[If you just want to look at the chart, it's down in the comments]
The "Blue Bloods Chart" is used in various college sports to determine who the sport's blue bloods are. What a blue blood is isn't officially defined, but it's usually teams who've been consistently among the best in a sport over a long period, while also having some championship level success. A blue bloods chart has a program's total weeks ranked in the top 25 on the X axis, and total weeks ranked in the top 5 on the Y axis.
The FBS version of this chart is found here. The FBS blue bloods are identified as Alabama, Michigan, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas, and USC (though Nebraska has been seriously slipping the last 15 years).
I've created a spreadsheet which has every FCS media poll going back to the beginning of the subdivision in 1978, which has allowed me to find the data needed to create a similar chart. The catch is that because many FCS teams have either left the subdivision, or have joined the subdivision at some point over the years, not every program has the same number of seasons in the FCS. For that reason, merely charting total weeks ranked can misrepresent the quality of a program.
So the chart that I've created and posted in the comments instead uses a program's % of weeks in the 25 and % of weeks in the top 5. I think this rate based method is a better representation of who the best programs have been. Because it's a rate stat, it needs a minimum sample size, which I've set at 150 weeks of FCS competition (around 12 seasons). That means many newer programs are not present here.
To answer the question of who the FCS blue bloods are, it's a bit complicated. The fact is, North Dakota State has been so so dominant on a level matched by no one else that putting them in a category with the other blue bloods isn't really fair. They should really be called a purple blood, or something. But for the purposes of this post, we'll throw them in with the others. When you look at the chart, the other top programs seperate themselves from the rest of the subdivision, but while Nevada is in that blue blood area of the chart, I would argue that they are not a blue blood because they never won a championship. The other schools in that part of the chart all have at least two championships.
So with all that in mind, the FCS blue bloods based on the chart are App State, Georgia Southern, Marshall, Montana, North Dakota State, and South Dakota State.
Obviously this is not the objective answer (there isn't one) but it is a fun discussion to have.
To me, the most obvious schools not present are James Madison, who were pretty dominant for a period and won two championships, and Youngstown State, who won 4 championships in the 90s. You could certainly argue in favor of them being blue bloods as well. I'd argue against JMU because being a blue blood is usually defined by relatively sustained excellence, but JMU spent their first ~20-25 years in the FCS being a peripheral power at best. I'd argue against Youngstown State because their peak was relatively short, and they've been good but not great throughout most of their history.
Thanks for sticking with me and reading- this was a fun project that took a while. Once again, the chart(s) and data are posted in the comments.
The bottom left section of the graph had too many teams to be visable, so I split it off into a smaller, zoomed in chart. The teams from 0%-3% are still pretty tough to make out, but that's almost unavoidable.
Also just adds more similarities to WIU and EIU. Similar-sized universities in similar-sized towns. Exact same number of weeks on the top 25 in the exact same timeframe.
Do you know where the first Jimmy John's shop was? Essentially across the street from EIU. Do you know where the second Jimmy John's shop was? Three blocks from WIU.
NIU went DI independent for a while and joined the DI MAC in '73. Left for a bit (independent, then Big West), but came back, then recently jumped to the Mountain West.
EIU and WIU went DII independent and then joined (along with Akron, UNI, Northern Michigan, YSU, and Wayne State) the DII Mid-Continent Athletic Association (a DII football-only conference that eventually moved to I-AA in 1981, added other sports in 82, dropped football in 84, became the Mid-Con Conference in 89, then eventually the Summit League in '07).
ISU and SIU migrated over to the DI MVC when they still had football. That league dropped football in '85, and ISU and SIU joined WIU and EIU (along with UNI and Missouri State... then SW MO State), forming the Gateway Conference, which was I-AA at the time.
I don't have enrollment numbers from back in the 70s/80s, but I know that as of 2004, NIU had about 5k more students than ISU did. With their proximity to Chicago, it probably seemed like NIU would end up being the other "big" state school behind U of I. Since the early '00s though, the enrollment at the directionals has declined significantly while ISU's has held very steady (between 20k and 22k for the last 25 years). NIU now has 5k fewer students than ISU.
TLDR - NIU was larger than everyone else in the 70s and 80s, joined a I-A conference then, and stayed at that level. Everyone else joined a I-AA conference in the early 80s and stayed at that level, even though ISU is now larger.
The inspiration for Jimmy John's was a sandwich shop in Carbondale named Booby's. It was closed for a number of years but was reopened a couple of years ago.
They became playoff eligible in 2008, had a mid season then and one truly bad season in '09 (their third losing season since 1964), made the playoffs in 2010, and then started their dynasty in 2011 winning 10 of the next 14 championships before moving to FBS
Kinda makes me sad that 6 of the top 10 are in FBS now. The 2000's when App State, GA Southern, JMU, Delaware and the Griz were all really good. It was really the golden age for FCS football before NDSU came and ruined it.
Deleted your comment u/Trojann2 but i wrote it out so now you gotta read it
yeah ruined all the fun parity we used to have. for 20 years we had blueblood programs battling it out in the playoffs every season. Some great matchups and fun games especially in the Semifinals. Even when App State took 3 in a row it was never a lock that they were going to win it. Then the evil empire took over and it became which team had the honor of losing to NDSU that season from 2010 on. If you got put into NDSU's side of the bracket and you're just like welp fun season everybody see you next year.
I will say it's been really fun to be able to root for NDSU again now that you're up in FBS.
What's really insane is that NDSU was only in FCS for something like 6 years before they became the dominant program.
And they look like they are serious contenders for the MW title this year already. It would be absolutely bonkers if they ended up going undefeated and making the playoff.
Their football history is wild. They've essentially always been good. Their all time winning pct is .673, they have 18 total national championships (3 small college, 5 D2, 10 FCS), and 38 conference championships. They also have only had 3 losing seasons since 1964, which is absolutely insane.
For comparison, Ohio State has a win pct of .736, 16 national titles (only 9 are claimed), and 41 conference titles. They also have only had 3 losing seasons since 1964.
In collge sports the term 'Blue Blood" is something that takes many decades. Nebraska is a blue blood. Oregon is not. Some did this analysis a month ago under the [correct] interpretation of the Blue Blood term. Even NDSU would not be considered a Blue Blood under the definition.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/s/Znx1WfVGP4
Personally, I like your definition better as a way to define who the best programs are. There has been so much turnover in FCS football that the FBS definition of Blue Blood is not he best way to do it.
Being a blue blood is something that is gained over long periods, no doubt- that's why JMU and Youngstown State are more questionable as FCS blue bloods. But I think if you want to include the FCS in the discussion, you have to tweak your definition of "long periods," because even beyond the fact that many teams have moved up more recently, the subdivision has only existed since 1978, while the FBS blue bloods chart goes back to 1936.
But even if you go based on the raw number of weeks, I still think NDSU is a blue blood even with so many fewer years of compeition.
NDSU is the dot at ~270, ~215. Even with only 22 seasons in the subdivision they still have the most weeks spent in the top five of anyone. I don't see how you can possibly argue against their inclusion even under the traditional definition. Otherwise, Montana would be the only blue blood, which I don't see as an accurate representation of FCS history.
Also the FBS blue bloods chart, that's the only place those teams have been. They've never had anywhere else to go. Most of the power FCS programs have moved up. The only real "blue blood" FCS team that's been around the entire FCS era is Montana
You're right, but I just don't think the FBS definition of blue blood works for FCS. Teams that were dominant have pretty much always moved up after a relatively short time period. It is weird to me to see SDSU as a blue blood in this definition. It wasn't that long ago that I was in school and we were a decent to pretty good team, but couldn't get over the NDSU hump in the playoffs.
Regardless of what the charts metrics are, I still consider Montana St a blue blood. You could argue UNI as well. I think they’re still top 5 in playoff wins all time, although that has resulted in 0 playoff wins and they have been slipping recently
Montana State has only been nationally relevant since Vigen took over 6 years ago. They missed the playoffs for 18 straight years following the one season they made the playoffs and won the title in 1984. They didn't even make it to the semi's after that until 2019. They're an elite team this decade unquestionably. But the history is simply not there. That's like arguing that Indiana is an FBS Blue Blood.
Indiana is a dreadfully bad comparison. We're a lot closer to Oregon. One or two random moments of "oh they're winning" up until about 2010 when things start to shift. Oregon's early 2010s stretch of being good is '09-'14 where as ours is really just '10-'12 (with one bad playoff loss and two years running into an SHSU buzzsaw that was just better than us) but the short bad period after and the rise back up in '18 and '19 aligns really well.
Now I wouldn't call Oregon a blue blood either really. I don't think we are either yet. I think the whole concept is sorta too historically focused to be relevant. But let's not pretend that MSU had one incredible season and have been horrific otherwise for the last 15 years like Indiana has.
Fair enough. I was more saying that just because you're at the top now, similar to Indiana, doesn't mean you get the blue blood moniker. And i actually considered using Oregon but Oregon never actually won anything.
That's a good comp actually because Clemson did spend a while knocking on the door and they lost a natty before they finally got over the hump with Dabo and Watson. But for the 20 years or so before that they were just a middle of the pack team living in the shadow of FSU. And they never really had enough sustained success in their history to be considered a Blue Blood.
Problem is early FBS ratings are turrible. FCS ratings are a joke. For most the season. Might as well ask "what schools have I heard of?" for half of each season. Ranking every week of every season as if they're equal doesn't compute.
30
u/Adamscottd South Dakota State • Minnesota 23d ago