Started By
Message
re: Blue Bloods or New Money??
Posted on 2/4/20 at 1:20 pm to AustinKnight
Posted on 2/4/20 at 1:20 pm to AustinKnight
New money all day long> Blueblood. Both would be nice though.
0
Posted on 2/4/20 at 1:55 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
DawgsLife
Blue Bloods or New Money??
quote:
I’ll take that New Money slot all day.
Not sure i would put a New Money label on LSU. LSU has been very good for a very long time. Just not quite in the same company as Alabama, ND, Michigan, Ohio State, Oklahoma and a few others.
There needs to be a category that sits somewhere between new money and Blue Blood.
Blue OBJ Money....
Posted on 2/4/20 at 2:06 pm to MetryTyger
"Blue Blood" i.e. Old Money is more commonly referred to basketball programs since the sport of college basketball has teams who have been successful going back to the beginning of the sport (KU, UNC UK, Indiana - UCLA and Duke joined later)and who built the sport.
In contrast, the teams that built/invented college football (Princeton, Harvard, Yale) no longer play the game at the highest level. Only Michigan really goes back to the beginning of the sport. Ga Tech may be considered a Southern Blue Blood due to its 1917 undisputed NC.
In contrast, the teams that built/invented college football (Princeton, Harvard, Yale) no longer play the game at the highest level. Only Michigan really goes back to the beginning of the sport. Ga Tech may be considered a Southern Blue Blood due to its 1917 undisputed NC.
Posted on 2/4/20 at 2:32 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
But...they recognize it. It essentially means you can claim it, or not, and then fans can decide if they accept that claim or not. (Of course, in this age we have the BCS and playoff championships that give more credence to the claims.
But when you talk about anything older than those it is more of a subjective thing.
Exactly what does "they recognize it" mean?
Posted on 2/4/20 at 2:33 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
I agree with this.
Fine with me, I don't defend 1941.
Posted on 2/4/20 at 2:35 pm to Choctaw
quote:
LSU was the first school not in the Ivy League or Michigan to win a national championship.
I don't think this is true...
Posted on 2/4/20 at 4:00 pm to MetryTyger
quote:
Blue OBJ Money....
Posted on 2/4/20 at 4:02 pm to 3down10
quote:
Exactly what does "they recognize it" mean?
It means they list it on their web site as a National Championship?
I mean, you are arguing like I am the one that set the criteria. I am not. Go argue with the NCAA if you want to.
So, tell us your criteria.
This post was edited on 2/4/20 at 4:03 pm
Posted on 2/4/20 at 4:09 pm to Diesel88
quote:
LSU was the first school not in the Ivy League or Michigan to win a national championship.
quote:
I don't think this is true...
You are correct. It isn't true.
Minnesota won in 1904
Chicago won in 1905
LSU won in 1907.
Pretty impressive though.
Then you start getting into arguments about what National Championships should schools recognize. Which are legitimate. I don't think LSU claims that one, but they were 10-0. I don't understand why they don't claim it.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News