How would you rank the programs to win 3 or more NCs?

[johnhuskies95]

Danny Manning isn't the issue here. He's just the first guy who came to mind. I'm sure that there are a lot of coaches out there that Kansas would target. Other than Manning, I don't know who they would be. The point is that the future of Kansas isn't dependent on whether or not Bill Self stays there.

Kansas has had 4 coaches over the last 50 years. It's not like they've been churning out coach after coach year after year that has success. They've happened to make several good hires in a row.

No program is better than a crappy coach. And if you don't think that's true, go look up Billy Gillespie and Matt Doherty.

 

[Dooley]

My list:

1. UK -combo of rich history and recent success;
2. Duke - so good, they're allowed to play Tourney games 30 miles from campus most years ;
3. UNC - see, Duke;
4. UCONN - because I said so;
5. UCLA - still Top 5 worthy but lack of recent success slides them down
6. Kansas
7. Indiana
8. Louisville

 

[UConn990411]

Kansas has been to 14 Final Fours and hasn't missed an NCAA tournament since 1989. Kansas, historically, is easily a better program than UConn, unless you literally count nothing but NCAA championships.

Am I really supposed to be impressed by Kansas' inability to win big games?

I definitely think there's a case to be made for taking the team that's won four NCAA titles in five FF appearances over the team with three in 14.

 

[CallMeBruce]

Kansas has had 4 coaches over the last 50 years. It's not like they've been churning out coach after coach year after year that has success. They've happened to make several good hires in a row.

No program is better than a crappy coach. And if you don't think that's true, go look up Billy Gillespie and Matt Doherty.

Gillespie and Doherty were bad hires, but that's the point. Kentucky and UNC immediately recovered when they were replaced. If UConn lost Ollie, and then hired a jerk like Gillespie, I'm not sure the program recovers, at least not as quickly as Kentucky and UNC. Both of those programs fired lousy coaches and then poached guys who had been to the Final Four the prior year, and then were immediately elite programs again.

Am I really supposed to be impressed by Kansas' inability to win big games?I definitely think there's a case to be made for taking the team that's won four NCAA titles in five FF appearances over the team with three in 14.

If UConn had lost in the Final Four in '90, '95, '98, '02, or '06, would those have been worse seasons? Would the '09 team have been better off losing to Alabama? Getting to the Final Four is better than not getting to the Final Four. Treating Final Fours like they're only good if they lead to a title is absurd.

 

[johnhuskies95]

Gillespie and Doherty were bad hires, but that's the point. Kentucky and UNC immediately recovered when they were replaced. If UConn lost Ollie, and then hired a jerk like Gillespie, I'm not sure the program recovers, at least not as quickly as Kentucky and UNC. Both of those programs fired lousy coaches and then poached guys who had been to the Final Four the prior year, and then were immediately elite programs again.

You're completely speculating. UConn has only had to hire one new coach since they became a national power, and that guy led them to a national title in his second year. We don't know which coaches would be knocking on Manuel's door should Ollie or the next coach leave, but I'm guessing they would be pretty good.

 

[CallMeBruce]

You're completely speculating. UConn has only had to hire one new coach since they became a national power, and that guy led them to a national title in his second year. We don't know which coaches would be knocking on Manuel's door should Ollie or the next coach leave, but I'm guessing they would be pretty good.

I am speculating, but I'm certainly not alone in thinking that we're in the middle of a critical stretch for the future of UConn basketball. If Ollie makes another couple of and maybe wins another title over the next 10 years, and then leaves, he's probably very replaceable. If it happened now, I'm far less confident about who we'd be able to get.

 

[johnhuskies95]

I am speculating, but I'm certainly not alone in thinking that we're in the middle of a critical stretch for the future of UConn basketball. If Ollie makes another couple of and maybe wins another title over the next 10 years, and then leaves, he's probably very replaceable. If it happened now, I'm far less confident about who we'd be able to get.

There were rumors that a lot of very good coaches were legitimate candidates when Calhoun was on the cusp of retiring. I think that UConn is a lot better job than you think it is.

 

[SixRings]

Am I just stupid or is the original question unclear? If its about the teams retrospectively than who cares because history already has defined it. If the OP question is the next team to win three more than I will go with the side of the coin that keeps hitting -
#1 UConn - Not because homer but like their chances in the next 10 - 15 years. And a homer.
#2 Kentucky - Their recruiting dynamics (could also be the team to miss the most tournaments in the next 10 - 15 years).
#3 UofL - Pitino can win the big game, seems settled in, is getting recruits, probably dead from anal penetration accident before year 10
#4 Duke - But MK will retire within the next 10 yrs so ???
#5 MSU - same as Duke but how long does TI have left?
#6 UNC - Could get messy there moving forward. Recruits might have to go class and stuff.
#7 KU
#8 Mich
#9 Pick em Wisky, OSU, ???

 

[UConnLen]

You're missing the point. I'm not counting one thing at the exclusion of all others. That's what you're doing. Kansas has 560 more wins all-time, they have 26 more conference titles, 12 more NCAA tournament appearances (including the last 25), 9 more Sweet Sixteen appearances, 10 more Elite Eights, 9 more Final Fours, and 5 more championship game appearances. UConn has one more championship. I'm very proud of that, but it certainly doesn't mean more than all of that other success combined.

Great, but even if you completely eliminate those years, it's still 60% more final fours than UConn has ever been to.

When you're bitching about how valid your opinion is compared to mine, then yes, I'd say you're acting like you weren't expecting to be disagreed with.

I generally look at those separately. This one is my mistake.

So you're going to discount Big 12 and Big 8 success, but you're counting Yankee Conference titles?

Listen, it's a UConn board, and I get that. But I try to be at least somewhat objective. And saying that UConn is a more successful basketball program than Kansas is ludicrous. And I know this because I'm terrified of what would happen if our coach left. If Bill Self left Kansas next season, they'd go steal Danny Manning or promote an assistant or pick whatever top coach they want. If Ollie leaves UConn within the next couple of seasons, it's a body blow from which the program may not recover. A top-5 program all-time doesn't have to worry about that sort of thing.

Wake up Bruce-many outsiders said that when JC left it would be over for UConn bball too! UConn is simply a better program in 2014 than Kansas-based on results the last 20 years. Kansas is still great too.

 

[ASweet3781]

Well for starters I will rank UConn ahead of Kansas for no other reason than to annoy CallmeBruce who did nothing but annoy me with his hysteria in this thread building up Kansas and knocking down UConn. Makes perfect sense to do that on a UConn board. Make the case all you want based on records and stats . But spare me the cliches that have already been disproven. Uconn can't replace Ollie? Why would we have to last time I checked he said he wasn't going anywhere. Were you one of the wise men who thought UConn would never replace Calhoun? And than you act like Danny Manning is some proven tested sure fire elite coach based on winning a mid major tournament? Buzz off.

I don't normally like diminishing accomplishments but seeing Bruce went out of his way to do it for us, Should be noted that one of Kansas titles came while playing a home game and the other came off a massive choke by Memphis. Kansas was that close from even a less impressive win the big one resume. One that's long enough to begin with.

Anyways:
1 Kentucky
2 Duke
3 UNC
4 UCLA
5 UConn
6 Kansas
7 Louisville
8 Indiana

 

[BlueMAB]

Great, just what this place needs. Another Nelson who likes to fabricate strawmen opinions so he can easily shoot them down.

 

[David 76]

You need to define your parameters.
Best now ? (who is better than us?)
Best since the field went to 64 teams? (We arrived late to the party but caught almost everyone)
Best in history? UCLA and KY. And you can't count KY last championship or any that may come out of the Calipari era if you disparage UCLA because they" got all the good players"
Best value? If you were buying stock in any of these teams, UCONN would be the hot one. Duke & KY would still be blue chip. Kansas, UNC, might be slipping. UCLA is stable but not worth nearly as much as it once did

And just to add it one more time, F Kansas
And I hope in a few years it will be clear that UNC no longer belongs in this conversation either.

 

[dogfan96]

You need to define your parameters.
Best now ? (who is better than us?)
Best since the field went to 64 teams? (We arrived late to the party but caught almost everyone)
Best in history? UCLA and KY. And you can't count KY last championship or any that may come out of the Calipari era if you disparage UCLA because they" got all the good players"
Best value? If you were buying stock in any of these teams, UCONN would be the hot one. Duke & KY would still be blue chip. Kansas, UNC, might be slipping. UCLA is stable but not worth nearly as much as it once did

And just to add it one more time, F Kansas
And I hope in a few years it will be clear that UNC no longer belongs in this conversation either.

Well UCLA's rampant cheating is a proven fact. That alone should earn them a huge asterisk at the very least.

 

[Fishy]

I'm rejecting the original question.

As an elitist, I only rank teams with four championships - you are all free to associate with teams with just three titles, but I refuse to deal in scrapple.

I also discount titles won before I was born. I count those as half a title because the world was half as competent before I arrived. I also gave out demerits if most of those titles were before cable television because I felt like it - sorry, UCLA, but at some point, a title in 1971 loses its luster. A title in the 64-68 team era is a tougher nut than running through fewer than half that.

1) Kentucky - 6 titles
2) UCLA - 7 titles
3) UConn - 4 titles
4) Duke - 4 titles
5) North Carolina - 4.5 titles
6) Indiana - 4 titles

 

[husky91]

1) UK
2) KU
3) Zona
4) duke
5) UCLA
6) UNC
7) Ville
8) UConn

Can't rate is higher playing in this crap league.

For me it's:
1. Kentucky
2. UCLA
3. North Carolina
4. Duke
5. Kansas
6. UConn
7. Indiana
8. Louisville

 

[jleves]

1) UK
2) KU
3) Zona
4) duke
5) UCLA
6) UNC
7) Ville
8) UConn

Can't rate is higher playing in this crap league.

When is the last time you had either a happy or competent thought?

 

[sdhusky]

I'm rejecting the original question.

As an elitist, I only rank teams with four championships - you are all free to associate with teams with just three titles, but I refuse to deal in scrapple.

I also discount titles won before I was born. I count those as half a title because the world was half as competent before I arrived. I also gave out demerits if most of those titles were before cable television because I felt like it - sorry, UCLA, but at some point, a title in 1971 loses its luster. A title in the 64-68 team era is a tougher nut than running through fewer than half that.

1) Kentucky - 6 titles
2) UCLA - 7 titles
3) UConn - 4 titles
4) Duke - 4 titles
5) North Carolina - 4.5 titles
6) Indiana - 4 titles

I like to think of only programs with 4 titles since 1998

So, I have

1) UCONN

 

[61cygni]

I think Kansas would trade those unsuccessful for another NC.

 

[Brochacho]

1) UK
2) KU
3) Zona
4) duke
5) UCLA
6) UNC
7) Ville
8) UConn

Can't rate is higher playing in this crap league.

Where the hell did you get Arizona?

 

[Inyatkin]

We have a low number of Final Fours for the number of championships we've won. Four titles, only five Final Fours.
But here's the thing -- basically every time we get there, we win the whole thing. So every time we make the Final Four, we add a title, and the title/Final Four balance looks even more out of whack.
I have a hard time seeing this as a bad thing.

 

[CallMeBruce]

Well for starters I will rank UConn ahead of Kansas for no other reason than to annoy CallmeBruce who did nothing but annoy me with his hysteria in this thread building up Kansas and knocking down UConn. Makes perfect sense to do that on a UConn board. Make the case all you want based on records and stats . But spare me the cliches that have already been disproven. Uconn can't replace Ollie? Why would we have to last time I checked he said he wasn't going anywhere. Were you one of the wise men who thought UConn would never replace Calhoun? And than you act like Danny Manning is some proven tested sure fire elite coach based on winning a mid major tournament? Buzz off.

I don't normally like diminishing accomplishments but seeing Bruce went out of his way to do it for us, Should be noted that one of Kansas titles came while playing a home game and the other came off a massive choke by Memphis. Kansas was that close from even a less impressive win the big one resume. One that's long enough to begin with.

Anyways:
1 Kentucky
2 Duke
3 UNC
4 UCLA
5 UConn
6 Kansas
7 Louisville
8 Indiana

Ooookay. So now I'm a Kansas fan? Keep me updated.

 

[dogfan96]

Kansas has been to 14 Final Fours and hasn't missed an NCAA tournament since 1989. Kansas, historically, is easily a better program than UConn, unless you literally count nothing but NCAA Tournament Championships.

I do think that UCLA gets overrated because of a 12-year run that produced 10 titles. Yes, that's impressive, but it's a little different when you're just brazenly buying the best players every year. I don't think that UConn gets ahead of them, but it's worth considering.

Basically you're saying you'd trade a NC for 9 more Final Fours? No thank you, I'll pass

 

[CallMeBruce]

Basically you're saying you'd trade a NC for 9 more Final Fours? No thank you, I'll pass

I'm saying that going to 9 final fours is a more difficult accomplishment than winning 1 championship. If you think that a simple title count is the only measure by which teams can be compared, well, that's your prerogative. I definitely don't think that's a reasonable perspective. I've enjoyed the hell out of every UConn title, but the best team doesn't always win the championship. There's a lot of chance that goes into these things; it's a single-elimination tournament with 68 competitors. That's why the '94-'96 teams are all a little frustrating; each was good enough to win the championship, but each one had a single bad game at the wrong time.

 

[husky91]

?? You like the AAC and its hoops strength?

When is the last time you had either a happy or competent thought?

 

[husky91]

Zona is back huge. Owns the West Coast again. They will be a force if Miller stays.

Where the hell did you get Arizona?

 

[CallMeBruce]

Zona is back huge. Owns the West Coast again. They will be a force if Miller stays.

Are you talking right now or all-time? Zona #3 right now I can buy, but then UCLA at #5 makes no sense. If you're talking all-time, Zona #3 is absurd.

 

[Brochacho]

Zona is back huge. Owns the West Coast again. They will be a force if Miller stays.

They don't have 3 NCs, point of this thread. Although who really cares since this turned into another UConn is better than Kansas thread because we have 1 more NC but whatever.

 

[Robertelamin]

Zona? Real nice program and Miller has done well, still they are sitting at the kiddie table with Syracuse waiting (earning) a chance to sit with the big boys. UConn has made 4 final fours and won 3 championships since the last time Zona made a final four.

 

[dogfan96]

I'm saying that going to 9 final fours is a more difficult accomplishment than winning 1 championship. If you think that a simple title count is the only measure by which teams can be compared, well, that's your prerogative. I definitely don't think that's a reasonable perspective. I've enjoyed the hell out of every UConn title, but the best team doesn't always win the championship. There's a lot of chance that goes into these things; it's a single-elimination tournament with 68 competitors. That's why the '94-'96 teams are all a little frustrating; each was good enough to win the championship, but each one had a single bad game at the wrong time.

But you don't play to go to the Final Four. That's just an arbitrary line of demarcation for teams who manage to win 4 games (or fewer before the field expanded) in the tournament. You play to cut down the nets. I'd rather have 1 Final Four and 1 NC than 9 Final Fours and 0 NCs.. but that's just me

 

[UConnfan8]

Hell, I just want one...thats all...so close in 73 and 08

hey ur back