Highest FBS Winning Percentages Since 1950

• TBone14

  

  SINCE 1950
  Rank Team Winning % W-L-T Games
  1 Ohio State .758 497-154-15 666
  2 Oklahoma .755 519-164-12 695
  3 Penn State .735 498-177-7 682
  4 Nebraska .727 507-188-9 704
  5 Texas .722 495-188-10 693
  6 Michigan .707 467-190-13 670
  7 Alabama .704 490-201-17 708
  8 USC .703 477-195-20 692
  9 Tennessee .692 473-205-20 698
  10 Florida .676 459-216-17 692
  11 Notre Dame .674 447-213-12 672
  12 Florida State .667 450-220-17 687
  13 Auburn .665 446-222-12 680
  14 Arizona State .659 437-224-8 669
  15 Georgia .658 444-226-20 690
  
  Interesting list. Ohio State has won almost 76% of their games over the last 60 years. Amazing.
• vball10set

  wow--I wouldn't have guessed that....the comments to follow should be interesting as well.
• Hb31187

  

  hasnt this, or something very similar to this been posted here within the last month or so?
• WebFire

  That was modern era, which I think is 1946? List was very similar. No surprises on that list.
• OneBuckeye

  

  Arizona State is a surprise for me on that list.
• Con_Alma

  OneBuckeye;501273 wrote:Arizona State is a surprise for me on that list.

  
  I agree!!
• Sonofanump

  I thought the FSU record might have been a mistake, they started D1 in 1951 just in time to make the list
• Sonofanump

  http://michigan-football.com/ncaa/ncaa_1a.htm
• sleeper

  

  Zero SEC teams in the top 6, soon to be 4 Big Ten teams in the top 6.
  
  So much for being the best conference in the country..
• enigmaax

  sleeper;501634 wrote:Zero SEC teams in the top 6, soon to be 4 Big Ten teams in the top 6.
  
  So much for being the best conference in the country..

  
  Ha ha. Even in your silly world that doesn't make any sense. Because if you have a couple of schools way up there at the top, it just means they beat a bunch of shitty teams every year - the same knock on the Big Ten that has existed for the last, oh....60 years.
• darbypitcher22

  

  that was a stat I didn't know about. Kind of cool to take some pride in
• krambman

  

  I assume that teams had to have played a certain number of games or needed to be D-1A that whole time to make the list because I'm pretty sure that Boise State's FBS winning percentage would put them on that list.
• ohiotiger33

  

  It is odd to make stats from certain points in time, though. I think OSU has been the best program over the last 10 years, but the previous 10 years were Nebraska and FSUs. Decade by decade makes more sense.
• lhslep134

  

  ohiotiger33;501895 wrote:It is odd to make stats from certain points in time, though. I think OSU has been the best program over the last 10 years, but the previous 10 years were Nebraska and FSUs. Decade by decade makes more sense.

  
  Honestly the best time to start is when the majority of schools had teams and people used real instead of leather helmets. IMO of course.
• ohiotiger33

  

  Haha, that is a very good point.
• karen lotz

  

  lhslep134;501905 wrote:Honestly the best time to start is when the majority of schools had teams and people used real instead of leather helmets. IMO of course.

  
  I really don't want to turn this into a ND/OSU pissing match again, just asking a question.
  
  Do you also think all of the records from when wooden shafted golf clubs were used should be ignored?? What about when baseball players didn't wear helmets? Or when there was a jump ball after each basket scored in basketball or when dunking was illegal??
• fan_from_texas

  WebFire;501271 wrote:That was modern era, which I think is 1946? List was very similar. No surprises on that list.

  
  
  Who came up with 1946 as the point in time by which to measure? I'm not arguing, just trying to understand. Why not 1947? Or 1940?
• karen lotz

  

  fan_from_texas;501939 wrote:Who came up with 1946 as the point in time by which to measure? I'm not arguing, just trying to understand. Why not 1947? Or 1940?

  
  I assume it coincides with the end of WWII
• WebFire

  ^^^ What he said.
• krambman

  

  karen lotz;501935 wrote:I really don't want to turn this into a ND/OSU pissing match again, just asking a question.
  
  Do you also think all of the records from when wooden shafted golf clubs were used should be ignored?? What about when baseball players didn't wear helmets? Or when there was a jump ball after each basket scored in basketball or when dunking was illegal??

  
  With golf it's a little different because it's not just the clubs that have changed. There are just as many tournaments today, just as many people in the field each week, and as players have gotten longer, so have courses, so a par 5 is still a par 5. My guess is that scoring average may be slightly lower today than 40 or 70 years ago, but probably not by much.
  
  Baseball is a horrible example because the equipment and the game itself has hardly changed in 100 years. Still 90 feet to first, still 3 strikes and your out, and still 6 outs for an inning. What has changed is steroids, and most agree that those records aren't legitimate.
  
  With basketball, there's definitely an easy line to draw for the birth of modern basketball with the advent of the three point line and again with the institution of the shot clock. Obviously scoring was going to be much lower before these two things were put in place. There are definite eras in basketball, so it's definitely okay to draw lines for statistical comparison reasons.
  
  With football it's the same thing. Yes, a national championship is a national championship, but is a championship for the 1910's as impressive when football was only 20-30 years old, and there were less than half as many schools with varsity football as their are today? It's honestly a bit ridiculous to count them the same. Also looking back all the way definitely skews the numbers when programs like Notre Dame and Michigan began playing varsity football 20+ years before everyone else. If we really wanted to debate this we should end the conversation with Princeton and Yale because they have twice as many national championships as Alabama who has the third most all time. But does anyone consider them to be the two greatest football schools of all time? Nope. Combined they only have one national championship after WWII. No one considers their titles to have the same weight or value as teams with more recent championships.
  
  1946 is a good cutoff point and most recognize that year, or one very close to it, as the beginning of modern football because it was after the end of WWII and it's when football began to really resemble the game we see today. College football may be the most difficult sport to find a dividing line for. Maybe you could choose the legalization of the forward pass or the beginning of the AP Poll as a dividing line, but that isn't even perfect. Most however recognize the first full season after WWII as the start of the modern era of football.
• Falcons53

  "and still 6 strikes for an inning."
  
  Huh?
• TheMightyGators

  Big2 little 8?
• WebFire

  A football field is still 100 yards, 10 for a first down. A touchdown is still worth 7 and a field 3.
• karen lotz

  

  WebFire;503054 wrote:A football field is still 100 yards, 10 for a first down. A touchdown is still worth 7 and a field 3.

  
  
  Pssh.
• sleeper

  

  WebFire;503054 wrote:A football field is still 100 yards, 10 for a first down. A touchdown is still worth 7 and a field 3.

  
  ...and Michigan still sucks.