Top 100 Teams This Century

[Obi-Wan]

6 hours ago, First_Backer_Inside said:

Yes, it was Marian. Probably could have played at a higher level than that too. The 2019 team was good for Cass that made the 2A list, but hard to believe they were better than the '05 and '08 teams. A case could be made for the '06 team too. Got bounced by Heritage in a mud pit game second round of sectionals. Had some great battles with Heritage and Harding back in the 2000's.

Mannering will tell you the best team in that time period was the '03 team. Seagraves was a Freshman taking reps at FB. That team was bounced by a Harding team that was out of the world talented. And I agree with your statement about the '19 team. They had a lot a talent, but I think the depth of some of those early 2000 teams just overwhelms that team. 

[23andCounting]

4 hours ago, Bash Riprock said:

Curious....do you have a better source?

I do not. I appreciate that we have a guy like Sagarin who does this for Indiana high schools. It's a good system, a fun system to look at. Obviously it has it's flaws, which is why I made the "90% at the end of the season" comment. Overall I think it does a pretty good job. But to think you can compare teams from year to year is ludicrous in my opinion. 

[23andCounting]

3 hours ago, Obi-Wan said:

Mannering will tell you the best team in that time period was the '03 team. Seagraves was a Freshman taking reps at FB. That team was bounced by a Harding team that was out of the world talented. And I agree with your statement about the '19 team. They had a lot a talent, but I think the depth of some of those early 2000 teams just overwhelms that team. 

Harding was a small version of Warren Central during that time period. The only difference was school size and coaching. Not saying the coaching at Harding wasn't good, because it was. But there are some coaching staffs in Indiana who could have won state every year with the kind of talent Harding had. 

[23andCounting]

6 hours ago, BDGiant93 said:

If the 2006 Warren team isn't near the top, then I don't know what to tell you. That team was brutally talented. They beat the #2 team in the state (Ben Davis) 76-7, and it should have been worse.

I would advocate for any Warren team during that dynasty. The Snider team that lost to Warren in 2004 would have beaten the majority of 6A champions in my opinion. Even with Quale Lewis out with a broken ankle, that Snider team was pretty good. Just ask Penn. So yeah, kudos to all those Warren teams. 

[BLACKGOLD2007]

No 2000 Penn, what was there sag rating... Hard to believe non state champion teams are better than one that did win state. I know that isn't how sag works, but still. 

[23andCounting]

5 hours ago, BLACKGOLD2007 said:

No 2000 Penn, what was there sag rating... Hard to believe non state champion teams are better than one that did win state. I know that isn't how sag works, but still. 

Every state championship team deserves to pump their chest and tout "we're the best of all time." If they don't, there's a problem. There just isn't a realistic way to measure the great Penn teams of the past to the Center Grove's of today or anyone else in between. One could say kids today are better trained and more developed, but not sure I'm buying it. 

That Penn team wasted the south by three touchdowns, so for them not to be ranked validates everything I've posted regarding Sagarin. 

[temptation]

22 hours ago, 23andCounting said:

Every state championship team deserves to pump their chest and tout "we're the best of all time." If they don't, there's a problem. There just isn't a realistic way to measure the great Penn teams of the past to the Center Grove's of today or anyone else in between. One could say kids today are better trained and more developed, but not sure I'm buying it. 

That Penn team wasted the south by three touchdowns, so for them not to be ranked validates everything I've posted regarding Sagarin. 

Athletes are bigger, faster and stronger than generations of past.  Now, does that necessarily guarantee that teams of today would beat teams of the past?  I am not willing to go THAT far though I lean that way.

Edited May 15, 2025 by temptation

[BLACKGOLD2007]

31 minutes ago, temptation said:

Athletes are bigger, faster and stronger than generations of past.  Now, does that necessarily guarantee that teams of today would beat teams of the past?  I am not willing to go THAT far though I lean that way.

This thread I thought was about Sag. ratings. 

My comment was directed strictly at Penn non-state champions making the list while the 2000 Penn team went 14-1 and won the title doesn't make the list. But, all is good. Just my 2 cents on Penn.

22 hours ago, 23andCounting said:

Every state championship team deserves to pump their chest and tout "we're the best of all time." If they don't, there's a problem. There just isn't a realistic way to measure the great Penn teams of the past to the Center Grove's of today or anyone else in between. One could say kids today are better trained and more developed, but not sure I'm buying it. 

That Penn team wasted the south by three touchdowns, so for them not to be ranked validates everything I've posted regarding Sagarin. 

I will say the state runner up teams of Geez would have beat the Yeoman runner up teams. Don't need to mention the Champion teams, they got the job done. lol

[BDGiant93]

41 minutes ago, temptation said:

Athletes are bigger, faster and stronger than generations of past.  Now, does that necessarily guarantee that teams of today would beat teams of the past?  I am not willing to go THAT far though I lean that way.

This. I totally agree. The 1991 Ben Davis Team was a special group, but I don't know if they could hold a candle to some of the more recent super teams. I mean, there were players on that team that would have been great in any decade, but if you try to put that team with what would now be considered a small offensive and defensive line up against the 2017 Ben Davis team, let's say, I don't think that 91 team would compare. Now, Steve Holman and Chris Ings could have played anytime, anywhere, any place. 

[23andCounting]

1 hour ago, BLACKGOLD2007 said:

I will say the state runner up teams of Geez would have beat the Yeoman runner up teams. Don't need to mention the Champion teams, they got the job done. lol

I'd stack Geesman's teams up with Moore's. The run that Wright had at Warren Central would be hard to beat though. 

[23andCounting]

1 hour ago, temptation said:

Athletes are bigger, faster and stronger than generations of past.  Now, does that necessarily guarantee that teams of today would beat teams of the past?  I am not willing to go THAT far though I lean that way.

Agree, it's hard not to lean toward today's teams based on advanced training alone. But there were some really good teams back in the 80's and 90's. If Snider's '86 Vaughn Dunbar team wasn't the program's best of all time (with their starting quarterback), they were certainly Top 3 or 4 in my opinion. That's just one example from my neck of the woods. 

[BLACKGOLD2007]

20 hours ago, BDGiant93 said:

This. I totally agree. The 1991 Ben Davis Team was a special group, but I don't know if they could hold a candle to some of the more recent super teams. I mean, there were players on that team that would have been great in any decade, but if you try to put that team with what would now be considered a small offensive and defensive line up against the 2017 Ben Davis team, let's say, I don't think that 91 team would compare. Now, Steve Holman and Chris Ings could have played anytime, anywhere, any place. 

The 2003 Warren team was the best team I had seen take the field until I witnessed the 2017 BD team. To think that there are teams in the country better than that football team really had me thinking about the quality of those other teams. 

In regards to past teams stacking up against current athletes. The mental exercise of the Penn teams from the 90's even the ones that lost state games, I firmly believe those teams would beat the Penn teams that made it to state during the Yeoman years. Even though Yeoman was the DC for Geez, the difference at the top of program is 100 fold. Geez was a difference maker. Penn teams under him were hungry and disciplined, even when the were winning state titles. Yeoman teams (I was on the first 4) eventually became complacent and bought into the we are Penn, we will just win this game. Yeoman had some special teams, but I don't see the 95, 96 or 97 or 00 teams getting beat by 03, 11, 15 or 17. 

That 2017 BD team was nasty....Carmel was their only close game in the regular season. When Penn went to Carmel and walked them, I had false confidence we could make that a game...We quickly found out that was not the case. 

 

[BLACKGOLD2007]

19 hours ago, 23andCounting said:

I'd stack Geesman's teams up with Moore's. The run that Wright had at Warren Central would be hard to beat though. 

No doubt. Those Warren teams were just different. I think the Penn teams of the 90s were able to adapt and overcome, but I don't know if the results would be any different than to 03 state game. 

I really am just trying to keep the past Penn team comparison with the most recent Penn teams. While the players are bigger faster and stronger, the Penn title teams in the 90s were playing teams bigger faster and stronger than them. That is why I believe that those teams would beat the Yeoman teams. 

[23andCounting]

3 hours ago, BLACKGOLD2007 said:

No doubt. Those Warren teams were just different. I think the Penn teams of the 90s were able to adapt and overcome, but I don't know if the results would be any different than to 03 state game. 

I really am just trying to keep the past Penn team comparison with the most recent Penn teams. While the players are bigger faster and stronger, the Penn title teams in the 90s were playing teams bigger faster and stronger than them. That is why I believe that those teams would beat the Yeoman teams. 

Agree. By and large, there's truth to teams being better now versus then. Coaches have better training, players have better training, and now more than ever, many schools are sporting strength and conditioning coaches who are specific to that field. But...............................there were some programs that were head and shoulders better than the rest during their era that put some well coached, hard nosed teams on the gridiron. Some of those old Carmel, WC, BD, Penn, Snider, Bloomington South, and Dwenger teams would compete just fine against programs of today. 

[hhpatriot04]

1 hour ago, 23andCounting said:

Agree. By and large, there's truth to teams being better now versus then. Coaches have better training, players have better training, and now more than ever, many schools are sporting strength and conditioning coaches who are specific to that field. But...............................there were some programs that were head and shoulders better than the rest during their era that put some well coached, hard nosed teams on the gridiron. Some of those old Carmel, WC, BD, Penn, Snider, Bloomington South, and Dwenger teams would compete just fine against programs of today. 

The schemes are also much more complicated and adaptable now. 

A pass heavy team from the 20th century would face huge problems against modern defenses.

A run heavy team from the 20th century might be OK offensively, but would they have the defense to defend against a RPO scheme from today? I don't think they could adapt even with a week of practice. Previous systems are being run at the middle school level now.

[hhpatriot04]

On 5/13/2025 at 12:20 PM, Bash Riprock said:

Curious....do you have a better source?

Calpreps supposedly looks at every game in the country but I have my doubts about its accuracy.

I understand the criticisms of Sagarin. But try to look at it for what it is, a measurement of performance in games with Indiana teams against Indiana teams, so out of state games don't count. 

TW did a study about 15 years ago that showed Sagarin predicting playoff games around 80 percent accuracy. When you realize that a good percentage of games are won by less than a field goal, that's a very high level of statistical accuracy. It's the best we have and was good enough for the BCS and NCAA for 25 years.

[Bash Riprock]

18 hours ago, hhpatriot04 said:

Calpreps supposedly looks at every game in the country but I have my doubts about its accuracy.

I understand the criticisms of Sagarin. But try to look at it for what it is, a measurement of performance in games with Indiana teams against Indiana teams, so out of state games don't count. 

TW did a study about 15 years ago that showed Sagarin predicting playoff games around 80 percent accuracy. When you realize that a good percentage of games are won by less than a field goal, that's a very high level of statistical accuracy. It's the best we have and was good enough for the BCS and NCAA for 25 years.

Those were my thoughts…while not perfect, not aware of another source more accurate. I do think it’s tricky when coming up with all time greatest lists. Very tough to compare not only the team itself, but the quality of competition those teams all went up against. 

[Rodney]

On 5/13/2025 at 5:49 PM, 23andCounting said:

I would advocate for any Warren team during that dynasty. The Snider team that lost to Warren in 2004 would have beaten the majority of 6A champions in my opinion. Even with Quale Lewis out with a broken ankle, that Snider team was pretty good. Just ask Penn. So yeah, kudos to all those Warren teams. 

Ask penn is questionable

 

No hate to Snyder only penn

Also no team from the 80s or 90s would stand up to a similarly sized team of the same caliber now.

 

[23andCounting]

11 hours ago, Rodney said:

Ask penn is questionable

 

No hate to Snyder only penn

Also no team from the 80s or 90s would stand up to a similarly sized team of the same caliber now.

 

It would be insane to not give an edge to today's teams. But I think their are some exceptions for ,some of the better coached teams of the 80's and 90's. 

What I'm hearing you say: A clone of Jeff George and Vaughn Dunbar in 2025 is better than their counterpart four decades ago. I would agree with that, advanced training supports that conclusion. However, those two guys back then are better than 99.9% of their present day competitors. Remember, kids back then still lifted weights, had good coaching, and ran track, so it's not as if they didn't have any training. So there are some exceptions. I still think Gessman's teams would give Moore's teams a run for their money. That guy had five state titles. 

[temptation]

4 hours ago, 23andCounting said:

It would be insane to not give an edge to today's teams. But I think their are some exceptions for ,some of the better coached teams of the 80's and 90's. 

What I'm hearing you say: A clone of Jeff George and Vaughn Dunbar in 2025 is better than their counterpart four decades ago. I would agree with that, advanced training supports that conclusion. However, those two guys back then are better than 99.9% of their present day competitors. Remember, kids back then still lifted weights, had good coaching, and ran track, so it's not as if they didn't have any training. So there are some exceptions. I still think Gessman's teams would give Moore's teams a run for their money. That guy had five state titles. 

I may be overstepping my boundaries here and not staying on subject, but I often hear comparisons of professional basketball players in the 80s/90s versus today…

Modern NBA players are also bigger, faster, and stronger but (without giving @Bobref a coronary), rules, and how games are officiated are much different.

The amount of holding and grabbing that used to be allowed in both sports would challenge today’s teams greatly.

[US31]

(caution, I still rememeber college Statistics)😇

We are talking about "teams"....not individual "players".  Keep in mind, the population of Indiana is larger today....big high schools are, well,... "bigger".  

In 1980, there were about 5.5 million people.  Today its at (or close) to 7 million, around a 25% increase.  If we are talking about the top 1% of athletic genetics in the that population...

• In 1980 that was 55,000 people
• Today that is 70,000 people

You can extrapolate there are 25% more "great" players playing high school football today to fill out the rosters of high school teams.  Even if the quality of each individual player is more or less the same. 

The one statistic I don't have the effort to look up is the number of IHSAA members schools in 1980 vs Now.  Although I don't suspect its gone up 25% (as population has), especially in the biggest classes.

[23andCounting]

5 hours ago, US31 said:

(caution, I still rememeber college Statistics)😇

We are talking about "teams"....not individual "players".  Keep in mind, the population of Indiana is larger today....big high schools are, well,... "bigger".  

In 1980, there were about 5.5 million people.  Today its at (or close) to 7 million, around a 25% increase.  If we are talking about the top 1% of athletic genetics in the that population...

• In 1980 that was 55,000 people
• Today that is 70,000 people

You can extrapolate there are 25% more "great" players playing high school football today to fill out the rosters of high school teams.  Even if the quality of each individual player is more or less the same. 

The one statistic I don't have the effort to look up is the number of IHSAA members schools in 1980 vs Now.  Although I don't suspect its gone up 25% (as population has), especially in the biggest classes.

Very good point, however, some programs have lost student enrollment. Still a good point nonetheless.

[Komets2727]

On 5/9/2025 at 9:10 AM, US31 said:

Banks was the best HS player I ever saw play in person...and I've seen some good ones.

Rod Woodson head and shoulders ahead of Banks. 3 sport high school athlete, NFL hall of famer, nuff said

[23andCounting]

3 hours ago, Komets2727 said:

Rod Woodson head and shoulders ahead of Banks. 3 sport high school athlete, NFL hall of famer, nuff said

To @US31's defense, he did say "in person."

[temptation]

23 hours ago, Komets2727 said:

Rod Woodson head and shoulders ahead of Banks. 3 sport high school athlete, NFL hall of famer, nuff said

With all of the advancements in training and equipment, I would love to see Woodson in the modern era.