Started By
Message
re: Why the lack of bluebloods in the SEC?
Posted on 7/9/22 at 8:34 pm to Pulpwood Patterson
Posted on 7/9/22 at 8:34 pm to Pulpwood Patterson
It's difficult to pinpoint what a blueblood is. Everybody has their own idea and their own criteria.
Some base it off National Championships. Some off all-time wins. Others throw in Heisman winners, conference championships etc.
Still others want recency to rule the day, while others don't care and think wins alone rule the day.
I really don't care. I do agree that Alabama would belong on any blueblood list as they have all of the criteria mentioned. In the end, it really doesn't matter who is a blueblood and who is not. What it all boils down to me is who is winning today. Nebraska success30-40 years ago was interesting to watch, but does not affect me today at all.
ETA
I should add that whatever criteria you choose Alabama still comes out on top. That has to be impressive by any metric.
Some base it off National Championships. Some off all-time wins. Others throw in Heisman winners, conference championships etc.
Still others want recency to rule the day, while others don't care and think wins alone rule the day.
I really don't care. I do agree that Alabama would belong on any blueblood list as they have all of the criteria mentioned. In the end, it really doesn't matter who is a blueblood and who is not. What it all boils down to me is who is winning today. Nebraska success30-40 years ago was interesting to watch, but does not affect me today at all.
ETA
I should add that whatever criteria you choose Alabama still comes out on top. That has to be impressive by any metric.
This post was edited on 7/9/22 at 8:38 pm
1
Posted on 7/9/22 at 10:05 pm to DawgsLife
quote:.
It's difficult to pinpoint what a blueblood is. Everybody has their own idea and their own criteria
The best analogy I can think of is old money. Bluebloods is nothing more than programs with old money.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News