What do you consider to be a blue blood program?

[ElTexan]

'Blue blood' is a very old, established person who is still alive. You can start your metaphor there.

Harvard is 'dead' when it comes to cfb. They are not a blue blood.

 

[Chewbaccer]

I think that everyone has their own definition of what a "blue blood" program is. That is why we have some folks with as many as 15 that they consider "blue blood" and others have as few as 4.

I look at it in a similar fashion to determining whether or not a player is a hall of famer or not. I once heard hall of fame consideration described this way: If you have to think about whether or not a player is a hall of famer and try to build a case, they aren't a hall of famer.

So imo, if you have to think about whether or not a program is a blue blood or not and have to build a case for them, they're not.

Using that criteria, I have, in no particular order: Notre Dame, Alabama, Oklahoma, USC, tOSU, Michigan and Texas.

This doesn't mean there aren't other great programs with great histories, but beyond those listed, I have to start trying to build a case for them.

Eh, I'm in favor of a big Hall of Fame, and a big list of blue bloods as well.

 

[WizardHawk]

UW was in that same mold as Harvard. UW v Cal was the first football game played out here I believe. They still hold the record for most seasons without a loss and dominated the sport way back then. Hell, Bama beating them in the Rose Bowl put South Eastern football on the map so they have their hand in history.

But they didn't dominate enough through the 50's-70's and their run through the 80's and 90's didn't produce enough NC's or Heisman's. And everyone knows the depths they have gone through since the late 90's.

So UW is super important to the early history of the sport, but as far as a national conversation goes it pretty much stops there. They were key to the formation of the PCC and the rebuilding into the Pac, but that's not really of any relevance outside of the West Coast.

Even if they rebuild back to the 90's level of ball those big gaps keep them off any kind of super elitist kind of list. And frankly, the only people who care about those titles are those who wish to use them to make themselves feel super important and above others so I really don't have a need for it anyway.

 

[Win TWINS!!!]

Eh, I'm in favor of a big Hall of Fame, and a big list of blue bloods as well.

Threads like this, make me miss the throw downs...

 

[Chewbaccer]

Threads like this, make me miss the throw downs...

They were fun before the timer broke and never got fixed.

 

[Win TWINS!!!]

They were fun before the timer broke and never got fixed.

And the dupe voting.

 

[Chewbaccer]

And the dupe voting.

That was lame, but I'm sure it was obvious with some of the stuff I argued, I really didn't care about the wins and losses.

When they finally got so bad I stopped doing them was when I'd come up with a good topic, have to look some shit up to make my argument, just have Peach or HCF accept every TD there.

 

[trojanfan12]

Eh, I'm in favor of a big Hall of Fame, and a big list of blue bloods as well.

Yeah, I'm a little pickier. I think hall of fame and blue blood should be very exclusive clubs that are very difficult to get into. But, like I said, everyone has their own definition.

 

[Edisto_Tiger]

Arrogant sonsabitches that need a beat down.

 

[H2S]

heh...
MSU Coach Mark Dantonio just completed a pre-B1GCCG Press Conference...

REPORTER: Coach? Do you think that - with the program's continued success, winning record and playing now in its 3rd conference championship game in 5 years - will a win tomorrow change MSU from a "blue collar" to a "blue blood?"

DANTONIO: I hope not.

 

[Chewbaccer]

Arrogant sonsabitches that need a beat down.

Clemson made my list, but then again, my list was by far the longest list anyone has posted.