Started By
Message
0
Posted on 4/22/24 at 11:20 am to OU Guy
Blue blood doesn’t even mean anything anymore. Being a blue blood is like being a figurehead in football. Nebraska is STILL considered a blue blood, same with OU and Notre Dame. Michigan hadn’t accomplished a damn thing in forever before this past year. All are considered blue bloods over schools like LSU and Georgia.
Posted on 4/22/24 at 11:59 am to TN Tygah
Georgia, LSU and Penn ST. not close to being Blue Bloods.
Especially Georgia
Especially Georgia
Posted on 4/22/24 at 12:05 pm to Dick Tracy
quote:
Georgia, LSU and Penn ST. not close to being Blue Bloods.
Especially Georgia
Hey dumbass, that’s what I meant. Blue blood is an outdated term that isn’t official, and no one really decides when status starts or stops. Blue blood means nothing. If it did, LSU would be a blue blood and Nebraska wouldn’t be. Nebraska will never be 90s Nebraska again.
What’s the criteria? There is none. It’s just, “schools I used to hear about a lot when I was a kid”
This post was edited on 4/22/24 at 12:07 pm
Posted on 4/22/24 at 12:23 pm to Dick Tracy
quote:
Georgia, LSU and Penn ST. not close to being Blue Bloods. Especially Georgia
This isn’t about blue bloods ITT.
Instead, This is about MEGA blue bloods since WW2.
Posted on 4/22/24 at 12:26 pm to ColoradoAg
quote:
This from the fair weather fan to end them all
He's just salty because LSU baseball no longer exists
This post was edited on 4/22/24 at 12:34 pm
Posted on 4/22/24 at 12:50 pm to ColoradoAg
quote:
OU may be the neediest group of posters anywhere. Look at me! Look at me! We are SEC too! fricking pathetic behavior
Doesn’t this describe the following poster groups here?
1. Texas A and M
2. Missouri
Because
quote:
Hey, look at our non-championship achievements
Is all they do.
Posted on 4/22/24 at 1:44 pm to Archibald
Oklahoma = Blue Blood
Nebraska = 2nd place
Texas = 3rd place
Arkansas = 4th place
Call ir "susan" for all I care but view it as old SWC and Big Eight that became the Big 12 in realignment.
Nebraska = 2nd place
Texas = 3rd place
Arkansas = 4th place
Call ir "susan" for all I care but view it as old SWC and Big Eight that became the Big 12 in realignment.
Posted on 4/22/24 at 1:56 pm to TN Tygah
I do not consider Nebraska or Texas a "Blue Blood"
If it helps, view it as simple math
134 Division 1 college football teams in the USA
100% = 134
50% = 67
10% = 13.4
5% = 6.7 (rounded up to 7 teams)
USA 5% in cfb = 6 to 7
Notre Dame > ALL as they are a true "national team"
Ohio State > Michigan
Alabama > all other ACC and SEC schools
Oklahoma > all other SWC and Big 8 schools
Southern Cal > PAC and all west coast schools
Texas has 4 Natty's under two coaches (3 under DKR and 1 under ButterTooth)
Georgia Tech has 4 Natty's under 4 different coaches in 2 different conferences and 4 different era's.
By your logic of "Elite" or "Blue Blood", the Bumbles > the nutless cows.
If it helps, view it as simple math
134 Division 1 college football teams in the USA
100% = 134
50% = 67
10% = 13.4
5% = 6.7 (rounded up to 7 teams)
USA 5% in cfb = 6 to 7
Notre Dame > ALL as they are a true "national team"
Ohio State > Michigan
Alabama > all other ACC and SEC schools
Oklahoma > all other SWC and Big 8 schools
Southern Cal > PAC and all west coast schools
Texas has 4 Natty's under two coaches (3 under DKR and 1 under ButterTooth)
Georgia Tech has 4 Natty's under 4 different coaches in 2 different conferences and 4 different era's.
By your logic of "Elite" or "Blue Blood", the Bumbles > the nutless cows.
Posted on 4/22/24 at 2:33 pm to djsdawg
quote:
This isn’t about blue bloods ITT.
Instead, This is about MEGA blue bloods since WW2.
Not sure what that means.
But these are the top 10 in winning percentage since 1945 (when WW2 ended)
1 - OSU
2 - OU
3 - Bama
4 - PSU
5 - Michigan
6 - Texas
7 - ND
8 - UGA
9 - Southern Cal
10 - FSU
Nebraska is at 11, LSU is at 12.
Not sure how many count as blue bloods, but those are the top teams by winning percentage. The top 5 are above 70%, so maybe that's where the line belongs.
Posted on 4/22/24 at 9:35 pm to OU Guy
IMO a true blueblood is never down for a sustained period of time(>5+ years) and when they're up will be a perinneal top 5 team competing for NCs. And seeing their name on your teams schedule will strike fear in you even if they're down
Notre Dame and Nebraska used to fit that description, but have lost their luster after sustained down years
USC used to fit that description, but the NCAA/powers at be will never allow an elite coach at USC to run free longterm again as the location and city's culture (much like Miami) can precipitate a sustained dynasty that's overly dominant and bad for CFB
Texas and Michigan are close to that description, but lack longterm dominance/sustained runs as title contenders. They'll generally have a decade of being borderline contenders(5-10 range) that ends in a title, but generally lack the ability to reload and replicate the success
The big 3 in Florida prevent each other from fitting this description as when one comes close, another rises and impedes the others recruiting monopoly
LSU and Georgia lack longterm relevance
Penn State has never been dominant
The only 3 true blue bloods are OSU, OU and Bama
Notre Dame and Nebraska used to fit that description, but have lost their luster after sustained down years
USC used to fit that description, but the NCAA/powers at be will never allow an elite coach at USC to run free longterm again as the location and city's culture (much like Miami) can precipitate a sustained dynasty that's overly dominant and bad for CFB
Texas and Michigan are close to that description, but lack longterm dominance/sustained runs as title contenders. They'll generally have a decade of being borderline contenders(5-10 range) that ends in a title, but generally lack the ability to reload and replicate the success
The big 3 in Florida prevent each other from fitting this description as when one comes close, another rises and impedes the others recruiting monopoly
LSU and Georgia lack longterm relevance
Penn State has never been dominant
The only 3 true blue bloods are OSU, OU and Bama
This post was edited on 4/22/24 at 9:39 pm
Posted on 4/22/24 at 9:44 pm to Lolathon234
quote:
Texas and Michigan are close to that description, but lack longterm dominance/sustained runs as title contenders. They'll generally have a decade of being borderline contenders(5-10 range) that ends in a title
Generally? Texas has 1 title, in the last 50 years.
Michigan has 2 titles, in the last 75 years.
quote:
LSU and Georgia lack longterm relevance
During that same time, these schools have 4 and 3 titles.
Posted on 4/22/24 at 10:12 pm to Dawgfanman
Texas played for the title in 2023(playoff), 2009, 2005, 1990, 1983, 1977, 1970, 1969, 1963, 1959, 1950
Michigan: 2023, 2022, 2021, 1997, 1989, 1986, 1975, 1973, 1970, 1948, 1947, 1943, 1941, 1940
To non-SEC fans, aside from Herschel Walker, Georgia was completely irrelevant until Richt and never dominant until Kirby. And LSU has never been seen as dominant year over year, even during their 2003-2012 stretch. If they win in 2011 things might be different, but they didn't
Michigan: 2023, 2022, 2021, 1997, 1989, 1986, 1975, 1973, 1970, 1948, 1947, 1943, 1941, 1940
To non-SEC fans, aside from Herschel Walker, Georgia was completely irrelevant until Richt and never dominant until Kirby. And LSU has never been seen as dominant year over year, even during their 2003-2012 stretch. If they win in 2011 things might be different, but they didn't
This post was edited on 4/22/24 at 10:14 pm
Posted on 4/22/24 at 11:13 pm to Lolathon234
quote:
Texas played for the title in 2023(playoff), 2009, 2005, 1990, 1983, 1977, 1970, 1969, 1963, 1959, 1950 Michigan: 2023, 2022, 2021, 1997, 1989, 1986, 1975, 1973, 1970, 1948, 1947, 1943, 1941, 1940 To non-SEC fans, aside from Herschel Walker, Georgia was completely irrelevant until Richt and never dominant until Kirby. And LSU has never been seen as dominant year over year, even during their 2003-2012 stretch. If they win in 2011 things might be different, but they didn't
That’s fine. But you claimed that Texas regularly has decades of sustained success that end in a title. It occurred once in 50 years. Maybe you shouldn’t overstate your case?
Posted on 4/22/24 at 11:34 pm to Lolathon234
quote:
The only 3 true blue bloods are OSU, OU and Bama
Ok, but we are talking about mega bluebloods after WW2, not true blue bloods.
Posted on 4/23/24 at 4:12 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
That’s fine. But you claimed that Texas regularly has decades of sustained success that end in a title. It occurred once in 50 years. Maybe you shouldn’t overstate your case?
quote:
but lack longterm dominance/sustained runs as title contenders. They'll generally have a decade of being borderline contenders(5-10 range) that ends in a title, but generally lack the ability to reload and replicate the success
Reading comprehension ffs
Posted on 4/23/24 at 4:19 pm to OU Guy
How is Texas on this list?
Posted on 4/23/24 at 4:29 pm to ecb
quote:How is LSU on the list?
How is Texas on this list?
That's a joke. Literally a joke.
Page 7 of 7
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News