Started By
Message
re: The changing of the Blue-Bloods
Posted on 4/18/18 at 2:39 pm to WG_Dawg
Posted on 4/18/18 at 2:39 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
there's literally zero argument, unless your rank of all time programs is only based on the last 10 years at a time.
Being relevant is still pretty important to me to continue blue blood status, less and less matters the further you go back. So many of these teams just have accomplished very little the last, 10, some 20+ years. Doesn't mean they aren't a historically good program, but to me, to maintain being a blue blood, you cant go decade+ long hiatuses presently and still call yourself definitively one.
This post was edited on 4/18/18 at 2:41 pm
2
Posted on 4/18/18 at 2:43 pm to thunderbird1100
quote:
So many of these teams just have accomplished very little the last, 10, some 20+ year
dude 10 years is absolutley nothing, I've got underwear older than that. Prior to 2008 bama went over 10+ years without doing much of anything besides an SEC title in 99 but nobody in america would discount them as being a blue blood.
To lose BB status to me it would take DECADES of futility. UT (although not a blue blood but is pretty unquestionably the #2 all time SEC team) is dangerously close to losing that spot they've held for so long, due to their record the last ~18 years. Nebraksa hasn't done hardly anythign since the late 90s either and they've started tumbling down the ranks. And both of those programs have had some BAAAAD years in there. I just don't think you can say "well you didn't win a national title the last 10 years so what you did in the previous 90 is irrelevant". It's far too short sighted.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 2:56 pm to thunderbird1100
quote:
Doesn't mean they aren't a historically good program, but to me, to maintain being a blue blood, you cant go decade+ long hiatuses presently and still call yourself definitively one
Ohio State football went 34 years without a NC...does that count?
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News