Posted by
Message
magildachunks
Member since Oct 2006
27881 posts

The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
For Criteria, mainly, how far back do we go to start? Twenty years years (Beginning of the new century} or thirty years? (Sorry Georgia. Forty years is too far back for this. No NC boost for you.)

How many on the list? Five to Ten at most? How long ago must they have been truly relevant, as in continued NC's or competing for them.

And then let's throw out some nominations and why they belong.

I'll say we start in 1990. So here's who I have on the list:

Bama: Obviously
LSU: Only team besides Bama to win more than two NC's since 2000. 3 NC, streak of 8-win seasons at 20.
Florida: 3 NC's since 1990. Still a Powerhouse even though they had a few down years earlier this decade.
Ohio State: 2 NC since 2000. Dominates Big Ten. Easy pick here.
Oklahoma: 1 NC, played for numerous more. Dominates Big 12.

That's about who I have. I guess a case could be made for USC and FSU, but recent years make me not want to pull the trigger.

Clemson is too new to the table. Yes, they are a great program now, but continued success needs to happen for them to make the cut, not a five year span.


WHo y'all got?


Leto II
Auburn Fan
West Cobb
Member since Dec 2018
4548 posts

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
Bama is the only Blue Blood in the SEC in football. Kentucky is the only one in basketball.


RollTide1987
Alabama Fan
Washington, D.C.
Member since Nov 2009
48557 posts
 Online 

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
quote:

I'll say we start in 1990.


quote:

LSU





wadewilson
LSU Fan
Harrison County
Member since Sep 2009
23864 posts

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
If Florida and Oklahoma count by those metrics, LSU certainly does.


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
2212
SummerOfGeorge
Alabama Fan
DeKalb
Member since Jul 2013
66447 posts
 Online 

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
You should probably call them the NEW Bloods

Get it? Do you get it?
This post was edited on 7/7 at 5:07 pm


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
284
scionofadrunk
Tennessee Fan
Williamson County, TN
Member since Mar 2020
1961 posts

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
Well, "new" and "Blue Blood" are kind of an oxymoron, since a Blue Blood indicates a historically good program. But this is actually a pretty good thread idea, so I'll play.

In the SEC, my votes go to Alabama, Florida, and LSU. The trophies mean everything, and those three schools have them. Florida took a sucker punch in the early to mid 2010s, but its return to a perennial 10-win power means they've earned their keep.

LSU has been unbelievably good since 2000. And no explanation needed for Alabama.

I'm leaving Clemson out, because their history is not established enough. They only experienced significant success in the past 5 years.

Oklahoma has trouble bringing home the big one, but it's hard to not call them a Blue Blood. I say they're in.

Ohio State is in.

Who else am I missing?


Mithridates6
LSU Fan
Member since Oct 2019
4671 posts

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
It should start in the postwar era. Michigan and ND might still be in it, but not by much


jlovel7
LSU Fan
Louisiana
Member since Aug 2014
11693 posts
 Online 

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
Blue blood isn’t about success. It’s about prestige you’re born with.

I could become a trillionaire and they still wouldn’t let me join Comus in Nola. The blue bloods are the blue bloods.


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
130
WilliamTaylor21
LSU Fan
4641 Arse Whipping Avenue
Member since Dec 2013
21870 posts
 Online 

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
Let's be honest, blue blood is a term irrelevant teams use to feel relevant.

Texas, Notre Dame, A1abana, Nebraska, etc.,

It's hard to celebrate winning a bowl of oranges - so they dwell on ancient history.

While the teams at the top of the game (LSU, Clemson) are focused on dominating NOW - not THEN.


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
2232
kywildcatfanone
Kentucky Fan
Wildcat Country!
Member since Oct 2012
71235 posts

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
200
SR SponsorSR Fan
USA
Member since 2001
Thank you for supporting our sponsors
Advertisement
kywildcatfanone
Kentucky Fan
Wildcat Country!
Member since Oct 2012
71235 posts

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
quote:

Bama is the only Blue Blood in the SEC in football. Kentucky is the only one in basketball.


And this is the correct answer for anyone listening.


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
1713
SummerOfGeorge
Alabama Fan
DeKalb
Member since Jul 2013
66447 posts
 Online 

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
Power 5 Rankings - Since 2000

Winning Percentage
1. Ohio State (207-43) (82.8%)
2. Oklahoma (219-49) (81.7%)
3. LSU (202-59) (77.4%)
4. Georgia (198-67) (77.4%)
5. Alabama (182-63) (74.3%)
6. Clemson (196-70) (73.7%)
7. Oregon (188-70) (72.9%)
8. TCU (182-71) (71.9%)
9. Southern Cal (174-71) (71.0%)
10. Wisconsin (188-77) (70.9%)
11. Florida (181-76) (70.4%)
11. Texas (181-76) (70.4%)
13. Virginia Tech (183-81) (69.3%)
14. Florida State (169-81) (67.6%)
15. Auburn (175-84) (67.6%)

National Titles
1. Alabama (5)
2. LSU (3)
3. Clemson (2)
3. Florida (2)
3. Ohio St (2)
3. USC (2)
7. Auburn (1)
7. Miami (1)
7. Oklahoma (1)
7. Texas (1)
7. Florida St (1)

Playoff Appearances
1. Alabama (5)
1. Clemson (5)
3. Oklahoma (4)
4. Ohio State (3)
5. Florida St (1)
5. Georgia (1)
5. LSU (1)
5. Michigan State (1)
5. Notre Dame (1)
5. Oregon (1)
5. Washington (1)

Playoff Wins
1. Alabama (6)
1. Clemson (6)
3. LSU (2)
3. Ohio State (2)
5. Georgia (1)
5. Oregon (1)

I think since 2000 your list of "ELITE" programs would be

- Alabama
- LSU
- Ohio State
- Clemson

The 2 I'm not sure about are
- Oklahoma
- Florida

Oklahoma won a national title in the first year of this timeline, and they've been to 4 playoffs and basically been dominated in 3 of them and have yet to win a single playoff game.

Florida was great from 2000-2009, but they haven't been a national title threat since then. Kind of similar to USC.
This post was edited on 7/7 at 5:20 pm


scionofadrunk
Tennessee Fan
Williamson County, TN
Member since Mar 2020
1961 posts

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
So you're telling me I'm 100% right. Thanks, George!


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
31
RollTide1987
Alabama Fan
Washington, D.C.
Member since Nov 2009
48557 posts
 Online 

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
quote:

ND might still be in it


They have won seven national championships since 1945. They would most certainly still be in it.


TigerLunatik
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Jan 2005
48418 posts

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
There are so many different definitions of blue blood out there that it's tough to nail down any one set of criteria. But, using 2000 as a benchmark for currently successful teams makes a lot sense considering the age of the players and what teams they grew up on being successful. Obviously the turn of the century is another reason.
This post was edited on 7/7 at 5:29 pm


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
00
Mithridates6
LSU Fan
Member since Oct 2019
4671 posts

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
Yeah and Michigan does have a very good winning pct in the last few decades, just not much hardware aside from Big Ten titles. 1970 seems like a good demarcation line since integration was becoming more common and more games were televised. Winning pct since 1970 You'd need to add in other qualifiers like SoS and postseason success


C W
Member since Mar 2020
143 posts

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
Other than Alabama, Clemson has been in more playoffs than any team and like Alabama has won twice. LSU has been only once so obviously Clemson has been a better program in the last 5 years than LSU


TigerLunatik
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Jan 2005
48418 posts

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
quote:

Clemson has been a better program in the last 5 years than LSU

There's no arguing that. Clemson has really benefitted from the ACC basically being a group of five conference. I would have liked to have seen them play a tougher schedule. I'm not even saying they couldn't have done the same thing. It just would have been fun to watch them navigate a better schedule.


tiger perry
LSU Fan
Member since Dec 2009
23818 posts
 Online 

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
Yeah, Clemson is set up for success for the foreseeable future as the have no completion in the ACC. Will be in the playoff yearly. Dabo has that machine rolling


tigerinridgeland
LSU Fan
Mississippi
Member since Aug 2006
7302 posts

re: The new "Blue Bloods" of College Football. Let's make Criteria and a list.
If you are going back to 2000, add in appearances in the BCS Championship game, since it was the precursor of the playoff, and teams had to be ranked in the top 2 to play.


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
10
Page 1 2 3 4
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 4next pagelast page

Back to top

logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter