothing compared to what Notre Dame and Nebraska has been.
Well Nebraska has not won a conference championship since 1999 yet they still have 46 which is more than anyone else...so far. Oklahoma is 2nd all time with 45 and I predict that changes this year.
If Urban Meyer became ND's head coach, I believe he could turn them around, idk about Nebraska.
Do you know that 15 of those conference championships are from 1894 to 1923 when Nebraska was a part of the Missouri Valley Intercollegiate Athletic Association? I appreciate that you took the time to type in conference championships into google but you have to go beyond the first result of the search engine in order to provide context. Plus, this just reiterates the point of how far they've fallen off and how unlikely it is that they'll ever be what they once were..
A point that I am still royally upset about. We would be #2 today if not for the vacations/forfeits. No one is catching Michigan in my lifetime. They had too much of a head start.
Well that and that Michigan played more games in their first 40 seasons than Alabama did. Michigan started earlier but only had played 42 games before Alabama’s first season. From 1892-1916, Michigan played 227 games compared to Alabama playing 160 games. Not so much a head start but so many more games played in the first few decades. Michigan is more of a traditional power before 1950.
They have more conference championships than Alabama. They were certainly blue bloods.
I tend to agree. I don't easily remove a team from blue blood status but for the points I already stated in this thread I think Nebraska is just about there. If they don't get their next coaching hire right and have another decade of mediocrity I don't think it'll be a question anymore..
They and Oklahoma won like 95% of the total Big 8 championships. I cannot give that equal weight to Alabama's number of SEC championships, of which several teams have a respectable number of.
Agreed, but you can't exclude everyone not in the SEC. 46 conference championships and 5 national championships - all of the national championships in the modern era. If they don't belong, almost nobody does.
I think they do belong, but I do think they are fading away. I don't think it's impossible to right their ship, but it will be a daunting task indeed.
They had a 30-year head start in three different conferences. They won several of those in four-team conferences, which hardly constitutes a challenge. (It's like all those Stanley Cups that Montreal won back when there were only six to eight hockey teams - it's an accident of time).
I disagree on this particular issue. I'm not dissing that they most certainly were an accomplished school, but blue bloods is the likes of us, Ohio State, Oklahoma, USC, Notre Dame and maybe a couple of other schools (Michigan maybe......possibly Florida State once Bowden got there).
The five national titles is a much greater accomplishment and moves them closer to that status - I'll agree there.
