re: Why is Texas considered a blue blood program in football

Look at the top 9 schools with all time wins. That is a good start. One of those schools is Yale who no longer plays big boy FB. USC was not listed in the top 9. Nebraska was and I dont consider them a blue blood anymore. But I am pretty sure it has to do with all time wins. PSU is on the list and I cant recall the last time they won a natty

Because the Big 12 was crap all.of those years.

quote:

---

Nope, I set the trap and you took the bait.

---

I see you were the kid on the short bus that got to lick the window

quote:

---

You can think what you want, but there are 8 Blue Bloods.

---

To quote "The Dude" (:dudeYO:)

quote:

---

not in the same conference until 1996, and we were already a blue blood at that point

---

Numbnuts, Oklahoma aka The Sooners were in the SWC with uTx at the start!

They got tired of the bevo poop and they went to what became The Big Eight. The Pokes followed suit later and they left for The Big Eight.

Basically what became the Big 12 was a reunification of the SWC charter school in Oklahoma and the Texas schools (less TCU, who is now back in after uTx went back to the SIAA, who is now the SEC)

Like Michigan the folks in austin padded the record with unfair home and home games and other assorted nonsense. In the SWC, austin was a big fish in a small pond.

As for the Cotton Bowl, you know Vanderbilt played there (and in TX) and still whipped that nutless steer a$$ so bad they had to make Oklahoma their permanent rival.

quote:

---

See you next week, next month, next year this topic comes up.

---

OK, good lord willing and the creek don't rise and it is not nap time or crayon period in school. You are special!

Georgia is a better program now than Texas or LSU

Wins buddy . The most consistent teams with a lot of wins are usually considered blue bloods . If you go down the list most of the teams listed don’t have many years where they are not winning 10 games a year . Nebraska is one the few exceptions .

Clout(by any other metric they may as well be auburn, Clem, tenner, Florida or Penn st). They are a good program, the confusion comes from the medias love affair with Tex. They want them to be good every year bc it’s great for ratings. They write articles about them bc it gets clicks. When ppl hear about the greatness that is ut football at the start of every year, in every discussion, casuals just assume Tex is blue blood. Perception is reality.

kinda ironic coming from a Florida fan with your poverty facilities.

And then one day he was shooting at some food and up from the ground come a-bubbling crude.

Hook 'em

quote:

---

Blue bloods are the teams that were popular when the sport started to gain national TV attention. As a result, they generally have the largest fan bases and most loyal fans. In the old days, TV time and things like that weren't as common, so being on a team that got on national TV was a big deal. Those types of things helped with recruiting and all that.

That's all it means.

---

quote:

---

That's probably the best definition I've seen

---

This is interesting but I'm going to have to disagree a bit that it is this simple.

When CFB on TV emerged... Teams were restricted in how many times they could be on per year. It was two or three times a year. And if you were on three times one year... you could have only two games the next.

So lots of teams got on TV considering there was only one network televising CFB content.

To some degree the attention your TV games got was a function of who you were playing.

For example... Oklahoma would be on against Texas and Nebraska most years. Some years it would be one or the other and an OOC game.

For instance, In 1977, OU got on against Ohio State and Nebraska but not Texas.

Many other teams got the same amount of TV appearances as the so called Blue Bloods... but they didn't draw eyeballs. Partly because they weren't that popular themselves... and part of it is because their televised games didn't have the matchups that some of the Blue Blood teams had.

In a nutshell, TV might have played a part in the establishment of the Blue Bloods... but it wasn't because they were on TV all that many more times than other teams.