Home› Hardcore Husky Board

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register
Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Not only are we not a national brand

YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 35,487 Founders Club
in Hardcore Husky Board
We are also not a Blue Blood

· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
«13456

Comments

  • KidsInCagesDawgKidsInCagesDawg Member Posts: 339
    But 10,900 of those votes are from Sven
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 35,487 Founders Club
    Lotta Natties in the past 20 years by non blue bloods...







    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,758
    edited February 2023
    RaceBannon said:

    Blue blood is a restricted club. The votes don't surprise me

    Michigan is a blue blood but Florida has been better for 30 years

    Clemson had a big decade

    UW has fits of glory followed by despair

    Texas is a blue blood despite 7 wins a year

    Its
    Notre Dame
    Michigan
    Texas
    Oklahoma
    Bama
    tOSU
    USC

    Curious why you put Texas in and not Nebraska? They seem fairly equivalent to me.

    I think the other 6 are clear blue bloods. To me there's either 6 or 8, I don't see enough separation between Texas and Nebraska to have one but not the other.

    I like 6.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 35,487 Founders Club
    dnc said:

    RaceBannon said:

    Blue blood is a restricted club. The votes don't surprise me

    Michigan is a blue blood but Florida has been better for 30 years

    Clemson had a big decade

    UW has fits of glory followed by despair

    Texas is a blue blood despite 7 wins a year

    Its
    Notre Dame
    Michigan
    Texas
    Oklahoma
    Bama
    tOSU
    USC

    Curious why you put Texas in and not Nebraska? They seem fairly equivalent to me.

    I think the other 6 are clear blue bloods. To me there's either 6 or 8, I don't see enough separation between Texas and Nebraska to have one but not the other.

    I like 6.
    It's often been stated, that to be a true Blue Blood, you need to have tradition, location and money. Nebraska lacks the location piece these days. Notre Dame is the worst of the blue bloods on the field the past 30 years, but they still have all 3.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • CFetters_Nacho_LoverCFetters_Nacho_Lover Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 30,441 Founders Club
    dnc said:

    RaceBannon said:

    Blue blood is a restricted club. The votes don't surprise me

    Michigan is a blue blood but Florida has been better for 30 years

    Clemson had a big decade

    UW has fits of glory followed by despair

    Texas is a blue blood despite 7 wins a year

    Its
    Notre Dame
    Michigan
    Texas
    Oklahoma
    Bama
    tOSU
    USC

    Curious why you put Texas in and not Nebraska? They seem fairly equivalent to me.

    I think the other 6 are clear blue bloods. To me there's either 6 or 8, I don't see enough separation between Texas and Nebraska to have one but not the other.

    I like 6.
    I voted on these polls on the twatter and can’t remember how I voted on Texas and Nebraska. The other 6 are for sure blue bloods. Texas and Nebraska you can argue convincingly for them as a yes or no.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 35,487 Founders Club
    dnc said:

    YellowSnow said:

    dnc said:

    RaceBannon said:

    Blue blood is a restricted club. The votes don't surprise me

    Michigan is a blue blood but Florida has been better for 30 years

    Clemson had a big decade

    UW has fits of glory followed by despair

    Texas is a blue blood despite 7 wins a year

    Its
    Notre Dame
    Michigan
    Texas
    Oklahoma
    Bama
    tOSU
    USC

    Curious why you put Texas in and not Nebraska? They seem fairly equivalent to me.

    I think the other 6 are clear blue bloods. To me there's either 6 or 8, I don't see enough separation between Texas and Nebraska to have one but not the other.

    I like 6.
    It's often been stated, that to be a true Blue Blood, you need to have tradition, location and money. Nebraska lacks the location piece these days. Notre Dame is the worst of the blue bloods on the field the past 30 years, but they still have all 3.
    The IRON LAWS® of college football were always meant to be forward looking. Aubbie's (foolish) contention was if you have these three things you will succeed going forward it's only a matter of tim.

    I don't think that's what "Blue Bloods" is trying to describe and Aubbie himself never applied them in that fashion that i'm aware of.

    For one obvious poont he applied these IRON LAWS to UW (vis a vis Oregon) as a guarantee that we would surpass them again ultimately. I don't think even Aubbie would argue UW is a blue blood.

    So no, I am confident it has not been often stated that these things are required to be a Blue Blood. I'm not sure it's ever been stated until this thread.

    #AuburnDawgFSSuperiorityGuy
    Things get misquoted around here all the Tim....ain't no big thing.

    That being said, what's a better definition of a Blue Blood than the "Iron Laws"? @creepycoug isn't a Blue Blood because he still doesn't have tradition and no dinero either.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,758
    edited February 2023
    YellowSnow said:

    dnc said:

    YellowSnow said:

    dnc said:

    RaceBannon said:

    Blue blood is a restricted club. The votes don't surprise me

    Michigan is a blue blood but Florida has been better for 30 years

    Clemson had a big decade

    UW has fits of glory followed by despair

    Texas is a blue blood despite 7 wins a year

    Its
    Notre Dame
    Michigan
    Texas
    Oklahoma
    Bama
    tOSU
    USC

    Curious why you put Texas in and not Nebraska? They seem fairly equivalent to me.

    I think the other 6 are clear blue bloods. To me there's either 6 or 8, I don't see enough separation between Texas and Nebraska to have one but not the other.

    I like 6.
    It's often been stated, that to be a true Blue Blood, you need to have tradition, location and money. Nebraska lacks the location piece these days. Notre Dame is the worst of the blue bloods on the field the past 30 years, but they still have all 3.
    The IRON LAWS® of college football were always meant to be forward looking. Aubbie's (foolish) contention was if you have these three things you will succeed going forward it's only a matter of tim.

    I don't think that's what "Blue Bloods" is trying to describe and Aubbie himself never applied them in that fashion that i'm aware of.

    For one obvious poont he applied these IRON LAWS to UW (vis a vis Oregon) as a guarantee that we would surpass them again ultimately. I don't think even Aubbie would argue UW is a blue blood.

    So no, I am confident it has not been often stated that these things are required to be a Blue Blood. I'm not sure it's ever been stated until this thread.

    #AuburnDawgFSSuperiorityGuy
    Things get misquoted around here all the Tim....ain't no big thing.

    That being said, what's a better definition of a Blue Blood than the "Iron Laws"? @creepycoug isn't a Blue Blood because he still doesn't have tradition and no dinero either.
    I think tradition is definitely a requirement for blue blood status. I don't think location is. Norman, OK is nothing special (neither is South Bend) but i think those schools are clear blue bloods. Tuscaloosa isn't a great location either. If your argument is location only matters for proximity to recruits even that leaves South Bend out IMO.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • rodmansragerodmansrage Member Posts: 6,269
    YellowSnow said:

    RaceBannon said:

    Blue blood is a restricted club. The votes don't surprise me

    Michigan is a blue blood but Florida has been better for 30 years

    Clemson had a big decade

    UW has fits of glory followed by despair

    Texas is a blue blood despite 7 wins a year

    Its
    Notre Dame
    Michigan
    Texas
    Oklahoma
    Bama
    tOSU
    USC

    @RaceBannon wasn't Nebraska a blue blood at one point? 5 Natties from the 70s to 90s. Did they get stripped of their status.

    northwestern is one of the teams you lose to you automatically get your blue blood status stripped.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 35,487 Founders Club
    dnc said:

    YellowSnow said:

    dnc said:

    YellowSnow said:

    dnc said:

    RaceBannon said:

    Blue blood is a restricted club. The votes don't surprise me

    Michigan is a blue blood but Florida has been better for 30 years

    Clemson had a big decade

    UW has fits of glory followed by despair

    Texas is a blue blood despite 7 wins a year

    Its
    Notre Dame
    Michigan
    Texas
    Oklahoma
    Bama
    tOSU
    USC

    Curious why you put Texas in and not Nebraska? They seem fairly equivalent to me.

    I think the other 6 are clear blue bloods. To me there's either 6 or 8, I don't see enough separation between Texas and Nebraska to have one but not the other.

    I like 6.
    It's often been stated, that to be a true Blue Blood, you need to have tradition, location and money. Nebraska lacks the location piece these days. Notre Dame is the worst of the blue bloods on the field the past 30 years, but they still have all 3.
    The IRON LAWS® of college football were always meant to be forward looking. Aubbie's (foolish) contention was if you have these three things you will succeed going forward it's only a matter of tim.

    I don't think that's what "Blue Bloods" is trying to describe and Aubbie himself never applied them in that fashion that i'm aware of.

    For one obvious poont he applied these IRON LAWS to UW (vis a vis Oregon) as a guarantee that we would surpass them again ultimately. I don't think even Aubbie would argue UW is a blue blood.

    So no, I am confident it has not been often stated that these things are required to be a Blue Blood. I'm not sure it's ever been stated until this thread.

    #AuburnDawgFSSuperiorityGuy
    Things get misquoted around here all the Tim....ain't no big thing.

    That being said, what's a better definition of a Blue Blood than the "Iron Laws"? @creepycoug isn't a Blue Blood because he still doesn't have tradition and no dinero either.
    I think tradition is definitely a requirement for blue blood status. I don't think location is. Norman, OK is nothing special (neither is South Bend) but i think those schools are clear blue bloods. Tuscaloosa isn't a great location either. If your argument is location only matters for proximity to recruits even that leaves South Bend out IMO.
    Norman, OK is like 3 hrs drive from DFW. The Red River game happens annually in the Cotton Bowl. From a recruiting perspective OU seems a lot closer to the promised land than Lincoln- i.e., "location".

    South Bend is a dump but close to football recruiting grounds of the Upper Midwest and they are as National Brand as it gets. The biggest thing holding them back at this point is refusal to bend (no pun indented) on academis.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,758
    YellowSnow said:

    dnc said:

    YellowSnow said:

    dnc said:

    YellowSnow said:

    dnc said:

    RaceBannon said:

    Blue blood is a restricted club. The votes don't surprise me

    Michigan is a blue blood but Florida has been better for 30 years

    Clemson had a big decade

    UW has fits of glory followed by despair

    Texas is a blue blood despite 7 wins a year

    Its
    Notre Dame
    Michigan
    Texas
    Oklahoma
    Bama
    tOSU
    USC

    Curious why you put Texas in and not Nebraska? They seem fairly equivalent to me.

    I think the other 6 are clear blue bloods. To me there's either 6 or 8, I don't see enough separation between Texas and Nebraska to have one but not the other.

    I like 6.
    It's often been stated, that to be a true Blue Blood, you need to have tradition, location and money. Nebraska lacks the location piece these days. Notre Dame is the worst of the blue bloods on the field the past 30 years, but they still have all 3.
    The IRON LAWS® of college football were always meant to be forward looking. Aubbie's (foolish) contention was if you have these three things you will succeed going forward it's only a matter of tim.

    I don't think that's what "Blue Bloods" is trying to describe and Aubbie himself never applied them in that fashion that i'm aware of.

    For one obvious poont he applied these IRON LAWS to UW (vis a vis Oregon) as a guarantee that we would surpass them again ultimately. I don't think even Aubbie would argue UW is a blue blood.

    So no, I am confident it has not been often stated that these things are required to be a Blue Blood. I'm not sure it's ever been stated until this thread.

    #AuburnDawgFSSuperiorityGuy
    Things get misquoted around here all the Tim....ain't no big thing.

    That being said, what's a better definition of a Blue Blood than the "Iron Laws"? @creepycoug isn't a Blue Blood because he still doesn't have tradition and no dinero either.
    I think tradition is definitely a requirement for blue blood status. I don't think location is. Norman, OK is nothing special (neither is South Bend) but i think those schools are clear blue bloods. Tuscaloosa isn't a great location either. If your argument is location only matters for proximity to recruits even that leaves South Bend out IMO.
    Norman, OK is like 3 hrs drive from DFW. The Red River game happens annually in the Cotton Bowl. From a recruiting perspective OU seems a lot closer to the promised land than Lincoln- i.e., "location".

    South Bend is a dump but close to football recruiting grounds of the Upper Midwest and they are as National Brand as it gets. The biggest thing holding them back at this point is refusal to bend (no pun indented) on academis.
    I don't disagree with any of this. I don't think Nebraska's future is super bright. But I do think they still qualify as a Blue Blood. Maybe they won't after another ten years of failure. But like most schools they are still just the right coach away from success. If they find him they can still revive the brand IMO.

    Notre Dame and Texas as well.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,758
    For me there's a difference between Tier I and Blue Bloods. Tier I is more forward lookin (with obviously a healthy dose of accomplishments). Blue Bloods is more historical accomplishments. To me Nebraska is a dying Blue Blood but probably no longer in Tier 1.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 35,487 Founders Club
    dnc said:

    For me there's a difference between Tier I and Blue Bloods. Tier I is more forward lookin (with obviously a healthy dose of accomplishments). Blue Bloods is more historical accomplishments. To me Nebraska is a dying Blue Blood but probably no longer in Tier 1.

    I think you still gotta consider Nebraska a Blue Blood based on history. They are no doubt dying, but as we've so often seen, any school like that is just one home run hire away from getting the ship righted. The challenge is, of course, those guys are so far an few between.

    So here's in interesting question: When did Cal cease being a Blue Blood? When the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor they certainly still met all the requirements- e.g., NTs in 1920, 21, 22, 23 and 37.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.