The top ten programs of the NCAA Tournament Era | The Boneyard

The top ten programs of the NCAA Tournament Era

Status
Not open for further replies.

alexrgct

RIP, Alex
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
10,094
Reaction Score
15,650
The NCAA Tournament era (NCAATE) is a readily definable era in WCBB. It began in 1982, concurrent with the AIAW tournament drawing to a close. So, from 1982 through 2015, which programs have accomplished the most?

I went ahead and tabulated numbers based on a series of threads I started in 2012 and have continued every year after the conclusion of each NCAA tournament. The scoring methodology rewards regular season success (the proxy for which being tournament seeding), as well as tournament success. The system awards five points for a #4 seed, 10 for a #3, 20 for a #2, and 30 for a #1. It also awards five points for making the Sweet 16, 15 for the Elite Eight, 30 for the national semis, 40 for being national runner-up, and 70 for a national championship.

So from Numbers 10 to 1, here are the top programs of the NCAATE:

#10: Baylor (455 total points)

Baylor is not a program steeped in tradition, but it has reaped the benefits of one fantastic coach for 15 years. The 2000s were an up-and-down decade that included a surprising national championship in 2005. Kim Mulkey then successfully recruited Brittney Griner and Odyssey Sims in 2009 and 2010, and the rest has been history. The outcome has been another national championship in 2012, with more high seeds and points-earning NCAA tournament finishes. Baylor is only going to continue movin' on up.

#9 University of North Carolina (475 points)

Sylvia Hatchell has enjoyed three decades of earning points. The thrilling national championship in 1994 has been the highlight, but UNC had a very successful decade in the 2000s. Meanwhile, the 2010s have been somewhat successful, with a trip to the Elite Eight and the Sweet 16, along with some decent tournament seeds. Hatchell's health and the loss of Diamond Deshields, as well as the ascent of South Carolina to UNC's direct detriment, may hurt the Tar Heels' ranking in the future.

#8 Maryland (505 points)

Maryland has had three separate decades with point-scoring seasons, including, of course, the decade featuring the 2006 national championship. Meanwhile, the 2010s have been very solid, including consecutive trips to the national semis. Finally, Maryland was very sound in the 1980s as well. The 1990s were pretty much a lost decade for the Terps, but Brenda Frese certainly brought UMD to national prominence.

#7 Notre Dame (530 points)

The Irish became a blip on the RADAR in 1997, when they shockingly made the national semis as a #6 seed. Four years later, Notre Dame was the national champion. For 10 years, Muffet didn't have much in the way of NCAA tournament success until 2011, and since then, the Irish have been national runners-up four times. ND has been the clear #2 program of the 2010s and may just surge ahead given how successfully McGraw has been recruiting.

#6 Georgia (630 points)

Good ol' Andy Landers may never have won a national championship, but he came damn close. He also coached Georgia to top-15 program ratings in the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s, a rare feat indeed. In the 2010s, Georgia hasn't done much, but the Bulldogs did make the Elite Eight in 2013. No one knows what future is in store for Georgia going forward, but the past is rich in tradition (even if it never included the Grand Prize of any season).

#5 Duke (660 points)

Gail Goestenkors pretty much built Duke from scratch in the early 1990s. The Devils made their presence known in 1998 when they made the regional finals. A year later, they were national runners-up, and Duke has been very, very successful ever since. Duke was the clear #3 program of the 2000s and is currently the #6 program of the 2010s. As long as they get top-four seeds and make the regional semis or better, Duke will continue to accumulate points. No national championship, but being a top-five program is nothing to sneeze at.

#4 Louisiana Tech (855 points)

La Tech is one of the most storied programs in WCBB starting at the tail end of the AIAW era. Even though the Techsters get no points for the penultimate AIAW championship in 1981, their stunning success gave them the momentum to win the inaugural NCAA tournament championship in 1982. The Lady Techsters were a serious powerhouse for the remainder of the 1980s, the clear #1 program of that decade. After winning the 1988 national championship, La Tech remained in contention throughout the 1990s and were a top five program of that decade. It's been slow going ever since, but you can't take away the points La Tech has already earned. Will they ever return to national prominence? To be continued...

#3 Stanford ( 1,030 points)

Tara's Cardinal have done nothing but rack up points since making the regional semis and finals in the late 1980s and winning national championships in 1990 and 1992. The Cardinal were the clear #2 program of the 1990s, the #6 program of the 2000s, and the #3 program thus far of the 2010s. From 2008 through 2014, The Cardinal were very high seeds (usually #1), made at least the national semis for five straight seasons, and were national runners-up twice. It doesn't look like Stanford will move up in the rankings, but the Cardinal certainly aren't in any position to move down.

#2 UConn (1,590 points)

Look, you know UConn. You know Geno. You know 10 national championships and six more trips to the national semis. You know about top-two seeds. You know about the surprise run to the national semis in 1991, and all the success that followed. You know Kerry Bascom, and you know Kaleena Mosqueda-Lewis. If you don't, you'll see their names on the Huskies of Honor wall sometime. The Huskies were the #3 program of the 1990s, the #1 program of the 2000s, and are in the lead as the #1 program of the 2010s. The only thing keeping them from being the #1 program of the entire NCAATE is a complete lack of point-scoring seasons in the 1980s. I personally wouldn't trade UConn's 10 NCs for any other program's lesser number, but nevertheless, it's clear the Huskies are squarely behind...

...#1 Tennessee (1,910 points)

Hey, no UConn fan wants to give the LVs their due, but it is what it is (as we say in the business world in lieu of something meaningful). Pat Summitt coached her kids to the #2 program of the 1980s, the clear #1 program of the 1990s, and the #2 program of the 2000s. Eight national championships, five national runners-up finishes, and five more trips to the national semis- I mean, that's a lot of points! Add in the high seeds, and there you have it. The other thing: the LVs aren't done. Holly and Pat have made the LVs the #5 program of the 2010s thus far and will finish as a top-five program of the decade as long as Tennessee continues to earn top-two seeds and flirt with winning its regional bracket. No team has come close to a top-five program for four decades in a row, hence the #1 spot here. A 320 point lead over #2 UConn is surmountable, but the Huskies' seasons with Katie Lou Samuelson (and beyond) will have to mimic their seasons with Breanna Stewart before #1 is in any danger.

Well, thanks for reading. Any thoughts?
 

alexrgct

RIP, Alex
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
10,094
Reaction Score
15,650
One last note: Purdue was tied with Baylor in points, so I gave Baylor the tiebreaker on the strength of two national championships to Purdue's sole championship.
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2011
Messages
2,096
Reaction Score
5,187
I do not care what your numbers show... just proves data can be twisted to show whatever you want.... UCONN is not behind Tennessee. No way. Sorry... just not able to agree with that no matter how you did you math. 10 National Titles. 8 Straight Final Fours, before that 5 straight Final Fours. 5 Undefeated teams. (which if I am not mistaken was a 157-0 record over those five seasons)... Three titles with only 1 loss.... (oo, 03, 15) Thus in 8 of their national title wins they had a total of 3 losses. Not one, but two THREE-Peats, a Two Peat, and two single titles.

UCONN is the best program. No matter how we twist other data. And to think... all this was accomplished in 20 years compared to Tennessee's 33 years.
 

KnightBridgeAZ

Grand Canyon Knight
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
5,267
Reaction Score
8,837
I do not care what your numbers show... just proves data can be twisted to show whatever you want.... UCONN is not behind Tennessee. No way. Sorry... just not able to agree with that no matter how you did you math. 10 National Titles. 8 Straight Final Fours, before that 5 straight Final Fours. 5 Undefeated teams. (which if I am not mistaken was a 157-0 record over those five seasons)... Three titles with only 1 loss.... (oo, 03, 15) Thus in 8 of their national title wins they had a total of 3 losses. Not one, but two THREE-Peats, a Two Peat, and two single titles.

UCONN is the best program. No matter how we twist other data. And to think... all this was accomplished in 20 years compared to Tennessee's 33 years.
His basic premise is not to find the "best" program, but to identify the best results over a 34 season period. UConn would probably pass Tennessee at some point if you only go back 20 or 25 years or whatever it is. The list for the last 20 years would look much differently, as Georgia for instance would fade, Maryland would not be in the same position, etc. etc. As he indicates, UConn suffers over the entire period because they were not on the map back in the '80s. It is a valid analysis.

Now, as a separate point, yes, UConn has had much more success than Tennessee had in any equivalent period, I am sure. And, the longer the period becomes, going forward, the less the discrepancy in period of success will matter and presuming similar tracks to now UConn will eventually overtake Tennessee.

It is sort of like, Pat Summitt has more wins than Geno. Well, it took her longer to get to each milestone and she coached a lot longer, so, well - but that doesn't mean we can say that because he has done it better, Geno has more wins. It doesn't work like that.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2013
Messages
728
Reaction Score
986
This system is flawed at best. One gets 20 for being #2, gets awarded of only 15 for making it to elite 8. Basically one gets awarded more for perception of the selection committee than actually how the team plays in the tournament. Same goes for #3. While #1/4 , perception gets awarded as much as the actual playing. For example, Stanford is awarded as many points the year when they lost to Harvard as another lower team that actually made it to final4.(maybe airflow less as the team that actually made it in that regional maybe earned 5 point from seeding)
Maybe you should reverse this system. Give 5 points for being #1-4 seeds but actually award more points for playing the games! wta does not give ranking points from seeding, one actually needs to win to get points. If you lose out in the first round, you only gets 1 ranking point regardless of your ranking.
 

alexrgct

RIP, Alex
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
10,094
Reaction Score
15,650
01Neaggrad02 said:
I do not care what your numbers show... just proves data can be twisted to show whatever you want.... UCONN is not behind Tennessee. No way. Sorry... just not able to agree with that no matter how you did you math. 10 National Titles. 8 Straight Final Fours, before that 5 straight Final Fours. 5 Undefeated teams. (which if I am not mistaken was a 157-0 record over those five seasons)... Three titles with only 1 loss.... (oo, 03, 15) Thus in 8 of their national title wins they had a total of 3 losses. Not one, but two THREE-Peats, a Two Peat, and two single titles. UCONN is the best program. No matter how we twist other data. And to think... all this was accomplished in 20 years compared to Tennessee's 33 years.
You come across as deluded and creepy in your hatred of the Lady Vols. Look, Tennessee was contending for and winning national championships from the very beginning of the NCAATE and has been in contention ever since. Uconn has not. Meanwhile, Tennessee was well ahead of UConn in the 90s. Uconn has leapt ahead in the 2000s and 2010s, and by 2019, it'll be close. But Tennessee will be somewhat ahead still.

Accusing me of twisting data is patently stupid. Sorry- it's just an asinine response to my giving credit to a program that's been in the top five for four consecutive decades.
 

alexrgct

RIP, Alex
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
10,094
Reaction Score
15,650
hussybulldog said:
This system is flawed at best. One gets 20 for being #2, gets awarded of only 15 for making it to elite 8. Basically one gets awarded more for perception of the selection committee than actually how the team plays in the tournament. Same goes for #3. While #1/4 , perception gets awarded as much as the actual playing. For example, Stanford is awarded as many points the year when they lost to Harvard as another lower team that actually made it to final4.(maybe airflow less as the team that actually made it in that regional maybe earned 5 point from seeding) Maybe you should reverse this system. Give 5 points for being #1-4 seeds but actually award more points for playing the games! wta does not give ranking points from seeding, one actually needs to win to get points. If you lose out in the first round, you only gets 1 ranking point regardless of your ranking.
Name one system that's a better proxy for awarding a regular season than seeding in the tourney. Teams get high seeds for compelling records and SOS. It's how the overwhelming majority of the wcbb season is played. A disappointing result in the tourney doesn't erase everything the team in question had accomplished.
 
Joined
Mar 24, 2015
Messages
173
Reaction Score
336
Pretty good system, good balance of regular season and tournament. Thanks for sharing the results!
 
Joined
Mar 24, 2015
Messages
173
Reaction Score
336
March Madness has skewed the regular season a bit for MCBB and WCBB.

To put it in UConn terms, how do we evaluate the 1996-1997 season? An utter failure because UConn failed to win the NC? They went undefeated, undefeated in Big East, won Big East tournament, and beat the eventual NC Tennessee during the regular season (they also beat a ranked Western Kentucky, Georgia, Kansas, and Notre Dame (twice)).

Or what about Notre Dame in 2013-2014?

I don't know about fans, but I think Geno and Muffet would consider those really successful seasons (for Geno, more so when it happened, as they hadn't won 10 NCs then and it wasn't expected every year).
 

UcMiami

How it is
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
14,101
Reaction Score
46,584
What it comes down to is you can massage numbers any way you want, but if you are looking at the full history of the NCAA's the approximately 1/3 of that period where Uconn was nonexistent by any measure is a currently insurmountable 'penalty' when comparing to a team that was very good for the whole time period. The only way to come to a different result would be to so overweight NCs as to make the rest of the 'quality' numbers meaningless - in which case, there is no need for analysis - you just count NCs.
The fact is TN has played in more NC games, more final four games, more elite eight games, etc. They just have not won more NC games.

Shorten the time frame to 1990 forward and you will get a different result, but then you will not be analyzing 'the NCAA period' but an arbitrary time frame based on 'Uconn becoming relevant'.
 

JS

Moderator
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
2,001
Reaction Score
9,695
You come across as deluded and creepy in your hatred of the Lady Vols. . . . Accusing me of twisting data is patently stupid. Sorry- it's just an asinine response
Please calm down, Alex. You deserve credit and are getting it.

You must've expected some blowback, if not Neag's typically emotional tone. ("Hatred of the LV's?" I don't know. Extreme pride in UConn certainly, complete with blinders to the definition of topic.)

Of the several thousand views your thread will get, it will anger a few people. What Neag is saying, if you discard the arguably ad hominem accusations of twisting, is that everything depends on the time frame and criteria selected.

Some UConn fans would rather ask:

What's the best program now?
What's the best program over the past five years? Ten? Fifteen? Twenty?
Who's the best coach? Now? On his/her career?
Why are the 1980's relevant, other than to historians of the game? Was the competitive landscape then comparable to more recent times?

All fair questions that are relevant to where things stand and have stood for a long time. But not the question your study asks and answers, with quite interesting results and commentary for those who can view them dispassionately.

Please continue your outstanding work and try to ignore partisan responses (if any further appear) that are not germane.
 
Joined
Apr 10, 2015
Messages
11,335
Reaction Score
25,045
The NCAA Tournament era (NCAATE) is a readily definable era in WCBB. It began in 1982, concurrent with the AIAW tournament drawing to a close. So, from 1982 through 2015, which programs have accomplished the most?

I went ahead and tabulated numbers based on a series of threads I started in 2012 and have continued every year after the conclusion of each NCAA tournament. The scoring methodology rewards regular season success (the proxy for which being tournament seeding), as well as tournament success. The system awards five points for a #4 seed, 10 for a #3, 20 for a #2, and 30 for a #1. It also awards five points for making the Sweet 16, 15 for the Elite Eight, 30 for the national semis, 40 for being national runner-up, and 70 for a national championship.

So from Numbers 10 to 1, here are the top programs of the NCAATE:

#10: Baylor (455 total points)

Baylor is not a program steeped in tradition, but it has reaped the benefits of one fantastic coach for 15 years. The 2000s were an up-and-down decade that included a surprising national championship in 2005. Kim Mulkey then successfully recruited Brittney Griner and Odyssey Sims in 2009 and 2010, and the rest has been history. The outcome has been another national championship in 2012, with more high seeds and points-earning NCAA tournament finishes. Baylor is only going to continue movin' on up.

#9 University of North Carolina (475 points)

Sylvia Hatchell has enjoyed three decades of earning points. The thrilling national championship in 1994 has been the highlight, but UNC had a very successful decade in the 2000s. Meanwhile, the 2010s have been somewhat successful, with a trip to the Elite Eight and the Sweet 16, along with some decent tournament seeds. Hatchell's health and the loss of Diamond Deshields, as well as the ascent of South Carolina to UNC's direct detriment, may hurt the Tar Heels' ranking in the future.

#8 Maryland (505 points)

Maryland has had three separate decades with point-scoring seasons, including, of course, the decade featuring the 2006 national championship. Meanwhile, the 2010s have been very solid, including consecutive trips to the national semis. Finally, Maryland was very sound in the 1980s as well. The 1990s were pretty much a lost decade for the Terps, but Brenda Frese certainly brought UMD to national prominence.

#7 Notre Dame (530 points)

The Irish became a blip on the RADAR in 1997, when they shockingly made the national semis as a #6 seed. Four years later, Notre Dame was the national champion. For 10 years, Muffet didn't have much in the way of NCAA tournament success until 2011, and since then, the Irish have been national runners-up four times. ND has been the clear #2 program of the 2010s and may just surge ahead given how successfully McGraw has been recruiting.

#6 Georgia (630 points)

Good ol' Andy Landers may never have won a national championship, but he came damn close. He also coached Georgia to top-15 program ratings in the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s, a rare feat indeed. In the 2010s, Georgia hasn't done much, but the Bulldogs did make the Elite Eight in 2013. No one knows what future is in store for Georgia going forward, but the past is rich in tradition (even if it never included the Grand Prize of any season).

#5 Duke (660 points)

Gail Goestenkors pretty much built Duke from scratch in the early 1990s. The Devils made their presence known in 1998 when they made the regional finals. A year later, they were national runners-up, and Duke has been very, very successful ever since. Duke was the clear #3 program of the 2000s and is currently the #6 program of the 2010s. As long as they get top-four seeds and make the regional semis or better, Duke will continue to accumulate points. No national championship, but being a top-five program is nothing to sneeze at.

#4 Louisiana Tech (855 points)

La Tech is one of the most storied programs in WCBB starting at the tail end of the AIAW era. Even though the Techsters get no points for the penultimate AIAW championship in 1981, their stunning success gave them the momentum to win the inaugural NCAA tournament championship in 1982. The Lady Techsters were a serious powerhouse for the remainder of the 1980s, the clear #1 program of that decade. After winning the 1988 national championship, La Tech remained in contention throughout the 1990s and were a top five program of that decade. It's been slow going ever since, but you can't take away the points La Tech has already earned. Will they ever return to national prominence? To be continued...

#3 Stanford ( 1,030 points)

Tara's Cardinal have done nothing but rack up points since making the regional semis and finals in the late 1980s and winning national championships in 1990 and 1992. The Cardinal were the clear #2 program of the 1990s, the #6 program of the 2000s, and the #3 program thus far of the 2010s. From 2008 through 2014, The Cardinal were very high seeds (usually #1), made at least the national semis for five straight seasons, and were national runners-up twice. It doesn't look like Stanford will move up in the rankings, but the Cardinal certainly aren't in any position to move down.

#2 UConn (1,590 points)

Look, you know UConn. You know Geno. You know 10 national championships and six more trips to the national semis. You know about top-two seeds. You know about the surprise run to the national semis in 1991, and all the success that followed. You know Kerry Bascom, and you know Kaleena Mosqueda-Lewis. If you don't, you'll see their names on the Huskies of Honor wall sometime. The Huskies were the #3 program of the 1990s, the #1 program of the 2000s, and are in the lead as the #1 program of the 2010s. The only thing keeping them from being the #1 program of the entire NCAATE is a complete lack of point-scoring seasons in the 1980s. I personally wouldn't trade UConn's 10 NCs for any other program's lesser number, but nevertheless, it's clear the Huskies are squarely behind...

...#1 Tennessee (1,910 points)

Hey, no UConn fan wants to give the LVs their due, but it is what it is (as we say in the business world in lieu of something meaningful). Pat Summitt coached her kids to the #2 program of the 1980s, the clear #1 program of the 1990s, and the #2 program of the 2000s. Eight national championships, five national runners-up finishes, and five more trips to the national semis- I mean, that's a lot of points! Add in the high seeds, and there you have it. The other thing: the LVs aren't done. Holly and Pat have made the LVs the #5 program of the 2010s thus far and will finish as a top-five program of the decade as long as Tennessee continues to earn top-two seeds and flirt with winning its regional bracket. No team has come close to a top-five program for four decades in a row, hence the #1 spot here. A 320 point lead over #2 UConn is surmountable, but the Huskies' seasons with Katie Lou Samuelson (and beyond) will have to mimic their seasons with Breanna Stewart before #1 is in any danger.

Well, thanks for reading. Any thoughts?
First --Thank you for compiling this. Uconn had some great La Tech games--I mixed them us at the time with LSU.
Second--As a Uconn Fan and WBB fan like most I have no issue with giving Pat and Tenn their DUE. They set the tone for WBB early on. Great teams, Great players and super competition for UConn. However the early competition in WBB wasn't super great--a really dedicated coach and school could and did win it all then.
Third--Gale G. of Duke apparently was a better coach and organizer than I and others gave her credit for. Again Thank you for this!!!!
 
Joined
Apr 10, 2015
Messages
11,335
Reaction Score
25,045
March Madness has skewed the regular season a bit for MCBB and WCBB.

To put it in UConn terms, how do we evaluate the 1996-1997 season? An utter failure because UConn failed to win the NC? They went undefeated, undefeated in Big East, won Big East tournament, and beat the eventual NC Tennessee during the regular season (they also beat a ranked Western Kentucky, Georgia, Kansas, and Notre Dame (twice)).

Or what about Notre Dame in 2013-2014?

I don't know about fans, but I think Geno and Muffet would consider those really successful seasons (for Geno, more so when it happened, as they hadn't won 10 NCs then and it wasn't expected every year).

I think the MYTH of Uconn fans not accepting exceptional teams NOT winning the NC was started by Geno years ago--he was wrong then and now. Yes we are disappointed, that's true of any fan of any team who does not meet expectation. All true Uconn fans don't expect to win every year--but love it when we do. We've had some great teams like the Barbara Turner/Willnet team that played their hearts and souls to beat a tough Duke I still love them. Disappointed for the kids because they played so hard.
 
Joined
Nov 20, 2011
Messages
2,718
Reaction Score
7,094
A Statistical Department is hiring mathematicians. Three recent graduates are invited for an interview: one has a degree in pure mathematics, another one in applied math, and the third one obtained his degree in statistics.
All three are asked the same question: "What is one third plus two thirds?"
The pure mathematician: "It's one."
The applied mathematician takes out his pocket calculator, punches in the numbers, and replies: "It's 0.999999999."
The statistician: "What do you want it to be?"
--------
Three statisticians go hunting. When they see a rabbit, the first one shoots, missing it on the left. The second one shoots and misses it on the right.
The third one shouts: "We've hit it!"
 
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
395
Reaction Score
1,132
I'm not sure how you say that the team that has won the tournament the most times isn't the best team during the tournament era. Especially when that team is 4-0 in the championship game against the team you have 1st.

Add to that 5 undefeated seasons(2 back to back)
90 game win streak
70 game win streak
3-peat... twice
8 consecutive final fours(and counting)
etc...
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2011
Messages
425
Reaction Score
895
The NCAA Tournament era (NCAATE) is a readily definable era in WCBB. It began in 1982, concurrent with the AIAW tournament drawing to a close. So, from 1982 through 2015, which programs have accomplished the most?

I went ahead and tabulated numbers based on a series of threads I started in 2012 and have continued every year after the conclusion of each NCAA tournament. The scoring methodology rewards regular season success (the proxy for which being tournament seeding), as well as tournament success. The system awards five points for a #4 seed, 10 for a #3, 20 for a #2, and 30 for a #1. It also awards five points for making the Sweet 16, 15 for the Elite Eight, 30 for the national semis, 40 for being national runner-up, and 70 for a national championship.

So from Numbers 10 to 1, here are the top programs of the NCAATE:

#10: Baylor (455 total points)

Baylor is not a program steeped in tradition, but it has reaped the benefits of one fantastic coach for 15 years. The 2000s were an up-and-down decade that included a surprising national championship in 2005. Kim Mulkey then successfully recruited Brittney Griner and Odyssey Sims in 2009 and 2010, and the rest has been history. The outcome has been another national championship in 2012, with more high seeds and points-earning NCAA tournament finishes. Baylor is only going to continue movin' on up.

#9 University of North Carolina (475 points)

Sylvia Hatchell has enjoyed three decades of earning points. The thrilling national championship in 1994 has been the highlight, but UNC had a very successful decade in the 2000s. Meanwhile, the 2010s have been somewhat successful, with a trip to the Elite Eight and the Sweet 16, along with some decent tournament seeds. Hatchell's health and the loss of Diamond Deshields, as well as the ascent of South Carolina to UNC's direct detriment, may hurt the Tar Heels' ranking in the future.

#8 Maryland (505 points)

Maryland has had three separate decades with point-scoring seasons, including, of course, the decade featuring the 2006 national championship. Meanwhile, the 2010s have been very solid, including consecutive trips to the national semis. Finally, Maryland was very sound in the 1980s as well. The 1990s were pretty much a lost decade for the Terps, but Brenda Frese certainly brought UMD to national prominence.

#7 Notre Dame (530 points)

The Irish became a blip on the RADAR in 1997, when they shockingly made the national semis as a #6 seed. Four years later, Notre Dame was the national champion. For 10 years, Muffet didn't have much in the way of NCAA tournament success until 2011, and since then, the Irish have been national runners-up four times. ND has been the clear #2 program of the 2010s and may just surge ahead given how successfully McGraw has been recruiting.

#6 Georgia (630 points)

Good ol' Andy Landers may never have won a national championship, but he came damn close. He also coached Georgia to top-15 program ratings in the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s, a rare feat indeed. In the 2010s, Georgia hasn't done much, but the Bulldogs did make the Elite Eight in 2013. No one knows what future is in store for Georgia going forward, but the past is rich in tradition (even if it never included the Grand Prize of any season).

#5 Duke (660 points)

Gail Goestenkors pretty much built Duke from scratch in the early 1990s. The Devils made their presence known in 1998 when they made the regional finals. A year later, they were national runners-up, and Duke has been very, very successful ever since. Duke was the clear #3 program of the 2000s and is currently the #6 program of the 2010s. As long as they get top-four seeds and make the regional semis or better, Duke will continue to accumulate points. No national championship, but being a top-five program is nothing to sneeze at.

#4 Louisiana Tech (855 points)

La Tech is one of the most storied programs in WCBB starting at the tail end of the AIAW era. Even though the Techsters get no points for the penultimate AIAW championship in 1981, their stunning success gave them the momentum to win the inaugural NCAA tournament championship in 1982. The Lady Techsters were a serious powerhouse for the remainder of the 1980s, the clear #1 program of that decade. After winning the 1988 national championship, La Tech remained in contention throughout the 1990s and were a top five program of that decade. It's been slow going ever since, but you can't take away the points La Tech has already earned. Will they ever return to national prominence? To be continued...

#3 Stanford ( 1,030 points)

Tara's Cardinal have done nothing but rack up points since making the regional semis and finals in the late 1980s and winning national championships in 1990 and 1992. The Cardinal were the clear #2 program of the 1990s, the #6 program of the 2000s, and the #3 program thus far of the 2010s. From 2008 through 2014, The Cardinal were very high seeds (usually #1), made at least the national semis for five straight seasons, and were national runners-up twice. It doesn't look like Stanford will move up in the rankings, but the Cardinal certainly aren't in any position to move down.

#2 UConn (1,590 points)

Look, you know UConn. You know Geno. You know 10 national championships and six more trips to the national semis. You know about top-two seeds. You know about the surprise run to the national semis in 1991, and all the success that followed. You know Kerry Bascom, and you know Kaleena Mosqueda-Lewis. If you don't, you'll see their names on the Huskies of Honor wall sometime. The Huskies were the #3 program of the 1990s, the #1 program of the 2000s, and are in the lead as the #1 program of the 2010s. The only thing keeping them from being the #1 program of the entire NCAATE is a complete lack of point-scoring seasons in the 1980s. I personally wouldn't trade UConn's 10 NCs for any other program's lesser number, but nevertheless, it's clear the Huskies are squarely behind...

...#1 Tennessee (1,910 points)

Hey, no UConn fan wants to give the LVs their due, but it is what it is (as we say in the business world in lieu of something meaningful). Pat Summitt coached her kids to the #2 program of the 1980s, the clear #1 program of the 1990s, and the #2 program of the 2000s. Eight national championships, five national runners-up finishes, and five more trips to the national semis- I mean, that's a lot of points! Add in the high seeds, and there you have it. The other thing: the LVs aren't done. Holly and Pat have made the LVs the #5 program of the 2010s thus far and will finish as a top-five program of the decade as long as Tennessee continues to earn top-two seeds and flirt with winning its regional bracket. No team has come close to a top-five program for four decades in a row, hence the #1 spot here. A 320 point lead over #2 UConn is surmountable, but the Huskies' seasons with Katie Lou Samuelson (and beyond) will have to mimic their seasons with Breanna Stewart before #1 is in any danger.

Well, thanks for reading. Any thoughts?
It's always fun to play with numbers. What logic did you use to come up with your point system and if things were worth different amounts would that change the rankings? I know in your system uconn would lose points if elite 8 was 30 final 4 40 and title 50 instead of 70. Is there also away to reward consistency? For example 5 consecutive sweet 16's would be worth something. Uconn's 8 straight final 4's or 3 straight titles have value. Just a thought.
 

rbny1

Gotham Husky Fanatic
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
1,461
Reaction Score
4,528
My statistical analysis: 100 points for winning a national championship, 0 points for anything else. Guess who comes out on top? Just saying.
 
Joined
Mar 24, 2015
Messages
173
Reaction Score
336
My statistical analysis: 100 points for winning a national championship, 0 points for anything else. Guess who comes out on top? Just saying.

So, by that logic, Texas A&M is a better program 1982-2015 than LSU? Than Auburn? Virginia? Georgia? As good a program as North Carolina? Purdue? Maryland?

Nah, nah, let's quash that noise right now. Even Geno as said as much: sustained excellence is the goal (whether rewarded by a NC or not).
 

alexrgct

RIP, Alex
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
10,094
Reaction Score
15,650
My statistical analysis: 100 points for winning a national championship, 0 points for anything else. Guess who comes out on top? Just saying.

Huh??? It's 30 for being a #1 seed and 70 for winning a national championinship. There are plenty of points for anything else. A #1 seed who was a national runner up gets 70 points total. Louisville, meanwhile, got 40 points for 2013 because they are a five seed (so no credit for their regular season). UConn has had several 60-point seasons for being a #1 seed who got as far as the national semifinals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
232
Guests online
2,634
Total visitors
2,866

Forum statistics

Threads
156,959
Messages
4,073,902
Members
9,962
Latest member
Boatbro


Top Bottom