Are we still an elite program?

[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.

 

[Huskies4ever]

dont let a louisville fan see that last post

In his defense, he did say "and a couple others...."

 

[MilliniumPrince]

Everyone is wondering what will become of UConn hoops post Jim Calhoun. Articles are being written, threads are being posted, etc., wondering if we will be able to maintain elite status. But are we really elite anymore?

As much as I want to say yes, if Kemba's team doesn't have that miraculous post season run in 2011, and even the most optimistic UConn fan must admit we caught lightning in a bottle then, I'm not sure. Our last 7 years have been very mediocre and our post season record has been awful. The numbers below don't look like that of an elite program.

The 2011 title allowed us to maintain the elite perception, but the recent underlying numbers don't support it. I can't help but wonder if Arizona hits that 3 in the 2011 tourney if UConn would still be perceived as a top hoop school.

Anyway, I'm not looking to get slammed here. I'd love JC to stay 10 more years. But I'm just taking an honest look at recent history and really, it's not 'all that.'

With new facilities, etal, a new coach can likely at least maintain our recent records and hopefully even improve.

Honest thoughts?

YEAR RECORD BE RECORD BE SEED BE TRN WINS NCAA TRN SEED NCAA TRN WINS
2007 17-14 6-10 12 0 x 0
2008 25-8 13-5 4 0 4 0
2009 27-4 15-3 3 0 1 4
2010 18-16 7-11 12 0 x 0
2011 32-9 9-9 9 5 3 6
2012 20-14 8-10 9 2 9 0
2013 x 0 x 0

Total 139-65 58-48 7 10

"Cocaine is a helluva drug" - Rick James

 

[Huskies4ever]

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...

See, I put Cuse tier 2, Pitt tier 22 (kidding, they are tier 4 or later).

 

[UConnDan97]

"Cocaine is a helluva drug" - Rick James

 

[Dann]

i enjoy these kind of talks. so lets make a boneyard rating system and rate every team to come up with a list. any takers? how many things do you count and how much weight?

ncaa ship - 10 points
final 4- 9
elite 8- 8
sweet 16- 7
round of 32- 6
all american, ncaa app, lottery pick- 5
nit ship, draft pick non lottery- 4
conf ship title, nba all star-3

all time program wins-do some #'s to points scale? or maybe do it by winning % all time.

what else? changes? how many years do we go back? 30?

 

[Huskies4ever]

The poor bastard who started this post and Gregory Koch (who's a great poster and a proud UConn student, by the way). I feel sorry for Gregory. But the original poster was bashed worse than all but a few UConn fans in the history of this board (...and deservedly so)!

 

[Dann]

i'm just waiting for stb to chime in and tell us where cuse ranks.

maybe even al will check in and pimp out all those undefeated years rutgers has had.

 

[Huskies4ever]

i'm just waiting for stb to chime in and tell us where cuse ranks.

maybe even al will check in and pimp out all those undefeated years rutgers has had.

This thread became dominated by Dan's with reasoning (you, UConnDan97, and myself)! I like your idea with the points system, by the way. Maybe we can tweak it a little, but it is a great concept. Do you wanna bet our beloved Huskies will be ranked pretty favorably?

 

[hungry husky]

I actually don't have much of a problem with Florida being in there, based on the last decade or so of their performance. Donovan has certainly done a nice job there. The one I'm scratching my head on is....Indiana??? Is Bobby Knight back in town? They were okay under Davis and Sampson (and we know about Sampson). Crean had them playing pretty good last year (only last year, by the way), but he had a horrible time in his first three years (6-25, 10-21, 12-20), so.....Indiana???

If UConn ever had a three year stretch of 6-25, 10-21, and 12-20, I am pretty sure that half of the Boneyard would have already committed suicide...

Indiana is elite for me based on the fact that they can put together a shit string of years and still recruit the top players in the country. They're only recently in the elite conversation based on their play for me, but if you're using recent success as your primary consideration then they aren't elite.

 

[UConnDan97]

Indiana is elite for me based on the fact that they can put together a **** string of years and still recruit the top players in the country. They're only recently in the elite conversation based on their play for me, but if you're using recent success as your primary consideration then they aren't elite.

I hear what your saying, but then if that is the criteria, Pitt, Georgetown, Villanova, and Louisville are all elite too. To add to that, I'm not sure they are able to get the top recruits in the nation anymore. Here is a list of who they've sent to the NBA in the last 10 years (round):

2008 - Eric Gordon (1st) DJ White (1st)
2005 - Bracey Wright (2nd)
2002 - Jared Jeffries (1st)

Let's compare that with the world's most famous mid-major, Gonzaga:

2009 - Austin Daye (1st)
2006 - Adam Morrison (1st)
2005 - Ronny Turiaf (2nd)
2002 - Dan Dickau (1st)

So to recap, I'm not saying that Indiana isn't a very good program. All I'm saying is that it is very tough for them to still be considered "elite". Either way, it's all irrelevant, because the one thing I'm sure about is that UCONN IS ELITE!!!

 

[Kitaman]

Wow with so many responses I hope posters are not trying to convince themselves.

When I argue with an idiot what does that make me?

 

[UConnDan97]

Wow with so many responses I hope posters are not trying to convince themselves.

When I argue with an idiot what does that make me?

Either a bigger idiot.....or a teacher!

 

[HeGotGame]

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 guess your tier 3 just has a lot more teams then mine. For me, Tier 1 is the blue bloods, Tier 2 is the next 4 that round out the top 10 and Tier 3 rounds out the top 20.

Bama and OK state are not in my top 20. OK State has 3 EE since 1965. I need more then that.

Tier 2 - UConn, Mich State, LVille and Cuse

My tier 3 would be Florida, Ohio State, Michigan, Arizona, Gtown, NC State, Maryland, Texas, UNLV and BC. (1 in there is a joke, Ill leave it up to you to guess who it is.)

 

[freescooter]

there is a difference between certain "blue blood" programs, those who are always going to be given the benefit of the doubt, and can trace their success back several decades and the newer programs, so I sort of like the blue blood-new blood distinction. People will pay attention to Indiana and UCLA even if they are bad. In the next level, or maybe as an "or equal" column, sort of a level 1A, I would put UConn, Michigan State, and I can't really think of anyone else. Certainly not Arizona, maybe Florida if they do something beyond winning with essentially the same team back to back years. Those teams are maybe Tier 2, along with a few others. Syracuse, Louisville are the next level. Sorry that 2 national championships dating from before the computer era don't impress me. Same with Georgetown, who I'd put here along with a bunch of others like Texas. these are programs that have had solid runs and good resumes, but either haven't gotten over the top (Hi Louisville) or have some other issue that prevented them from reaching elite levels (can you spell choke, Syracuse?). they are always, or almost always, good, just not reularly elite.

 

[CL82]

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.

This post pushed me over the edge to my first ignore on the new board. Clueless, negative, and wordy it's like an amalgamation of the worst traits or the board's worst posters. Congratulations Greg, you are the Tolstoy of suckiness.