- 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 it time to revise or add to the CFB blue bloods roster?
Posted on 6/30/16 at 10:07 am to Buckeye Backer
Posted on 6/30/16 at 10:07 am to Buckeye Backer
quote:
Michigan State should be considered moving forward
Posted on 6/30/16 at 10:12 am to Buckeye Backer
quote:
Dantonio has built them into a B1G power
After that Alabama game...
Michigan State looked like the 2012 Notre Dame team. Smoke and mirrors.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 10:15 am to Grandioso
quote:
2016 Recruiting rankings:
Texas - #6
Texas A&M - #17
TCU - #22
Baylor - #36
Texas Tech - #46
I mean lets be fair here. Didn't Baylor just lose like 4 guys to Texas and therefore they plummeted and Texas is going up?
Texas is losing more top guys to outside state schools I would say than TCU/Baylor. LSU has always done well in the state, OSU is trying to open pipelines and other schools are getting a few they hadn't in the past
Posted on 6/30/16 at 10:18 am to Buckeye06
quote:
I mean lets be fair here. Didn't Baylor just lose like 4 guys to Texas and therefore they plummeted and Texas is going up?
I don't believe that had anything to do with the rankings. In fact, it should make the #6 class just that much stronger.
quote:
LSU has always done well in the state
Always? Since the Saban/Miles era. And it's typically confined to the Houston area.
quote:
OSU is trying to open pipelines and other schools are getting a few they hadn't in the past
Everyone is trying to open a pipeline in Texas. Who wouldn't? Nebraska had a steady, steady stream for a long time. Obviously, Oklahoma recruits very well in the state. Colorado used to recruit Texas (and New Orleans too) well in the 80's and 90's.
Honestly, Ole Miss is probably the out-of-state team recruiting better than any. Shady bustards.
This post was edited on 6/30/16 at 10:23 am
Posted on 6/30/16 at 10:22 am to Dixie Normus
you left out Yale. they were awarded the mythical natty many times
and their win total must be astronomical, although their percentage may be lousy now.
I say this in response to Pitt. I only was aware of their Jackie Sherril/Tony Dorsett title.
They must have won 8 of those before 1952, which was the year I heard Maryland vs Oklahoma on the radio for the mythical natty, since I was living in Maryland and thought they walked on water until the Okies thrashed them.
and their win total must be astronomical, although their percentage may be lousy now.
I say this in response to Pitt. I only was aware of their Jackie Sherril/Tony Dorsett title.
They must have won 8 of those before 1952, which was the year I heard Maryland vs Oklahoma on the radio for the mythical natty, since I was living in Maryland and thought they walked on water until the Okies thrashed them.
This post was edited on 6/30/16 at 10:23 am
Posted on 6/30/16 at 10:29 am to Grandioso
quote:
Texas - #6
Was that before or after they get the Baylor guys?
I think on one hand, UT fans and admin has been delusional during their last few searches. LSU fans have shown themselves to be just as foolish, thinking "we're LSU, people will be lining up to coach here." What most seem to forget is how important timing is to this whole thing. Both programs want established coaches, but that list is short and those guys already have good jobs. And likely kids who are in school and don't want to leave, etc..
However, people dismissing UT have likely not spent much time in Austin. Like LSU fans saying "why would Maneiri ever leave LSU for UT--he be stupid to make a lateral move." But Austin is a much nicer place to live than Baton Rouge. Better schools and many more things to do. Getting a house on Lake Travis or Lake Austin is much cooler than one on Highland Road. So much more live music. Park at Auditorium Shores and run around Town Lake with the city skyline in the background. Zilker Park. Festivals every weekend.
I love LSU, so I'm happy to be in Baton Rouge. But objectively, Austin provides a much higher quality of life. That's why I would never dismiss any rumor involving any coach going there at anytime. That being said, it's not so great that UT can just snap their fingers and get Saban, entrenched in Alabam pa creating a legacy as likely the best coach in the history of college football. Because they're Texas, everyone should--and will--listen. But the timing has to be right. And it almost never is for any upper echelon program trying to poach a great coach from another upper echelon one. Just look at the last several football searches for UT, Bama, Michigan, Notre Dame, Florida, USC, etc...
That being said, I think UT is at a disadvantage with playing at Disch-Falk. I'm sure they've made some improvements since I last attended games there(Huston Streets' last year), but it's stil not on campus, it's still on the East side of 35, the parking is still shite, and I'm not sure if they've replaced the turf with natural grass yet, but that place would get hot as balls in May. It's just not a great home field.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 10:34 am to lsutigers1992
I put the website I used in the OP, right below all the statistics.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 10:35 am to Hot Carl
quote:
And it almost never is for any upper echelon program trying to poach a great coach from another upper echelon one. Just look at the last several football searches for UT, Bama, Michigan, Notre Dame, Florida, USC, etc..
This in so many ways. It just so happened to work out that Meyer came around when Tressel left
I think those rankings are post the 4 guys switching
Posted on 6/30/16 at 10:36 am to Baloo
When I said that, I used it as a point of reference to say that Texas has not been playing well currently, but is undoubtedly still a blue blood from a historical standpoint.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 10:37 am to Mr Personality
quote:The four S.Carolina fans on the internet are going to come at you bro.
I love the (w) here as if anyone would ever think you were talking about South Carolina in a blue bloods convo.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 10:42 am to LSU82BILL
I mean, if you consider the sheer amount of years it will take to catch up to them and actually displace them, it's not going to be an easy task. Sure, Nebraska hasn't been good in a while, but winning 8 games a year means teams are only catching up to them by maybe two games a year. They also have a bunch of titles. That's also very difficult to catch up to.
I also think you're forgetting that this is from a historical perspective, not a current one. Texas, USC, and Nebraska are currently mediocre to bad, but their history as blue bloods is indisputable.
I also think you're forgetting that this is from a historical perspective, not a current one. Texas, USC, and Nebraska are currently mediocre to bad, but their history as blue bloods is indisputable.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 10:55 am to Dixie Normus
Texas is only considered a blue blood because they keep telling us they are. Over the last 40 years they have as many NCs as Climpson, Ga Tech and BYU. Not exactly blue blood material. If you took off the logos on the helmet and looked at their production, the Horns are a solid, not spectacular program. You can't be the subject of more, "WTF is wrong with Texas???" questions than you are title considerations and be considered a blue blood.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 11:02 am to SoFla Tideroller
quote:
Texas is only considered a blue blood because they keep telling us they are. Over the last 40 years they have as many NCs as Climpson, Ga Tech and BYU. Not exactly blue blood material.
You can say the same for Michigan.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 11:04 am to Mr Personality
quote:
I love the (w) here as if anyone would ever think you were talking about South Carolina in a blue bloods convo.
The only thing South Carolina would be in a blue blood conversation is how much of a bitch they are in their rivalry with Clemson.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 11:11 am to Grandioso
Yup. Agree. Michigan is even worse because the coach they idolize was 0fer his first 8 Rose Bowls.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 11:12 am to Dixie Normus
Alabama really should be in a class all its own, considering they amassed theirs in a conference with 5 others schools in the next tier on your list.
The SEC's overall historical strength hurts all six of those schools when you try and compare them with 1 or 2 team top heavy conferences.
The SEC's overall historical strength hurts all six of those schools when you try and compare them with 1 or 2 team top heavy conferences.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 11:24 am to Waffle House
CFB Data Warehouse has a decent all-time program ranking system here:
LINK
The crazy thing is teams 9-13 are all SEC teams. It shows the depth of the conference, as most conferences are really just one or two great teams and a lot of chaff. It also makes Bama's #1 ranking more impressive.
But what's interesting is they have rankings for Last XX years, and they have one for 35 years, which is about the modern era of college football, 1980 on. That's about when national TV games became more common and there was a shift from winning your conference to winning the national title. Also, the more modern passing game got going here. Here's their Last 35 years rankings:
LINK
1 Miami
2 FSU
3 Bama
4 Florida
5 Nebraska
6 Ohio St
7 USC
8 Oklahoma
9 Michigan
10 LSU
LINK
The crazy thing is teams 9-13 are all SEC teams. It shows the depth of the conference, as most conferences are really just one or two great teams and a lot of chaff. It also makes Bama's #1 ranking more impressive.
But what's interesting is they have rankings for Last XX years, and they have one for 35 years, which is about the modern era of college football, 1980 on. That's about when national TV games became more common and there was a shift from winning your conference to winning the national title. Also, the more modern passing game got going here. Here's their Last 35 years rankings:
LINK
1 Miami
2 FSU
3 Bama
4 Florida
5 Nebraska
6 Ohio St
7 USC
8 Oklahoma
9 Michigan
10 LSU
Posted on 6/30/16 at 11:39 am to Baloo
The first link includes Minnesota inside the Top-20, and they're weighted almost entirely by six national championships before WWII ended. Minnesota hasn't been to a major bowl game in over a half-century.
Back then, when Minnesota was claiming national titles, seasons ended by December and a Final Poll was taken.
Personally, I don't see how you can draw too many conclusions about quality of a conference.
Back then, when Minnesota was claiming national titles, seasons ended by December and a Final Poll was taken.
Personally, I don't see how you can draw too many conclusions about quality of a conference.
This post was edited on 6/30/16 at 11:41 am
Posted on 6/30/16 at 11:39 am to Dixie Normus
quote:
14 Nat'l titles
I guess if you repeat a lie long enough it becomes true.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News