Started By
Message
re: Is LSU a blue blood? Is Georgia?
Posted on 10/21/20 at 12:56 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Posted on 10/21/20 at 12:56 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
People forget/discount it but LSU had plenty of success before 2000 and are a top 10ish all time program.
LSU had success but not enough to warrant blue blood consideration. As I've pointed out multiple times before, prior to the arrival of Nick Saban, LSU had five 10-win seasons in their whole history. For comparison's sake, Alabama had five seasons of 10 wins or more in the decade prior to Saban's arrival in Baton Rouge.
This post was edited on 10/21/20 at 12:59 pm
1
Posted on 10/21/20 at 1:01 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
People who like LSU say that's blue blood, people who don't say it isn't.
I'm a die-hard fan and I'd say we aren't. Neither is Miami, Clemson, Florida, FSU, etc. who had little sustained success before the 1980s. LSU, Georgia, and Penn State are just outside the "blue-blood" cutoff line
Posted on 10/21/20 at 1:15 pm to Oilfieldbiology
New money is better than no money 
Posted on 10/21/20 at 1:18 pm to themetalreb
Im of the opinion that the list of blue bloods doesnt change. They're the teams that have been good since the early days of football and continued to have success at the end of the century and in to the next. Whether it's the same kind of success they had way back when or not doesn't change it.
It's just my opinion and everyone has a different one. Doesnt make theirs or mine wrong. Just different opinions.
The list doesn't change. Teams don't lose their status even though they've struggled. It happens even to the best programs.
It's just my opinion and everyone has a different one. Doesnt make theirs or mine wrong. Just different opinions.
The list doesn't change. Teams don't lose their status even though they've struggled. It happens even to the best programs.
Posted on 10/21/20 at 1:23 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
That's great. They haven't done anything in almost 90 years. If we're debating Nebraska's blue blood status after 19 years of being down, Princeton and Yale are definitely out of the conversation.
I'm not debating Nebraska. They are in. Once a Blue Blood always a Blue Blood. Kind of like the Big 6. Once you are in, you are in.
BUT...let me clarify. I am not advocating that we include them. just saying that the criteria used should be very carefully chosen. Those two get eliminated not because their titles were so long ago, but because nobody played football back then. Almost literally nobody.
Posted on 10/21/20 at 1:25 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
LSU had success but not enough to warrant blue blood consideration. As I've pointed out multiple times before, prior to the arrival of Nick Saban, LSU had five 10-win seasons in their whole history. For comparison's sake, Alabama had five seasons of 10 wins or more in the decade prior to Saban's arrival in Baton Rouge.
I get that and understand, but they sit there with 4 or 5 NCs now and that is probably more than some of the blue Bloods, right?
Which brings us to the question of what makes a Blue Blood? Is it success previous to a particular time frame? Or is it overall success of a program?
Posted on 10/21/20 at 1:44 pm to DawgsLife
It's long term success of a program that elevates it to a certain level of prestige that is enduring.
LSU has the titles at this point, but it's still a somewhat unremarkable school otherwise in small state. It doesn't have the old-time SEC charm of a school like Alabama or even Tennessee.
UGA has more overall prestige as a school, but lacks the titles. While I don't really think you could "become" a blue blood school, if UGA won several titles over the next couple of decades they'd have a decent argument that they're as close as it gets.
LSU has the titles at this point, but it's still a somewhat unremarkable school otherwise in small state. It doesn't have the old-time SEC charm of a school like Alabama or even Tennessee.
UGA has more overall prestige as a school, but lacks the titles. While I don't really think you could "become" a blue blood school, if UGA won several titles over the next couple of decades they'd have a decent argument that they're as close as it gets.
Posted on 10/21/20 at 1:46 pm to themetalreb
I think you need consistent multi sport success to be a blue blood. Or be so overwhelmingly dominant for a long time in one sport that it's indisputable. The less popular the sport, the more dominate you have to be, and the faster it wears off after you stop being successful.
We are no longer a blue blood due to track success. The half-life is too short. We may be on our way to becoming one due to baseball, but have to win the big one first. Other teams may be on this road too, I don't follow baseball.
Kentucky and Alabama are bluebloods due to single sport dominance. Florida and LSU and I guess Auburn are bluebloods due to multiple sport success. Florida is slipping, but will retain its rank for a while yet.
We are no longer a blue blood due to track success. The half-life is too short. We may be on our way to becoming one due to baseball, but have to win the big one first. Other teams may be on this road too, I don't follow baseball.
Kentucky and Alabama are bluebloods due to single sport dominance. Florida and LSU and I guess Auburn are bluebloods due to multiple sport success. Florida is slipping, but will retain its rank for a while yet.
This post was edited on 10/21/20 at 1:48 pm
Posted on 10/21/20 at 1:50 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
It's long term success of a program that elevates it to a certain level of prestige that is enduring.
I get that and agree. But they won one of their championships in 1958. I do understand that typically it is sustained success over a long period of time. But when you consider Nebraska, Texas, USC etc....I mean the only teams that could even be considered a Blue Blood these days would be Alabama, Ohio State and MAYBE ND.
How long has it been since the others have won a title?
Yes...#1980, but we are not claiming to be blue bloods
Posted on 10/21/20 at 1:53 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
UGA has more overall prestige as a school, but lacks the titles. While I don't really think you could "become" a blue blood school, if UGA won several titles over the next couple of decades they'd have a decent argument that they're as close as it gets.
Realistically I'm not sure there should be any schools added to the 8 or so schools on the blue blood list. They should start another category for teams like LSU that have more recent success over a long period of time.
Oh, well. It's not like we could be considered, so it doesn't mean that much to me. It was just something to give my opinion about.
Posted on 10/21/20 at 2:02 pm to themetalreb
If this is your thread title then you don't know what that word means.
Posted on 10/21/20 at 2:04 pm to kywildcatfanone
Enlighten us please...
Posted on 10/21/20 at 3:02 pm to themetalreb
quote:
I would say yes to LSU...3 natty’s over the last 16-17 years...no to Georgia...
No and No. The Bluebloods are a closed group at this point. Alabama, Notre Dame, Texas, Michigan, Oklahoma, and USC. Those were the programs dominant when the mythology of college football was developing, remain power brokers, and have remained top teams for the better part of a century. Great programs like LSU, Georgia, Ohio State, Penn State, Auburn, and Nebraska are historical top 10-15 programs but don't really have the same cache.
Basketball has it's equivalents in Kansas, UCLA, Indiana, Kentucky, UNC, and Duke
Posted on 10/21/20 at 3:08 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
UGA has more overall prestige as a school, but lacks the titles. While I don't really think you could "become" a blue blood school, if UGA won several titles over the next couple of decades they'd have a decent argument that they're as close as it gets.
You can't really earn your way into the CFB (or college basketball) Blue Blood clubs through success, as that was really only part of the equation. It was fixed in time when the game was becoming part of sporting culture in the 1920's and 30's.
Posted on 10/21/20 at 3:27 pm to WildcatMike
quote:
Don’t get pissy...it is a good comparison.
Wait, that’s coming from you.
Posted on 10/21/20 at 3:50 pm to themetalreb
No, LSU is blue collar which is fine!
Posted on 10/21/20 at 3:55 pm to BamaScoop
You are way off these days. Sheesh..
Posted on 10/21/20 at 4:16 pm to themetalreb
If 3 national titles since 2000 doesn’t constitute a blue blood then idk what does. Got twice as many as OU and Texas in that frame.
Posted on 10/21/20 at 4:29 pm to themetalreb
This topic has now been discussed twice in the last few months. This is all you need to know:
ULTIMATE BLUE BLOODS:
- Alabama
BLUE BLOODS
- Notre Dame
- USC
- Oklahoma
- OHIO STATE
BORDERLINE BLUE BLOODS:
- Penn State
- Florida State
- Louisiana State
- Florida
- Texas
FORMER BLUE BLOODS WITH A CURRENT IDENTITY CRISIS:
- Tennessee
- Miami
- Minnesota
- Nebraska
- Michigan
AWAITING TO BE BORDERLINE BLUE BLOOD:
- Georgia
- Clemson
- Auburn
- Washington
- Michigan State
- Pittsburgh
ULTIMATE BLUE BLOODS:
- Alabama
BLUE BLOODS
- Notre Dame
- USC
- Oklahoma
- OHIO STATE
BORDERLINE BLUE BLOODS:
- Penn State
- Florida State
- Louisiana State
- Florida
- Texas
FORMER BLUE BLOODS WITH A CURRENT IDENTITY CRISIS:
- Tennessee
- Miami
- Minnesota
- Nebraska
- Michigan
AWAITING TO BE BORDERLINE BLUE BLOOD:
- Georgia
- Clemson
- Auburn
- Washington
- Michigan State
- Pittsburgh
Posted on 10/21/20 at 4:30 pm to turnpiketiger
quote:
If 3 national titles since 2000 doesn’t constitute a blue blood then idk what does.
Yeah that's apparent, thanks.
Page 8 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News