UConn in the NCAA Tournament

[Justin M]

Winning percentage in the NCAA tournament since 1985:
1)UCONN 54-15 .783
2)DUKE 80-25 .762
3)KENTUCKY 69-22 .758
4)NORTH CAROLINA 75-24 .758
5)KANSAS 73-27 .730

Since '85
Uconn 4 National Championships
Duke 4 National Championships
Kentucky 3 National Championships
UNC 3 National Championships
Kansas 2 National Championships

 

[upstater]

Winning percentage in the NCAA tournament since 1985:
1)UCONN 54-15 .783
2)DUKE 80-25 .762
3)KENTUCKY 69-22 .758
4)NORTH CAROLINA 75-24 .758
5)KANSAS 73-27 .730

Since '85
Uconn 4 National Championships
Duke 4 National Championships
Kentucky 3 National Championships
UNC 3 National Championships
Kansas 2 National Championships

Even more impressive when you consider they are perennially underseeded compared to the above teams.

 

[huskyniner]

That is absolutely beautiful.

 

[Inyatkin]

12-1 since 2011. 16-2 since 2009. That'll help your percentages.

 

[uconngb]

How about 8-1 in Final Four all time?? That has to be some kind of record for winning % in the FF, maybe challenged only by UCLA.

 

[AfgHusky15]

Winning percentage in the NCAA tournament since 1985:
1)UCONN 54-15 .783
2)DUKE 80-25 .762
3)KENTUCKY 69-22 .758
4)NORTH CAROLINA 75-24 .758
5)KANSAS 73-27 .730

Since '85
Uconn 4 National Championships
Duke 4 National Championships
Kentucky 3 National Championships
UNC 3 National Championships
Kansas 2 National Championships

I blame Ollie for his 1.000 winning record in the NCAA tournament!!!... enough is enough already!

 

[Jerry1714]

How about 8-1 in Final Four all time?? That has to be some kind of record for winning % in the FF, maybe challenged only by UCLA.

UCLA is 3-3 in the FF since 1980.

 

[CallMeBruce]

I blame Ollie for his 1.000 winning record in the NCAA tournament!!!... enough is enough already!

And hey, if we miss the tournament this year, he'll still be undefeated in the tournament next year.

 

[ThetaZoo]

Winning percentage in the NCAA tournament since 1985:
1)UCONN 54-15 .783
2)DUKE 80-25 .762
3)KENTUCKY 69-22 .758
4)NORTH CAROLINA 75-24 .758
5)KANSAS 73-27 .730

Since '85
Uconn 4 National Championships
Duke 4 National Championships
Kentucky 3 National Championships
UNC 3 National Championships
Kansas 2 National Championships

We should be banned for this...and probably will be as soon as the NCAA finds out.

 

[3rdbass]

Winning percentage in the NCAA tournament since 1985:
1)UCONN 54-15 .783
2)DUKE 80-25 .762
3)KENTUCKY 69-22 .758
4)NORTH CAROLINA 75-24 .758
5)KANSAS 73-27 .730

Since '85
Uconn 4 National Championships
Duke 4 National Championships
Kentucky 3 National Championships
UNC 3 National Championships
Kansas 2 National Championships

The one thing I did notice was how many less games we have played compared to others on that list. We have played 24% less games than the next lowest Kentucky and 34% less than the highest one Duke. We definitely have the down years that the other elite programs don't. Though when we get in we are in it to win it.

 

[jibsey]

The one thing I did notice was how many less games we have played compared to others on that list. We have played 32% less games than the next lowest Kentucky and 52% less than the highest one Duke. We definitely have the down years that the other elite programs don't. Though when we get in we are in it to win it.

Not throwing cold water I noticed the same thing, but I'll take it for sure. We have been opportunistic especially for the last 2 titles.

 

[Gringo]

The one thing I did notice was how many less games we have played compared to others on that list. We have played 24% less games than the next lowest Kentucky and 34% less than the highest one Duke. We definitely have the down years that the other elite programs don't. Though when we get in we are in it to win it.

Not all the games we missed, but a decent chunk, come from the 80's when we weren't making the tournament. I'm guessing if you took a sample from 1990 to today the difference wouldn't be as glaring.

 

[3rdbass]

The one thing I did notice was how many less games we have played compared to others on that list. We have played 24% less games than the next lowest Kentucky and 34% less than the highest one Duke. We definitely have the down years that the other elite programs don't. Though when we get in we are in it to win it.

Sorry, for editing my numbers incorrectly. It is 32% increase against Kentucky and 52% increase against Duke as I originally had posted. Pretty big discrepancies but makes sense since we definitely have more down years were we don't make the tourney. Thus, shows even with Calhoun are recruiting hasn't ben in the upper echelon of college basketball. We have to develop teams over a few years to get us competitive against the blue bloods. We are more of the blue collar team of college basketball so to speak.

 

[Gurleyman]

Not all the games we missed, but a decent chunk, come from the 80's when we weren't making the tournament. I'm guessing if you took a sample from 1990 to today the difference wouldn't be as glaring.

Yeah - we never made it in the five years from 85-89. If you look at the loss column, we have 15 and UK has 22. Those 5 years would get us to 20, and we have one more title than them (ie, a year we didn't lose at all). So between us and UK, the difference is 1 appearance (they had probation in the early 90s and NIT years under Gillespie and Calipari).

The gap is a little larger for Duke and a couple others.

 

[DCUconnfan]

How about 8-1 in Final Four all time?? That has to be some kind of record for winning % in the FF, maybe challenged only by UCLA.

So by my count (which could be wrong, not sure what you're looking at, perhaps different from my memory), we're 4-1 in the final 4, having only been 5 times. How far back are you going?

 

[amory]

And hey, if we miss the tournament this year, he'll still be undefeated in the tournament next year.

Personally I think if the season keeps going the way it's going, and we don't win the AAC tournament, we should self-impose a ban. Then we can act like we totally would've made it but darn, that ban.

 

[3rdbass]

Not all the games we missed, but a decent chunk, come from the 80's when we weren't making the tournament. I'm guessing if you took a sample from 1990 to today the difference wouldn't be as glaring.

Good point I missed that the OP took from 1985 to present. Yes from 1990 to present the winning percentages are all close to each other around 77% to 78% except Kansas which is 71%. The percentage of games for UCONN playing is 17% less than the next lowest Kentucky and NC and 25% lower than Duke. This is basically due to us missing it 6 times in 25 years compared to Duke-1, Kentucky-4, North Carolina-3 and Kansas none.

Though, when we get in it our percentage of winning the whole thing is the best at 21% compared to Duke 17%, Kentucky and NC 14% and Kansas a putrid 4%.

Seems though we build our teams through the years and not just one year. Though this would be the first year we missed the NCAA tourney the year after winning it all. Go UCONN and let's not break this streak.

Records since 1990 are as follows.
UCONN 54-15 78% 4 NCAA's Champs and 6 misses out of 25 years.
Duke 66-20 77% 4 NCAA's Champs and 1 misses out of 25 years.
Kentucky 63-18 78% 3 NCAA's Champs and 4 misses out of 25 years.
North Carolina 62-19 77% 3 NCAA's Champs and 3 misses out of 25 years.
Kansas 59-24 71% 1 NCAA's Champs and 0 Misses out of 25 years.

 

[Waquoit]

Even more impressive when you consider they are perennially underseeded compared to the above teams.

I'm not sure that's true. Last year for sure, but perennially?

 

[Brochacho]

We have been a #1 or #2 seed 11 times since 1990. But yeah, let's go with under-seeded.

 

[businesslawyer]

Good point I missed that the OP took from 1985 to present. Yes from 1990 to present the winning percentages are all close to each other around 77% to 78% except Kansas which is 71%. The percentage of games for UCONN playing is 17% less than the next lowest Kentucky and NC and 25% lower than Duke. This is basically due to us missing it 6 times in 25 years compared to Duke-1, Kentucky-4, North Carolina-3 and Kansas none.

Though, when we get in it our percentage of winning the whole thing is the best at 21% compared to Duke 17%, Kentucky and NC 14% and Kansas a putrid 4%.

Seems though we build our teams through the years and not just one year. Though this would be the first year we missed the NCAA tourney the year after winning it all. Go UCONN and let's not break this streak.

Records since 1990 are as follows.
UCONN 54-15 78% 4 NCAA's Champs and 6 misses out of 25 years.
Duke 66-20 77% 4 NCAA's Champs and 1 misses out of 25 years.
Kentucky 63-18 78% 3 NCAA's Champs and 4 misses out of 25 years.
North Carolina 62-19 77% 3 NCAA's Champs and 3 misses out of 25 years.
Kansas 59-24 71% 1 NCAA's Champs and 0 Misses out of 25 years.

Of course KY and KS make the tournament more consistently in us. They both played in basketball conferences where half the schools weren't trying to compete. UNC and Duke, making the tourney more consistently than us, should get credit for it.

 

[3rdbass]

Of course KY and KS make the tournament more consistently in us. They both played in basketball conferences where half the schools weren't trying to compete. UNC and Duke, making the tourney more consistently than us, should get credit for it.

It also talks to the fact that Kansas and Kentucky get better recruits than us year in and year out. Easier to reload when you get the top players into your program every year. Though it also speaks to how impressive it is that UCONN has been able to be most successful program with less tries. We are a true basketball team of blue collar players.

 

[businesslawyer]

So better recruits than us year in year out is relevant to getting into the tourney, but irrelevant to what happens when you are in? Or is relevant to playing in conferences where most of the members aren't trying to compete with you?

 

[3rdbass]

So better recruits than us year in year out is relevant to getting into the tourney, but irrelevant to what happens when you are in? Or is relevant to playing in conferences where most of the members aren't trying to compete with you?

I wouldn't call the Big 12 not competitive. Yes the SEC isn't worth much but the Big 12 always has decent teams.

 

[businesslawyer]

I wouldn't call the Big 12 not competitive. Yes the SEC isn't worth much but the Big 12 always has decent teams.

Now, yes, but back in the 90s? Nope.

 

[Brochacho]

It also talks to the fact that Kansas and Kentucky get better recruits than us year in and year out. Easier to reload when you get the top players into your program every year. Though it also speaks to how impressive it is that UCONN has been able to be most successful program with less tries. We are a true basketball team of blue collar players.

#1 and #2 seed Final Four conversion percentage by school since 1990:
UConn: 3/11 .272
Duke: 8/18 .444
UK: 5/12 .416
UNC: 8/13 .615
KU: 6/16 .375

We are actually pretty bad at reaching the FF with our best teams.