- Joined
- Aug 2, 2015
- Messages
- 4,699
- Reaction Score
- 11,023
These threads tend to have a whiff of neediness but I have to say I was a little surprised myself how well this SCar run stacks up historically.
The Blueblood Programs of Women's College Basketball
- Thread starter visitingcock
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2016
- Messages
- 7,230
- Reaction Score
- 25,642
Five of those 9 included final four WINS - not mere appearances.
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2015
- Messages
- 4,699
- Reaction Score
- 11,023
I'm aware. When you discuss Final Four Appearances it's not customary to only list the ones where you didn't win a game. You include all of them.
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2016
- Messages
- 7,230
- Reaction Score
- 25,642
Not if you’ve already listed them as runnerups.
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2015
- Messages
- 4,699
- Reaction Score
- 11,023
I understand what you're doing, it's just strange. No big deal.
LETTERL
Pack Leader
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2014
- Messages
- 4,182
- Reaction Score
- 7,261
I have a different take on "blue blood". I consider a blue blood to be a team with a rich, and extended history of fielding competitive teams and being a factor in the sport. This will upset many on the board...because the power teams now weren't necessarily power teams in the early days of modern WCBB.
So...for me, blue blood teams would include Georgia, Tennessee, Stanford, Maryland, Louisiana Tech, Old Dominion as what I would call a "first tier" of blue blood. These teams each dominated the sport in stretches during the early founding years of WCBB and for the most part, are still a factor. LaTech and ODU have seen their fortunes fade in recent years but they each dominated the sport for a few years in the 1970s and 1980s. LaTech was a top team into the early 2000s.
The next tier would include teams like UCONN, NC State, Duke, Vanderbilt, Rutgers, Ohio State, LSU, South Carolina. I'm sure if I had the time, I could expand on this but these are teams I remember being very, very good during my early days of following WCBB and for the most part, they're still mostly decent (Rutgers notwithstanding). These teams have each experienced long stretches of success and also some periods of mediocrity. I don't put UCONN in the first tier because it took a while for the UCONN machine to get going. But once it did...oh boy!
Speaking for NC State, the Wolfpack Women were one of the early powers in modern WCBB, then other programs started putting more emphasis on the sport and State lost its advantage. Now, the team is in the midst of a revival...experiencing even greater success than we had in what were our dominant days.
So...that's my take on what it means to be a blue blood. Did not mean to offend anyone by keeping their team off my list.
So...for me, blue blood teams would include Georgia, Tennessee, Stanford, Maryland, Louisiana Tech, Old Dominion as what I would call a "first tier" of blue blood. These teams each dominated the sport in stretches during the early founding years of WCBB and for the most part, are still a factor. LaTech and ODU have seen their fortunes fade in recent years but they each dominated the sport for a few years in the 1970s and 1980s. LaTech was a top team into the early 2000s.
The next tier would include teams like UCONN, NC State, Duke, Vanderbilt, Rutgers, Ohio State, LSU, South Carolina. I'm sure if I had the time, I could expand on this but these are teams I remember being very, very good during my early days of following WCBB and for the most part, they're still mostly decent (Rutgers notwithstanding). These teams have each experienced long stretches of success and also some periods of mediocrity. I don't put UCONN in the first tier because it took a while for the UCONN machine to get going. But once it did...oh boy!
Speaking for NC State, the Wolfpack Women were one of the early powers in modern WCBB, then other programs started putting more emphasis on the sport and State lost its advantage. Now, the team is in the midst of a revival...experiencing even greater success than we had in what were our dominant days.
So...that's my take on what it means to be a blue blood. Did not mean to offend anyone by keeping their team off my list.
.-.
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2015
- Messages
- 4,699
- Reaction Score
- 11,023
I do not mind the concept of saying Tennessee and Stanford are 1st class blue bloods.
I do question giving blue blood status to programs that haven't been relevant for 30 years and leaving off other programs that have had longer runs of success than those no longer contending programs.
It doesn't really make sense that ten years in 1970/1980 is more important for blue blood status than Geno's 30 year run at UConn.
That's very much saying that Army football is currently a blue blood and someone like Miami or FSU is not.
Part of the WBB problem in dictating these things is that the sport is really only one coach deep at a lot of places
I do question giving blue blood status to programs that haven't been relevant for 30 years and leaving off other programs that have had longer runs of success than those no longer contending programs.
It doesn't really make sense that ten years in 1970/1980 is more important for blue blood status than Geno's 30 year run at UConn.
That's very much saying that Army football is currently a blue blood and someone like Miami or FSU is not.
Part of the WBB problem in dictating these things is that the sport is really only one coach deep at a lot of places
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2016
- Messages
- 7,230
- Reaction Score
- 25,642
Nobody is saying that anybody’s run is better than Geno’s 30-40 year run. Just don’t leave out the LaTechs who achieved great success before money ran them out of the game and part of their success was against a Tennessee and a U$C. The only programs who have attained near their success are other blue bloods - and NOBODY has done it under two coaches, much less successive coaches.
Delta State ( now D-2) only had a 7 year power run so they don’t really meet my full criteria but they were an early power. So, they could be left off if someone wants to be exclusive. Immaculata? They were the AIAW power and not really an NCAA blue blood but they were like the birthplace of competitive wbb after Title IX.
Remember, beauty and blueness of blood is in the eye of the beholder and this thread was intended for friendly argument. It’s not intended to lead to bloodshed.