All Time Tier List

[August_West]

You really think they were beating that UNLV team?

there was no way in hell they could've. Would've been cool to try though.

 

[Waquoit]

Gee, no BCU or Pitt.

 

[Northbound]

Yeah, I do. We were a “team of destiny.”

People remember UNLV‘s beat down of Duke but forget about that they barely squeaked by Ball State.

Correct, their destiny was the Elite Eight

 

[CL82]

Correct, their destiny was the Elite Eight

LOL, I suppose there really is no argument against that is there?

 

[donyell34]

Syracuse has no right to be in with any tier which states "Elite" sorry. I mean they are the Don Sutton of college basketball. Have rights to be in the hall, but only due to consistency in a long period of time. But hardly ever a threat for a title outside of one with one key player. Otherwise I guess it looks ok but has Arizona and Louisville really achieved much despite always having top recruits?

Agree, championships and majors in golf should be the defining criteria. The Don Suttons of college bb.

 

[Friarsnoop]

Louisville has 3 national titles* and 7 more Final Fours*. It's hard to deny them elite level.

 

[ucp990411]

I'd disagree vehemently but I doubt I will convince you otherwise and there's nothing gained.

I will say if UConn had beaten Duke in 89, UCLA in 95 and the Donyell missed FT's year (96?), UConn would have 3 more FF's for a total of 8. Eight FF's and a minimum of four championships puts UConn in real elite level. Also would extend UConn's FF history back one decade longer

I'd disagree vehemently but I doubt I will convince you otherwise and there's nothing gained.

I will say if UConn had beaten Duke in 89, UCLA in 95 and the Donyell missed FT's year (96?), UConn would have 3 more FF's for a total of 8. Eight FF's and a minimum of four championships puts UConn in real elite level. Also would extend UConn's FF history back one decade longer.

We played Duke in 1990 and the Florida game was in 1994.

 

[RayIsTheGOAT]

In what world is Gonzaga two tiers below Syracuse?

 

[bendm]

i agree with tier I but tier 2 should be reserved for teams w/ multiple chips. gotta kick cuse and zona down. not gonna waste my time with the others tiers.

 

[tzznandrew]

In what world is Gonzaga two tiers below Syracuse?

I mean, I hate Syracuse, but they really do have a long and rich history that Gonzaga can't match. Gonzaga doesn't even have a title and both Syracuse and Gonzaga have the same amount of Final Fours in the last decade.

Syracuse shouldn't be a tier with UConn and the other schools there, but they should absolutely be above a school that had zero NCAA tournament appearances before 1995.

 

[Chin Diesel]

We played Duke in 1990 and the Florida game was in 1994.

Yeah. I knew dream season was 89-90.

 

[Zissou]

 

[Zissou]

 

[TheChamps990411]

Every time I see UCLA in the Blue bloods category I shake my head. They should have an asterisk indicating that all of their success was pre-85. Best history, but fell off.

Yup. And Uconn with 4 titles in the last 23 years should be a blue blood. At the end of the day titles are the biggest factor in lists like this. Syracuse on the 2nd line is a joke. What an overrated program.

 

[Zissou]

Yup. And Uconn with 4 titles in the last 23 years should be a blue blood. At the end of the day titles are the biggest factor in lists like this. Syracuse on the 2nd line is a joke. What an overrated program.

However you rate Duke, UConn should be on that same line

 

[CL82]

Louisville has 3 national titles* and 7 more Final Fours*. It's hard to deny them elite level.

Do they though? Not according to the NCAA.

 

[Zissou]

Do they though? Not according to the NCAA.

They do. There are a lot of asterisks in the books. If you count Wooden’s titles you count them all. If you don’t count the asterisks, UCLA is not a Blue Blood.

 

[CL82]

They do. There are a lot of asterisks in the books. If you count Wooden’s titles you count them all. If you don’t count the asterisks, UCLA is not a Blue Blood.

How so? The NCAA didn’t take away UCLA’s titles, did they?

 

[superjohn]

They do. There are a lot of asterisks in the books. If you count Wooden’s titles you count them all. If you don’t count the asterisks, UCLA is not a Blue Blood.

It's all silly, the NCAA goes after some programs and doesn't go after others. We all know Louisville won a third national championship because we watched it but it was vacated by the NCAA.

Not a good example since UCLA doesn't have any asterisks next to any of their national championships because none of them were vacated.

 

[auror]

However you rate Duke, UConn should be on that same line

Can't put UConn on the same tier as Duke, sorry. Titles we're only 1 below, but they've got more than triple the final fours that we do (5 to 17) and college basketball fans value final fours very highly. They're also way ahead in overall wins, win%, tournament appearances and wins, sweet 16s, elite 8s, more pros, more 1st overall picks, etc. Basically everything.

1 extra title is also quite a big difference in general, only 15 out of 350 schools have even won more than 1.

 

[Zissou]

How so? The NCAA didn’t take away UCLA’s titles, did they?

No, they turned a blind eye to it. After UNC skated, I think the NCAA lost any remaining credibility as an authority for the asterisk debate.

Count the titles (and note the asterisks as desired).

 

[Zissou]

Can't put UConn on the same tier as Duke, sorry. Titles we're only 1 below, but they've got more than triple the final fours that we do (5 to 17) and college basketball fans value final fours very highly. They're also way ahead in overall wins, win%, tournament appearances and wins, sweet 16s, elite 8s, etc. Basically everything.

1 extra title is also quite a big difference in general, only 15 out of 350 schools have even won more than 1.

So you are saying that Duke’s winning percentage in Final Fours is much lower than UConn’s. I wouldn’t knock Duke too much for that, I’d keep them on the same line.

 

[CL82]

No, they turned a blind eye to it. After UNC skated, I think the NCAA lost any remaining credibility as an authority for the asterisk debate.

Count the titles (and note the asterisks as desired).

See I think you put the*next to UNC or Syracuse. But Louisville lost its title. It’s the NCAA tournament so they get to say what counts and what doesn’t.

 

[Waquoit]

UConn still has the Beeper year on the books as a tourney year. Glass houses and all

 

[Zissou]

See I think you put the*next to UNC or Syracuse. But Louisville lost its title. It’s the NCAA tournament so they get to say what counts and what doesn’t.

Like I said, the NCAA lost the credibility to be an infallible source for sanctions.

SMU got the death penalty. UConn was routinely slapped around with violations. UNC, UCLA, and Kansas largely skated.

It’s a bit like the discussion of who gets in the baseball HOF from the PED era. There isn’t a consistent standard applied, so the decisions are suspect and less authoritative.

 

[CL82]

Like I said, the NCAA lost the credibility to be an infallible source for sanctions.

SMU got the death penalty. UConn was routinely slapped around with violations. UNC, UCLA, and Kansas largely skated.

It’s a bit like the discussion of who gets in the baseball HOF from the PED era. There isn’t a consistent standard applied, so the decisions are suspect and less authoritative.

I don’t disagree with you regarding the NCAA‘s consistency in applying sanctions, but in the end, if you’re talking about the NCAA tournament champion, they are the arbiters of who that is.

So saying, “well UCLA has baggage”, and it does, is irrelevant.

JMO

 

[Zissou]

I don’t disagree with you regarding the NCAA‘s consistency in applying sanctions, but in the end, if you’re talking about the NCAA tournament champion, they are the arbiters of who that is.

So saying, “well UCLA has baggage”, and it does, is irrelevant.

JMO

Agree on the NCAA, and agree to disagree on the NCAA’s sole authority on the validity of the asterisks! Vox Populi!

 

[BGesus4]

UConn and Villanova in their tier: sure.
Georgetown and St Johns in their tier: makes sense.

Nobody else from the Big East worth mentioning? Seton Hall or Marquette maybe as respectable programs?

EDIT: Just kidding. I'm blind. Marquette is there. I accept that. Carry on.

Seton Hall deserves something for that St Peter’s run, right???

 

[Zissou]

Seton Hall deserves something for that St Peter’s run, right???

1 Final Four, with no titles, doesn’t put them on the Big Board.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Can't put UConn on the same tier as Duke, sorry. Titles we're only 1 below, but they've got more than triple the final fours that we do (5 to 17) and college basketball fans value final fours very highly. They're also way ahead in overall wins, win%, tournament appearances and wins, sweet 16s, elite 8s, more pros, more 1st overall picks, etc. Basically everything.

1 extra title is also quite a big difference in general, only 15 out of 350 schools have even won more than 1.

Agreed. Titles matter but they aren’t everything. It would be a boring sport if they were. Winning games matters, winning league titles, not missing the tournament, winning games when you get there. All of that matters a lot. I have no issues with the top tier. Duke belongs there. UConn, for now, doesn’t. Let’s fix that.