CS: Definitive 8 College Football Blue Bloods

[Across The Field]

Some people do give "a shit" about history. Sorry, I love Michigan's Football History (just not the real recent history) and I love the direction they are headed in!!!

View attachment 119835

Just like I am proud of America's history and hopefully America's future

View attachment 119836

Great, but you're also not talking about the games from a century ago as if they are any indication of how this rivalry has actually gone.

 

[SJ76]

1 of these things is not like the others...

No nattys. But consistent top 5 about every year. Usually in the Hunt.

I was being nice.

PAC 12 doesn't really have any legit nattys

 

[SJ76]

I still don't see how you could have Oregon in even going with the most modern times. Florida State and LSU are certainly warranted given their national titles if your simply basing it on the more recent years, which this article is not. Florida State was the first team I thought of being an obvious miss but after reading their reasoning and specifications, I really can't argue against it. Had they played as many games as the others with their same results, no question they'd be right up there towards the top. And yes OU has not been as dominant in the top 5 for for some years now, but they have owned Florida State 6-1, which is no small feat.

Trying to figure out the last time FSU played OU.. Big 8?

 

[ckhokie]

Why isn't anyone talking Texas A&M? I mean...let's just consider that 2012 season alone if people want to talk recent history.

HOW MANY OTHER 'BLUE BLOODS' HAVE WON 2 CONFERENCE TITLES AND 2 NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS IN ONE SEASON???

 

[B_dub]

Trying to figure out the last time FSU played OU.. Big 8?

Lol. 2000 in the National championship. 2010 and 2011 I think we're the other dates as of late. Still watch the OU/Nole game in 2011 from time to time. Man there was some big time hits in that game for both teams.

 

[nddulac]

THAT is the power of being a real Blue Blood.

Notre Dame is definitely one.

That's why I say Princeton and Yale still belong.

 

[24seven]

Here’s A Definitive List Of College Football’s 8 “Blue Blood” Programs

Any issues?

Theres:
Nebraska
Texas
Alabama
Michigan
USC
Notre Dame
Ohio State
Oklahoma

LOL @ 7 of these losing to the real USC last time they played!!!

 

[B_dub]

LOL @ 7 of these losing to the real USC last time they played!!!

Wow. And it's not like they got beat by the 8th team (Oklahoma), either. Just have never played before. Crazy.

 

[theSabanator20]

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

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

It's nice to see you still focus on the past when talking about meeeechegan football rather than what they've done recently. But then again you're the same homer that takes great pride in all the Natty's Yer Boyz won 100+ years ago.

meeeechegan football: ain't shit unless ya bring up stuff they did 10, 11 decades ago.



hail to the victors? Not lately @ all.

Unless OSU is playing a game at this exact moment against Michigan, everything we're talking about is in the past.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Ohio State is 5 games over .500 in the modern era against michigan, but sure, those games that happened before the forward pass really matter!

Must suck to have to put qualifiers on statistics to make them seem better for your program than they are.

"Oh yeah, well we're better in the modern era, while playing at home, at night, on November 21st".

 

[Across The Field]

Must suck to have to put qualifiers on statistics to make them seem better for your program than they are.

"Oh yeah, well we're better in the modern era, while playing at home, at night, on November 21st".

Doesn't suck at all. Basically, it means that as long as college football has existed as it does today, we've been the better team. But hey, you hang your hat on those Woodrow Wilson-era wins. I know you have no other choice.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Doesn't suck at all. Basically, it means that as long as college football has existed as it does today, we've been the better team. But hey, you hang your hat on those Woodrow Wilson-era wins. I know you have no other choice.

Yes, I'll hang my hat on all of our other wins because I don't need to qualify that statement.

 

[Across The Field]

Yes, I'll hang my hat on all of our other wins because I don't need to qualify that statement.

And I'll hang my hat on the ones that actually matter. It's nice knowing my team isn't relying on wins from before my grandpa was born to maintain relevance.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

And I'll hang my hat on the ones that actually matter. It's nice knowing my team isn't relying on wins from before my grandpa was born to maintain relevance.

Neither does mine? From 1976-2003, Michigan was 18-7 against Ohio State. See, I can add random qualifiers as well. And 19-17 (18 if you count OSU's non win from 2010) from 1976 - present. You're choosing a random era of time to make your team seem better, and because Michigan has so many wins against Ohio State, I can do the same thing except I can start at a lot more places. In this case, we don't need to count wins from the Nixon era.

 

[Across The Field]

Neither does mine? From 1976-2003, Michigan was 18-7 against Ohio State. See, I can add random qualifiers as well. And 19-17 (18 if you count OSU's non win from 2010) from 1976 - present.

Except those are completely arbitrary dates, mine isn't. The "Modern Era" of college football is pretty widely accepted as having began in 1946. Your two dates are of no significance except to serve the random purpose of giving michigan the lead over a certain period of time.

42% of michigan's wins and 8 of their 10.5 national championships happened before the modern era. They are a fossil in the grand scheme of things.

I have a feeling we're roughly the same age (31), so obviously you know things have been pretty great for me in this rivalry and not so much for you.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Except those are completely arbitrary dates, mine isn't. The "Modern Era" of college football is pretty widely accepted as having began in 1946. Your two dates are of no significance except to serve the random purpose of giving michigan the lead over a certain period of time.

42% of michigan's wins and 8 of their 10.5 national championships happened before the modern era. They are a fossil in the grand scheme of things.

I have a feeling we're roughly the same age (31), so obviously you know things have been pretty great for me in this rivalry and not so much for you.

1976 isn't random, that's the year we jumped from 8 bowl games to 11. It was the start of the modern bowl boom. Pretty important IMO.

You also won't find a "general consensus" of "modern era" in CFB. A quick google search actually comes up with many people considering it 1960's+, some people WWII+, and some people even say 1980's+. Your arbitrary date doesn't start when the AP poll started, your arbitrary date starts in the middle of a decade, after WWII, and well before the first coaches poll started in 1950. Fact is, your number is just as random. Hell, at the start of your arbitrary date, CFB teams typically used the "one platoon" system -- meaning players often played both offense and defense. It wasn't until 1965 that it was fully regulated by the NCAA to force teams to have different units for offense/defense/special teams.

Fact is, your date is arbitrary -- just like mine. There are many milestones and changes in the way that CFB is played. All of which you could randomly choose to start counting from to make your argument sound better.

Also, great guess on the age. 30 here.

 

[Across The Field]

1976 isn't random, that's the year we jumped from 8 bowl games to 11. It was the start of the modern bowl boom. Pretty important IMO.

You also won't find a "general consensus" of "modern era" in CFB. A quick google search actually comes up with many people considering it 1960's+, some people WWII+, and some people even say 1980's+. Your arbitrary date doesn't start when the AP poll started, your arbitrary date starts in the middle of a decade, after WWII, and well before the first coaches poll started in 1950. Fact is, your number is just as random. Hell, at the start of your arbitrary date, CFB teams typically used the "one platoon" system -- meaning players often played both offense and defense. It wasn't until 1965 that it was fully regulated by the NCAA to force teams to have different units for offense/defense/special teams.

Fact is, your date is arbitrary -- just like mine. There are many milestones and changes in the way that CFB is played. All of which you could randomly choose to start counting from to make your argument sound better.

Also, great guess on the age. 30 here.

Okay, I'll play along.

Let's start with 1960: OSU leads 31-23-2
From 1980: Ohio State leads 19-16-1
From 1950: Ohio State leads 36-28-2
From 1965: Ohio State leads 27-22-2

Any way you slice it, Ohio State owns this series when we're not talking about games played before the plastic helmet was invented.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Okay, I'll play along.

Let's start with 1960: OSU leads 31-23-2
From 1980: Ohio State leads 19-16-1
From 1950: Ohio State leads 36-28-2
From 1965: Ohio State leads 27-22-2

Any way you slice it, Ohio State owns this series when we're not talking about games played before the plastic helmet was invented.

From 1976, Michigan leads the series. We already discussed this.

 

[Across The Field]

From 1976, Michigan leads the series. We already discussed this.

No they don't.