Started By
Message
re: The changing of the Blue-Bloods
Posted on 4/18/18 at 2:17 pm to WG_Dawg
Posted on 4/18/18 at 2:17 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:I would agree, which is why I think judging teams as a program based on 60-100 years ago seems strange
And I believe all of the aforementioned are still behind UT, really goes to show how excellent they were their entire history prior to 2009.
I definitely would rank Tenn #1 out of Tenn/UGA/UF/AU/LSU in terms of ALL time, but I would rank them last in my lifetime, and I am 30......
So at what point to I say they are actually the worst program instead of the best to those that hang on to the term blue blood?
This post was edited on 4/18/18 at 2:18 pm
Posted on 4/18/18 at 2:27 pm to lsupride87
quote:
I think judging teams as a program based on 60-100 years ago seems strange
eh I don't think so, it's not like they count any less just becuase we weren't there for it. I mean 60 years ago my uncle (not even grandparent) was in HS going to uga games and would attend a few years later. When I'm older I'd think it odd for someone to disregard UGA's 02 and 05 SEC titles that I was around for and went to just because they're too young to remember.
quote:
I would rank them last in my lifetime
yeah as far as RIGHT NOW there's no doubt they're on the bottom
quote:
So at what point to I say they are actually the worst program instead of the best to those that hang on to the term blue blood?
I mean I guess it depends on what the topic of discussion is, which in this case is "blue bloods" which in my mind means all time/historic.
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News