The Blueblood Programs of Women's College Basketball

[CajunHusk94]

Notre Dame 1910-2019:

 

[visitingcock]

Don’t hate. Participate.

 

[bballnut90]

THE POWER “DECADES:”

UConn: 2009-2018 It is highly doubtful that Geno’s ten year run will ever be rivaled much less equaled. 6 championships and four final fours is insane. 340 wins may be the third best ten year number. The bluest of the blue bloods.

Tennessee: 1989-1998. Pat put together 4 championships, a runnerup, 2 final fours, an Elite 8 and two sweet 16’s Ang with 314 wins in the ten year period.

Louisiana Tech1979-1988. Sonja Hogg and Leon Barmore put together 3 championships, 2 runners ups, 2 final fours and 2 elite 8s with 322 wins on the cusp of the AIAW / NCAA era. The only dynasty’s of wbb.

South Carolina 2015-2024. Dawn is still possibly within her ten year powertreak with 3 titles, 3 final fours, an elite 8, two-sweet 16s and a 30 win ( no tournament) season in an era of 319 total wins. The steak could be improved this year only by winning the championship again or by finishing number 2.

Baylor 2010-2019 Kim’s ten year effort showed 2 national championships ine final four. 5 elite 8s And two sweet 16s with an excellent compilation of 341 wins.

Stanford 1988-1997., Tara claimed 2 championships 4 final fours, 2 elite 8- and two sweets 16s in ten years. Although they did not have more than 300 years during the ten year power period, you can’t leave the present winningest coach in wbb off the list of blue lions.

Notre Dame 1910-2019: although Muffet had only one 1 championship during her best ten years, she reached THE GAME five other times in the period. The phenomenal accomplishment that was blunted only by Geno’s championships. The 349 wins during the period was especially powerful in gaining 1 championship, 5 runner ups 2 final four and a two sweet. 16s

Tennessee 1999-2008 had 2 titles, 5 title game appearances and 8 Final Fours over a 10 year span. UConn from 1995-2004 with 5 titles and 7 Final a fours.

Also, Dawn is firmly in the midst of her decade run. Wouldn’t be shocked if they add another banner or 2 from the 2017-2026 time frame.

 

[Bone Dog]

The steak could be improved this year only by winning the championship again or by finishing number 2.

Improve on steak? I hope not by covering it in some sauce from a jar.

But seriously, I think the odds are very good that Dawn will finish either #1 or #2 this year. She is not done yet. Your wish will be granted.

 

[visitingcock]

Improve on steak? I hope not by covering it in some sauce from a jar.

But seriously, I think the odds are very good that Dawn will finish either #1 or #2 this year. She is not done yet. Your wish will be granted.

It’s a tough and talented field and I’m starting to think a certain previously expected starter for us will not play this year.

 

[visitingcock]

Tennessee 1999-2008 had 2 titles, 5 title game appearances and 8 Final Fours over a 10 year span. UConn from 1995-2004 with 5 titles and 7 Final a fours.

Also, Dawn is firmly in the midst of her decade run. Wouldn’t be shocked if they add another banner or 2 from the 2017-2026 time frame.

Yes. The two greats had other power runs in additions to the ones I listed. I just listed the one I considered best for each of them.

As to Dawn’s potential ongoing streak, the 2015 final four drops off if 2025 is added. Thus, only a championship or runnerup and improve it this year. Any other improvement is to far ahead to think of

 

[Bone Dog]

It’s a tough and talented field and I’m starting to think a certain previously expected starter for us will not play this year.

I'm very sorry to hear this.

 

[bballnut90]

Yes. The two greats had other power runs in additions to the ones I listed. I just listed the one I considered best for each of them.

As to Dawn’s potential ongoing streak, the 2015 final four drops off if 2025 is added. Thus, only a championship or runnerup and improve it this year. Any other improvement is to far ahead to think of

I think the odds of matching/surpassing 2015 and 2016 are pretty good for your team these next 2 seasons

 

[southie]

To me, ‘blue blood’ is a team where respect from with in sport is a given. I’d add Georgia and Bentley to the schools that you have to at least consider. Georgia s part of the foundation that led to the game we see today. Andy Landers knew how to win. Barbara Stevens had 900 wins at Bentley. Yes, it’s D2, but 900 wins is a lot.

I just can't get on board with Georgia. What did Landers actually win? If anything, he underachieved with the talent he accumulated, especially in 1996. Blueblood = National Championship(s)

 

[Gamecockfan77]

Well, it goes to the general requirement of a power streak of ten years with multiple championships. Notre dame’s two championships don’t fit into a ten year period. However the had multiple championship appearances in that ten year power period ( of 2010-2019). That ten years was phenomenal with 349 wins, 1 championship and 5 runnerup finishes. . Indeed, my notes show 349 wines during 10-09 to UConn’s 340 wins in 09-18 ( though UConn had 6 championships during their best 10 year power run.)

The 9 Final Fours probably make up any difference.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

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.

 

[visitingcock]

The 9 Final Fours probably make up any difference.

Five of those 9 included final four WINS - not mere appearances.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

Five of those 9 included final four WINS - not mere appearances.

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.

 

[visitingcock]

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.

Not if you’ve already listed them as runnerups.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

Not if you’ve already listed them as runnerups.

I understand what you're doing, it's just strange. No big deal.

 

[LETTERL]

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.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

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

 

[visitingcock]

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

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.