you are referring to was UCF and they were a Cinderella as opposed to having long term staying power. Moreover, in your reference to VT I do not recall the same things being said about VT, more than likely because at the time we had Michael Vick.

As I said, people can have differing criteria as to what constitutes a Top 15 program, however, your response has got me thinking that we are not even talking about the same thing. In my opinion, calling somebody a Top 15 program is a different connotation than calling somebody a blue blood. VT was a Top 15 program for a period but, they have never been a blue blood. Conversely, there was a time when Alabama was changing coaches like they changed underwear after the Bear left. They were not a Top 15 program during that time but, they were still a blue blood. It is possible to be one or both, however, what it takes to be either one has some decidedly different criteria, in my opinion. It is very hard to break in to the blue blood club, one could argue that Oregon may be the only recent current member, however, schools move in and out of the Top 15 club with much more regularity. The blue bloods have a variety of things including money, prestige, national following and some record of historical success. A Top 15 program has similar characteristics in much smaller measures and much shorter windows.

To address your TV point, when any sport focuses more on ratings than on field competition it is already losing because at the end of the day the game is the product. It is why the NFL with its parity is the 800 pound gorilla and the NBA and MLB are at best little brothers. No team or player is bigger than the sport in the NFL, even including TB12 and the Pats, and that is in stark contrast to both the NBA and MLB. College football used to be much closer to the NFL model but, with some changes that have already happened and more looming it is moving more toward the NBA/MLB models.