apnews.com
Louisville only being #1 for 4 weeks in their history just doesn't seem real
Ready for an even crazier fact: 50% of those weeks at #1 were in the last 4 seasons.
What year did the AP Poll begin?
How?
I am 68 and there was an AP poll when I was a kid. There was a UPI poll as well.
This calendar year is possible. Every Top 6 poll is 20+ points, and there are 9 polls left, so we could get 180+ more points. Gets us to a little over 6,220. But also likely we have some loses that drop us down, particularly with the Clingan injury.
Maybe. They sure have a really lofty ranking considering they haven't played anyone yet. Will be interesting to see how far they drop after their first loss or two.
Interesting. I think you can make a good argument for not awarding 25 points to the number one team from eras that only ranked 20 teams and 10 teams. If you instead only give the top rank team the number of points equal to the total amount of rank teams you don't artificially adding weight to less competitive eras. Connecticut would fair better using this methodology.
Neat chart, but if there's an argument against us being a blue blood, it's basically this. The top 5 are the programs you think and then there's a big separation after that. And then we're down in the teens among a bunch of decent but not elite BE/B1G programs. (Yes, I know this is all time, and nobody cares about Cincy's dominance in 1960, but this is the argument.)
I knew the Texas and Gonzaga wins wouldn't carry much water, but I've been pleasantly surprised by UNC. They didn't seem that great when we played them and I thought they'd suffer the same fate. But they look like they have staying power in the top 10 as a true signature win for us.
For me the only argument is relative lack of deep tournament runs, and the fact that our history as an elite program is dwarfed by the traditions of winning as some of the programs. I love being 5-1 in the final four, but UNC Duke UCLA UK KU all have at least twice as many final fours, tons of elite eight runs, don’t have tournament appearance droughts for the most part like we have
Don’t really think polls should matter that much in any argument.
Agreed. Any poll before about halfway through the conference schedule (1/15 ish), is nonsense anyways.
It’s a plausible argument.
And yet no one has had more championships over the last quarter century. I'm not going to apologize for winning when we get there.
It would be more interesting if they used a start date of 1990 or 2000 where we would rank in the poll.
