How would you rank the programs to win 3 or more NCs? | Page 3 | The Boneyard

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
FourRings said:
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.


Thank You - thought I swallowed some Crazy pills.... RIF.

Can't pick UCONN - bad for mojo.

3 more? KY, Louisville seem like their in it every year. Zona too, but the always whiff in the tourney.
Expand ...
 
CallMeBruce said:
I'm a troll because I'm agreeing with the OP? Man, people here have a serious inferiority complex.
Expand ...

Inferiority complex? You're the one who's saying we'd be screwed because we couldn't get someone like Danny Manning (which makes no sense on any level). Listen to the Memphis fan.
 
johnhuskies95 said:
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.
Expand ...

Well, I may be paranoid, but I hope we don't have to find out for a while.
 
CallMeBruce said:
I'm a troll because I'm agreeing with the OP? Man, people here have a serious inferiority complex.
Expand ...
I think the point is that you said the Kansas name draws recruits while the UConn name doesn't quite yet. That simply isn't true. At a minimum the UConn brand is equal to Kansas in the eyes of recruits because UConn has been the most dominant program in college basketball since the current batch of recruits were born.
 
.-.
I think we're being a little harsh on Bruce. I mean, I think most people around the country would rank Kansas ahead of us in terms of blueblood status/historical excellence. Probably even rank them ahead of us in terms of future outlook/current state of program - given our conference situation. Frankly, one of the things I sometimes think when I look at where the program has come is "holy swear words, we now have more titles than Kansas".

However, I wouldn't trade our four titles for their mish-mosh of almosts, a 1952 championship and Danny Manning. I'd rank them behind us, but largely because I'm biased.
 
husky91 said:
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.
Expand ...

In your own words:
Can't listen is dumber for posting in this crap grammar

p.s.: Nice post/like ratio. genius.
 
Sportsman5 said:
I think the point is that you said the Kansas name draws recruits while the UConn name doesn't quite yet. That simply isn't true. At a minimum the UConn brand is equal to Kansas in the eyes of recruits because UConn has been the most dominant program in college basketball since the current batch of recruits were born.
Expand ...

Then why aren't we able to land the players they are? Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it's just my perception. But I was born in the early-80s, and my whole life the basketball bluebloods have been Duke, UNC, Kansas, and Kentucky. As I look at ESPN's recruiting board (I know it's not perfect, but for a quick-and-dirty measure, it will work), I see our top recruit at #30, while Kansas has #3 and #11. Maybe things change with the class of 2015, especially if Ollie (quickly, please) signs a long-term deal, but I don't know.

Gurleyman said:
However, I wouldn't trade our four titles for their mish-mosh of almosts, a 1952 championship and Danny Manning. I'd rank them behind us, but largely because I'm biased.
Expand ...

Oh, definitely not. I've gotten to enjoy the hell out of all four UConn titles (though I foolishly watched the Rolling Stones at the HCC the night of the first title). I guess I have long felt like we've been playing catch-up with the elite programs, since we've only been really nationally relevant for about 25 years.
 
CallMeBruce said:
Then why aren't we able to land the players they are? Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it's just my perception. But I was born in the early-80s, and my whole life the basketball bluebloods have been Duke, UNC, Kansas, and Kentucky. As I look at ESPN's recruiting board (I know it's not perfect, but for a quick-and-dirty measure, it will work), I see our top recruit at #30, while Kansas has #3 and #11. Maybe things change with the class of 2015, especially if Ollie (quickly, please) signs a long-term deal, but I don't know.



Oh, definitely not. I've gotten to enjoy the hell out of all four UConn titles (though I foolishly watched the Rolling Stones at the HCC the night of the first title). I guess I have long felt like we've been playing catch-up with the elite programs, since we've only been really nationally relevant for about 25 years.
Expand ...

You have to ignore the last two years because of the coaching change. Also, even going back 5 years is completely different than UConn going forward. 5 years ago UConn had 2 final fours, 2 national championships and an aging coach. Now they have 5 final four, 4 national championships and a young, energetic, relatable coach with unbelievable NBA pedigree. the 2015 class and future classes should be top 10 every year and should occasionally contend for #1
 
CallMeBruce said:
I guess I have long felt like we've been playing catch-up with the elite programs, since we've only been really nationally relevant for about 25 years.
Expand ...

I feel like they have been resting on ancient history because they haven't kept up with UCONN over the past 25 years.
 
.-.
For 15-20 years we dominated the best conference in the nation.
And we did it with lower rated players than anyone on this list.

I appreciate the history of UCLA and KY. Admire what Duke and unc did.
But this is the UCONN era.
 
CallMeBruce said:
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.

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.
Expand ...


I'm with you - using History Kansas is better. But your last paragraph-- how has UCLA been without Wooden? They had Larry Brown for a short time. Howland had a little run with no title. I know you didn't put UCLA there but just sayin' if your last paragraph is a criteria then we have to look hard at dropping UCLA.
 
1) UConn

Any post that doesn't start with that is funny to me. I've never understood why people undercut their own favorite program in a hypothetical ratings chart based on nothing but opinion. Since it's based entirely on opinion, it's always "1) UConn" for me. The best part is that I could make that argument without breaking too much of a sweat, based on our performance in the greatest conference in the history of college basketball, our performance in the tournament after it was expanded, etc. These hypotheticals should just default to: 2), 3), 4), etc...
 
Can i make a few points?
1) Over the last 15 season there is NO doubt that Uconn is the BEST college program out there. I would also say that our numbers over the last 25 years are just was good as most others.

2) Uconn better than Kansas? If your going back 40+ years than maybe not.....over the last 25? Yes easily. and for the record.....there would be ALOT of huge names lined up to take Ollie's job but i believe we would keep it in house .....coach Moore or Allen maybe?

3) Not getting the Blue chip recruits that UK Duke and Kansas get? over the last 5 years we have dealt with Nate miles, laptops stolen, APR issues with mutiple penilties, losing scollies, retiring/bad health coach, banned from post season, the heart and soul of the BE taken away and the BE leaving us. Do u not think other coaching staffs used this against us? but here is the GREAT news! you dont need MAA to win national championships (we have had 1 in 5 years)....

.....this is the future of college basketball, Ollie knows the blueprint to win and when the CALs and K's of the game figure it out.......we will the new BB program!
 
hoophuskee said:
I'm with you - using History Kansas is better. But your last paragraph-- how has UCLA been without Wooden? They had Larry Brown for a short time. Howland had a little run with no title. I know you didn't put UCLA there but just sayin' if your last paragraph is a criteria then we have to look hard at dropping UCLA.
Expand ...

I think I was pretty clear that I think UCLA is wildly overrated based on what they did over one 12-year stretch while they were brazenly buying the best players.
 
I do agree a lot goes into how far back you want to go. Since 1989 (so over the past 25 years) Kansas has made it to 6 FF's, compared to UCONN's 5. But in that same span, UCONN has won 4 NC's to Kansas' 2. Historically, Kansas, Last 25 years, UCONN.

Last 25 years, UNC 5 final 4's, 2 NC's. Again, historically UNC, last 25 years UCONN.

Same goes for Duke, etc. I do get the question was about historically and you can't argue that other teams including Duke and Ken$ucky to have more final 4's than UCONN since the 1950's, so yeah historically those programs are "better". But in the spirit of "what have you done for me lately", I think 25 years is a pretty long way to "go back" and look at stats. The fact that UCONN is #1 or 2 over the past 25 years is something special.
 
.-.
ericsandiego said:
I do agree a lot goes into how far back you want to go. Since 1989 (so over the past 25 years) Kansas has made it to 6 FF's, compared to UCONN's 5. But in that same span, UCONN has won 4 NC's to Kansas' 2. Historically, Kansas, Last 25 years, UCONN.

Last 25 years, UNC 5 final 4's, 2 NC's. Again, historically UNC, last 25 years UCONN.

Same goes for Duke, etc. I do get the question was about historically and you can't argue that other teams including Duke and Ken$ucky to have more final 4's than UCONN since the 1950's, so yeah historically those programs are "better". But in the spirit of "what have you done for me lately", I think 25 years is a pretty long way to "go back" and look at stats. The fact that UCONN is #1 or 2 over the past 25 years is something special.
Expand ...

If we're limiting it to the past 25 years, it's probably #1 Duke, #2 UConn, #3 UNC. Duke is hard to top, though. 4 titles, 7 championship games, 8 Final Fours, 10 Elite Eights, 17 Sweet Sixteens, and 24 tourney appearances. The two delicious first-round losses to no-name schools in the last three years have been very entertaining, however.
 
Historical Final Fours are overrated and misleading.

What's more impressive not to mention relevant? Losing in the Elite 8 in close hard fought games to the eventual National Champs in 1995 and 2002? Or winning 2 games and making the Final Four in 1950whatever? Less teams in the NCAA's, many good teams of the year playing in the NIT instead, and less games to win.

I
 
NCAA Tourney Record past 15 years
Duke 29-10, 2 NCs, 2 other
UCONN 38-8, 4 NCS, 1 other FF

20 years:
Duke: 38-14, 2 NCs, 2 other
UCONN 48-12, 4 NCs, 1 other FF

25 years
Duke: 66-19, 4 NCs, 4 other
UCONN 54-15, 4 NCs, 1 other FF

Duke was better 20-25 years ago but not in a long time. Do they get more publicity? Higher ranked recruits? Are they more likely to be picked in office pools in 49 states? Does Dickey V slobber over them?
Yes Yes Yes Yes and Yes.
Have they played better basketball than us? Not in the last 20 years.
 
I'd like to see a list of tournament games played since 1979.
 
I really think that you need to split the championships between about pre-1980 when it went to 48 teams and post 1980. That was more or less the birth of the "modern" tourney. Though I think you could add the 3-point line as the single biggest change to the game, even more than the time clock. The 3-pointer totally changed the game and made upsets much more viable, and put a premium on outside shooting. UCLA doesn't win all those titles with the modern 3-point line in my estimation. In the "modern era" UConn is right up there. Top 5 for sure and I think you could make a case that its only behind Duke and probably UNC, but not by much.
 
.-.
Upon further thought, I think a case could be made that the tournament actually changed in 1975, the year that the field expanded to 32 and at-large teams were added in the sense we currently know them. Before 1975, there was a limit of 1 team per conference, and the term "at-large" referred to teams not affiliated with a league. Beginning in 1975, the 1 team per conference rule ended which made the field significantly tougher. Heck, in 1971, the #2 team in the nation, Southern Cal, didn't play in the NCAA tournament, nor did Maryland in 1974 when they were ranked #3.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,321
Messages
4,563,283
Members
10,459
Latest member
SeanElAmin


Top Bottom