Do you consider Penn State a blue blood in college football?

[Midnighter]

JMO but a lot of that is going to depend on who you ask. If its the "younger" crowd I think that list changes but for most of us "boomers" its about right.

To clarify - and don't choke on the big grain of salt - but it's the overall scores as judged by ESPN journalists (about 12 of them - Andrea Adelson, Edward Aschoff, Brian Bennett, Heather Dinich, Travis Haney, Chris Low, Ivan Maisel, Ryan McGee, Ted Miller, Adam Rittenberg, Mark Schlabach and Mitch Sherman).

 

[bbrown]

To clarify - and don't choke on the big grain of salt - but it's the overall scores as judged by ESPN journalists (about 12 of them - Andrea Adelson, Edward Aschoff, Brian Bennett, Heather Dinich, Travis Haney, Chris Low, Ivan Maisel, Ryan McGee, Ted Miller, Adam Rittenberg, Mark Schlabach and Mitch Sherman).

nhhh I'll crush it and use it to rim my glass. It's Margarita time.

 

[Charlie1978]

Do you consider Penn State a blue blood in college football? Many people interpret the term blue blood differently. To me, it's belonging to the original aristocracy yet others would consider it as part of the current elite ruling class.

When I see Penn State left off blue blood lists I always counter with the following:

It's been written that Penn State football has two national championships and that's used against Penn State in consideration for blue blood status. The NCAA recognizes Penn State football as having FOUR national championships: 1911, 1912, 1982 and 1986 and don't get me started about 1968 and 1994. The NCAA's own website lists Penn State as co-national champions in 1911 and 1912. The link is below.

Since Penn State won not just one but TWO two national championships in the early days of college football that's certainly noteworthy for those claiming long-time early-on blue blood status because that is:
7 years before Notre Dame won their first one in 1919
13 years before Alabama won their first one in 1925
19 years before USC won their first one in 1931
30 years before Ohio State won their first one in 1942
38 years before Oklahoma won their first one in 1950
39 years before Tennessee won their first one in 1951
51 years before Texas won their first one in 1963
58 years before Nebraska won their first one in 1970.

For those that state a football program needs to be relevant in every decade:
Penn State football had multiple 11+ win seasons during the '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s, '00s and '10s, a feat Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska, Alabama, Texas, LSU, Georgia, USC, Notre Dame, Auburn, Clemson, FSU, Florida, Miami, Oklahoma, Tennessee nor Texas A&M can claim.

College football championship history

Here is a comprehensive list of every college football champion from 1869 to the present day.

www.ncaa.com

Yes of course. And we are defined as a blue blood in more ways than the average nit wit can understand. Most recently, we did NOT have a losing record in the aftermath of the sanctions. ALL other so-called blue bloods would have not been able to do that, they struggle with winning when they make a coaching change, although less so now as the haves are sorting from the have nots. We have never been welcome by the BIG Farce and in fact had to overcome hateful envy from the Bastards at O$U and Meatchicken.

Yes Alabama has surpassed us, and Georgia could as well over time with Kirby, but we do not owe anyone apologies for where we are or what we have accomplished.

 

[fairgambit]

No. Blue Bloods win championships and, despite the inclusion of those storied teams of 1911 and 1912, who beat the likes of Gettysburg, Villanova, and St. Bonaventure, we have not. We are Aqua Bloods.

 

[PSUSignore]

Yes. #8 in all time wins. Done and done.

Wins don't tell the whole story. An extreme example is Boise State, who is #6 in all time FBS win percentage. Nobody would consider them a blue blood.

 

[OptionBob]

No. Blue Bloods win championships and, despite those storied teams of 1911 and 1912, who beat the likes of Gettysburg, Villanova, and St. Bonaventure, we have not. We are Aqua Bloods.

OK, your definition about "winning championships" certainly makes valid sense. However, in the world of CFB, such monikers as "champions" come with huge asterisks.

Alabama is the only program, IMO, that can boast NC level teams over several decades.

But look at the other names mentioned so easily as "blue bloods" above:

1. Ohio State -- a title in 1968 and then nothing until that controversial win over Miami decades later. Then nothing again until 2014, when only a John O'Neill crew allowed the Buckeyes to beat Penn State (you might recall the dropped interception that led to 7 points and the +4-second FG that added 3 more). A functioning replay system would have kept OSU from a shot at the NC that season. Are the Buckeyes annual contenders now? Yes. But since WWII, about the same number of times as Penn State has contended.

2. Michigan -- a voted in 1/2 title in 1997 and then the cheating-assisted one last year. Otherwise, the Wolverines have been no more an annual powerhouse since WWII than someone like Tennessee or Florida.

3. Texas -- 1963 and 2005, with a few great seasons that suffered from losses in the Bowl game. Penn State easily trumps such a resume.

4. Notre Dame -- since Lou Holtz's 1988 title, what have the Irish done? Ara had ND a yearly powerhouse, but ND has had longer droughts between unbeaten seasons than Penn State has.

5. USC -- I'm okay with USC being up there near Alabama since the Trojans have been outstanding under 3 different coaching regimes.

6. Nebraska -- once Texas joined the Big 12 in 1996 and whipped the Huskers for the conference title, NU has had 1997 and then nothing. The Huskers feasted on the Big 8 by having only 1 yearly battle to worry about: OU. Their Bowl record during all that success was not quite so awe inspiring as their season records would indicate.

7. Oklahoma -- Again, success with 3 different coaches since WWII, like USC. I'd rank the Sooners right there the the Tide and the Trojans.

8. Georgia -- gee, 1980 and then zip. Yes the Bulldogs are the Big Dogs now, but that 30-year drought is at least worthy of pasuing their inclusion in a discussion of Blue Blood programs.

Now I come to my favorite team. the Penn State Nittany Lions.

The Lions have been undefeated and untied (a key limiting factor IMO) 5 times -- 1968, 69, 73, 85, and 94. Needing only favorable votes by regionally-influenced sports writers and coaches, Penn State could legitimately claim them all as National Championships. That alone puts the Lions abpve OSU, UM, Texas, and Nebraska.

Add the 1982 season when PSU had a chance to earn a title on the field, and thw Lions could claim 6 NCs.

[NOTE: For this debate, I use the period since WWII since it encompasses my lifetime and includes seasons I have at least had a reasonable chance to follow CFB.]

 

[Midnighter]

Wins don't tell the whole story. An extreme example is Boise State, who is #6 in all time FBS win percentage. Nobody would consider them a blue blood.

I don't disagree, but it's a big reason why Michigan is so well regarded. Yale and Harvard have a lot of wins too.

And I see now you said 'win percentage' - I'm talking all time program wins (like 800+ of them).

 

[bbrown]

Wins don't tell the whole story. An extreme example is Boise State, who is #6 in all time FBS win percentage. Nobody would consider them a blue blood.

 

[Blair10]

Do you consider Penn State a blue blood in college football? Many people interpret the term blue blood differently. To me, it's belonging to the original aristocracy yet others would consider it as part of the current elite ruling class.

When I see Penn State left off blue blood lists I always counter with the following:

It's been written that Penn State football has two national championships and that's used against Penn State in consideration for blue blood status. The NCAA recognizes Penn State football as having FOUR national championships: 1911, 1912, 1982 and 1986 and don't get me started about 1968 and 1994. The NCAA's own website lists Penn State as co-national champions in 1911 and 1912. The link is below.

Since Penn State won not just one but TWO two national championships in the early days of college football that's certainly noteworthy for those claiming long-time early-on blue blood status because that is:
7 years before Notre Dame won their first one in 1919
13 years before Alabama won their first one in 1925
19 years before USC won their first one in 1931
30 years before Ohio State won their first one in 1942
38 years before Oklahoma won their first one in 1950
39 years before Tennessee won their first one in 1951
51 years before Texas won their first one in 1963
58 years before Nebraska won their first one in 1970.

For those that state a football program needs to be relevant in every decade:
Penn State football had multiple 11+ win seasons during the '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s, '00s and '10s, a feat Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska, Alabama, Texas, LSU, Georgia, USC, Notre Dame, Auburn, Clemson, FSU, Florida, Miami, Oklahoma, Tennessee nor Texas A&M can claim.

College football championship history

Here is a comprehensive list of every college football champion from 1869 to the present day.

www.ncaa.com

Yes, Penn State is definitely a blue blood program.

 

[MrTailgate]

By any metric, we suck. That I’m sure of.

 

[psuro]

Wins don't tell the whole story. An extreme example is Boise State, who is #6 in all time FBS win percentage. Nobody would consider them a blue blood.

But they have a blue field. that's close.

 

[BobPSU92]

Maybe we should ask Frank Reagan.

 

[psuro]

Maybe we should ask Frank Reagan.

View attachment 575482

my moustache hero.

 

[LionsAndBears]

Yes, PSU is a Blue Blood. Just because we haven't been National Champions recently doesn't take away from our longstanding reputation in college football. We are Top 10 all-time and we're one of a fraction of programs that have and can win a national championship.

 

[pap]

Yes.

Nice post

 

[Nits1989]

Yes. Blue blood is more of a historical look at a program, big picture. Penn State qualifies.

 

[PSUSignore]

I don't disagree, but it's a big reason why Michigan is so well regarded. Yale and Harvard have a lot of wins too.

And I see now you said 'win percentage' - I'm talking all time program wins (like 800+ of them).

If Boise St had 800 wins would it make a difference? Nope, not one bit. Blue blood status is an accumulation of many factors. Number of wins in a vacuum without consideration of strength of opponents, rankings, titles, Heismans, bowls, etc. doesn't carry enough weight.

Online I often see references to "the chart" to identify the blue bloods because there's a clear gap after the top 8, and those 8 programs meet many criteria that you'd expect from top performing programs over many years. PSU is usually considered the first team out. Nebraska is still in, but has been dropping towards the bottom left in this chart rapidly over the last 20 years.

AP polls chart

 

[CaseStudy]

No, and it saddens me to know that we are still overcoming the destructive final years under Paterno. I moved to Seattle in 1998 and lived in the PNW until 2022. During that time Oregon was clearly a better program. Why? That can't be explained by local HS football talent. It's pretty clear that Paterno had a negative program influence long before the 'ick' of the Sandusky debacle (btw, that's still a thing if you follow recruiting). Now we have the program in the hands of a salesman first, coach second type guy that unfortunately is not particularly good at coaching or scheming. Why are we accepting this? We have had the largest alumni association the country for years. Spend what it takes to bring in a killer to head the program and make it work for you like Cael Sanderson.

 

[PSU1969A]

It depends upon your definition of "blue blood".

 

[LafayetteBear]

Do you consider Penn State a blue blood in college football? Many people interpret the term blue blood differently. To me, it's belonging to the original aristocracy yet others would consider it as part of the current elite ruling class.

When I see Penn State left off blue blood lists I always counter with the following:

It's been written that Penn State football has two national championships and that's used against Penn State in consideration for blue blood status. The NCAA recognizes Penn State football as having FOUR national championships: 1911, 1912, 1982 and 1986 and don't get me started about 1968 and 1994. The NCAA's own website lists Penn State as co-national champions in 1911 and 1912. The link is below.

Since Penn State won not just one but TWO two national championships in the early days of college football that's certainly noteworthy for those claiming long-time early-on blue blood status because that is:

Well, if it's meaningful to have won NCAA football championships way back in the day when the automobile was still a relatively new invention, then my sturdy Golden Bears have the crap beat out of the Nittany Lions. Cal head coach Andy Smith's "Thunder Chicken" teams won the Natty in 1920, 1921, 1922, and 1923. (The Roaring Twenties were heady days for the sturdy Golden Bears.) They won another Natty in 1937.

But things went downhill after 1937, and it has been a lengthy drought, to say the least. I remember that, as a Cal undergraduate in the late 70's, the Cal Athletic Dept. would roll out members of the Thunder Chicken teams during half time of some home games to offer them a round of applause and remind everyone that Cal used to be relevant in college football. They were OLD. And that was almost fifty years ago. It made me nauseous even then.

My take on it is "What have you done for me lately?" PSU has Natty's in 1982 and 1986, and arguably won the Natty in 1968 and 1994. Those are relatively recent Nattys. Moreover, the team has been consistently ranked in the Top 10 during most of the last few decades. That reeks of CFB blueblood to me.

 

[eilion]

Yes. Blueblood is a reflection of the past. We were one of the dominant programs in the 80s when TV and media was just taking off. PSU milked Joe and where he brought the program for all it was worth.