Started By
Message
re: The changing of the Blue-Bloods
Posted on 4/18/18 at 8:33 pm to LSU Patrick
Posted on 4/18/18 at 8:33 pm to LSU Patrick
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
As of now, UGA really does not fit in this group.
Move them above LSU and they fit.
No one claims Georgia is a Blue Blood, but they are indeed on the short list to become one soon.
1
Posted on 4/18/18 at 8:34 pm to AlaCowboy
quote:
No one claims Georgia is a Blue Blood, but they are indeed on the short list to become one soon.
UGA would need to win, at minimum, 2 national titles in the next 5 years to even be considered. Try winning 1 first. Not to mention UGA just won its first SEC Title in 12 years last season.
This post was edited on 4/18/18 at 8:37 pm
Posted on 4/18/18 at 10:10 pm to VermilionTiger
So when you're an older man, and u will before u know it, you're gonna have something sitting around saying LSU national champs 2003.
I suppose when a youngster says to u that 03 title doesn't matter because it happened 60 years ago, you'll agree that it was 60 years ago and LSU' s title should be disregarded? After all, the youngsters parents weren't even walking in 03.
I suppose when a youngster says to u that 03 title doesn't matter because it happened 60 years ago, you'll agree that it was 60 years ago and LSU' s title should be disregarded? After all, the youngsters parents weren't even walking in 03.
Posted on 4/18/18 at 10:38 pm to TouchdownTony
As was mentioned way upthread, it can be fairly argued there as only 3 blue blood programs at this point that have meet historic and recent characteristics Alabama, Ohio st, and Oklahoma.
Posted on 4/19/18 at 12:20 am to BurlesonCountyAg
quote:
A&M is close to being in the discussion.
"Blue-Bloods" not "Blue Balls"
Posted on 4/19/18 at 12:22 am to TideFaninFl
Michigan's coach is a goombah.
Posted on 4/19/18 at 1:55 am to Bill Parker?
Clemson is one.
Posted on 4/19/18 at 5:21 am to Shawn Spencer
I realize that the sole criteria of most on this board is national titles, I don't agree that UGA doesn't belong.
Objectively when you take multiple criteria into account UGA clearly fits. UGA has more wins, a higher win %, and more conference titles than AU, LSU, and UF. I assume you're not arguing that AU, LSU, and UF don't belong on this list (I'm not).
then I think we should quit using blue-bloods and use better than average football schools.
Objectively when you take multiple criteria into account UGA clearly fits. UGA has more wins, a higher win %, and more conference titles than AU, LSU, and UF. I assume you're not arguing that AU, LSU, and UF don't belong on this list (I'm not).
then I think we should quit using blue-bloods and use better than average football schools.
Posted on 4/19/18 at 6:54 am to lsupride87
quote:
lsupride87
I truly do not understand taking pride in something that happened waaaaaaaaaay before I was born
Of course you wouldn’t understand
Posted on 4/19/18 at 6:59 am to TideFaninFl
I'd say give Notre Dame, Miami, Clemson and Auburn extra credit.....
reason being, those are the 4 most successful "non-state" schools in the country.
Out of the 4, Notre Dame is the only blue-blood but cases can be made that in the modern era all 4 deserve consideration. And it's even more impressive that none are the primary state school. Notre Dame is more of a national brand though, so I guess it makes up for some of it.
reason being, those are the 4 most successful "non-state" schools in the country.
Out of the 4, Notre Dame is the only blue-blood but cases can be made that in the modern era all 4 deserve consideration. And it's even more impressive that none are the primary state school. Notre Dame is more of a national brand though, so I guess it makes up for some of it.
Posted on 4/19/18 at 7:15 am to TideFaninFl
So reading the thread it occurred to me that we need a (or several) break points. Perhaps one should be blue-bloods before WW2 and blue-bloods after WW2 or one could be before 1970 and after 1970 (integration).......
Posted on 4/19/18 at 7:23 am to Shawn Spencer
quote:
I don't agree that UGA doesn't belong.
This is what makes UGA fans so incorrigible and impossible to be around. Because they believe their own bullshite.
Posted on 4/19/18 at 7:44 am to TailbackU
Do you even know what he was responding to? Seems doubtful based on this post.
Posted on 4/19/18 at 8:42 am to TailbackU
quote:
This is what makes UGA fans so incorrigible and impossible to be around.
WTF are you talking about?Love how you leave the 2nd part of his post.
quote:
Objectively when you take multiple criteria into account UGA clearly fits. UGA has more wins, a higher win %, and more conference titles than AU, LSU, and UF. I assume you're not arguing that AU, LSU, and UF don't belong on this list (I'm not).
He clearly states his case for UGA belongs in the 2nd group and he's exactly right.
Really dude,if you're THIS triggered by all things UGA you need to move to a nice safe space in Auburn or Opalaka.Unfortunately its gonna be a little more difficult online.
Posted on 4/19/18 at 8:48 am to RD Dawg
UGA is up there for sure. Kirby might just be what y'all needed all along. UGA is a sleeping giant. But I still think Florida is the true sleeping giant of the sec east.
Posted on 4/19/18 at 9:12 am to RD Dawg
That auburn guy hates uga so much, he forgot to read the post so he could post the same thing he always posts.
Posted on 4/19/18 at 9:14 am to samson73103
quote:Why wouldnt I understand? I dont give have pride or really use LSUs 1958 national title (29 years before I was even latched on a titty) to talk shite to others? It seems completely ridiculous to me
Of course you wouldn’t understand
In my opinon, the younger people that use this dont really care either, they simply use it as trash talk without really believing in it
This post was edited on 4/19/18 at 9:16 am
Posted on 4/19/18 at 9:18 am to lsupride87
quote:
I truly do not understand taking pride in something that happened waaaaaaaaaay before I was born
I am guessing you don't celebrate Christmas, 4th of July etc?
quote:And if they won a boxing title this year, would that title do it for you? No, because it is boxing, not because of the timeline.
LSUs boxing titles really dont do it for me
But I agree with WG. Bluebloods are for teams who have had sustained success ove the years, not just a blip of a 10 year strong period.
Ohio State
Texas
USCw
Alabama
Notre Dame
Michigan
Oklahoma
I would say if Michigan and Texas does not break through to become a serious power again, they are in danger of losing Blueblood status. I can't thin of any other teams that really deserve being added o the group. There could be some teams considered to be second tier that, if they went on a sustained streak might be considered.
LSU
Florida
Auburn
Georgia
Nebraska (Dropped them from Blueblood for lack of any success lately)
Clemson (A long way to go, though)
Miami
FSU (Maybe closest)
Penn State
Tennessee (Very close but fading)
This post was edited on 4/19/18 at 9:21 am
Posted on 4/19/18 at 9:19 am to DawgsLife
quote:We are comparing holidays to me not caring about what lsu football did in 1958?
I am guessing you don't celebrate Christmas, 4th of July etc?
Posted on 4/19/18 at 9:25 am to WareagleKK
quote:
reason being, those are the 4 most successful "non-state" schools in the country.
"Non-state"? What on earth does that have to do with anything? Do you honestly think people are going to turn Auburn down because they are called Auburn University ? Crap. Half of your recruits commit to the "University of Auburn" anyway! They don't have any idea what a state university is!
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News