CS: Definitive 8 College Football Blue Bloods

[4down20]

Only by people with no appreciation for the game. ANyone using a 5 year window is lacking perspective

Yeah, because nobody mentioned the 60's or anything.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

It was a figure of speech in regards to 90% of your national championships coming from ancient history and compared to more modern teams you haven't really been top tier lately.

Under that concept wouldnt that make princeton and ale blue bloods there were so many claimed championships pre poll era

 

[4down20]

Under that concept wouldnt that make princeton and ale blue bloods there were so many claimed championships pre poll era

Yeah, but to Michigans credit, at least they didn't puss out.

 

[Voltaire26]

Looks good to me. In order I'd go with

1. ND
2. OU
3. BAMA
4. USC
5. OSU
6. Texas
7. Nebraska
8. Michigan

I like your order ... I would say you done it fairly ... My Order would be

1. Alabama
2. ohio state (I hate myself right now)
3. USC
4. Notre Dame
5. Oklahoma
6. Michigan
7. Texas
8. Nebraska

 

[TheRobotDevil]

Yeah, but to Michigans credit, at least they didn't puss out.

Theres got to be a better way to gauge this when you look at the real numbers and history. Its hard to make a case for some teams

 

[starbigd]

I don't think you can "lose" your blue blood status.

Regardless of the arrogance of some fans here......being top 3 in wins, bowl wins, and NCs will always keep you in that company.

 

[fishinabarrel]

To me blue blood means more than just wins and losses. That has a lot to do with it sure but I look deeper. Teams like ND, Texas, and Michigan may not have the most recent success but they have gigantic budgets, fan bases, and influence in the college football world.

 

[4down20]

I don't think you can "lose" your blue blood status.

Regardless of the arrogance of some fans here......being top 3 in wins, bowl wins, and NCs will always keep you in that company.

You have the 60's, you are fine.

My point is that if more time goes by and you only have your 2005 national championship in recent history then you'll be looking at lot like Michigan where the majority of what you cite is ancient history to basically everyone.

 

[Bamabino]

Michigan is no longer a blueblood. 1 NC in 70 years is a laughingstock. All-time wins vs B1G cupcakes is an embarrassment, not a credit. Of Michigan's 925 wins, 573(62%) of them are against:


Albion
Case Institute of Technology
Chicago
Pennsylvania
Navy
E.Michigan
Vanderbilt
Purdue
Northwestern
Indiana
Illinois
Minnesota
Iowa
Penn. State
Wisconsin
Michigan State

 

[Voltaire26]

Michigan is no longer a blueblood. 1 NC in 70 years is a laughingstock. All-time wins vs B1G cupcakes is an embarrassment, not a credit. Of Michigan's 925 wins, 573(62%) of them are against:


Albion
Case Institute of Technology
Chicago
Pennsylvania
Navy
E.Michigan
Vanderbilt
Purdue
Northwestern
Indiana
Illinois
Minnesota
Iowa
Penn. State
Wisconsin
Michigan State

You spend far too much time and energy hatin' Michigan

 

[starbigd]

You have the 60's, you are fine.

My point is that if more time goes by and you only have your 2005 national championship in recent history then you'll be looking at lot like Michigan where the majority of what you cite is ancient history to basically everyone.

It's one thing to not be relevant. It's quite another to say a program is no longer a blue blood despite owning the records they hold, and still being a heavyweight in terms of money, fans and influence.

 

[4down20]

It's one thing to not be relevant. It's quite another to say a program is no longer a blue blood despite owning the records they hold, and still being a heavyweight in terms of money, fans and influence.

You should re-read what I wrote.

 

[Bamabino]

You spend far too much time and energy hatin' Michigan

Not hate. Pity.Truth hurts, huh?

 

[huskers1217]

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

Isn't that the top 8 of all time wins?

ehh..its close

Rank Team Won Lost Tied Pct. [a] Games
1 Michigan 925 331 36 .730 1292
2 Notre Dame 892 313 42 .732 1254
3 Yale 890 366 55 .700 1311
4 Texas 886 354 33 .709 1273
5 Nebraska 880 368 40 .699 1288
6 Ohio State 875 320 53 .722 1248
7 Alabama 864 326 43 .718 1233
8 Oklahoma 861 319 53 .720 1233
9 Harvard 857 385 50 .683 1292
10 Penn State 856 382 41 .685 1279
11 Penn 837 484 42 .629 1363
12 Tennessee 820 371 53 .680 1244
13 USC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NCAA_football_teams_by_wins#cite_note-2 813 333 54 .700 1200

 

[Innermind]

To me blue blood means more than just wins and losses. That has a lot to do with it sure but I look deeper. Teams like ND, Texas, and Michigan may not have the most recent success but they have gigantic budgets, fan bases, and influence in the college football world.

Exactly.

It has to do with boasting a massive fan following, and having major networks covet a school for the privilege of broadcasting their games, and noticing a lot of people walking the streets in the school's gear outside of the home state, etc.

In marketing terms, this is indicative/descriptive of teams possessing a lot of "brand equity"... so essentially, "Blue Blood" is a marketing term.

 

[ellupo]

I like your order ... I would say you done it fairly ... My Order would be

1. Alabama
2. ohio state (I hate myself right now)
3. USC
4. Notre Dame
5. Oklahoma
6. Michigan
7. Texas
8. Nebraska

Winner winner chicken dinner.

The thread should have stopped right at this post.

 

[HammerDown]

Replace Nebraska with Tennessee.

Replace Michigan with LSU.

Replace Texas with Florida.

Replace Notre Dame with Auburn.

But, yeah. Other than that, they're half right.

 

[Olyduck]

why the obsession with "blue bloods" based on the past instead of whats going with the programs right now?

 

[Red_Alert]

The 60's is the only reason I put you close to the same boat rather than in the same boat. Otherwise you have only 1 since 1970, aka the past 45+ years.

In other words, Texas is fading.

Nobody underachieves like tejas. Michigan is close behind tho.

.

 

[TBBishop]

I understand why. But you don't really stand out that much in terms of national championships in recent history.

The list could be completely different if you're talking about the best programs from the last 10 years, the last 20 years, or the last 30 years. If it's about recent history, whatever that exactly means, the only teams on this list that would probably make it is Alabama, USC and the stankin' ass Nuts. If it's about recently you have more than one SEC team. If it's about recently, you'd have 2+ Florida teams. But you don't become a blue blood recently. We're talking about royalty here. You don't get any more blue blood than the programs the OP listed. Every one of them can claim best program of all time for one reason or another. I can't even understand anyone who's team is on this list complaining about the list.