Vote for the top three HS Football Dynasties Over The Last 5 Years

Which 10 teams are the top football dynasties over the last 5 years

  • Total voters
    53
naughty said:
Lakeland is still underrated and kind of not respected as tou can see by the poll.



But wow i posed this and just left it alone for awhile and it has done pretty well.
Click to expand...

I personally believe the best Warren Central team since 2000 would beat the best Lakeland team since 2000. In 2003 Warren Central absolutely demolished a very very good Elder team that won state.
 
I pulled out an old vhs football highlights tape I assembled from various sources and wanted to transfer some of them to dvd and was amazed that the last 1/2 hour of the two hour tape was a scholastic sports america show broadcast in 1997 and was almost solely about the great Berwick - St Ignatius mathcup in 1997, lots of interviews and pre-game stuff and then tons of game action with commentary, nice piece of video I never realized or forgot I had, BTW St I won 37-6 but I believe the next year Berwick came back and evened the series

in some ways, that great inter state matchup that received lots of publicity (both were multi-year USA Today national champions) was a minor instigating factor between dls and mater dei hooking up in 1998 and beyond
 
1. SLC

2. Colerain

3. DLS/St.X

SLC at number 1 is a no brainer.
DLS W/L record is a little decieving. I have a hard time believing they are not one of the top 3 dynasty's.

I chose Colerain over St. X because Colerain has been more consistent than St. X.

Colerain went undefeated in the regular season in 2003, 2004, 2006, 2007
St. X went undefeated in the regular season in 2005, 2007
Colerain has been in the playoffs all 5 years.
St. X did not qualify for the playoffs in 2003.
Colerain has just as many playoff wins during that time period, despite not having won 2 state titles.
Colerain's 5 losses during this time were all to a top 25 eventual state champion team. The combined records of the 4 teams that beat Colerain during these 5 years is 59-1.
The combined records of the 7 teams that beat St. X during these 5 years is 76-17

and lastly

I would say that in 2003, and 2006 Colerain was better than St.X by decent margin, and in 2004 Colerain was better than St. X by a large margin.
In 2005 St. X was just slightly better than Colerain; In 2007 St.X was better by a decent margin.

It's close between the two schools, but I don't think St. X is ahead of Colerain during the last 5 years yet. Maybe after next season depending on how the season goes. Honestly its amazing that we have TWO football programs of this caliber within 10-15 minutes of each other.
 
He told me "You are right" in his last response to me...(about where he said SLC is tied for the most state titles when in fact they are tied for second with a few other teams)
 
Fightingfor7crusader said:
I personally believe the best Warren Central team since 2000 would beat the best Lakeland team since 2000. In 2003 Warren Central absolutely demolished a very very good Elder team that won state.
Click to expand...

bashing are we. Well i personally believe that the 2004, and 2005 lakeland squads would walk all over your (usually slow Indiana team). Just so you know in 2004 lakeland held the team it played in states to -rushing yards all game. And in 2005 had the best run of all the teams. So try again. One of your former coaches will tell you all about lakeland. Just ask him about the 78-0 blowout and 54-21 blowouts he had to take. And he will also tell you how lakeland 2nd,3rd, and 4th strings scored on his squad.


And still the dreadnaughts get no respect. But unless you live in florida you really dont have any respect or like of the dreadnaughts. Thats just how it is.
 
Last edited:
pied said:
I don't think it's an analogy as much as it is a joke. As a joke it's kind of funny, hard to deny that.

Kind of like the oldie, What's the difference between tOSU/ou(take your preference) and Cheerios?


























wait for it











































Cheerios know what to do in a Bowl.
Click to expand...

Well, your jokes would be funnier if they really made sense. Ohio State has more BCS wins than Texas and unlike the Buffalo Bills, they also actually won a championship. Sorry to burst your bubble.
 
Bennies'01 said:
Well, your jokes would be funnier if they really made sense. Ohio State has more BCS wins than Texas and unlike the Buffalo Bills, they also actually won a championship. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Click to expand...

You must be a hit at parties.

I'd point out that Ohio State has more losses as well, Texas is a perfect 2-0.
 
Pied,

The Buffalo Bills won the AFL championship in 1964 and 1965, and OSU won the National Championship in 1968 and 2002, so they each have two titles in the last 44 years.

I think we're in good shape.
 
coletrain06 said:
1. SLC

2. Colerain

3. DLS/St.X

SLC at number 1 is a no brainer.
DLS W/L record is a little decieving. I have a hard time believing they are not one of the top 3 dynasty's.

I chose Colerain over St. X because Colerain has been more consistent than St. X.

Colerain went undefeated in the regular season in 2003, 2004, 2006, 2007
St. X went undefeated in the regular season in 2005, 2007
Colerain has been in the playoffs all 5 years.
St. X did not qualify for the playoffs in 2003.
Colerain has just as many playoff wins during that time period, despite not having won 2 state titles.
Colerain's 5 losses during this time were all to a top 25 eventual state champion team. The combined records of the 4 teams that beat Colerain during these 5 years is 59-1.
The combined records of the 7 teams that beat St. X during these 5 years is 76-17

and lastly

I would say that in 2003, and 2006 Colerain was better than St.X by decent margin, and in 2004 Colerain was better than St. X by a large margin.
In 2005 St. X was just slightly better than Colerain; In 2007 St.X was better by a decent margin.

It's close between the two schools, but I don't think St. X is ahead of Colerain during the last 5 years yet. Maybe after next season depending on how the season goes. Honestly its amazing that we have TWO football programs of this caliber within 10-15 minutes of each other.
Click to expand...

Dynasties are made up of championships..............3,4,5, championships and then you may have a dynasty.

Were the Buffalo Bills a dynasy because they had a great record? NO

:hello:
 
Chicago said:
Pied,

The Buffalo Bills won the AFL championship in 1964 and 1965, and OSU won the National Championship in 1968 and 2002, so they each have two titles in the last 44 years.

I think we're in good shape.
Click to expand...

Bennies reminds me of a guy that if you started a joke, " A priest, a nun, and a rabbi walk into a bar", he would ask what bar, when and where.
 
New England Patriots.. 3 titles in 4 years and people called that a dynasty..
La Lakers 3 titles in 3 years.. also a dynasty..
San Antonio Spurs 3 championships in 5 years in the NBA..
USC Football 2002-2007...
Even App St. winning 3 titles in 3 years in FBS Football some consider that a dynasty..
In D-2 Grand Valley St. 4 National titles in 5 years.. considered a dynasty..
Also in D-2 North Alabama 3 titles in three years '93-'95
In Nascar Jeff Gordon won 3 titles in 4 years in 1995-1998
Michael Schumacher wins 5 driving titles in 5 years.. from 2000-2005
Cincinnati Reds 1972-1976 4 NL West Titles and 2 WS championships with 1 more WS appearance in that time..
Heck for any WNBA fan.. that i still have never met.. Houston Comets 4 WNBA titles in 5 years..
UCONN Womens basketball 4 NCAA titles in 5 years..
NY Islanders of the early 1980's 4 titles in 4 years..


Alot of people call great and dominate 5 year periods dynasties.. please don't bash him because he called them dynasties.. If you argue that is isnt a 5 year thing.. what do we always hear about the Pats a few years ago.. ohh thats right their dynasty.. maybe there has been a change in the usage of that word.. no longer does it just refer to a long time where a pharaoh rules..
 
Ahhhorsepoo said:
New England Patriots.. 3 titles in 4 years and people called that a dynasty..
La Lakers 3 titles in 3 years.. also a dynasty..
San Antonio Spurs 3 championships in 5 years in the NBA..
USC Football 2002-2007...
Even App St. winning 3 titles in 3 years in FBS Football some consider that a dynasty..
In D-2 Grand Valley St. 4 National titles in 5 years.. considered a dynasty..
Also in D-2 North Alabama 3 titles in three years '93-'95
In Nascar Jeff Gordon won 3 titles in 4 years in 1995-1998
Michael Schumacher wins 5 driving titles in 5 years.. from 2000-2005
Cincinnati Reds 1972-1976 4 NL West Titles and 2 WS championships with 1 more WS appearance in that time..
Heck for any WNBA fan.. that i still have never met.. Houston Comets 4 WNBA titles in 5 years..
UCONN Womens basketball 4 NCAA titles in 5 years..
NY Islanders of the early 1980's 4 titles in 4 years..


Alot of people call great and dominate 5 year periods dynasties.. please don't bash him because he called them dynasties.. If you argue that is isnt a 5 year thing.. what do we always hear about the Pats a few years ago.. ohh thats right their dynasty.. maybe there has been a change in the usage of that word.. no longer does it just refer to a long time where a pharaoh rules..
Click to expand...
As was said, the term Dynasty has been greatly devalued. Because many people use ther term that way does not legitimize it.

The root of dynasty is: "A family or group that maintains power for several generations". Properly applied to sports you would get John Wooden's UCLA teams as the perfect example. Wooden being the "family" and the successive generations of Bruins who won championships. People love the superlative and use Dynasty way too often. USC was not a dynasty - gimme a break. Reds 2 WS titles? no way.

Jeff Gordon? I'm a huge NASCAR fan and Gordon fan and have NEVER heard him referred to as a dynasty. Nor Dale Earnhardt. The Petty dynasty is in reference to Richard and his Father's dominance over the sport - successive generations.

Call that a listing of dominant teams, great teams if you want, but do not call them dynasties. As I said earlier, if these are dynasties, then we must invent a whole new word for what the Celtics, Bruins, and Yankees have done because they are in an entirely different class.
 
elwood said:
As was said, the term Dynasty has been greatly devalued. Because many people use ther term that way does not legitimize it.

The root of dynasty is: "A family or group that maintains power for several generations". Properly applied to sports you would get John Wooden's UCLA teams as the perfect example. Wooden being the "family" and the successive generations of Bruins who won championships. People love the superlative and use Dynasty way too often. USC was not a dynasty - gimme a break. Reds 2 WS titles? no way.

Jeff Gordon? I'm a huge NASCAR fan and Gordon fan and have NEVER heard him referred to as a dynasty. Nor Dale Earnhardt. The Petty dynasty is in reference to Richard and his Father's dominance over the sport - successive generations.

Call that a listing of dominant teams, great teams if you want, but do not call them dynasties. As I said earlier, if these are dynasties, then we must invent a whole new word for what the Celtics, Bruins, and Yankees have done because they are in an entirely different class.
Click to expand...

Do you realize you are fighting an impossible battle? The use of the term dynasty is very widespread in sports.
 
If any word was ever used by anyone, anywhere, in any manner, it is now legitimate to use the word in that manner, no matter how wrong the usage was the first time.

Good call.

It's hard for one person to have a dynasty, but you have stupidity cornered.
 
SLCDad said:
The poll is for a 5 year period not for a single game or a single season.
Click to expand...

ok over 5 years lakeland has 3 state titles. a 53 game winning streak . 2 national titles. what does x have.

2 state titles, no more then 20 wins in a row, and 1 national title. Not down playing X. But you make it seem like lLakeland was a one hit wonder. Lakeland has been doing it for more then just 5 years. Try the last 30 years in Florida football. So again we see again The Dreadnaughts are truly not respected unless you live in Florida. And for the most parts central Florida. People respect Lakeland in Florida, but that dose not mean they like them.

And this is not me bragging. Just simply again stating that no team has been more dominate over the last 5 years in Florida then lakeland,Florida.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top