- 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: People love to tell Georgia "not since 1980..."
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:23 pm to CapstoneGrad06
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:23 pm to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
And they no longer have a massive advantage in strength and conditioning they once held.
Aka they test for steroids now
1
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:24 pm to VermilionTiger
quote:
You can’t lose a blue blood credential or gain a blue blood credential
Dumb. Pitt, Princeton, Harvard, Georgia Tech were blue bloods once.
The problem with the term is people want to apply it solely to wins and losses. If that’s the case, Notre Dame wouldn’t be a blue blood anymore IMO. But they are bolstered by media and national presence.
It’s a tough term to define for CFB.
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:26 pm to DBG
quote:
Yea that’s why I don’t think Oklahoma is the best example of what the point of the thread is.
Oklahoma has still been very nationally relevant since 2000
I like the OP's main thought of "big time programs that contstantly get fawned over but haven't won a lot lately" but I agree OU probably isn't the best. They have been in title contention quite often just haven't won it all, but most programs can say the same or would trade places with them. A program like Michigan or USC is one that deserves even more flak, but the thing is both of those programs have fallen SO far and are SO off anyone's radar that it's just stating the extremely obvious.
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:28 pm to RollTide1987
Winning a natty is harder now than ever before. Many teams racked up titles when they were voted on. There were very few consensus titles that weren’t split. You had split titles 6 times in the 60’s, 3 times in the 50’s, 4 times in the 70’s...and that’s just with teams given the ‘consensus’ champ moniker.
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:29 pm to WG_Dawg
Michigan is really THE example. Since 1997, when Nebraska was the real champion, they’ve had what 2-3 teams in real title contention? 2006 they were in the mix until the end, and 2016 I think they were too.
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:30 pm to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
I don’t think Tennessee is in danger of being Minnesota.
No of course not, but we need to realize this isn't the same "tennessee" that dominated the 90s. They have utterly whiffed on their 3 previous coaches and while pruitt seems to be solid he still hasn't really accomplished much on the actual field yet and doesn't have them anywhere near winning the SEC.
Jim Donnan wasn't really a bad coach, he just had the misfortune of playign spurrier and fulmer eveyr year. Pruitt probably isn't a bad coach he jsut has to play kirby and saban every year.
I don't think Tennessee will ever recapture the 90s. Sure they will be good again because they're too good of a program. They'll probably win a title again at some point. But they'll never have a 7-8 year stretch like they did in the 90s.
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:31 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
A program like Michigan or USC is one that deserves even more flak,
Well USC got screwed over by the NCAA and basically got a death penalty that has affected them for a decade.
When your program becomes persona non grata for 3 years and not a destination point for kids - and you don't have scholies, it takes awhile to recover from that. You know they were going to have at least 5 years where they wouldn't have much of a chance.
So they had many lost years.
There's no excuse now and Clay Helton pulling in the worst recruiting class in the Pac-12 is unacceptable.
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:32 pm to RollTide1987
quote:gumps need to worry more about bama.
If Oklahoma doesn't start getting their act together soon, we might need to start questioning their "Blue Blood" credentials.
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:33 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
The right coach can turn USC around in an instant. And their issue hasn’t been attracting a good coach, it’s been their athletic department being run like a local booster club.
They have a real AD now so we’ll see
They have a real AD now so we’ll see
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:36 pm to TexasTiger08
quote:
Winning a natty is harder now than ever before
It absolutely is. And it also, more times than not, takes a stroke of luck here or there.
Like OP said people like to say "lmao 1980! uga sucks!" but when you really get into it we could easily be sitting here with sevearl more national titles and richt still being our head coach as one of the best in sec history.
-in 96 UF lost their last game of the year yet got a rematch a month later to win the title
-in 03 LSU lost to a mediocre UF yet still played for and won the title
-in 06 UF lost to an overrated AU yet still played and won a title
-in 07 LSU lost twice, including to arkansas in the last game of the regular season, yet had every possible break you could get to squeeze in to the title game
-in 08 UF lost to friggin ole miss yet still played and won a title
-2011..obviously
-2012, bama lost to aTm yet still played and won a title
You get the idea, and there have been several more examples since then of teams losing but having some good luck to win a title. In 2002 we legit had a national title team and might ahve been the best team, but both OSU/UM went undefeated so we were left out. In 03, 06, 08, etc all those years, those teams that lost but got a chance anyway did so because there weren't 2 undefeateds that were worthy.
We've had national title level teams in 02, 07, 12, and 17 just haven't actually won it. I wouldn't trade the state of our program for one like AU or UT that has a title a decade or 2 ago but hasn't really been nationally/playoff relevant in a while
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:40 pm to VADawg
quote:
Nashville's population explosion will help them too
Depends on who's making up the explosion.
This post was edited on 10/8/20 at 3:40 pm
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:41 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
LSU went from 1958-2003.
I would have never realized it had you not pointed it out, but it's blowing my mind that this gap was 45 years, and UGA is at a 40-year gap from 1980.
Of course, UGA got much closer in their drought than LSU did.
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:43 pm to saintsfan22
quote:
Depends on who's making up the explosion.
exactly.
Georgia has always had good high school talent. IT wasn't even THAT long ago, probably only 20 years, that the majority of kids growing up in GA were UGA fans, even though we weren't that great. There was jsut a "southern pride for the home state" kinda thing. With the explosion of Atlanta/metro suburbs beign infiltrated by yankees or other people coming from OOS just coming in for work that has all but disappeared. The state is still as talented as ever if not more so but these kids aren't born and raised UGA fans. People keep laughing at UGA for missing out on 5* guys in state but I mean how much of an "in state" prospect are you really if you are from thousands of miles away and your parents just moved here 5 years ago?
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:43 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
Jim Donnan wasn't really a bad coach, he just had the misfortune of playign spurrier and fulmer eveyr year. Pruitt probably isn't a bad coach he jsut has to play kirby and saban every year.
Donnan was done in because Quincy Carter never improved after his freshman season. He should have been a Heisman/All-American type of QB but just never got there.
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:46 pm to OvertheDwayneBowe
quote:
I would have never realized it had you not pointed it out, but it's blowing my mind that this gap was 45 years, and UGA is at a 40-year gap from 1980.
the internet and social media is to blame IMO. Back in the days nobody really bothered to think about stuff like that unless you were actually having a conversation about it. Now any mouthbreather with a wifi connection can say whatever lame drivel they want.
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:48 pm to VADawg
quote:
Donnan was done in because Quincy Carter never improved after his freshman season. He should have been a Heisman/All-American type of QB but just never got there.
I get that, but if mcelwain was at UF instead of spurrier and dooley was at UT instead of fulmer who knows how many more of those battles quincy wins?
He dfeinitely failed ot improve but my point was that donnan was at UGA at a time that 2 of the all time best also happened to be in his division.
Also, donnan was fired for not beating tech, period. Whether quincy ever showed improvement or not.
Posted on 10/8/20 at 3:49 pm to RollTide1987
Michigan, Notre Dame, USC, Texas, and Nebraska are all closer to losing BB status.
Only Alabama and Ohio State are further entrenched as BBs at the moment.
Only Alabama and Ohio State are further entrenched as BBs at the moment.
Posted on 10/8/20 at 4:10 pm to WG_Dawg
If college football were still regional and had exclusive tie-ins with bowls, OU probably manages a split in 2004, because USC would have gone to the Rose. They probably would have managed one in 2008 also, as UF would go to the Sugar.
You replace the CFP with the old system, and OU is in contention 4 other years.
If you use national titles as the sign of a blue blood, then in 20 years you will have maybe 4 blue bloods total.
You replace the CFP with the old system, and OU is in contention 4 other years.
If you use national titles as the sign of a blue blood, then in 20 years you will have maybe 4 blue bloods total.
Posted on 10/8/20 at 4:13 pm to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
It is amazing to me that more time has now passed since their 2000 title than between 1985 and 2000. I grew up in the 90s and only knew Oklahoma for being a below average program in the Big 8/12. So when Stoops got rolling, the mid 80s Oklahoma teams were often referenced. And he we sit 20 years removed from that. Just crazy.
That’s how getting old and time works. Anything approaching a decade or more in the past seems like ancient history when you’re a teenager.
Then the next 20 years flies by.
In reality OU only had a 5-6 year stretch of bad football, and only 3 losing seasons in the 90’s.
Posted on 10/8/20 at 4:33 pm to DBG
2000 being 20 years closer than 1980 is probably why
Also “1980!!” probably isn’t much of a thing outside message boards
Also “1980!!” probably isn’t much of a thing outside message boards
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News