Started By
Message
1
Posted on 4/2/25 at 10:42 am to bigDgator
quote:
-USC Trojans (12 National Championships)
-LSU Tigers (7 National Championships)
-Texas Longhorns (6 National Championships)
-Arizona State Sun Devils (5 National Championships)
-Miami Hurricanes (4 National Championships)
-Cal State Fullerton (4 National Championships)
-Arizona Wildcats (4 National Championships)
I would probably go with the Super Regional era in college baseball as the main point of significance. That started in 1999.
When we look at a program like USC, theyve only made the NCAAt six times in this new era of baseball. Only two CWS appearances and have played for no national titles.
So I guess what I am saying, would we really call USC a blueblood in baseball compared to a South Carolina, Florida, or even an Arkansas type program right now?
To each their own, but when I think about top baseball programs across the country, most reside in the SEC. USC, Miami, CSF, Arizona State, etc. do not really come to mind even with those programs titles in the 80's & 90's.
This post was edited on 4/2/25 at 10:43 am
Posted on 4/2/25 at 10:45 am to Granola
Pre 90's, the CWS was a true 8 team tournament.
Now, it is two 4 team tournaments, with a day off, followed by a 2 out of 3 series.
The earlier format put a premium on pitching; if you didn't have quality depth, you didn't make it very far.
Either way, it is still a hard tournament to win, and the winners earn it.
Baseball games turn around for the smallest of reasons, and Karma and baseball tend to go hand in hand.
Now, it is two 4 team tournaments, with a day off, followed by a 2 out of 3 series.
The earlier format put a premium on pitching; if you didn't have quality depth, you didn't make it very far.
Either way, it is still a hard tournament to win, and the winners earn it.
Baseball games turn around for the smallest of reasons, and Karma and baseball tend to go hand in hand.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 11:36 am to Hawgeye
Yeah, the term "Blueblood" has come to mean top program, which is not what a Blueblood really is. Blueblood is someone born into money who didn't have to earn it. People use the term adoringly, and really to me it means didn't do it yourself.
Old money always makes fun of new money, but new money kicks the shite out of old money.
Old money always makes fun of new money, but new money kicks the shite out of old money.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 11:44 am to bigDgator
quote:
What is significant about 1990? I know in basketball they say 1985 began the modern era, which is when the tourney moved to 64 teams.
‘85 would be good for baseball too. That’s about when kids started choosing to attend college after being drafted.
In the ‘70s and before it was a sport for undrafted kids.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 11:46 am to bigDgator
quote:
Yeah, the term "Blueblood" has come to mean top program, which is not what a Blueblood really is
To me is the historical greats that get special treatment and always seem to be in the mix for the title.
Baseball doesn’t know how to treat bluebloods, they left LSU out of the entire NCAA tournament one year with an RPI of 27.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:00 pm to bigDgator
So I threw this together.. some of the top teams, plus all of the SEC teams..
My List
1 Texas
2 LSU
3 USC
4 Arizona State
5 Arizona
6 Miami
7 South Carolina
8 Stanford
9 Cal State Fullerton
10 Vanderbilt
11 Oregon State
12 Oklahoma State
eta: I'm 100% confident that I screwed up some of these stats.. it was a lot of data entry.. so my apologies in advance if something isn't right, but it should be close
My List
1 Texas
2 LSU
3 USC
4 Arizona State
5 Arizona
6 Miami
7 South Carolina
8 Stanford
9 Cal State Fullerton
10 Vanderbilt
11 Oregon State
12 Oklahoma State
eta: I'm 100% confident that I screwed up some of these stats.. it was a lot of data entry.. so my apologies in advance if something isn't right, but it should be close
This post was edited on 4/2/25 at 12:03 pm
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:24 pm to BigBro
fricking Vandy. 5 trips to Omaha, 20 wins, 2 championships. 4 wins average per trip. 
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:27 pm to bigDgator
Not that the article is irrelevant, but it's strange that it is 3 years old.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:31 pm to Corriente Kid
quote:
Not that the article is irrelevant, but it's strange that it is 3 years old.
I was just looking for something relevant to the discussion, and that is the one I found. I may have been able to find a more recent one, but I didn't spend a lot of time on it.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:33 pm to Timstrebor
Mike Martin and FSU the definition of choke.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:34 pm to BigBro
I had no idea Texas had 593 more wins than the second-most winning team, Stanford. That is crazy.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:57 pm to Corriente Kid
[quote]I had no idea Texas had 593 more wins than the second-most winning team, Stanford. That is crazy.[/quote
The crazy thing is having only 4 different head coaches from 1911-2016. That is some crazy stability they’ve had for a century.
The crazy thing is having only 4 different head coaches from 1911-2016. That is some crazy stability they’ve had for a century.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:58 pm to dchog
Piggy knows all about choking in baseball
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:00 pm to Corriente Kid
quote:
I had no idea Texas had 593 more wins than the second-most winning team, Stanford. That is crazy.
I believe that's the number as of the end of the 2024 season.. no idea if it's accurate or not.. it's in the right ballpark though..
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:04 pm to bigDgator
Seems like ASU is recommitting to baseball. I wonder if Arizona will do the same...
I thought A-Rod made a large donation to Da U's baseball program? It makes no sense why they aren't a powerhouse year in and year out.
I thought A-Rod made a large donation to Da U's baseball program? It makes no sense why they aren't a powerhouse year in and year out.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:21 pm to bigDgator
I think LSU is the top modern day blue blood of Baseball. Miami might be two
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:26 pm to scottydoesntknow
quote:
I think LSU is the top modern day blue blood of Baseball. Miami might be two
I think you have to separate "modern power" vs "blue blood". For me, A "blue blood" program refers to teams that have a long-standing history of success and tradition, often dating back many decades. These programs are considered to be part of the elite, historically dominant teams that have won multiple championships over the years and have an ingrained culture of excellence. A blue blood is typically a program with an established legacy,
If we are talking "Modern" power there is no doubt that LSU stands alone at the top. It's not even close. They are a force.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:32 pm to HorninHouston
quote:
I think you have to separate "modern power" vs "blue blood". For me, A "blue blood" program refers to teams that have a long-standing history of success and tradition, often dating back many decades. These programs are considered to be part of the elite, historically dominant teams that have won multiple championships over the years and have an ingrained culture of excellence. A blue blood is typically a program with an established legacy, If we are talking "Modern" power there is no doubt that LSU stands alone at the top. It's not even close. They are a force.
Maybe but College Baseball was more of a niche afterthought prior to really somewhere around late 80s. There was just less number of schools that really took it seriously until that point. Its no blight on those schools, they were great accomplishments but at the same time a good comparison might be all the UCLA basketball titles while comparing them to an uber competitive title today
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:38 pm to bigDgator
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News