- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is LSU considered a CFB Blue Blood?
Posted on 10/30/22 at 3:55 pm to GruntbyAssociation
Posted on 10/30/22 at 3:55 pm to GruntbyAssociation
Really good question and fun discussion.
I think MikeTheTiger71 made a very solid case, well thought out.
When I think of Blue Bloods, I think of a team with a history of winning, over time. College football is cyclical, so teams will have peak and valleys, but the better teams are able to win consistently.
The game has also evolved due to many reasons including transportation, segregation, broadcasting, popularity, and NIL so some historical teams fade over time while others emerge.
Undisputed:
1. Michigan - the definition of a blue blood - they would not be who they are now without that early success. Most wins ever. They stacked up more wins than anyone in the early years and built up an insurmountable lead.
2. Alabama
3. Notre Dame - most storied program in history
4. Ohio State - model of consistency over time
5. Oklahoma
6. USC
7. Texas
8. Nebraska - Despite being mediocre the last 20 years, and a lull from 1940-60, they have historically been dominant. I think it will be VERY hard for them to come back to form.
I agree that LSU is somewhere in the 9-12 range historically. And they won’t move much over time. So draw the line where you will, based on your definition of blue blood.
9. Tenn - strictly on early historical success is ahead of LSU as a blue blood. BUT they were fading quickly until their resurgence this year. The game had changed so much and Tennessee does not have the recruiting ground to compete with LSU long term. I see LSU gaining ground on them over time, but Robert Neyland build a blue blood program over there and they do have a 10-21-3 head-to-head advantage over LSU.
10. LSU - they were the second non Ivey league team to win a NC (1908). That is their defining mark of early success (though claimed much later).
11. Georgia - I put LSU ahead of Georgia by a razor thin margin because of the 5 NCs and the 18-13-1 head-to-head. But from a blue blood argument, these two programs are very similar.
12. Penn State, For me LSU is ahead of Penn State because Penn State played independent until 1992. Penn State probably would not have had quite the same success playing against 2 other blue bloods (Mich and OSU). LSU had to earn theirs again Bama, Tenn, and Georgia.
LINK
This is a good website to see how teams have done historically.
Side note- I’m a West Point grad, and if I was making this argument 50 years ago, Army would be easily in the top 10, but the game changed so much and Army will never be able to compete on a level playing field again.
I think MikeTheTiger71 made a very solid case, well thought out.
When I think of Blue Bloods, I think of a team with a history of winning, over time. College football is cyclical, so teams will have peak and valleys, but the better teams are able to win consistently.
The game has also evolved due to many reasons including transportation, segregation, broadcasting, popularity, and NIL so some historical teams fade over time while others emerge.
Undisputed:
1. Michigan - the definition of a blue blood - they would not be who they are now without that early success. Most wins ever. They stacked up more wins than anyone in the early years and built up an insurmountable lead.
2. Alabama
3. Notre Dame - most storied program in history
4. Ohio State - model of consistency over time
5. Oklahoma
6. USC
7. Texas
8. Nebraska - Despite being mediocre the last 20 years, and a lull from 1940-60, they have historically been dominant. I think it will be VERY hard for them to come back to form.
I agree that LSU is somewhere in the 9-12 range historically. And they won’t move much over time. So draw the line where you will, based on your definition of blue blood.
9. Tenn - strictly on early historical success is ahead of LSU as a blue blood. BUT they were fading quickly until their resurgence this year. The game had changed so much and Tennessee does not have the recruiting ground to compete with LSU long term. I see LSU gaining ground on them over time, but Robert Neyland build a blue blood program over there and they do have a 10-21-3 head-to-head advantage over LSU.
10. LSU - they were the second non Ivey league team to win a NC (1908). That is their defining mark of early success (though claimed much later).
11. Georgia - I put LSU ahead of Georgia by a razor thin margin because of the 5 NCs and the 18-13-1 head-to-head. But from a blue blood argument, these two programs are very similar.
12. Penn State, For me LSU is ahead of Penn State because Penn State played independent until 1992. Penn State probably would not have had quite the same success playing against 2 other blue bloods (Mich and OSU). LSU had to earn theirs again Bama, Tenn, and Georgia.
LINK
This is a good website to see how teams have done historically.
Side note- I’m a West Point grad, and if I was making this argument 50 years ago, Army would be easily in the top 10, but the game changed so much and Army will never be able to compete on a level playing field again.
2
Posted on 10/30/22 at 4:36 pm to Blackhawk 22
quote]Blackhawk 22[/quote]
Thanks for your input, to me there’s so much to consider in regard to this topic.
Thanks for your input, to me there’s so much to consider in regard to this topic.
Posted on 10/30/22 at 8:14 pm to Blackhawk 22
Thanks for the shout out. I would agree that Michigan is the bluest of the blue bloods from a longevity standpoint. It’s just hard to view them in the #1 spot with only one NC in the last 70 years.
I also have trouble viewing Tennessee as more of a blue blood program than LSU. There is no question that they rose to prominence under Neyland before LSU really started to garner national attention, but they only earned one national title under him. It took 9 undefeated regular seasons before they were finally recognized as champions. That says a lot about the degree to which they were truly viewed as blue bloods during that era. Given they are almost even in the AP poll historically, I would give the edge to LSU based on NCs.
Otherwise I generally agree with your points and your rankings. Yours also was a well thought out post.
I also have trouble viewing Tennessee as more of a blue blood program than LSU. There is no question that they rose to prominence under Neyland before LSU really started to garner national attention, but they only earned one national title under him. It took 9 undefeated regular seasons before they were finally recognized as champions. That says a lot about the degree to which they were truly viewed as blue bloods during that era. Given they are almost even in the AP poll historically, I would give the edge to LSU based on NCs.
Otherwise I generally agree with your points and your rankings. Yours also was a well thought out post.
This post was edited on 10/30/22 at 8:17 pm
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News