Greatest College BB Programs Ever | Page 4 | The Boneyard

Greatest College BB Programs Ever

NJHusky said:
They are counting the forfeited title in the calculation....WHY???
Expand ...
ucp990411 said:
Yup. But 2013 for Louisville was vacated so that one doesn't count.
Expand ...

Vacated games were counted. See the rationale used:
"Each team had their categories added up and that led to a point total. All appearances in the NCAA Tournament, Final Four, all vacated wins did count in this scenario. The teams played those games, and won or lost them. They happened, so they count. "

My bet is the criteria were massaged until they got the results they wanted. Why else would you count NBA picks (weighted heavily toward the higher picks)? The fact those picks helped with other criteria, like wins and titles and tournament bids, Final Fours and National Championships is double dipping IMHO.
 
HooperScooper said:
And the official Top 10 is:


The criteria chosen and the choice of point levels awarded for each leaves open lots of possibilities for "massaging the data" until the basic ranking you want is achieved. Not likely to get it exactly as you want it but putting it all on a spread sheet and changing point awards for each category until you get close is certainly possible.

For example, the award of points for NBA picks is one way to award more points to schools that have already piled up lots of points with wins, championships, etc. It just seems redundant to me.

See all criteria and how points were awarded:

"CBS Sports' assembly of the 68 best programs in history (read the ranking of Nos. 68-51 and Nos. 50-26) was objectively driven by the data. Still, I did need to come up with categories and assign values to them. I relied upon wins and losses, NCAA Tournament success, conference dominance, NIT titles -- because it was a significant tournament for decades, and even still is a marked achievement in today's age -- and the cultivation of NBA talent. Those categories' points were added up and the master order was determined. "

  1. NCAA Tournament championships (20 points)
  2. Final Four appearances without a national title (10 points)
  3. Regular-season titles (5 points)
  4. Elite Eights without making the Final Four (3 points)
  5. NIT titles (3 points)
  6. NCAA Tournament bids (2 points)
  7. Wins (0.5 points)
  8. Losses (-0.5 points)
  9. Wins over ranked opponents (0.5 points)
  10. Weeks ranked (0.1 point)
  11. Top-10 NBA picks (5 points)
  12. 11-30 NBA picks (3 points)
  13. 31-60 NBA picks (1 point)
Expand ...
 
I don't have huge issues with the top 5, but seeing Cincinnati and Louisville there do irk me a bit. I really think UConn should be sitting at #6.

At the end of the day, it's not the end of the world.

This does kind of vilify our claims that we are a blue blood, and that in itself does please me.
 
I would argue that through 1970, an NIT title should be roughly equivalent to an NCAA title. I believe the 1970 Marquette team was the last big time program to turn down an NCAA bid for an NIT bid, but prior to 1970, the NIT was usually the deeper tournament because it was entirely at-large bids while the NCAA had mostly automatic bids, quite a few of which went to weak teams from weak conferences. Look at some of the teams UCLA played before the Final Four to win its early titles. There were a lot of wins over teams like UC Santa Barbara, New Mexico State and Santa Clara.

The NCAA Tournament didn't start to look like the modern tournament until the mid 70's, when it began significant expansion and also stopped the practice of regional bracketing in the early rounds (I can't find exactly when the regional bracketing ended). In 1981 the NCAA added the 3 point line, in 1985 it expanded the tournament to 64 teams, and in 1986 it added a shot clock. It is really hard to compare what happened prior to those three events with what happened after.

A championship from 1960 should be worth maybe half the value of a championship from 1990 or 2020.
 
CallMeBruce said:
They have more NCAA appearances, more wins, a better record overall, more final fours, and more weeks ranked.
Expand ...
Have to remember that they were very good in the "Never Nervous Purvis" era...
 
Butch said:
That's like saying UConn women's bball are not a blue blood 60 years from now, only because they didn't win a title they in 25 years.
Expand ...
If the women go 25 years without winning a title, and are not in a bunch of Final Fours in that span, then, yes, I would not consider them a blue blood anymore.
 
.-.
brasssbonanzaa said:
UConn is tied or leads in most national championships in the past (starting from 2019) 10 years, 20 years, since the turn of the century, and the last 25 years. A total of five programs have more titles.

But not yet in this arbitrary blue blood group?
Expand ...
I dunno, maybe I have an inferiority complex. Perhaps it feels to me to be a little bit like giving oneself one's own nickname. But, for whatever reason, I've never held our program to be at the same "blue blood" level as UK, KU, Duke and UNC. UConn is next in line in my mind, and will be included in that first group if and when we have some big successes (a few Final Fours, at least 1 championship, NCAAT every year) in the next 10 years.

Note: Everything I say in this thread should be read with the caveat that this whole discussion is somewhat stupid and extremely subjective. Definitely fun, though!
 
Get a Job said:
I dunno, maybe I have an inferiority complex. Perhaps it feels to me to be a little bit like giving oneself one's own nickname. But, for whatever reason, I've never held our program to be at the same "blue blood" level as UK, KU, Duke and UNC. UConn is next in line in my mind, and will be included in that first group if and when we have some big successes (a few Final Fours, at least 1 championship, NCAAT every year) in the next 10 years.

Note: Everything I say in this thread should be read with the caveat that this whole discussion is somewhat stupid and extremely subjective. Definitely fun, though!
Expand ...
Agreed
 
I still feel like UConn is treated by the bluebloods the way the Italian Cycling team treated Dave in Breaking Away. Never really accepted.
 
Watchdog said:
My bet is the criteria were massaged until they got the results they wanted. Why else would you count NBA picks (weighted heavily toward the higher picks)? The fact those picks helped with other criteria, like wins and titles and tournament bids, Final Fours and National Championships is double dipping IMHO.
Expand ...

Don't be ridiculous. Norlander did not change the formula to get certain results. If anything, the way he treated the numbers helped us, as everyone one of those Yankee Conference titles counted the same as our Big East titles.
 
.-.
I didn’t realize Cincinnati was considered an all-time great program, but I always enjoy our battles with them. Their team identity fits so well in the Big East (and they used to recruit very well in NYC) and their football program seems to have outgrown the AAC. Im sure they’d love to join a power football conference but I wonder if football independence and re-joining the Big East is a better position for them than their current state. I really don’t know enough about the dynamics of college football to say, but I would like to see another public university join the Big East
 
Ts5034 said:
If they are judging programs basically from their existence, you can see some surprises like a St John's making the top 25. IIRC, St John's is ranked top 10 for all time wins in college basketball history.
Expand ...
I remember when St Johns was good year in and year out. It all changed when they changed their name to "Red Storm" lol!
 
BoukofJames said:
I didn’t realize Cincinnati was considered an all-time great program, but I always enjoy our battles with them. Their team identity fits so well in the Big East (and they used to recruit very well in NYC) and their football program seems to have outgrown the AAC. Im sure they’d love to join a power football conference but I wonder if football independence and re-joining the Big East is a better position for them than their current state. I really don’t know enough about the dynamics of college football to say, but I would like to see another public university join the Big East
Expand ...
How do you think Xavier would we feel about this?
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
I would argue that through 1970, an NIT title should be roughly equivalent to an NCAA title. I believe the 1970 Marquette team was the last big time program to turn down an NCAA bid for an NIT bid, but prior to 1970, the NIT was usually the deeper tournament because it was entirely at-large bids while the NCAA had mostly automatic bids, quite a few of which went to weak teams from weak conferences. Look at some of the teams UCLA played before the Final Four to win its early titles. There were a lot of wins over teams like UC Santa Barbara, New Mexico State and Santa Clara.

The NCAA Tournament didn't start to look like the modern tournament until the mid 70's, when it began significant expansion and also stopped the practice of regional bracketing in the early rounds (I can't find exactly when the regional bracketing ended). In 1981 the NCAA added the 3 point line, in 1985 it expanded the tournament to 64 teams, and in 1986 it added a shot clock. It is really hard to compare what happened prior to those three events with what happened after.

A championship from 1960 should be worth maybe half the value of a championship from 1990 or 2020.
Expand ...
That is what I was saying about Providence they had 2 NIT titles that they won when the NIT was really seen as the better tournament. Deeper field, no automatic bids. At large teams in particular often chose it over the NCAAs. I’m not sure I agree that rule changes like the 3 point line and shot clock made the Championship tougher. Those changed the game some but not sure they made it tougher but certainly the expansion to 48 then 64 did.
 
That list actually is interesting and the methodology definitely is very interesting, as well. Screw it, we need more titles to move up in the public eye.

At least the men's program. Women's program is a media darling.
 
Syracuse thread on this
 

Attachments

  • 247F66A2-EEB9-4C41-BBB8-3185CCD4E38A.jpeg
    247F66A2-EEB9-4C41-BBB8-3185CCD4E38A.jpeg
    288.2 KB · Views: 303
.-.
It’s hard to believe that we were just named the 8th greatest program in the history of college basketball and some people are viewing this as negative in any way. Can you imagine telling anyone in 1989 that UConn would be considered a top-10 program of all-time in 2020? It’s fun to debate lists like this, even ones with objective criteria, but I was stoked to be reminded of our standing among the greatest programs.

I think an interesting list would be the top programs since the NCAA Tournament expanded to 1985 teams. Somebody with more time on their hands than me should make that list.
 
ToolzieFan said:
It’s hard to believe that we were just named the 8th greatest program in the history of college basketball and some people are viewing this as negative in any way. Can you imagine telling anyone in 1989 that UConn would be considered a top-10 program of all-time in 2020? It’s fun to debate lists like this, even ones with objective criteria, but I was stoked to be reminded of our standing among the greatest programs.

I think an interesting list would be the top programs since the NCAA Tournament expanded to 1985 teams. Somebody with more time on their hands than me should make that list.
Expand ...
These lists are always silly, that we're only 2 places in front of Cincy and behind Louisville is nothing to take pride in. Sorry I clicked on it.
 
They're looking at programs from every angle. Weeks ranked to NBA draftees. We've been ranked for maybe more than half as many weeks as Louisville
 
While the stats are there for Kentucky to be #1, it chaps my butt none the less.
 
All Time
1-UCLA
2-Kentucky
3-UNC
4-Duke
5-Indiana
6-Kansas
7-UConn
8-Louisville
9-Nova
10-Mich State

Modern Era - since 1980
1-UNC
2-Duke
3-UConn
4-Kentucky
5-Louisville
6-Nova
7-Kansas
8-Florida
9-Indiana
10-Mich State

Last 5 Years
1-Nova
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,175
Messages
4,555,785
Members
10,441
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom