Is the day of the "Blue Blood" over?
- Thread starter della
- Start date
They've shown nothing since Clappy. He did win the league, they were a 1 seed, maybe the overall 1. A few S16s there, no break through, the flop with Zeller and Oladipo era... just nothing. Clappy couldn't sustain or break through... so overall really since the run by Davis to the title game. It looks like Nebraska football from my view but I'm not watching them closely.
They should have hired Pitino after Louisville booted him and just joined the rest of the sport and put winning first.
And if IU didn't have the ballz to hire Pitino they should have thrown the sink at Bennett. That guy is an elite coach and his style is perfect for the Big 10.
....I'll use ellipsis wherever the hell I want....
Your question was steered at certain program(s) and you know it. Until ut achieves more than ONE Elite 8 in their entire history, your gum flapping here is nothing more than useless drivel. You'd be better off running your yapper about when ut was good in football.
What gave you the idea the thread was about certain programs? Maybe, “blue bloods”? Can’t get anything by you.
I’ve got news for you. Just because you cheer for a historically successful program doesn’t make you successful or more knowledgable than anyone else. Sorry to tell you that you don’t glean any greatness from a team you cheer for. You are stuck with whatever you personally accomplish in life and nothing more.
Your question was a reflection of your wishful thinking, and based on this latest response from you, I'm 'stuck' in a pretty good place, regardless of who I root for.
Sorry they just don't have it. They're in that MSU/Uconn area which isn't bad company to be In.
Just pretend Della's not talking about UK and actually taking about Barnes coached teams UT and UT, makes her responses better. She's clearly only insinuating and insinuating is subjective. "
She's much better. I've gave her a few likes.
This thread is one of her best ever IMO. Huge fan.
Last edited:
Im not disagreeing that i think we belong in the blue blood tier.
I just dont think Indiana does either, imo.
Why not just pretend and assume I'm talking about what I posted. It would have been simple enough to state why you/y'all thought the blue bloods will maintain their historical status or even improve if that is what you think. I really didn't insinuate, I asked the question and threw a few points out there.
There was really no reason to get your asses chapped.
Well, if that is true resist the urge to "like" the next poster that says I'm a do do head or something similar.
It is important for my fans and myself to be on the same page.
I can't promise anything. Huge fan of do do heads.
I'm not really sure either. They're in purgatory until the basketball gods figure out what they want to do with them.
I mean yea hypothetically if IU could get a natty this decade, i think that would push them blue blood status.
Transversely, if UL were to win one this decade, i guess we’d still be tiered with uconn and msu bc we dont have a title from before the 80s.
Thats the main difference imo, besides the obv number of titles advantage.
I guess it depends on ones personal opinion on how they view titles from the modern era vs the old titles. I personally think the modern era should hold more weight for a number of factors, but at the same time its not like the teams/players from back then could control how the tourney was ran, some teams choosing to play in the NIT, integration of black players etc. They played the teams that were put in front of them and won the tourney, so I can see it both ways.
Transversely, if UL were to win one this decade, i guess we’d still be tiered with uconn and msu bc we dont have a title from before the 80s.
Thats the main difference imo, besides the obv number of titles advantage.
I guess it depends on ones personal opinion on how they view titles from the modern era vs the old titles. I personally think the modern era should hold more weight for a number of factors, but at the same time its not like the teams/players from back then could control how the tourney was ran, some teams choosing to play in the NIT, integration of black players etc. They played the teams that were put in front of them and won the tourney, so I can see it both ways.
If there is a team who will beat Kentucky longterm in the conference
Right now I would be looking at Alabama or Arkansas
Outside chance at LSU or Auburn
Tennessee might not make the Top 5.
Just the truth.
Pretty sure you don’t care about the rest of the blue bloods
Right now I would be looking at Alabama or Arkansas
Outside chance at LSU or Auburn
Tennessee might not make the Top 5.
Just the truth.
Pretty sure you don’t care about the rest of the blue bloods
If there was a baseball team in the conference I'd expect to beat Texas, I'd look at one of the Mississippi schools for a sure win, but any number of other would probably do it too.
Now you are playing with hurt feelings and
Lashing out, Della
We all have seen what Barnes can do.
You will be up there competing but Sweet 16/Elite 8 is probably the ceiling
You created this thread in hopes of Tennessee somehow replacing Kentucky as the #1 program in conference
Arkansas and Alabama right now are probably bigger threats
Nah, the last time MSU played Texas you vanished, so I was wondering if mentioning it would still have that effect or if it diminishes with time. Looks like it has diminished a bit.
Whatever you want to tell yourself, Della.
Texas was a young baseball team last year. I predicted a semifinal appearance before the season. Would have been happy to play in the championship series.
But we are the #1 team this year and huge favorites.
Not a big deal, Della
When we get to the SEC if someone hasn’t replaced Kentucky yet in basketball
Pretty sure you can put Texas up there with Alabama and Arkansas as the biggest threats
Actually will begin this season ranked higher than all of them
You said, Texas couldn't lose to a Mississippi team last year. So, how is that excuse applicable?
You obviously need some remedial studies in SEC CBB. bama was a 1 hit wonder last year. Maybe they can continue where they left off, but they lost a lot of Sr's, so will just have to see. Kentucky and Tennessee will have loaded classes, but it will just come down to team chemistry. I'm not sure what Arky has, but don't count out Pearl and Auburn either.
You way down there, Della
You wonder why people on here treat you foul.
Not going to do that, Della
But you say some outlandish stuff
Yeah I mean I think people get too hung up on the whole blue blood thing. Supposed to be those of nobility birth. UofL basically being a mid major most of its life doesn't support that.
I agree, plus as time goes on if we start promoting more and more programs as blue bloods if they have success, blue blood status loses some its luster anyways, imo. Its meant to be the elite of the elite.
a question for another day is can one lose blue blood status? How long would, for example, duke have to be medicore under JS (hypothetically) to lose that status. I think the other 4 are safe regardless sans maybe ucla. But hard to keep them out as long as they got the most nattys imo, even if they did win most of them in a short time period.
a question for another day is can one lose blue blood status? How long would, for example, duke have to be medicore under JS (hypothetically) to lose that status. I think the other 4 are safe regardless sans maybe ucla. But hard to keep them out as long as they got the most nattys imo, even if they did win most of them in a short time period.
Imo elite and blue blood are separate. Blue bloods are born in nobility, upper class from the beginning. Duke didn't win a title until 1991, IU had all 5 of theirs at that point. Kansas has 3 titles with long spans in between. UCLA can attribute most of their history to one man. IMO Kentucky and UNC are the only two you can't find a fault with. Again I still find it silly as to how much recent success is considered for a term meant to be about old money. How old is old money? How old is too old?
To each his own, I guess. To me, she's just a blabbering LuLu from the hills spouting nonsense.
Totally agree, thats why i said the elite of the elite. Above elite.
But while i cant even name the exact year, whats considered the “modern era” is pretty universal. And i just think its harder to win a title in a 64 team tourney than a 16 team tourney but again its not the programs that won the trophies fault that thats how it was back then. They played the games and won the games so again i can see it both ways.
regardless just my opinion, not a hill i wanna die on.
You have come into this thread first to post about me and then to take a swipe at Tennessee in a thread titled about blue bloods, so for me to take Umbridge with that and take a shot at Texas seems fitting to me.
Tennessee is ranked #12 in AP preseason and currently has #3 rated recruiting class in 247, so me claiming that the Vols should be pretty good if everything comes together isn't much of a stretch.
I agree with the notion to each their own. I read you as a rather dense UK fan that lashes out against phantom attacks that don't exist.
Pure BS. This thread is your modus operandi ...if you know what that means.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar JC. I thought it was an interesting topic considering all the change in College athletics. I just posed a question for discussion.
This could be classic, @della and the @SheriffBufordTJustice going at it...
EvilMonkeyInTheCloset
Well-Known Member
Bringing up a five day old post only to prove absolutely no point at all
EvilMonkeyInTheCloset
Well-Known Member
I'll admit two things.....Bringing up a five day old post only to prove absolutely no point at all
I didn't read through the whole thread. I stopped at your post because quoting your post and saying what I said, about encompasses the exact argument needed to be made......that the blue bloods had their time.
The rest was just extra stuff I didn't wanna bothered sifting through.
The other thing I'll admit is that I don't truthfully give a f*** how Kentucky does. Never have. Not in your title years, and certainly not when you fail to win despite Calipari's best "efforts" to buy a championship winning team with ALL the one-and-doners (yes, all of them).
If I'm gonna go out of my way to hate on a team and not want them to win a championship.....Kentucky is not even in the top 3 on my list.
You should take that as a compliment.
EvilMonkeyInTheCloset
Well-Known Member
Of what Iowa is gonna do to Kentucky once they're no longer blue blood status, perhaps........
The smoking smiley face is dead. Not sure what happened to thatOf what Iowa is gonna do to Kentucky once they're no longer blue blood status, perhaps........
