Started By
Message
re: Which football team is more of a blue blood? UGA or LSU
Posted on 2/3/20 at 1:01 pm to SwampManiac
Posted on 2/3/20 at 1:01 pm to SwampManiac
The answer is both. As both teams are enjoying success on the football field, recruiting and most of their athletic programs are in great shape. I would say that Alabama would be in the same conversation.
0
Posted on 2/3/20 at 1:06 pm to Eli Goldfinger
quote:
That’s a tough one...
A tougher one is:
What is stupider and more obnoxious than a Rant post discussing who is and is not a "blue blood"?
Posted on 2/3/20 at 1:14 pm to Eli Goldfinger
Neither are blue bloods lol. There are 5 football blue bloods. USC, Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame and Alabama. LSU & Georgia aren’t even in the top 10.
Posted on 2/3/20 at 1:23 pm to Muleriderhog
LSU may not be a blue blood and neither is UGA. This national title pulls LSU ahead of UGA imo
Posted on 2/3/20 at 1:23 pm to Leto II
LSU has three national championships, and four appearances this century. THAT’s a blueblood. If you don’t think so, I’m not going to argue, but you’re going to get punched in the mouth. 
Posted on 2/3/20 at 1:32 pm to Penrod
Based on this thread, it seems the belief of many is that the list of "blue blood" teams is unchangeable. If that's the case, it sort of becomes an irrelevant, meaningless moniker.
Others have given a window for a changing list, but they explicitly exclude things such as total wins, win %, championships, All-Americans, NFL representation, and other seemingly relevant indicators, instead focusing on very subjective intangibles such as overall perception regardless of the above criteria. In that case, the window for change seems false, as the criteria for the intangibles apparently had to have been solidified 50-100 years ago.
Ultimately, it doesn't seem worth the time for the LSUs and UGAs of the world to worry too much about it.
Others have given a window for a changing list, but they explicitly exclude things such as total wins, win %, championships, All-Americans, NFL representation, and other seemingly relevant indicators, instead focusing on very subjective intangibles such as overall perception regardless of the above criteria. In that case, the window for change seems false, as the criteria for the intangibles apparently had to have been solidified 50-100 years ago.
Ultimately, it doesn't seem worth the time for the LSUs and UGAs of the world to worry too much about it.
Posted on 2/3/20 at 1:32 pm to AUCE05
quote:
The rest are good programs that can play for a title every decade.
LSU has played for the title four times in the last two decades. I’m afraid you’ve been hoist on your own petard.
Posted on 2/3/20 at 1:45 pm to LSUNV
quote:
If we did like everybody else. We would have 7 right now!
Clemson has 7 undefeated seasons and claims three titles.
Posted on 2/3/20 at 1:58 pm to Eli Goldfinger
Neither but LSU is a better program than 97% of the “blue bloods” by a large margin now.
Notre Dame? shite
Oklahoma? shite
Michigan? Always been shite
USC? shite
Texas? shite
Nebraska? shite
Notre Dame? shite
Oklahoma? shite
Michigan? Always been shite
USC? shite
Texas? shite
Nebraska? shite
Posted on 2/3/20 at 2:00 pm to J2thaROC
quote:
Michigan? Always been shite
What?
Posted on 2/3/20 at 2:02 pm to Eli Goldfinger
UGA isn’t a blue blood, LSU maybe is, but one more natty in the next decade or so would seal it
UGA has one legitimate national title and one old iffy one, so I think they’d need to win 3 national championships to get in the conversation for blue blood. Granted that UGA being pretty consistently good helps their case, they have mostly avoided any sustained down years (unlike LSU pre 2000)
UGA has one legitimate national title and one old iffy one, so I think they’d need to win 3 national championships to get in the conversation for blue blood. Granted that UGA being pretty consistently good helps their case, they have mostly avoided any sustained down years (unlike LSU pre 2000)
Posted on 2/3/20 at 2:33 pm to tiger perry
quote:
TBH, Alabama is the only blue blood in the SEC.
Posted on 2/3/20 at 2:34 pm to Eli Goldfinger
LSU
Posted on 2/3/20 at 2:41 pm to Eli Goldfinger
LSU
Posted on 2/3/20 at 2:43 pm to Eli Goldfinger
Are Blue Bloods set in stone from the dawn of Football or can they change over time?
Posted on 2/3/20 at 2:51 pm to Muleriderhog
quote:
LSU & Georgia aren’t even in the top 10.
LSU is easily top 10. CFB Data warehouse/Winsipedia both can give you some insight
Posted on 2/3/20 at 2:51 pm to Cocotheape
quote:
Granted that UGA being pretty consistently good helps their case, they have mostly avoided any sustained down years
They did have 4 losing seasons in a row in the 50s.
quote:
unlike LSU pre 2000
Prior to the 90s, LSU had never had more than two losing seasons in a row.
In 1990, LSU ranked 13th nationally in all-time winning percentage, while UGA ranked 17th.
LSU has historically been ranked ahead of UGA in all-time win%, and has never had a losing record in the series with UGA.
Posted on 2/3/20 at 3:00 pm to Eli Goldfinger
What’s blue blood mean
Posted on 2/3/20 at 3:02 pm to 1BIGTigerFan
quote:
Are Blue Bloods set in stone from the dawn of Football or can they change over time?
They're etched in quicksand.
Posted on 2/3/20 at 3:03 pm to TIGRLEE
quote:
What’s blue blood mean
Anoxic.
Page 7 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News