CBS Sports: Ranking top 25 college basketball programs of last 25 years

[RuffRuff]

14 Sweet Sixteens for MSU to 9 for Florida is pretty significant. That's 5 extra years, 25% of the total sample, that they were "competing". Even for blue bloods, I usually generally think of a Sweet 16 as a "successful season". That means you've got a capable team in striking distance of a FF/championship if things break the right way.

14 to 10 total league championships.

MSU 2 extra Final Fours, 8 more NCAA tournament wins. Florida has 2 extra titles.

It's pretty close to me. I usually view these things in terms of happiness utility and championship equity. Obviously you get the most utility and equity with a title by far, but league championships do bring me joy and getting to the Final Four is great, too. There's definitely a point of pride in never missing the tournament once in the sample, even if as you say to me it's not as important as actually doing damage in the tournament (and overall having more Sweet 16s and Final Fours shows that MSU did a lot of tournament damage).

It's funny, because if you ask me, based on distant perception, who feels like the most successful team of the last 25 years, I am easily going Florida. They have a B2B in there (which is a massive accomplishment), and then the third with a different coach which flushes the fluke angle. As for league tourney's - sure, they're nice, especially in the BE/MSG, not sure they hold nearly as much weight in other conferences.

End of the day a S16 doesn't really imprint in your memory all that much, it's just a data point. I personally find winning an NC, hoisting a trophy, holding a parade, getting to put that banner up, having confetti shower down on you, to have multiples in value over even just getting to a final and losing. The goal is to win championships.

 

[auror]

It's funny, because if you ask me, based on distant perception, who feels like the most successful team of the last 25 years, I am easily going Florida. They have a B2B in there (which is a massive accomplishment), and then the third with a different coach which flushes the fluke angle. As for league tourney's - sure, they're nice, especially in the BE/MSG, not sure they hold nearly as much weight in other conferences.

End of the day a S16 doesn't really imprint in your memory all that much, it's just a data point. I personally find winning an NC, hoisting a trophy, holding a parade, getting to put that banner up, having confetti shower down on you, to have multiples in value over even just getting to a final and losing. The goal is to win championships.

Big Ten teams do care a lot about league titles (at least according to the Big Ten fans that talk about such things, like Mark Titus). SEC fans probably not as much, though now that the league is suddenly really good at basketball, maybe that will change.

I think if you moved it 1 year into the future (and so MSU lost their lone title), it would swing pretty far in Florida's favor, but at least MSU had one plus all the other success. You still cut down nets for a Final Four, and MSU had 7 of them in the last 25 years.

 

[HooperScooper]

Something to remember about write ups like this is that they are often authored by Syracuse grads who naturally have an anti UConn bias although I do not know about this author. But putting Syracuse on this list is laughable.

Kyle Boone went to Oklahoma State. He's been an unabashed UConn supporter the last few years. In 2022 he was the first college basketball writer I saw who predicted that UConn was going to be much better than their preseason ranking.

 

[HooperScooper]

It should be based on the past 25 seasons (not years - misleading due to covid year), during which UConn has 6 NCs and 7 Final4s.

The 1998-1999 season was 27 seasons ago. So if you take out a Covid year then Michigan State has 1 championship in the last 25 seasons.

 

[HooperScooper]

UConn — 5 national titles (2004, 2011, 2014, 2023, 2024), 7 Final Fours, massive tourney win total; elite recent efficiency.

What year was the 7th Final Four?

 

[superjohn]

Big Ten teams do care a lot about league titles (at least according to the Big Ten fans that talk about such things, like Mark Titus). SEC fans probably not as much, though now that the league is suddenly really good at basketball, maybe that will change.

I think if you moved it 1 year into the future (and so MSU lost their lone title), it would swing pretty far in Florida's favor, but at least MSU had one plus all the other success. You still cut down nets for a Final Four, and MSU had 7 of them in the last 25 years.

Big 10 teams care a lot about league titles because it's the only titles they can win.

 

[HuskyHawk]

A better comparison would be SF Giants versus Yankees, I am pretty sure royals and marlins have the same championship count as the yankees (maybe florida has 2).... Whereas the Giants have 3 WS (maybe 4?) versus 1 for the yankees. I for the record would rather have rooted for the giants the last 25 years

That's a bad comparison. The Giants were really good most of the time. We're talking about a team that wins a title and misses the playoffs most of the time vs a team that makes the playoffs regularly and even loses in championship games or league championships winning roughly the same number of titles.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Would you say that the Kansas fans and UConn fans have had the same experience since 2000? Would you rather be a Kansas fan than a UConn fan?

I think there's a reasonable argument either way. Some would choose more titles and the bad years, some would choose fewer titles and making a run every year. It's entirely subjective and I think that one is pretty close and could go either way. Kansas fans under 50 don't even remember missing the tournament so it's hard for them to even know what that is like.

 

[RuffRuff]

Big Ten teams do care a lot about league titles (at least according to the Big Ten fans that talk about such things, like Mark Titus). SEC fans probably not as much, though now that the league is suddenly really good at basketball, maybe that will change.

I think if you moved it 1 year into the future (and so MSU lost their lone title), it would swing pretty far in Florida's favor, but at least MSU had one plus all the other success. You still cut down nets for a Final Four, and MSU had 7 of them in the last 25 years.

League titles don't register at all on a national level. Sure, if you're MSU maybe you can talk trash to your UM neighbor at the local brewery.

 

[Inyatkin]

Incidentally, a lot of the feast or famine talk that has dogged UConn over the past 30 years is going away under Hurley. We make the tournament even in "down" years, which did not used to happen. Barring something catastrophic this year we are looking at a sixth straight berth, which is unprecedented for us and smooths out the peaks and valleys pattern

 

[superjohn]

I think there's a reasonable argument either way. Some would choose more titles and the bad years, some would choose fewer titles and making a run every year. It's entirely subjective and I think that one is pretty close and could go either way. Kansas fans under 50 don't even remember missing the tournament so it's hard for them to even know what that is like.

You didn't answer the question.

I asked you personally, would you rather be a Kansas fan or a UConn fan the past 25 years?

 

[superjohn]

That's a bad comparison. The Giants were really good most of the time. We're talking about a team that wins a title and misses the playoffs most of the time vs a team that makes the playoffs regularly and even loses in championship games or league championships winning roughly the same number of titles.

Would you rather be a Yankees fan or a Red Sox fan the past 25 years?

 

[CL82]

Big Ten teams do care a lot about league titles

Probably because national championships are largely an unattainable goal for them, at least in the modern era.

It isn't worth the time to Google, but I'm pretty sure we have more national championships than the Big Ten does in total.

 

[RuffRuff]

Probably because national championships are largely an unattainable goal for them, at least in the modern era.

It isn't worth the time to Google, but I'm pretty sure we have more national championships than the Big Ten does in total.

The Big Ten Conference has 10 NCAA men’s basketball championships all-time.

Here’s the breakdown by school:

• Indiana – 5 (1940, 1953, 1976, 1981, 1987)
• Michigan State – 2 (1979, 2000)
• Michigan – 1 (1989)
• Ohio State – 1 (1960)
• Wisconsin – 1 (1941)

3 in modern era. 1 since 99. Never know how to qualify those ancient titles as they’re artifacts at this point.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Several flaws in his logic such as narrowing the evaluation to total wins as the deciding factor downplaying the actual achievements that define greatness in college basketball.

UConn gets low marks for missing tournaments and that skews ranking.

5 titles and 6 Final Fours are unmatched by any other team on that list.

His biased flaw is assuming that dips in performance somehow cancel out championships when in reality UConn's peaks at the very top matter more in legacy rankings than filling the middle with steady but lesser result

Then he moves to the absurd. UConn has won its 5 titles under three different coaches, somehow winning with multiple coaches is a bad thing.

If anything , it proves institutional strength and not just a single legacy coach dynasty. Our ability to reload and win under different regimes should add weight, not reduce it.

The true testament of a great program is postseason dominance and not simply padding regular season records or wins.

I get it, these guys don't really care, but the truth speaks for itself.

You need to understand their methodology:

1 - Place Duke at the top of the list.
2 - Formulate a set of criteria that supports criteria #1.
3 - Diminish UConn's accomplishments as much as reasonably possible.
4 - Fine tune the set of criteria to best support criteria #3 while still fully supporting criteria#1.

 

[auror]

The Big Ten Conference has 10 NCAA men’s basketball championships all-time.

Here’s the breakdown by school:

• Indiana – 5 (1940, 1953, 1976, 1981, 1987)
• Michigan State – 2 (1979, 2000)
• Michigan – 1 (1989)
• Ohio State – 1 (1960)
• Wisconsin – 1 (1941)

3 in modern era. 1 since 99. Never know how to qualify those ancient titles as they’re artifacts at this point.

1975 is the extended modern era (expanded to 32 teams and started having at-large bids and was more influential than NIT at that point) and in that timeframe the Big Ten has 6 and UConn has 6.

 

[Inyatkin]

Probably because national championships are largely an unattainable goal for them, at least in the modern era.

It isn't worth the time to Google, but I'm pretty sure we have more national championships than the Big Ten does in total.

Do they grandfather titles? They probably do. Bill Walton, Big Ten legend

 

[cullaville]

Syracuse pretty high considering they dropped basketball a few years back

LOL

 

[HooperScooper]

Probably because national championships are largely an unattainable goal for them, at least in the modern era.

It isn't worth the time to Google, but I'm pretty sure we have more national championships than the Big Ten does in total.

You are correct. Twice as many in fact. Starting with 1985 (first NCAA Tournament with 64 teams) the Big Ten has won 3 titles. 1987 Indiana, 1989 Michigan, and 2000 Michigan State. Can't count 2002 Maryland since they were in the ACC back then.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Would you rather be a Yankees fan or a Red Sox fan the past 25 years?

I'd rather chop off an arm than be a Yankees fan in any period. But I don't get the point. The Sox have the 4th most wins since 2000.

Maybe you could ask whether you'd want to be a Cleveland Guardians fan, 7th most wins since 2000 or a Royals fans, fewest wins but one WS.

 

[Tenspro2002]

Would you rather be a Yankees fan or a Red Sox fan the past 25 years?

As a Red Sox fan I go back and forth. The highs have been incredibly high (2004, 2007, 2013, 2018), and we've had other almost-there contending years (2003, 2008, 2016-17, 2021), but we've also had a share of soul-crushing lows/embarassments (also 2003, 2011, 2012, forgettable years in 2010, 2014, 2015, 2019, and the last few until this year).

The Yankees have been consistently in contention but fell short routinely.

I suppose it's more fun watching highlights from years you know resulted in a title.