Sporting News: Best Programs Since 2000

[champs99and04]

Did you look at the article and see it was a simple point system? 1+1=2, that is all that it is.

If they graded NCs as a 10, as opposed to an 8, UConn would be #2 and everyone would be happy, but because it is an 8, the list and author is a joke.

Yes, I understand it was a point system. Doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

 

[Jerry1714]

This is not overly impressive considering how much talent Bill Self racks up every year. The NCAAs aren't hard to make anyway. SIXTY-EIGHT teams make the tournament. National championships are the ultimate measure of success; you win when it counts most.

This is more ridiculous than your comment that KU is "garbage every year".

I don't even know where to start with this one it is so out there

 

[huskiesNhoos]

This is not overly impressive considering how much talent Bill Self racks up every year. The NCAAs aren't hard to make anyway. SIXTY-EIGHT teams make the tournament. National championships are the ultimate measure of success; you win when it counts most.

This is more ridiculous than your comment that KU is "garbage every year".

I don't even know where to start with this one it is so out there

I started to try and reply to this, but it's just pointless as you said...

 

[Tenspro2002]

This seems like a fair ranking.

The debate we always have is on the value of consistency vs. the value of championships. On the whole, Kansas has been consistently better than us. Period. But our highs have been higher (or our highest highs more frequent). It's up to the individual fan to decide their own weighting. The weighting these guys have chosen seems reasonable to me.

 

[Jerry1714]

KU is a consistent program year in year out. But in relative terms based on the players brought in with their rankings, there are times they seem to underachieve no doubt.

They definitely have underachieved some years, but so have we. '05, '06, '12 were massive underachieving teams with the talent level they had.

 

[SixRings]

Delete my post. See the 2000 qualifier now. Duh.

 

[Huskies4ever]

I look at this issue slightly different:

1996 - Should have been in Final Four. Rickey Moore injury stopped it. I actually think our 95 team gives the best Kentucky team a run for their money. I know we play to win...unlike stupid Cuse who plays to keep it close

1999 - Championship

2004 - Championship

2009 - Should have played UNC for the championship. Dyson injury prevented it. I think we have a chance to win. Like Cuse vs. Kentucky, we play to win more than Mich State does. Both Cuse and Michigan State started those games knowing they lose.

2011 - Championship (this was a surprise)

2014 - Championship (oddly enough I was not surprised by this. I was just surprised how avg they were during the regular season)

That's a championship caliber team almost every 4 years. Our success is like clockwork (every four years a team matures). We have been gaining on these programs my entire adult life. Even by their dumb standards we have passed almost all other programs (including UNC). We are the future. I would bet on our players and the guys that JC taught over the likes of whoever eventually replaces K, Cal, Self and Williams

FIFY

 

[Danzz]

Cuse shocked me at 7.

 

[TasteofUConn]

Essentially, they're valuing Kentucky's additional three tournament appearances and additional two sweet sixteen's over UConn's additional two championships.

What they are doing is valuing Kentucky's one-and-dones more than our Kromahs and Giffeys. Simple as that.
The results are dependent on the algorithm they are using.
If you define "program success" as consisting substantially of "guys in the NBA," then you get one result. If you define "program success" as consisting substantially of "winning when it matters," then you get a different result.
The use of the algorithm is, really, self serving. They figured out which programs they thought were the best, and they went backwards from there to derive the algorithm they should use.
Frankly, my definition of "best program" would be heavily weighted toward, "what did you do with the talent you had?" and Kentucky wouldn't be top 5, and neither would Kansas or Sadexcuse. But, hey, I guess having more and doing less with it is high on some people's list.

 

[CallMeBruce]

This is more ridiculous than your comment that KU is "garbage every year".

I don't even know where to start with this one it is so out there

Give him a few minutes. He'll top it.

 

[Jerry1714]

we have 5 final fours

If only you read the title of the thread or the article..................

 

[Rocktheworld]

They have out performed us in every metric except titles, granted its the most important one, but saying Kansas is "garbage" just lets me know I cannot take you seriously.

People were/are still taking JimOllie seriously? Wow

Winning percentage per year is what killed us.

 

[dogpause]

All you have to do is count the rings. It's very simple.

 

[David 76]

I wonder how different it would be if you counted 1999?

We were in a bunch of EEs in the 90s. I'll take more inconsistency and a title every 4 years.
Fourth place is still good. I just wish we drew recruits like the other three.

 

[lange10]

I get that we're all fans of UConn and we're obviously a bit biased but sometimes it's just ridiculous what people say/think on here. First off, we moan and groan about the lack of attention we receive nationally, well we were ranked 4th so clearly some people respect us. Second, Duke is #1. Not a debate, sorry. Numbers 2, 3, 4 are up for debate. They had a point system and in that specific system we ended up 4th. What Kansas and Kentucky put out on the floor year in and year out is impressive. Plain and simple. I'm just glad to be considered a top 5 program over the last 15 years. We're doing pretty damn good. Anways, when we win #5 this year these rankings will change.

 

[Inyatkin]

Worth mentioning we were basically left for dead at least three different times in this time span (Calhoun leaving, APR and AAC) and yet we're in the mix with Kansas, Kentucky and UNC at the very top of the sport. They can't kill us.

 

[The Viking]

Basketball, unlike say Tennis, is a team sport. Why give points for "all-americans"?

Who gives a rats-ass when looking at the analysis of each team? Regular season wins/losses and Tournament success should be how you judge it IMO.

Take out the AA, sporting news players of the year, NBA players and I'd be interested where we end up. And do I see right that you get the same amount of points for reaching the championship game as you do the FF?

WTF?

 

[lavuuk153]

People are getting way too upset here. I'd rather have our last 15 years than anyone other than Duke. However, Kansas and Kentucky have both been consistently top ranked teams during this time frame moreso than us. I'd love for Uconn to just run train on the AAC (assuming we're stuck here) for the next 10 years and people to discredit us like they do Kansas for being a crappy league.

Also, since it never gets old...even limiting it to the last 15 years...as always Cuse fans...3>1

 

[Obrero]

Um, I think Michigan State got hosed. Their national championship is not noted. That would bump them up ahead of Syracuse.

 

[lavuuk153]

Um, I think Michigan State got hosed. Their national championship is not noted. That would bump them up ahead of Syracuse.

That year doesn't count. It's 2000-2001 through 2014-2015. It starts and ends with Duke.

 

[JimHurley]

People were/are still taking JimOllie seriously? Wow

Winning percentage per year is what killed us.

Dude, count the rings. That will tell who has been better since 2000. And enough of you being a jackass. I have the right to my opinion on this site just as you have yours. Respect it. There's plenty of comments on here I don't agree with but I don't go around bashing them.

 

[huskiesNhoos]

Dude, count the rings. That will tell who has been better since 2000. And enough of you being a jackass. I have the right to my opinion on this site just as you have yours. Respect it. There's plenty of comments on here I don't agree with but I don't go around bashing them.

well in this case there's a formulaic approach (albeit a kinda crappy one) to how the list was determined, and we're 4th best. sooooo this time you're opinion is wrong

 

[lavuuk153]

Dude, count the rings. That will tell who has been better since 2000. And enough of you being a jackass. I have the right to my opinion on this site just as you have yours. Respect it. There's plenty of comments on here I don't agree with but I don't go around bashing them.

It's funny with titles being the ultimate goal...would you rather be the Braves who won like 9,000 straight division tiles with 1 WS win or the Marlins who sucked ass like 80% of the time but won 2 titles. It's easy to look back and take the extra title...but while it's happening it's hard to overlook being relevant every year.

 

[Rocktheworld]

Dude, count the rings. That will tell who has been better since 2000. And enough of you being a jackass. I have the right to my opinion on this site just as you have yours. Respect it. There's plenty of comments on here I don't agree with but I don't go around bashing them.

Dude, read the scoring rubric. In this scoring scheme, agree with it or not (a separate debate), it hurt us. Get over it. UConn is great regardless. Ahead of UNC.

And I don't need to bash your posts. Your repeated whining ITT says enough. We get that you, subjectively, value NCs over everything else. Well, it's not your scoring metric, and it isn't your article.

 

[Kitaman]

Surprised so many people are trying to justify UConn being #4. Using overall winning percentage is flawed because there is no commonality in the scheduling structure. Look at these numbers and tell me Kentucky belongs ahead of UConn:

Tournament appearances: Kentucky 13, UConn 10 (should be 11 if you discount the NCAA mafia parachuting down on Calhoun)

Sweet Sixteen: Kentucky 7, UConn 5

Elite Eight: Kentucky 6, UConn 6

Final Four: Kentucky 4, UConn 4

National Championships: Kentucky 1, UConn 3

Essentially, they're valuing Kentucky's additional three tournament appearances and additional two sweet sixteen's over UConn's additional two championships.

I also recall a few head to head matchups we won when it mattered during this time frame. That alone refutes their listing.