Mandel: Dividing all 66 BCS teams into four-tier hierarchy

[MuskogeeHogFan]

You will probably find that where he ranks some of these teams is a bit of a head-scratcher, others are probably about right.

But one particular question I answered in August 2007 took on a life of its own. A reader asked me to rank the nation's power-conference schools by "prestige and place in the national scene." For reasons I can't recall, I opted to invoke a Medieval feudal system in dividing the 66 BCS programs at the time into Kings, Knights, Barons and Peasants.

Thus, my Program Pecking Order was born.

See the rankings on here on Fox Sports:

http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/story/college-football-program-pecking-order-3-0-dividing-all-66-bcs-teams-into-four-tier-hierarchy-052517

[Hogtimes]

Overall I would say he did a pretty good job.  I would certainly question Miami's ranking though.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Overall I would say he did a pretty good job.  I would certainly question Miami's ranking though.

I agree, but on the other hand, when you take "national brand recognition" into consideration, the Miami "U" with pretty distinctive colors, might be one of those highly recognizable brands from across the country. Maybe that was a part of this thought process. Not what they have done lately, but their long term legacy?

That perception is derived in large part both by a program's historical achievements and its more recent accomplishments, but it also encompasses everything from TV contracts to iconic uniforms to famed mascots to ... yes, helmets.

[Hog Fan...DOH!]

Ha, he must not have enough emails in the ole inbox. 

[island hog]

The horns haven't been relevant in football ( and in most sports ) in years and yet they are grouped with Alabama, et al?!!  What a damn joke.   

[BloodRedHog]

The horns haven't been relevant in football ( and in most sports ) in years and yet they are grouped with Alabama, et al?!!  What a damn joke.   

Money

[Boss Hog in the Arkansas]

Where is Arkansas listed? I cant open the link at work

[LRRandy]

Where is Arkansas listed? I cant open the link at work

third tier

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Where is Arkansas listed? I cant open the link at work

third tier

Yes, in the Knight's tier, below the King's and Baron's. Other schools in that category include:

Knights

Arizona State
Arkansas
Baylor
Boise State
Boston College
BYU
Cal
Colorado
Georgia Tech
Illinois
Iowa
Kansas State
Louisville
Maryland
Missouri
North Carolina
NC State
Northwestern
Oklahoma State
Ole Miss
Oregon State
Pittsburgh
Purdue
Syracuse
South Carolina
TCU
Texas Tech
Utah
West Virginia
Virginia
Washington

[Karma]

I believe in 2012 we were in the 2nd tier, so we dropped one.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I believe in 2012 we were in the 2nd tier, so we dropped one.

Nope. Same tier.

Stewart Mandel
Wednesday July 11th, 2012
https://www.si.com/more-sports/2012/07/11/kings-barons-knights-peasants-mailbag#

[Boss Hog in the Arkansas]

Yes, in the Knight's tier, below the King's and Baron's. Other schools in that category include:

Knights

Arizona State
Arkansas
Baylor
Boise State
Boston College
BYU
Cal
Colorado
Georgia Tech
Illinois
Iowa
Kansas State
Louisville
Maryland
Missouri
North Carolina
NC State
Northwestern
Oklahoma State
Ole Miss
Oregon State
Pittsburgh
Purdue
Syracuse
South Carolina
TCU
Texas Tech
Utah
West Virginia
Virginia
Washington

I think were above most of those schools. We need sub tiers!

[Karma]

Nope. Same tier.

Stewart Mandel
Wednesday July 11th, 2012
https://www.si.com/more-sports/2012/07/11/kings-barons-knights-peasants-mailbag#

Yeah, you're right. As much as I wish we were higher, I can't really argue where he has us.

[hogcard1964]

sad

[HogBreath]

I guessed I completely missed A&M doing something worthy of 2nd tier status, and Tennessee?  I guess the Manning years were good.  But that was a while back.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I guessed I completely missed A&M doing something worthy of 2nd tier status, and Tennessee?  I guess the Manning years were good.  But that was a while back.

As Mandel said, this ranking isn't just about current wins.

[hogcard1964]

I can't access the list, but I take it there's 4 tiers?

[King Kong]

I can't access the list, but I take it there's 4 tiers?

Yes

[DeltaBoy]

Blame all this on Frank, John Boy White , and Jeff Long cause we were in the top tier in the 60's and 70's!

[Paul]

I guessed I completely missed A&M doing something worthy of 2nd tier status, and Tennessee?  I guess the Manning years were good.  But that was a while back.

despite my hatred for the Vols, they did win the NC in 98 & have a enviable history

[Pigsknuckles]

Nebraska hasn't been the same post Osborne. Same for USC and Carroll. Even considering Swinney/Watson, how the heck did Clemson get so dominant so fast? Texas? Really enjoying them being down, but don't count on em to stay there. Mississippi State seems ranked a bit low. We seem about right. Note though that the tiers are alphabetically listed. Fun stuff to masticate on.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Nebraska hasn't been the same post Osborne. Same for USC and Carroll. Even considering Swinney/Watson, how the heck did Clemson get so dominant so fast? Texas? Really enjoying them being down, but don't count on em to stay there. Mississippi State seems ranked a bit low. We seem about right. Note though that the tiers are alphabetically listed. Fun stuff to masticate on.

Again, it isn't just about wins. It is also about being a nationally recognizable program and brand.

[colbs]

UCLA & A&M in the second tier is a bit of a head scratcher too.

[BearsBisonsBoars]

Yes, in the Knight's tier, below the King's and Baron's. Other schools in that category include:

Knights

Arizona State
Arkansas
Baylor
Boise State
Boston College
BYU
Cal
Colorado
Georgia Tech
Illinois
Iowa
Kansas State
Louisville
Maryland
Missouri
North Carolina
NC State
Northwestern
Oklahoma State
Ole Miss
Oregon State
Pittsburgh
Purdue
Syracuse
South Carolina
TCU
Texas Tech
Utah
West Virginia
Virginia
Washington

I question BSU, Syracuse, Virginia, TTU, Northwestern, and BCU's inclusion in this level.

[Bubba's Bruisers]

Blame all this on Frank, John Boy White , and Jeff Long cause we were in the top tier in the 60's and 70's!

This ain't the 60's anymore, but I know you likely don't understand why it's all changed for UA since then.

[Bubba's Bruisers]

UCLA & A&M in the second tier is a bit of a head scratcher too.

I wouldn't argue UCLA being in 2nd tier, but A&M does at least feel like a tweener.  We are definitely 3rd tier.

[bennyl08]

Again, it isn't just about wins. It is also about being a nationally recognizable program and brand.

Which makes Washington in the third tear really weird. National brand. Very recognizable. Historical and recent success.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Which makes Washington in the third tear really weird. National brand. Very recognizable. Historical and recent success.

There are several "head-scratchers" on his list. No doubt.

I think Mandel was about 16 when Don James (153-57-2) retired at Washington so he probably didn't pay a lot of attention to them since they have gone 160-140-1 and only had 2 seasons of double digit wins since his departure. That covers the "winning" part. A recognizable national brand? Well maybe, but not on the same level with USC, UCLA or Stanford in their own conference, at least at this point. I would recognize their logo and uniforms and I am sure you would too, but would some guy living in Ohio, New York, Maryland or Kansas? Maybe, maybe not. If they continue to win and see a lot of national highlight replays and continue to compete on the West Coast, sure, they will be back.

That's the problem for us. The conference that we play in and who we have to play against, it is tough to gain any degree of notoriety unless we consistently knock off big time opponents and win consistently. We certainly already have a logo that can't be mistaken for anyone else. We just have to string together years and years of high level success, more than two at a time. And even though Mandel says that this is "about more than wins", how does a team become an "Icon" of the sport and have a popular and recognizable brand and improve their recruiting rankings at the same time? By winning more.

[HogBreath]

  despite my hatred for the Vols, they did win the NC in 98 & have a enviable history

And they've gone thru about 19 coaches since then, due to the fact, they have mostly sucked.

[Adam Stokes]

And they've gone thru about 19 coaches since then, due to the fact, they have mostly sucked.

Only for the last decade. They still have 6 National Championships, and 8 SEC championships even in the years they didn't win it all.

Recruiting is a good barometer for prestige, because players will go to a crappy team and crappy coach if the brand is strong enough. Even though they've sucked it up recently, they still have been averaging 8 out of state 4-stars per class the past 4 years. We've averaged 3, and they have a lot more talent to pull from in TN. Their prestige alone is keeping them afloat in recruiting.

[Inhogswetrust]

As Mandel said, this ranking isn't just about current wins.

In that case Clemson should be close to a King but more like a Baron.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

In that case Clemson should be close to a King but more like a Baron.

That's the problem for us. The conference that we play in and who we have to play against, it is tough to gain any degree of notoriety unless we consistently knock off big time opponents and win consistently. We certainly already have a logo that can't be mistaken for anyone else. We just have to string together years and years of high level success, more than two at a time. And even though Mandel says that this is "about more than wins", how does a team become an "Icon" of the sport and have a popular and recognizable brand and improve their recruiting rankings at the same time? By winning more.

Clemson used to be a well known and successful brand and I can't think of any other P-5 team with a helmet logo like theirs, so it is distinctive from that standpoint. Most recently they have had 6 years in a row of double digit wins and the last time that they had more than two seasons of back to back double digit wins was during a 4 season stretch from 1987-1990.

But again, the relevance, the nationally recognized brand and increased recruiting rankings all stem from winning more consistently at a higher level.

[Inhogswetrust]

Clemson used to be a well known and successful brand and I can't think of any other P-5 team with a helmet logo like theirs, so it is distinctive from that standpoint. Most recently they have had 6 years in a row of double digit wins and the last time that they had more than two seasons of back to back double digit wins was during a 4 season stretch from 1987-1990.

But again, the relevance, the nationally recognized brand and increased recruiting rankings all stem from winning more consistently at a higher level.

Until Clemson won their NC under Ford they weren't known any more-so around the country as a King than several of those other Barons.

[runninhog]

At this point, I'd rank Memphis ahead of Kansas and Vandy. No issues with USC or Miami. Despite recent issues, they're still elite programs and once again on the rise.

[HogBreath]

In that case Clemson should be close to a King but more like a Baron.

Lol..exactly, it is not about the wins except when it's about the wins.


Truth is, it is always about the wins.

[Al Boarland]

Like most articles you can make an argument one way or the other. As it stands, I don't feel confident in our program being a consistent contender. So, put it in whatever tier you want.

[Stewhog 11]

17 of the last 18 national champions came from those in the top tier, only other is Auburn. Schools people are arguing don't belong, Texas, USC, and Miami are all among those.

[hawganatic]

Tennessee should be dropped another tier.  He dropped them from 1st tier to 2nd tier in 2012, and they have probably gotten worse since.  They rank 60th in wins for the entire ten year period.  I understand he isn't just ranking based in recent wins, but if he is going to bump Clemson up to top tier (which they deserve) for the previous few seasons, he should adjust all teams to what they have done in the same period.  In Tennessee's case, that is absolutely nothing.

I'd also bump FL out of the "Kings" tier.  They've done nothing but flounder around in a weak East since Meyer left.

Think a case can probably be made for TCU being in the Baron Tier over Texas A&M.  Louisville for that matter too.  Minus the Steve Kragthorpe years they've been pretty salty.

[onebadrubi]

As Mandel said, this ranking isn't just about current wins.

Then how is Clemson at the top?

[onebadrubi]

At this point, I'd rank Memphis ahead of Kansas and Vandy. No issues with USC or Miami. Despite recent issues, they're still elite programs and once again on the rise.

Vandy is above Memphis in many sports, why should Vandy not be in front of Memohis? 

Vandy actually has multiple sports they compete for championships in.  Baseball and golf come to mind real quick.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Then how is Clemson at the top?

That's the problem for us. The conference that we play in and who we have to play against, it is tough to gain any degree of notoriety unless we consistently knock off big time opponents and win consistently. We certainly already have a logo that can't be mistaken for anyone else. We just have to string together years and years of high level success, more than two at a time. And even though Mandel says that this is "about more than wins", how does a team become an "Icon" of the sport and have a popular and recognizable brand and improve their recruiting rankings at the same time? By winning more.

[onebadrubi]

What else does Clemson have going for them besides wins the last 2-3 years in one sport?  I think the Clemson example is exactly based on recently tv time and wins. 

[MuskogeeHogFan]

What else does Clemson have going for them besides wins the last 2-3 years in one sport?  I think the Clemson example is exactly based on recently tv time and wins. 

I agree, but it has been about the last 6 years of double digit win seasons.

[Karma]

What else does Clemson have going for them besides wins the last 2-3 years in one sport?  I think the Clemson example is exactly based on recently tv time and wins. 

They've won 2 NC in the last 40 years.  Only a handful of programs can say that. Plus the run down the hill is one of the best introductions in football.

[Dwight_K_Shrute]

Sorry if it's not just about wins then Arkansas has a stronger case for tier 2 status.  That means one of the top 33 teams.  Stadium size, long term tradition, fan engagement in terms of % of tickets sold, % of bowl tickets sold etc.  I'd also look at licensing revenue, giving, and size of jumbotron.

Taking all of those factors into account Arkansas has very little in common with most of Tier 3.

Cal?  A program that loses money, burns through coaches, the fan base is too high to care most of the time.  It's embarrassing to even be lumped in with most of those.  BYU has an argument for Tier 2 as does Iowa.

[onebadrubi]

They've won 2 NC in the last 40 years.  Only a handful of programs can say that. Plus the run down the hill is one of the best introductions in football.

Ok, so by your definition then Nebraska should be ranked higher.  (The article states why he dropped them though) but you are using 40 years to define his position. 

Just saying, to have Clemson that high it's because recent success, very recent albeit, in the win column of really just one sport. 

[Hoggish1]

Yawn...