All Hokie, All the Time. Period. Presented by First Bank & Trust Company

HokieAl
Joined: 10/07/1999
Posts: 19,964
Likes: 12,677
Founder

That actually shows part of the problem. It starts at 1936

Even going back 50 years to 1975 is a bit much. But anything before that is just noise. That is what always throws these discussions off, people have different scales of time when they look at college football. For me, who cares what people won in the 1940's. The sport is completely different now. If we just look at the most recent 50 years, what is that list? Because that is all that is actually relevant to modern college football. Going back to before television existed is just more of the endless need to debate things and generate clicks (not targeted at you, just the media in general). ** Edited by HokieAl at 2/4/2025, 2:58:22 PM
Posted: 02/04/2025 at 02:58 PM ET
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)

Thread Replies (10)

Full Thread →
There are some interesting viewpoints on what makes
Big12 guy 02/04/25 01:47 PM ET
That actually shows part of the problem. It starts at 1936
HokieAl 02/04/25 02:58 PM ET
The average American age is 38.5 years
obguthr 02/05/25 07:39 AM ET
Within 5 years (or sooner) anything before NIL is just noise...**
RTFC 02/04/25 11:32 PM ET
History is everything
SpeakToDamien 02/04/25 09:54 PM ET
The lists are practically the same. If you go back to the original
reestuart 02/04/25 07:06 PM ET
"Blue blood" can be just as much a pejorative as a compliment.
Baltimore_Hokie 02/04/25 05:19 PM ET
I do think enough people care if a program is tagged with blue blood status
VTHokie2000 02/06/25 09:59 AM ET
The beginning of the Super Bowl Era is probably a good place to start.
Maroon Baboon 02/04/25 04:33 PM ET
The first televised college football game was
Big12 guy 02/04/25 04:52 PM ET
Haha, some are that old, some
Big12 guy 02/04/25 03:28 PM ET