Are we still an elite program?

[FfldCntyFan]

I think we're still elite, but on the way down. My "elite" teams are...

UConn, Indiana, Michigan State, Duke, UNC, Kentucky, Kansas, and Florida.

How the F#&K do you have Indiana as 'elite' if we are 'on the way down'?

One very good season after nearly ten years of nothing makes them elite again? If they were still elite even with the nearly ten years of nothing, there is no way anyone can refer to us as no longer elite for at least six or seven more years. Either that or in your eyes it takes very little to lose elite status and even less to gain it back.

 

[uconNYC]

After winning 3 NCs UConn will always be considered a basketball power. I see us similar to U of Miami in football - where if we do have a few down seasons, everyone will be asking not "if" but "when" UConn will return to prominence again.

 

[Gregory Koch]

How the F#&K do you have Indiana as 'elite' if we are 'on the way down'?

One very good season after nearly ten years of nothing makes them elite again? If they were still elite even with the nearly ten years of nothing, there is no way anyone can refer to us as no longer elite for at least six or seven more years. Either that or in your eyes it takes very little to lose elite status and even less to gain it back.

I base "Elite" on recent performance. Not 10 years ago's performance. So I don't think we're Elite anymore. In the last 3 years, we didn't make the tournament 1 year, happened to have a miraculous run the second year after doing mediocre for most of the season, and then lost in the first round the third year. And I really don't care about 1999 or 2004 in my definition of "elite". They were 13 and 8 years ago. I don't consider Maryland "Elite" and they won in 2002. That was 8 years ago. They were "Elite" then, but they're not now. Plain and simple.

Let's take a look at another team in the 2011 Tournament and who they beat

R64: Georgetown
R32: Purdue
Sweet 16: Florida State
Elite 8: Kansas
Final Four: Lost

So, they made it to the final four, defeating at least two premier opponents in Georgetown and Kansas. Purdue was a great team that year too. Florida State was a decent team as well.

That team is VCU. Are they Elite? Clearly not. And also, they did better than we did in the NCAA Tournament in 2012.

In 2010, neither of us made the tournament.

In 2009, we beat Chattanooga, Texas A&M, Purdue, and Missouri (hardly elite teams), before losing to Michigan State. VCU lost in the First Round, narrowly, to an excellent UCLA team. Nevertheless, we have an advantage there.

2008, we lost in the first round to a mediocre San Diego team and VCU failed to qualify.

2007, we didn't make the tournament, and VCU shocked Duke before narrowly losing to Pitt in Overtime.

2012, of course, they made the second round and we lost in the first round.

Therefore, from 2007-2012, excluding VCU's "First Four" win in 2011, the Rams have 6 wins in 4 appearances in the tournament. 2 of those came against teams seeded 3 or higher. They also beat a Duke team seeded 6th, an unusually low seed for Duke, and lost to #3 seed Pitt in OT, a game they played very well. They have 1 Final Four appearance

From 2007-2012, we have 10 wins in 4 appearances, 2 against seeds 3 or higher, and lost to San Diego, a #13 seed, in the first round. We have 2 final fours, but on the way to them, have beaten Bucknell, Cincinnati, San Diego State, Arizona, Chatanooga, Texas A&M, Purdue, and Missouri.
In 2009, we lost once we were in the Final Four, to Michigan State. In 2011, we won after beating Kentucky and Butler in the Final Four.

Obviously, VCU is not an "Elite" team. Anyone who thinks they are is an idiot.

Our Tournament performance is only slightly better than VCU over the last 6 years. They have made one Final Four, we have made 2. Butler has also made 2, and has two semifinal wins. Obviously, Butler is not elite.
We had a miracle run in 2011, so did VCU. So did Butler, for that matter. Nobody would argue that VCU was good enough to beat Georgetown, Purdue, Florida State, or Kansas on a regular basis. Perhaps FSU, but even then I don't think so.
Butler may have been on par with Old Dominion, who they beat in the first round, but nobody would argue they could beat Pitt, Wisconsin, or Florida on a regular basis. They both got lucky. So did we. The only reason we were a 3 was because we won 5 games in 5 days in the Big East Tournament. Prior to that, we were 21-9. You figure DePaul was an easy win, that gets us to 22-9, even without miracle run. If things had gone by seed, we'd have been 22-10. Big East teams with similar records were Villanova at 21-11 who got a #9 seed, Georgetown, 21-10, who got a #6 seed, and St. John's, 21-11, who also got a #6 seed. With our SOS, we'd have probably gotten a 6. Considering there was also a #8 and a #11 in the Final Four, we might have made it, but it would have been a surprise. Without the 5 games in 5 days at the BET, we would never have gotten the #3 that you guys claim made our Championship not unlikely. That was probably the best conferene-NCAA Tournament run in the history of the NCAA, but without it, it would have been another mediocre season. And not only was there one other team with a miracle tournament run that year, but there were TWO. Nobody is claiming they're Elite teams.

Yes, we were once an Elite team. But those times have gone. And this NCAA ban will hurt us even more. Maybe in 5-10 years, we will be Elite again. I hope so. But we're not now.

Edit to respond to the cross-posted post above: Do you really think Miami U football is "elite" right now? I don't. Oh, by the way, they had a recent scandal too. They'll recover. So will we. But not right now.

 

[msgordon]

that last post is just so awful. i dont even know where to start or why im responding but . that is some of the worst logic ive ever seen. you give no credit to our 2004 title and base elite status on very recent performance, which i disagree with but whatever--but then you somehow decide that despite this, a team that won a NC 15 months ago is not elite. you then say anyone who thinks VCU is elite is an idiot(newsflash, youre an idiot) and that butler is obviously not elite. so you supposedly place extreme emphasis on the last couple of years, but then conclude that a team that made the title game 2 of the last 3 years is obviously not elite? you also use ridiculously twisted and biased logic when comparing us to VCU, seemingly giving them credit for beating traditional powerhouses, which contradicts your entire 'premise' of only weighing the last few years. You say stupid things like 'Purdue was a great team that year too' when VCU beat them and then when Uconn beat them you call them 'hardly elite'. You talk about VCU losing narrowly to an 'excellent' UCLA team (a 6 seed that got smacked by 20 in the next round), etc etc.

cliffs: your post sucks

 

[uchusky32]

Dud is to young to know what elite is. One year of good grades doesn't make you a road scholar!

 

[Dann]

wtf is going on here lol.

 

[uchusky32]

that last post is just so awful. i dont even know where to start or why im responding but . that is some of the worst logic ive ever seen. you give no credit to our 2004 title and base elite status on very recent performance, which i disagree with but whatever--but then you somehow decide that despite this, a team that won a NC 15 months ago is not elite. you then say anyone who thinks VCU is elite is an idiot(newsflash, youre an idiot) and that butler is obviously not elite. so you supposedly place extreme emphasis on the last couple of years, but then conclude that a team that made the title game 2 of the last 3 years is obviously not elite? you also use ridiculously twisted and biased logic when comparing us to VCU, seemingly giving them credit for beating traditional powerhouses, which contradicts your entire 'premise' of only weighing the last few years. You say stupid things like 'Purdue was a great team that year too' when VCU beat them and then when Uconn beat them you call them 'hardly elite'. You talk about VCU losing narrowly to an 'excellent' UCLA team (a 6 seed that got smacked by 20 in the next round), etc etc.

cliffs: your post sucks

that last post is just so awful. i dont even know where to start or why im responding but . that is some of the worst logic ive ever seen. you give no credit to our 2004 title and base elite status on very recent performance, which i disagree with but whatever--but then you somehow decide that despite this, a team that won a NC 15 months ago is not elite. you then say anyone who thinks VCU is elite is an idiot(newsflash, youre an idiot) and that butler is obviously not elite. so you supposedly place extreme emphasis on the last couple of years, but then conclude that a team that made the title game 2 of the last 3 years is obviously not elite? you also use ridiculously twisted and biased logic when comparing us to VCU, seemingly giving them credit for beating traditional powerhouses, which contradicts your entire 'premise' of only weighing the last few years. You say stupid things like 'Purdue was a great team that year too' when VCU beat them and then when Uconn beat them you call them 'hardly elite'. You talk about VCU losing narrowly to an 'excellent' UCLA team (a 6 seed that got smacked by 20 in the next round), etc etc.

cliffs: your post sucks

Dud just started watching last year, so ofcourse, that's when elite status starts. He back himself into a corner and doesn't know how to back out.

 

[Adios]

Dud is to young to know what elite is. One year of good grades doesn't make you a road scholar!

Dude*. Rhodes*.

 

[specialisthusky]

. I don't consider Maryland "Elite" and they won in 2002. That was 8 years ago. They were "Elite" then, but they're not now. Plain and simple.

That line was all the indication I needed to not waste my time reading that post.

 

[Robertelamin]

I base "Elite" on recent performance. Not 10 years ago's performance. So I don't think we're Elite anymore. In the last 3 years, we didn't make the tournament 1 year, happened to have a miraculous run the second year after doing mediocre for most of the season, and then lost in the first round the third year. And I really don't care about 1999 or 2004 in my definition of "elite". They were 13 and 8 years ago. I don't consider Maryland "Elite" and they won in 2002. That was 8 years ago. They were "Elite" then, but they're not now. Plain and simple.

Let's take a look at another team in the 2011 Tournament and who they beat

R64: Georgetown
R32: Purdue
Sweet 16: Florida State
Elite 8: Kansas
Final Four: Lost

So, they made it to the final four, defeating at least two premier opponents in Georgetown and Kansas. Purdue was a great team that year too. Florida State was a decent team as well.

That team is VCU. Are they Elite? Clearly not. And also, they did better than we did in the NCAA Tournament in 2012.

In 2010, neither of us made the tournament.

In 2009, we beat Chattanooga, Texas A&M, Purdue, and Missouri (hardly elite teams), before losing to Michigan State. VCU lost in the First Round, narrowly, to an excellent UCLA team. Nevertheless, we have an advantage there.

2008, we lost in the first round to a mediocre San Diego team and VCU failed to qualify.

2007, we didn't make the tournament, and VCU shocked Duke before narrowly losing to Pitt in Overtime.

2012, of course, they made the second round and we lost in the first round.

Therefore, from 2007-2012, excluding VCU's "First Four" win in 2011, the Rams have 6 wins in 4 appearances in the tournament. 2 of those came against teams seeded 3 or higher. They also beat a Duke team seeded 6th, an unusually low seed for Duke, and lost to #3 seed Pitt in OT, a game they played very well. They have 1 Final Four appearance

From 2007-2012, we have 10 wins in 4 appearances, 2 against seeds 3 or higher, and lost to San Diego, a #13 seed, in the first round. We have 2 final fours, but on the way to them, have beaten Bucknell, Cincinnati, San Diego State, Arizona, Chatanooga, Texas A&M, Purdue, and Missouri.
In 2009, we lost once we were in the Final Four, to Michigan State. In 2011, we won after beating Kentucky and Butler in the Final Four.

Obviously, VCU is not an "Elite" team. Anyone who thinks they are is an idiot.

Our Tournament performance is only slightly better than VCU over the last 6 years. They have made one Final Four, we have made 2. Butler has also made 2, and has two semifinal wins. Obviously, Butler is not elite.
We had a miracle run in 2011, so did VCU. So did Butler, for that matter. Nobody would argue that VCU was good enough to beat Georgetown, Purdue, Florida State, or Kansas on a regular basis. Perhaps FSU, but even then I don't think so.
Butler may have been on par with Old Dominion, who they beat in the first round, but nobody would argue they could beat Pitt, Wisconsin, or Florida on a regular basis. They both got lucky. So did we. The only reason we were a 3 was because we won 5 games in 5 days in the Big East Tournament. Prior to that, we were 21-9. You figure DePaul was an easy win, that gets us to 22-9, even without miracle run. If things had gone by seed, we'd have been 22-10. Big East teams with similar records were Villanova at 21-11 who got a #9 seed, Georgetown, 21-10, who got a #6 seed, and St. John's, 21-11, who also got a #6 seed. With our SOS, we'd have probably gotten a 6. Considering there was also a #8 and a #11 in the Final Four, we might have made it, but it would have been a surprise. Without the 5 games in 5 days at the BET, we would never have gotten the #3 that you guys claim made our Championship not unlikely. That was probably the best conferene-NCAA Tournament run in the history of the NCAA, but without it, it would have been another mediocre season. And not only was there one other team with a miracle tournament run that year, but there were TWO. Nobody is claiming they're Elite teams.

Yes, we were once an Elite team. But those times have gone. And this NCAA ban will hurt us even more. Maybe in 5-10 years, we will be Elite again. I hope so. But we're not now.

Edit to respond to the cross-posted post above: Do you really think Miami U football is "elite" right now? I don't. Oh, by the way, they had a recent scandal too. They'll recover. So will we. But not right now.

The only reason they were a 3 seed was because they won 5 games in 5 days? Well they did right? That has to count for something. That's why they play the games on the court and not Gregory Koch's head.

 

[uchusky32]

Dude*. Rhodes*.

I was trying to make a point!?

 

[husky99]

so I skiped the last six pages of this thread, is the answer yes we suck and calhoun sold his soul to win?

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I base "Elite" on recent performance. Not 10 years ago's performance. So I don't think we're Elite anymore. In the last 3 years, we didn't make the tournament 1 year, happened to have a miraculous run the second year after doing mediocre for most of the season, and then lost in the first round the third year. And I really don't care about 1999 or 2004 in my definition of "elite". They were 13 and 8 years ago. I don't consider Maryland "Elite" and they won in 2002. That was 8 years ago. They were "Elite" then, but they're not now. Plain and simple.

1 - Koch, are you Hungry Husky?

2 - If you are only considering recent performance I will ask again: How the F#&K do you have Indiana as 'elite'?

 

[Dann]

so I skiped the last six pages of this thread, is the answer yes we suck and calhoun sold his soul to win?

we are not a elite school because we didn't win it all last year, the 12 years before that don't count....

 

[dapriest]

I base "Elite" on recent performance. Not 10 years ago's performance. So I don't think we're Elite anymore. In the last 3 years, we didn't make the tournament 1 year, happened to have a miraculous run the second year after doing mediocre for most of the season, and then lost in the first round the third year.

Well it's a simple matter of semantics, isn't it. Your definition of "elite" is equivalent to most people's definition of "excellent recent results."

Most people would hold back on giving any program the title of "elite" based on 3 years performance. Not you. You boldly kick in the door and blurt out, "ELITE," when a program has a good 3 year run. VCU? ELITE. Butler? ELITE. Baylor? ELITE.

I'm not impressed at all with your primitive trolling modus operandus. It's really quite funny to me. It's like somebody saying Federer is done, no longer a threat, and today's win was just an aberration.

I am, however, impressed that you squeezed 7 pages (and counting) out of such an asinine post. Well done. Your troll lord will be pleased.

The funniest, and not coincidentally, stupidest part of your post is this contradiction: You don't want to go back more than a few years to make your assessment, but you dismiss the national championship as a fluke.

Here's a really easy definition of elite - how many fan bases would NOT switch places with the results of your program in terms of historical and ongoing success and program strength? If the answer is fewer than 10, then you're elite.

You won't find 10 programs that wouldn't exchange their results for ours over the last whatever years you want to use, beyond ONE. 2 years, check. 4 years, check. 8 years, check. 13 years, BIG CHECK.

Get your head out of your ass.

 

[UConnDan97]

I love it. We have a 20 win season (6 games above 0.500) the year after winning it all, and some Boneyarders want to write our obituary! Sometimes, this board gives me a good chuckle. Thank God we are only looking at recent results, huh...

 

[Dann]

what are other peoples top teams lists? i'm curious. do u just have a top 10 or do you have a couple tiers you rank teams and so on...i listed my thoughts, what are yours.

here are mine again

bb-duke/unc/uk/ka/ind/ucla
nb-uconn/msu/fl/zona
tier 3 has like 20 teams...

 

[dsturdy5]

I've heard coaches say they give the following advice to new coaches (paraphrasing):

Win 20 games most years
win 25 games occasionally
But NEVER win 30 games, the fanbase becomes too greedy after that

Seems to apply here

 

[UConnDan97]

what are other peoples top teams lists? i'm curious. do u just have a top 10 or do you have a couple tiers you rank teams and so on...i listed my thoughts, what are yours.

here are mine again

bb-duke/unc/uk/ka/ind/ucla
nb-uconn/msu/fl/zona
tier 3 has like 20 teams...

So are you saying that Indiana and UCLA are in "tier 1" and UConn, MSU, and Florida are in "tier 2"?? Wow.

 

[HeGotGame]

blue bloods:
duke/unc/ind/ucla/kan/uk - all are on top of the game or quickly coming back to life(ind). ucla is in a wierd stage right now.

new bloods:
uconn/michst/fl/zona(borderline)

in my eyes thats the top 10 all time, rank them how u want but i don't see a better school then these...

tier 3 : mix of historic programs and solid past 20 years programs)
gtown/cuse/texas/okst/bama/nova/unlv/md/gt/marq and a couple others...

How do you have a program like bama listed, they have been 1 EE in their history, and leave out lville who has 9 final fours and 2 NCs?

Tier 1 is right.

Add lville to tier 2 and take out Florida. You gotta wake up and realize they played basketball before 2000. Cuse and zona are debatable as who is in the top 10.

Tier 3 has a bunch of programs but bama, ok state, Georgia tech or marq aren't them.

 

[Dann]

So are you saying that Indiana and UCLA are in "tier 1" and UConn, MSU, and Florida are in "tier 2"?? Wow.

i'm saying there are 6 blue blood programs that are historic. they will always be brand names. ucla is down right now but not horrible and ind was down but is now back. they are like nd/bama/tex of the fball world types.

uconn/fl/msu/zona are new bloods. what they have done recently(past 25 years lest say) put them at the top of the sport. they dont have history/tradition but they are gold programs. with uconns 3rd ship they move to the front of this group.

the third group is a mix of recent teams and historic teams that make college basketball the quality sport of depth that it is. these programs are solid but are just not "elite".

 

[Dann]

How do you have a program like bama listed, they have been 1 EE in their history, and leave out lville who has 9 final fours and 2 NCs?

Tier 1 is right.

Add lville to tier 2 and take out Florida. You gotta wake up and realize they played basketball before 2000. Cuse and zona are debatable as who is in the top 10.

Tier 3 has a bunch of programs but bama, ok state, Georgia tech or marq aren't them.

i went on to include lville and michigan in tier 3 in a later post, that list was a random order of names (thats why i wrote "and a couple others" that i couldnt remember ranting...)

bama may not have the banners, but they have alot on the resume. um, i dont think i need to wake up as i clearly talk about blue bloods and are aware of history of the game. but i still don't count pitts ships from 1823 lol. and fwiw, okst is a tier 3 school, look up there resume.

as for lville tier 2, thats a fair argument. i would say them/cuse and a few others are 10-15 all time if i were to list them. i do not have them in my top 10, but close...

 

[UConnDan97]

i'm saying there are 6 blue blood programs that are historic. they will always be brand names. ucla is down right now but not horrible and ind was down but is now back. they are like nd/bama/tex of the fball world types.

This is exactly my problem with it, though (and you noted what I am about to say); I call it the "Notre Dame Trap". The Notre Dame Trap (referring to football) is looking at a team that was great historically for so long, but haven't been great since the mid-90's. Sure, they have a great fan base, and they seem to get pre-season rankings all the time, but nobody is going to argue that they are still elite in terms of performance. Revenue? Yes. Performance? Not a chance.

That's like saying that we are going to call Army football great because they used to win a lot of games. So did Yale and Harvard, my friends! If you want to look back 10 or even 20 years (which is all a new recruit is going to remember anyways, since most of them are about 18 years old), you will find a somewhat different story. That's all I'm saying.

 

[UConnDan97]

i went on to include lville and michigan in tier 3 in a later post, that list was a random order of names (thats why i wrote "and a couple others" that i couldnt remember ranting...)

bama may not have the banners, but they have alot on the resume. um, i dont think i need to wake up as i clearly talk about blue bloods and are aware of history of the game. but i still don't count pitts ships from 1823 lol. and fwiw, okst is a tier 3 school, look up there resume.

as for lville tier 2, thats a fair argument. i would say them/cuse and a few others are 10-15 all time if i were to list them. i do not have them in my top 10, but close...

I hate to criticize someone without providing my own answer (to be picked on by all). Here is my listing of elite teams, in no particular order:

UConn, Syracuse, UNC, Duke, Kansas, Michigan State, Florida, Kentucky.

There are a bunch in "tier 2", and I really struggled with what to do with Pitt. They NEVER do anything in the tourney, but man they have a great record over both Jamie Dixon and Ben Howland's careers! They have done a lot in the Big East and in their OOC, even though they choke almost every year. Because of the perennial choking, they go to tier 2. It will be interesting to see what happens to their NYC recruiting base when they go to the ACC. That's my 2 cents...

 

[Huskies4ever]

I think we're still elite, but on the way down. My "elite" teams are...

UConn, Indiana, Michigan State, Duke, UNC, Kentucky, Kansas, and Florida.

I like your list..........minus Florida.