Blue Blood - does Florida qualify?

[jleves]

Only thing I have to add is that Duke was anointed Blue Blood almost immediately after winning three or four without much debate. Their history is only 8 years more than ours (yes, they had some final fours before that). Their first in 91, our first in 99. And their last is 8 years older than our last. Just saying they don't have some UNC, UCLA, Kentucky history to them.

 

[bendm]

Only thing I have to add is that Duke was anointed Blue Blood almost immediately after winning three or four without much debate. Their history is only 8 years more than ours (yes, they had some final fours before that). Their first in 91, our first in 99. And their last is 8 years older than our last. Just saying they don't have some UNC, UCLA, Kentucky history to them.

Duke should rename their arena to Dick Vitale Indoor stadium

 

[superjohn]

I did value them more than anything else. But Ok So you’re arguing with the value Ive assigned to winning in each round. Winning a game in the tournament gets progressively harder with each round so the Fibonacci sequence is fitting. How would you assign the values so chips are worth even more? Would you double the value for each successive round? I don’t think it’s twice as hard to win in each successive game but I wouldn’t call you ridiculous for thinking it. But it is kinda ridiculous to say that to someone else with nothing more than a subjective top 10 to back it up.

Your chart is ridiculous and is no way objective.

I didn't call you ridiculous. I called it ridiculous putting Michigan over Villanova.

 

[bendm]

Your chart is ridiculous and is no way objective.

I didn't call you ridiculous. I called it ridiculous putting Michigan over Villanova.

Ya hear that everyone? Just defer to the top 10 superjohn scribbled on the back of a napkin based on the values he assigned using the superjohn sequence. All 100% objective and mathematically sound.

 

[superjohn]

Ya hear that everyone? Just defer to the top 10 superjohn scribbled on the back of a napkin and the values he assigned using the superjohn sequence. All 100% objective and mathematically sound.

Learn the difference between objective and subjective.

 

[jleves]

Your chart is ridiculous and is no way objective.

I didn't call you ridiculous. I called it ridiculous putting Michigan over Villanova.

I don't think it's ridiculous, but I would like to see it be 1,2,4,8,16,32. Isn't a championship at least double the worth of a final four?

I'd also like to see it from 1985 when the tourney went to 64.

 

[superjohn]

I don't think it's ridiculous, but I would like to see it be 1,2,4,8,16,32. Isn't a championship at least double the worth of a final four?

I'd also like to see it from 1985 when the tourney went to 64.

I think putting a numerical value to a national championship is silly.

 

[jleves]

I think putting a numerical value to a national championship is silly.

OK, understood it's arbitrary, but is there a better way to rank teams?

We all (well probably most) want to rank things.

 

[businesslawyer]

Noah and Horford both had wealthy athlete fathers. One of the others was well off too, as I recall, but I'm not sure who it was and I'm too lazy to research it right now.

Wasn’t one of that Florida teams guards named Green? I think he was the son of Sydney Green, who played for UNLV and then in the NBA. Noah’s father was Yannick Noah, a top 5 French tennis player. Don’t recall about Horford,

 

[Mr. French]

Wasn’t one of that Florida teams guards named Green? I think he was the son of Sydney Green, who played for UNLV and then in the NBA. Noah’s father was Yannick Noah, a top 5 French tennis player. Don’t recall about Horford,

Taurean Green, yes son of Sidney Green. Horford’s dad was in the league too.

 

[superjohn]

OK, understood it's arbitrary, but is there a better way to rank teams?

We all (well probably most) want to rank things.

The best way is by championships, that's how it's done in every other sport. It makes sense to factor in the 64 team era and the ones before it but championships should always be the standard in sports.

 

[bendm]

The best way is by championships, that's how it's done in every other sport. It makes sense to factor in the 64 team era and the ones before it but championships should always be the standard in sports.

And therein lies the question doesn’t it? how much are you factoring those things in, i.e., what are they worth. You say it’s silly to assign values but won’t explain how exactly you divine your rankings. That’s exactly the problem with the blue blood convo it’s always been based on perception.

 

[superjohn]

Wasn’t one of that Florida teams guards named Green? I think he was the son of Sydney Green, who played for UNLV and then in the NBA. Noah’s father was Yannick Noah, a top 5 French tennis player. Don’t recall about Horford,

Tito Horford. He played a little bit in the NBA and then overseas.

 

[superjohn]

And therein lies the question doesn’t it? how much are you factoring those things in, i.e., what are they worth.

Do people judge MLB franchises or NBA franchises historically based on making the playoffs or winning a round?

Where would Syracuse be in relation to UConn in your eyes/using your chart before 2023 or before 2014?

 

[RuffRuff]

I think putting a numerical value to a national championship is silly.

A NC should be worth well more than double being in a final. There is plenty if subjectivity to this or else it wouldn’t be such a debate. Very few runner ups are remembered.

You could argue so many metrics into this. Quality of NC. Dominance. Recency. B2B.

 

[bendm]

Do people judge MLB franchises or NBA franchises historically based on making the playoffs or winning a round?

No but I would never compare the nba and the ncaa that’s just silly. You also dodged the question

 

[superjohn]

No but I would never compare the nba and the ncaa that’s just silly. You also dodged the question

I already said putting a numerical value to national championships is silly.

Where would Syracuse rank for you as a program based on your chart in relation to UConn before 2023 and before 2014?

 

[superjohn]

So if it’s silly then how does your ranking factor in the other things you mentioned like final fours? How much weight do they carry by comparison? Is it just a feeling that’s very serious and not at all silly?

I'll ask for a third time.

Where would Syracuse rank for you as a program based on your chart in relation to UConn before 2023 and before 2014?

 

[bendm]

I'll ask for a third time.

Where would Syracuse rank for you as a program based on your chart in relation to UConn before 2023 and before 2014?

And I’ll ask for a fourth time, if it’s silly then how exactly does your ranking factor in the other things you mentioned like final fours? How much weight do they carry by comparison to chips? Is it all based on a very serious feeling that’s not at all silly?

Idk where Cuse would rank in a given year id have to recalculate based on their respective tourney success to that cutoff date but it currently factors in tourney success from 1975-2025.

 

[superjohn]

And I’ll ask for a fourth time, if it’s silly then how exactly does your ranking factor in the other things you mentioned like final fours? How much weight do they carry by comparison to chips? Is it all based on a very serious feeling that’s not at all silly?

Idk where Cuse would rank in a given year id have to recalculate based on their respective tourney success to that cutoff date but it currently factors in tourney success from 1975-2025.

Final 4's don't carry much weight with me at all, it's all about national championships. It's why I have UConn ahead of Duke, I already said this.

My guess is you would've had Syracuse ahead of UConn as a program before 2014 and possibly had Syracuse ahead of UConn before 2023. I would like you to weigh in on this.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Michigan's one title is probably the most controversial win in the last 50 years too, with an absolutely terrible call to simply hand Michigan the win.

They are not remotely close to Villanova until they win again.

 

[bendm]

Final 4's don't carry much weight with me at all, it's all about national championships. It's why I have UConn ahead of Duke, I already said this.

My guess is you would've had Syracuse ahead of UConn as a program before 2014 and possibly had Syracuse ahead of UConn before 2023. I would like you to weigh in on this.

You’ve made it crystal clear how you rank UConn against Duke and that’s about it. I’m not going through the trouble of recalculating UConn versus Cuse in 2014 and 2023

 

[nelsonmuntz]

The "Blue Bloods" door may be closing for good. Championships are simply going to be purchased going forward, so tradition and reputation are going to become irrelevant. There is no point in having a designation if it is simply a measure of which university wants to blow the most cash on its affiliated professional team.

Baseball will be the model. The Dodgers and Yankees are not blue bloods, they are simply the two markets with the most money. Astros, Rangers, Red Sox and Giants all challenge, all from big, wealthy metro areas. The next 10 franchises are fighting for scraps, and everyone after that does not matter, they may collectively make 1 or 2 World Series every decade.

 

[RuffRuff]

The "Blue Bloods" door may be closing for good. Championships are simply going to be purchased going forward, so tradition and reputation are going to become irrelevant. There is no point in having a designation if it is simply a measure of which university wants to blow the most cash on its affiliated professional team.

Baseball will be the model. The Dodgers and Yankees are not blue bloods, they are simply the two markets with the most money. Astros, Rangers, Red Sox and Giants all challenge, all from big, wealthy metro areas. The next 10 franchises are fighting for scraps, and everyone after that does not matter, they may collectively make 1 or 2 World Series every decade.

Twas my argument on why the Cinderella is dead and tourneys will be chalky. Economics driving a massive wedge in the talent gap.

 

[auror]

Only thing I have to add is that Duke was anointed Blue Blood almost immediately after winning three or four without much debate. Their history is only 8 years more than ours (yes, they had some final fours before that). Their first in 91, our first in 99. And their last is 8 years older than our last. Just saying they don't have some UNC, UCLA, Kentucky history to them.

Duke does have UNC/UCLA/Kentucky history to them as long as you're not strictly talking about titles. "Some final fours" is a funny way of saying 8 final fours before 1991 (which is still more than UConn has as a program now). They literally lost to UCLA and UK in title games in the 60s and 70s. They have more wins overall as a program than UCLA. UConn has like 500 less. They're 5th in tournament appearances, and the ones above them are all the names you'd expect (UK, Kansas, UCLA, UNC). They were anointed without fanfare because they already fit all the aspects. We're 14th in bids. They're 4th in Sweet 16s (UK, UNC, UCLA, then them), we're 12th.

 

[Hoophound]

Duke does have UNC/UCLA/Kentucky history to them as long as you're not strictly talking about titles. "Some final fours" is a funny way of saying 8 final fours before 1991 (which is still more than UConn has as a program now). They literally lost to UCLA and UK in title games in the 60s and 70s. They have more wins overall as a program than UCLA. UConn has like 500 less. They're 5th in tournament appearances, and the ones above them are all the names you'd expect (UK, Kansas, UCLA, UNC). They were anointed without fanfare because they already fit all the aspects. We're 14th in bids. They're 4th in Sweet 16s (UK, UNC, UCLA, then them), we're 12th.

We’re definitely new money compared to Duke and UK, but to younger people, 35 years of excellence isn’t new money.

 

[businesslawyer]

The "blue blood" debates are meaningless because "blue blood" is an undefined term. To some people it means schools that were good in the 1950s. To others it means schools that are good now. To still others it means schools that have had multiple national championships.

Anytime someone wants to have this debate, the first paragraph of any article needs to be for the purposes of this article, this the definition of blue blood..

What are you, a lawyer? Taking the fun out of everything? (Not that you’re not right.)

 

[NHUConnfan]

What the heck is this list lol

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Twas my argument on why the Cinderella is dead and tourneys will be chalky. Economics driving a massive wedge in the talent gap.

Eh, that is kind of your argument. The problem with your argument is that you think that there is some magic with the "P4". Whatever problems basketball may have with competitiveness, football's are going to be 5x worse. The performance gap between #1 and #50 in hoops will be smaller than the gap between #1 and #15 in football. The performance gap between #1 and #100 in basketball will be smaller than the gap between #1 and #30 in football. Without a major shock to the system, which is unlikely but not out of the question, the future of football is decided. Everyone on the outside today in football, and that includes most of the P4, has already lost. Show is over, train has left the station, ship has sailed, use any analogy you want. It. Is. Over. With basketball, there is potential for movement for a bunch of reasons that are worth their own thread.

 

[Lafayette]

Weird that anyone can put UCLA as a blue blood but does not see that the field was like 18-24 teams for some of theirs and barely expanded for the bulk.

1964!