Started By
Message
re: The changing of the Blue-Bloods
Posted on 4/18/18 at 10:35 am to Rocco Lampone
Posted on 4/18/18 at 10:35 am to Rocco Lampone
Texas is 7-1 vs bama all time... Just saying.
3
Posted on 4/18/18 at 10:37 am to Che Boludo
quote:
On the cusp (no order, but Nebraska/UT seem the closest to meeting the criteria):
- Nebraska (only because they've recently fallen below the .700 win % threshold)
- UTenn
- Penn St
- UF
- Auburn
- LSU
- UGA
- FSU
- Miami
None of these teams will ever be blue bloods. Just not enough history. Your team's dominance has to go back to at least before WW2.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 10:39 am to DaronTexas
Texas is definitely a blue blood.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 10:40 am to BurlesonCountyAg
Bruh i support all my Texas teams. But a&m has not been good long enough to even think about being a blueblood.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 10:49 am to BurlesonCountyAg
quote:
A&M is close to being in the discussion.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 11:03 am to TideFaninFl
That wasn't a NC game in 97 either.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 11:03 am to ColoBama
quote:
None of these teams will ever be blue bloods. Just not enough history. Your team's dominance has to go back to at least before WW2.
That would eliminate Oklahoma though.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 11:09 am to ColoBama
quote:
Your team's dominance has to go back to at least before WW2.
Complate garbage.So if Miami goes on to win 4 NC's in the next 15 years and has a total of 9,they won't be
a "blue blood"?
Lots of powerhouses pre WWII that will never sniff another NC (Minnesota,Pittsburgh,Army,Harvard,Princeton ) It was 75+ years ago and those titles are getting less significant over the course of time.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 11:38 am to Korin
quote:
That would eliminate Oklahoma though.
Maybe.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 11:41 am to RD Dawg
quote:
Complate garbage.So if Miami goes on to win 4 NC's in the next 15 years and has a total of 9,they won't be
a "blue blood"?
No and the culture at the U will never be one that goes along with a blue blood program.
When we say blue blood, think "royalty". Won't mean they don't already even have a great program. They're just not royalty when it comes to college football. Sounds snobbish but that's just the way it is.
I like Miami but let's be honest, they're trashy.
Georgia and Tennessee at their very best have always been Alabama-lite.
You can't just be a powerhouse from back then, you also have to have some modern credentials. As such, those Northeast teams you mentioned, don't qualify. They are fine universities but just not blueblood football programs.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 11:57 am to ColoBama
quote:
No and the culture at the U will never be one that goes along with a blue blood program.
What "culture" is that???And now the "culture"is part of the equation along pre WWII records? Who the Hell pUT you in charge of this formula?
quote:
They're just not royalty when it comes to college football.
So are Pitt and Minnesota "royalty" if they have modern success???
quote:
Miami but let's be honest, they're trashy.
And Bama wasn't trashy under the Dubose and Logan
Young ?
Don't care if a team is "trashy"or not,if they have 9
NC's they're blue bloods period.
This post was edited on 4/18/18 at 12:06 pm
Posted on 4/18/18 at 11:58 am to ColoBama
quote:
I like Miami but let's be honest, they're trashy.
ah the irony...Posted on 4/18/18 at 11:59 am to Che Boludo
As much as I hate to say it, I'm going to have to agree to move Nebraska out of blue blood status for the reasons you noted.
Texas is on the bottom rung now IMO.
Texas is on the bottom rung now IMO.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 12:03 pm to llfshoals
Blue Blood is a very specific term for a very specific group of programs. Those that have show continual high level of success over a long period. Doesnt mean they cant have a down decade, you just have to take the whole history of the program into account.
A better term that would include schools like Miami and Florida State would be Powerhouse
A better term that would include schools like Miami and Florida State would be Powerhouse
Posted on 4/18/18 at 12:04 pm to llfshoals
quote:
As much as I hate to say it, I'm going to have to agree to move Nebraska out of blue blood status for the reasons you noted.
Texas is on the bottom rung now IMO.
Now is the key word and blue blood status doesnt care where you are now.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 12:14 pm to Che Boludo
quote:
From the article I mentioned that used the posted criteria for Blue Bloods. Mind you, it is 2 year old data, so add an SEC Championship and NCG runner up to the resume. I think they clearly belong in second tier. Just a bit short on win%
Taken alone, I see your point, but I was considering your post in the context of the thread topic. The question was whether or not Michigan should still be considered a Blue Blood due to its more recent performance. This is why I say that UGA doesn't belong in that second tier. The other teams you had listed not only have strong overall football histories but have won a national championship within the past 30 years. I say that Penn State doesn't belong in the second tier either for the same reason. I give the benefit of the doubt to Nebraska because that program had a dynasty in the 90s, including probably the best CFB team of all time, and was considered a Blue Blood in the past.
UGA fans are really touchy about this, but it is true. Other than a few SEC championships and making the playoff last season, UGA hasn't really done shite since 19-freaking-82. I don't know about the rest of you, but I was 7 years old in 1982. I barely even remember that myself. Furthermore, it was nearly 40 years before that when UGA earned its prior claimed national title.
Bulldog fans have every reason to be excited about the future of the UGA football program, but if one is being honest, that program is not currently in the same category as most of the others listed in that second tier. Maybe Kirby can get them back there in another season or two.
This post was edited on 4/18/18 at 12:15 pm
Posted on 4/18/18 at 12:15 pm to BurlesonCountyAg
quote:
A&M is close to being in the discussion.
Hahahahahahahaha
455 all-time wins, 15-21 in bowls. They've won 11 games one time and it was 6 years ago. They have 7 conference titles in the last 50 years but just 1 in the last 25 years.
They are 9th in all-time wins. In the SEC.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 12:16 pm to StopRobot
quote:As one of the older guys on these forums I'm well aware of the rush to promote a team who has done well recently or dismiss Notre Dame.
Now is the key word and blue blood status doesnt care where you are now.
Even so, the Blue bloods have always had a pecking order.
Even the Dukes must bow before the King.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 1:03 pm to LSU Patrick
quote:
As of now, UGA really does not fit in this group.
Neither does LSU, UTenn or Auburn, imo. Sorry, but I don't think half of the SEC is a blueblood.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 1:05 pm to redeye
It's 800+ wins and .700. That's 8 programs (well 7, Nebraska is on probation).
Page 2 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News