The 8 "Blue Blood" Programs As Identified By 120,000 Twitter Users

[BUBear]

 

[bamawriter]

This is gonna go well.

 

[MiramarVol]

They snuck one in on us. Only if Volnation knew about it.

 

[landscapingvol]

It just proves that most people are stupid and perception is not reality. For example, Michigan has one shared NC since 1948; Clemson has 3, Washington has 4, Tennessee has 2, and LSU has 4. The entire premise of a "blue blood" is idiotic. If you are going to base it on history alone then why aren't Princeton, Harvard, and Army included? Princeton has 7 during the same time Michigan claims most of theirs; Harvard has 6; and Army has 3 in the 1940's.

 

[05_never_again]

It just proves that most people are stupid and perception is not reality. For example, Michigan has one shared NC since 1948; Clemson has 3, Washington has 4, Tennessee has 2, and LSU has 4. The entire premise of a "blue blood" is idiotic. If you are going to base it on history alone then why aren't Princeton, Harvard, and Army included? Princeton has 7 during the same time Michigan claims most of theirs; Harvard has 6; and Army has 3 in the 1940's.

When you see "blue blood," think "old money," not necessarily "best program." Michigan is the epitome of this.

Michigan's biggest claim to fame is that their program has been around a long time. That's almost the entirety of it. They were playing the game, and therefore accumulating wins that are part of their #1 win total, before most other schools were. Years before Alabama even had a team, Michigan was racking up wins against powerhouses like Racine, University of Toronto, Detroit Independents, Albion College, Stevens Institute of Technology, and Ann Arbor High School (seriously - 1891 Michigan Wolverines football team - Wikipedia). They count a 62-0 win over a high school team in their all-time win total.

Since they've been around so long and haven't really changed any of it, their logo is really famous, fight song is really famous, etc. They are by no means a blue blood program because of the success they've had on the field, especially over the last 30-40 years.

 

[Only_1_OK]

Well, of course we are.

The thing is, you can't limit that poll to just 8 programs overall. Yes, I believe Tennessee is considered a Blue Blood program by most in the collegiate world. I mean, just as much as Texas or Nebraska for certain.

On that same note, I'd certainly put Penn State on there as a Blue Blood (though I despise them), FSU, Georgia and Miami as well.

I'm not entirely sold on Washington. And LSU hasn't really reached that Blue Blood status either. Not sure why Florida is on there either because they really didn't come into national prominence until the 90s.

 

[bamawriter]

Well, of course we are.

The thing is, you can't limit that poll to just 8 programs overall. Yes, I believe Tennessee is considered a Blue Blood program by most in the collegiate world. I mean, just as much as Texas or Nebraska for certain.

It wasn't limited to 8, though maybe 18 wasn't really enough, either.

I'm not sure what you mean by "the collegiate world", but 120,000+ is a pretty good voting sample, and Tennessee didn't even get a "Yes" from 1/3 of those.

 

[Wireless1]

I’d say if blue blood is defined as pompous, self absorbed, elitist who think they are better than everyone else regardless of facts that prove otherwise, that list looks about right

 

[Firebirdparts]

I'm thinking red uniforms are an advantage in this poll.

 

[gisman]

The question i would have is what would it look like if the same poll was taken 15 years ago. Would Bama make the top 8? Probably would, but they wouldn't be #1 or even close. Where would Tennessee be? Clemson is interesting and funny, they had a pretty big gap between relevance. They are very good now and were good in the later 70's and early 80's. I am not saying that any one of those teams doesn't have an argument, but the current relevance is such a factor and blue blood is more dedication and tradition for years and years.

 

[peaygolf]

Well, of course we are.

The thing is, you can't limit that poll to just 8 programs overall. Yes, I believe Tennessee is considered a Blue Blood program by most in the collegiate world. I mean, just as much as Texas or Nebraska for certain.

On that same note, I'd certainly put Penn State on there as a Blue Blood (though I despise them), FSU, Georgia and Miami as well.

I'm not entirely sold on Washington. And LSU hasn't really reached that Blue Blood status either. Not sure why Florida is on there either because they really didn't come into national prominence until the 90s.

Florida, FSU, and Miami are not “blue bloods”

Great programs since 1980.......Zero before that. Definitely top 5-6 since then, but not historically.
Also, National Championships (Army, Navy, Etc.....) are not the only definition of blue blood. Look at winning %, prolonged national relevance, household name to middle America.

 

[knucklehead_vol]

The question i would have is what would it look like if the same poll was taken 15 years ago. Would Bama make the top 8? Probably would, but they wouldn't be #1 or even close. Where would Tennessee be? Clemson is interesting and funny, they had a pretty big gap between relevance. They are very good now and were good in the later 70's and early 80's. I am not saying that any one of those teams doesn't have an argument, but the current relevance is such a factor and blue blood is more dedication and tradition for years and years.

It will change slightly in another 15 years...

 

[stolitonic]

Where did the 120K Votes come from? Twitter users?

If that is the case 90% of the responses would be from people under 30. In other words, probably only remember Bama being great and not the post Bear and pre Stallings era.

Nebraska is kind of a head scratcher though. They have been down for as long or longer than the Vols have.

 

[bamawriter]

Where did the 120K Votes come from? Twitter users?

If that is the case 90% of the responses would be from people under 30. In other words, probably only remember Bama being great and not the post Bear and pre Stallings era.

The post-Bear and pre-Stallings era was less than a decade, and Bama still won an SEC title in that span. There aren't many football fans of any age that recall Bama being down more often than they've been up.

Truth is, the top 5 on that list are pretty much inarguable at this point. Anyone who even casually follows the sport would probably come up with those 5 teams in some order.

 

[BowlBrother85]

I don't see a problem with the 8 teams who were chosen... now, should Clemson be ahead of Tennessee? They are definitely rich right now, but that is brand spanking new money in the big scheme of things.

 

[BUBear]

 

[volfanhill]

Win something of consequence and you too can join the conversation

 

[ArdentVol]

I’d say if blue blood is defined as pompous, self absorbed, elitist who think they are better than everyone else regardless of facts that prove otherwise, that list looks about right

Cerrtainly fits for more than half of the list

 

[BowlBrother85]

Where did the 120K Votes come from? Twitter users?

If that is the case 90% of the responses would be from people under 30. In other words, probably only remember Bama being great and not the post Bear and pre Stallings era.

Nebraska is kind of a head scratcher though. They have been down for as long or longer than the Vols have.

This is one fallacy that I see on here a quite a bit. You don't need to have witnessed something to be well aware that it happened. Jim Brown retired from the NFL 8 years before I was born, but I still know that he played for Syracuse in college and Cleveland in the NFL and he was awesome. We shouldn't expect that people have a range of knowledge which doesn't extend beyond what they can personally remember. That is almost never the case with people who are genuine fans of a particular sport. They do know the history of the sport in most cases.

 

[VolnJC]

I don't really have an issue with those 8 we would have probably been listed in the 90s..we still have tradition....great fan support...and top 10 all time wins....what we need to get back to being a blue blood is competing yearly for championships

 

[Only_1_OK]

It wasn't limited to 8, though maybe 18 wasn't really enough, either.

I'm not sure what you mean by "the collegiate world", but 120,000+ is a pretty good voting sample, and Tennessee didn't even get a "Yes" from 1/3 of those.

120,000 Twitter users obviously can't be wrong lol.

Had that poll been done in the late 90s and early 2000s, Alabama probably wouldn't even be close to the top 8 and Tennessee would be. Because the overall history wouldn't be on anyone's mind. But shouldn't Alabama be considered a traditional power in football even with your suck years? The same could be said about our 90s years before Stoops.

Every team has their ups and downs and Tennessee has been in a drought just like you have been in as well. However, they still can and should be considered a nationally relevant a.k.a. "Blue Blood" program that historically has been challenging to win against. They are just as relevant on the national stage as Texas or Nebraska for certain. Far more historically than Florida or Miami.

 

[Only_1_OK]

Florida, FSU, and Miami are not “blue bloods”

Great programs since 1980.......Zero before that. Definitely top 5-6 since then, but not historically.
Also, National Championships (Army, Navy, Etc.....) are not the only definition of blue blood. Look at winning %, prolonged national relevance, household name to middle America.

Miami might be a stretch, but Florida State has been around since the 60s as a good program.

Agree on Florida.

Trust me, if National Championships were a true gauge of blue blood programs, Georgia wouldn't even sniff that list. But again, historically, they are a good program that can be tough to win against and have a deep seeded history and tradition in the college football world.

Either way, whomever came up with that list is an idiot.

 

[peaygolf]

Miami might be a stretch, but Florida State has been around since the 60s as a good program.

Agree on Florida.

Trust me, if National Championships were a true gauge of blue blood programs, Georgia wouldn't even sniff that list. But again, historically, they are a good program that can be tough to win against and have a deep seeded history and tradition in the college football world.

Either way, whomever came up with that list is an idiot.

From 1960-1976, FSU averaged 5 wins a season. I almost went there and still go to a game each year. They tossed around dropping the program before Bowden arrived.

 

[Only_1_OK]

From 1960-1976, FSU averaged 5 wins a season. I almost went there and still go to a game each year. They tossed around dropping the program before Bowden arrived.

I was thinking the Peterson years weren't too bad and helped build the foundations for what Bowden accomplished in his tenure. Even before that was Veller who had good success. They certainly had their up and down years during that time, but were on the national scene.

Again, far more nationally relevant than the University of Florida who really didn't come onto the scene until the 90s.

 

[bamawriter]

120,000 Twitter users obviously can't be wrong lol.

Had that poll been done in the late 90s and early 2000s, Alabama probably wouldn't even be close to the top 8 and Tennessee would be. Because the overall history wouldn't be on anyone's mind. But shouldn't Alabama be considered a traditional power in football even with your suck years? The same could be said about our 90s years before Stoops.

That ignores the fact that enough people voted for Michigan and Notre Dame for them to make this list.

Every team has their ups and downs and Tennessee has been in a drought just like you have been in as well. However, they still can and should be considered a nationally relevant a.k.a. "Blue Blood" program that historically has been challenging to win against. They are just as relevant on the national stage as Texas or Nebraska for certain. Far more historically than Florida or Miami.

I don't completely disagree, but Tennessee's legacy building years are aging rapidly. The Vols only have 5 SEC titles since universal integration. They only have 1 national championship since the two platoon system was introduced.