In a modern sense, what does being a blue blood actually mean?

Blackshirts BLVD said:
No. Blue blood is a status identified via looked through the lens of history. It's adding everything up. As teams like UGA keep doing what they are doing, they absolutely will join the group as they could potentially become top ten in things like wins, natties, etc... Teams can fall out too, but it is difficult as it takes long periods of time, just as it took long periods of time to be in the group.
Click to expand...
UGA is already in the top 10 in wins.

But I’d decline the invitation. I’d rather beat em than join em
 
Red_Alert said:
OK, you win. Georgia got good for the first time since 1980.

Erase all CFB history prior to 2021.

All in favor say "AYE".
Click to expand...

They just accomplished your school's biggest bragging point, winning back to back Championships.

Were you even alive when Nebraska did that?
 
Bayou Tiger said:
They just accomplished your school's biggest bragging point, winning back to back Championships.

Were you even alive when Nebraska did that?
Click to expand...

I've seen BOTH of Nebraska's back-to-back championship seasons, as well as when they won 3 out of 4.
 
Red_Alert said:
Georgia finished unranked 3 times in the last 10 years.
Click to expand...
Nebraska hasn't had a winning season since 2016!


They haven't even won more than 5 games in any of the last 6 seasons!

Bwahahahaha!
 
Bayou Tiger said:
They just accomplished your school's biggest bragging point, winning back to back Championships.

Were you even alive when Nebraska did that?
Click to expand...
They’ve also seen LSU’s 2019 team dethrone their 1995 team as the best ever. They’re real salty
 
Typical millennials, born on third thinking they hit a triple!
 
"Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street and building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the jealous are always right." - George Orwell
 
Bayou Tiger said:
Nebraska hasn't had a winning season since 2016!


They haven't even won more than 5 games in any of the last 6 seasons!

Bwahahahaha!
Click to expand...

Red_Alert said:
Erase the past.
Click to expand...

No







Ha Ha Smile GIF by The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon
 
Now if you go off definition of Blue Bloods (or traditional powers), most of them still hold up and even those that are "down" have potential to come back.

Here are likely the top 10 (9-10 get a little muddy) in most people's polls:

1. Alabama
2. Oklahoma
3. Ohio State
4. Notre Dame
5. USC
6. Michigan
7. Texas
8. Nebraska
9. Penn State
10. Tennessee

That tends to be the most polls that I see. There are valid arguments for Georgia and LSU in the 9 or 10 spot (in fact Georgia pass Tennessee in all-time wins and got a National Title just this season with that win over TCU so arguable Georgia might be #10 in most polls now but everything you Google is a little dated). I also sometimes see the top 4 arranged different but the rest tend to follow the general consensus.

Out of this list, nearly all of these teams are still somewhat contenders with the exception of the following teams:

1. Texas - Frankly their problems are systemic and fixable.
2. USC - They are already turning it around this year and they are very much still a power program
3. Nebraska - This will be the one that stands out the most. I think their problems are fixable but I think there is an argument that a program like Georgia or LSU is stronger right now than Nebraska. Nebraska is an interesting case study for this and this thread, I think, was partially made with them in mind. I think some of the comments about Michigan and Notre Dame will apply to them.
4. Penn State and Tennessee - I really don't consider either of these to be blue bloods. There is a gap once you get to them and in some polls both could be listed outside the top 10 in favor of teams like Auburn, Georgia, Florida, LSU, or Florida State.

Now comes the more controversial part of my post. There are 2 more teams that are winning now but stand out and frankly put them behind Texas and USC. They are Michigan and Notre Dame. Both seem like programs that can get to 10-11 wins and get in the mix but neither has shown anything the last 20 years to make me think they can actually win a National Title. You compare them with Clemson, LSU, Florida, etc. and you feel like they are now behind these programs and that their glory days are now gone. In comparison to Texas or USC who have droughts but show potential they could bring in top classes and win a title. Geography is playing a factor as both Michigan and Notre Dame have geographical disadvantages that keep them from getting the crown.

In summary, I think if you ranked programs on ability to win National Title, it would probably look like this (maybe order change)

1. Alabama
2. Georgia
3. Ohio State
4. LSU
5. Clemson
6. Florida
7. Texas
8. USC
9. Oklahoma
10. FSU or Tennessee

You get the vibe that SEC teams have a better chance to bring in top classes and actually win a title while Ohio State is a step above Michigan, Notre Dame, and Penn State now instead of in the same class. However, most the traditional programs are still winning and even the ones that are NOT winning feel like they are a coach away from winning. Tennessee is a classic example. A dormant program that was sitting their just waiting on a good administration and coach to turn things around. Nebraska seems to be there. Texas seems to be there. USC seems to be there.

In summary, the top programs are still the top programs in the sport but some teams get the vibe their glory days are past them (mostly due to Geographical limitations). NIL may change some of that in the future. I think all of the "blue bloods" are still very much relevant in the sport but a small number of them are at a disadvantage in their ability to win a title while there are some top 15-20 teams that might have a greater advantage than the blue bloods: Clemson, LSU, Georgia, etc.
 
It’s pretty overrated and means very little, if anything.

Teams like Michigan, ND, OU, USC, have all had some level of actual success/relevancy, nationally speaking. They have a lot more to work with than just purely blue blood status.

If strictly blue blood status really meant much of anything, then UMinny, MSU, Harvard, Yale, UPenn, Pitt, etc. would all be more relevant/successful in today’s CFB then they are right now.
 
Knight&Day said:
It’s pretty overrated and means very little, if anything.

Teams like Michigan, ND, OU, USC, have all had some level of actual success/relevancy, nationally speaking. They have a lot more to work with than just purely blue blood status.

If strictly blue blood status really meant much of anything, then UMinny, MSU, Harvard, Yale, UPenn, Pitt, etc. would all be more relevant/successful in today’s CFB then they are right now.
Click to expand...
Boombox Shut Up GIF
 
To the OP...

Nothing, absolutely nothing. Being a blue blood is only important to those programs that were "blue bloods".
 
Current blue bloods (in order IMO)

1. Alabama
2. Ohio State
3. Oklahoma
4. Georgia
5. Clemson
6. Florida State
7. LSU
8. Florida (this one is debatable IMO)

Historical blue bloods

ND, Michigan, Texas, Nebraska, & USC.

The bottom tier has largely been irrelevant for the last 15 years or so, and doesn't belong to be grouped with the above IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top