Blue bloods of Womens BB

[Dogdude]

Barmore won another with his own players 1988.

Quibbling? Quibbling? This thread is a giant quibble dadummit. That's what we came here for!

Pah, he acts like quibbling is not a noble pursuit. Pah, I say again!

People wanna act like LA Tech ain't blueblood because it's old blood. That's the bluest of blood there is.

Once a blue blood, always a blue blood.

[End Rant]

Well, I'm not quibbling with you here, it's just that it's such a fun word to say over and over.
I do agree with the concept that limiting the discussion to NCAA women's basketball recognition is unfair and incorrect. The formation of the NCAA's women's hierarchy is simply an artificial date. Basketball was played before then, and with the way the NIL is going, might well be played after the NCAA is relevant. Ancient history is still history.

 

[Just.A.Fan]

CHRIS will not win another title as coach, When GENO retires , she will be retiring too. The end of the most successful era in Women's BB. NEVER will be equalled. The main reason is there is no coach right now that has the genius of GENO. I think before GENO retires he will pick his own successor and will guide him on. HUSKIES FOREVER!!!!!

What makes you think it will be a man? My money would be on a woman!

 

[ucmiami2]

Interesting because they don't list Uconn under the men's teams but they are as dominant as any team over the last two decades.

Best line in the article.

The Lady Volunteers haven’t made it past a Sweet 16 since 2016,

Better line would be 'haven't made won an elite 8 game since 2008'!

 

[bballnut90]

I’d say Tennessee and UCONN are the clear top 2, both in terms of titles, title game appearances and Final Four appearances, not to mention longevity and consistent success.

Below them I’d put Notre Dame and Stanford, both of whom have had consistently strong runs for 25-30 years and a couple of titles.

Then there are a lot of “next tier” programs including:
-Baylor who effectively had a great 15-16 year stretch under Kim but has dropped off

-South Carolina who is in the midst of a great stretch but it has only lasted a decade so far. If Dawn racks up a couple of more titles I think they solidify their place in the grouping above.

-LSU who had a solid 6-7 year run in the 2000s and has transformed back into a national power under Kim

-LaTech who was dominant in the 80s and 90s


Other notables:
-Maryland has been excellent for about 20 years and won a title

-Louisville had a great stretch from 2009-2023, level of success appears to be tailing off though

-Duke was an elite program in the late 90s/2000s and remained relevant through most of the 2010s

-Georgia had a great 20ish year run under Andy Landers

-Marsha Sharp had a strong 15 year run at Texas Tech and won a title

-Iowa has had strong streaks throughout their history under multiple coaches

 

[visitingcock]

Let’s make it simple. Name all the programs who have been to four consecutive Final Fours,

Yes. @Next 12 . We know the top answer.

 

[HuskyNan]

Let’s make it simple. Name all the programs who have been to four consecutive Final Fours,

Yes. @Next 12 . We know the top answer.

Now name all of the teams that have been to 12 consecutive Final Fours

 

[Just.A.Fan]

Let’s make it simple. Name all the programs who have been to four consecutive Final Fours,

Yes. @Next 12 . We know the top answer.

Name which schools women's BB programs have been to at least 20 final four appearances?

 

[visitingcock]

Now name all of the teams that have been to 12 consecutive Final Fours

That’s not heavily implied by my note to Next 12?

 

[HuskyNan]

Name which schools women's BB programs have been to at least 20 final four appearances?

...since 2000 and been to every NCAA tournament since 1989. Except 2020 when the tourney was cancelled, of course

 

[Just.A.Fan]

...since 2000.

Sure, that's fine!

Oh, you edited your initial post.

 

[CL82]

The criterion of having to win a championship under at least two different coaches, in order to be viewed as a "blue blood" program, is arguably an important one

I don't know that I've ever heard that criterion used for Blue Bloods. I have heard it used for dynasty, but only rarely.

I think your central point is spot on, though. You can't have any conversation about "Blue Bloods" until you define what you mean by that. The term seems to mean different things to different people, particularly in men's basketball. Some people seem to define it as being good in the 40s, wow others seem to define it as the best four teams currently. The term seems to be the Rorschach test of basketball with ever-changing definitions.

All that said, by any criteria Connecticut women's basketball is a Blue Blood program (and by most criteria, the men's program is as well.)

 

[CL82]

CHRIS will not win another title as coach, When GENO retires , she will be retiring too. The end of the most successful era in Women's BB. NEVER will be equalled. The main reason is there is no coach right now that has the genius of GENO. I think before GENO retires he will pick his own successor and will guide him on. HUSKIES FOREVER!!!!!

You are probably correct, though I am not certain of this.

From an economics perspective it makes sense for Chris to be the head coach for a season or two and earned Geno's $3 million salary. I'm not saying every coach of Connecticut women's basketball needs to be paid that amount, but certainly Dailey should be if she takes the job.

From a transition perspective CD a year or two makes sense as well. It would allow a seamless transition to a new head coach and would be a respectful gesture towards the most recent recruits. Off the top of my head I could certainly see Chris as head coach and say Carla Barube joining the team as associate head coach for a year or two before stepping into the head coach role.

All of that said, Chris has said that she doesn't intend to coach once Geno leaves. Of course, she also has said that they're not joined at the hip. So who knows?

 

[Rowdy831]

Dynastic Blueblood:: LA tech (ancient though it is)

Blue bloods: UConn, Tennessee, Stanford, Notre Dame, Baylor, SCar ( minimum 2 NCs and a decade of excellence)

Tier 3: all the other former champs who aren’t blue bloods.U$C No decade of dominance.

Pretty good list I would say. Not too sure about Baylor and I wouldn't include South Carolina but that would be based more the Blue Blood definition than them not being deserving of being recognized as one the great programs of the sport.