Started By
Message

re: The changing of the Blue-Bloods

Posted on 4/18/18 at 2:17 pm to
Posted by lsupride87
Member since Dec 2007
96724 posts
Posted on 4/18/18 at 2:17 pm to
quote:

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 would agree, which is why I think judging teams as a program based on 60-100 years ago seems strange


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 by WG_Dawg
Hoover
Member since Jun 2004
86624 posts
Posted on 4/18/18 at 2:27 pm to
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.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter