UConn is a Blue Blood

[jake14mw]

Team of the Century is good enough for me.

 

[temery]

Team of the Century is good enough for me.

77 more years. Maybe 76.

 

[That Guy]

From the Kentucky board lol

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Agree. Look at Kentucky, Duke & UNC in particular. One and done is not working.

I think this is partially the reason for so many coaching retirements recently, or coaches like Boeheim no longer being able to compete. Calipari and Pearl are spiraling. The top teams can no longer stockpile talent, and players do not have to put up with lousy coaching. Furthermore, the cheater programs (Kentucky, Auburn for example) no longer have an advantage because everyone can pay their players.

I started a thread on the football board on this topic. I think the programs that will be successful going forward will be urban or close to cities. Legacy will matter a little, but nothing like it did before. Selling high school recruits will be less important than evaluating and selling transfers. Keeping the bench happy will be very important. One coach that could struggle in this world is Geno. He would play just 5 players if it was possible. That approach won't work going forward.

 

[wingsfan055]

ChatGPT considers UConn a Blue Blood. It's the smartest model ever developed. End of debate.

 

[temery]

ChatGPT considers UConn a Blue Blood. It's the smartest model ever developed. End of debate.

Now ask it about the MEN'S team.

 

[bendm]

Blue Bloods: UK, UNC, Duke, KU
Light-Blue Bloods: UCLA, IU, UConn, Nova

A fifth chip would move us past KU again and tie us with Duke, but those programs lap us in games won, conference chips, tourney appearances, and final fours. I think we need 6 chips for indisputable tier 1 blue blood status.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Blue Bloods: UK, UNC, Duke, KU
Light-Blue Bloods: UCLA, IU, UConn, Nova

A fifth chip would move us past KU again and tie us with Duke, but those programs lap us in games won, conference chips, tourney appearances, and final fours. I think we need 6 chips for indisputable tier 1 blue blood status.

I think Calipari sucks so bad as a coach that he has actually un-blue blooded Kentucky. Now Kentucky needs two more championships to re-establish their blue blood credentials.

 

[housekeys]

From the Kentucky board lol

View attachment 85957

Definition of a blue blood? Here is one. When the face of red blooded fans turns blue when discussing UConn winning another championship. Blue blood is so last century. We are not blue blood. But we are nasty good and we can steam roll red blooded, green "with envy" blooded, or "blue blooded" teams, when March and April come around.

 

[Friarsnoop]

I've always thought this is the stupidest argument you guys have on this board. Whether you win it this year or not, the blue bloods will never consider you one of them. Just enjoy the journey and the championships.

 

[uconnric]

What does being a blue blood get you?

 

[Huskyforlife]

I've always thought this is the stupidest argument you guys have on this board. Whether you win it this year or not, the blue bloods will never consider you one of them. Just enjoy the journey and the championships.

Exactly, it’s a silly label created by certain fan bases to stroke their own egos. Nobody agrees on the criteria, especially when historically great programs like UCLA and Indiana are left out by large portions of CBB fans. Winning title number 5 would make them more jealous than a stupid label anyways.

 

[phillionaire]

What does being a blue blood get you?

the respect of weirdos on the internet

 

[ElGreco]

From the Kentucky board lol

View attachment 85957

Hope he is enjoying our run

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

They have 11 national titles and 19 final fours, including four in the last two decades.

If they don’t fit your definition of a blue blood, then you need a new definition.

Until I saw only 19 Final Fours, I was going to say that this comment was more appropriate for the WBB Board.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

77 more years. Maybe 76.

I was expecting 67 or 87.

 

[mauconnfan]

I've always thought this is the stupidest argument you guys have on this board. Whether you win it this year or not, the blue bloods will never consider you one of them. Just enjoy the journey and the championships.

Here’s the good news the fact you came here from Dunkin Donuts to point this out tells me all I need to know. We ARE blue bloods and you guys suck!!!

Thanks for your interest in UConn basketball!

 

[noeynox]

One Final Four in ten years. Got past the first round once in ten years. Zero conference champions, zero conference tournament champs in ten years.

Nope.

I'll take, "things salty Syracuse fans say" for 1000 Alex.

 

[Waquoit]

Of course we are blue bloods. We were cast into the abyss and came back. No other program had to deal with that nonsense. Our story is unprecedented. The deniers need to go to the back of the bus with the HH's.

 

[MilliniumPrince]

The is Prime Yard...

 

[ElGreco]

I think this is partially the reason for so many coaching retirements recently, or coaches like Boeheim no longer being able to compete. Calipari and Pearl are spiraling. The top teams can no longer stockpile talent, and players do not have to put up with lousy coaching. Furthermore, the cheater programs (Kentucky, Auburn for example) no longer have an advantage because everyone can pay their players.

I started a thread on the football board on this topic. I think the programs that will be successful going forward will be urban or close to cities. Legacy will matter a little, but nothing like it did before. Selling high school recruits will be less important than evaluating and selling transfers. Keeping the bench happy will be very important. One coach that could struggle in this world is Geno. He would play just 5 players if it was possible. That approach won't work going forward.

The playing field is being leveled. Totally correct with your comments. It’s a new era and the days of hard line coaches controlling players are over. Women’s game is not in the same place yet. Personally, I think Geno wants at least one more NC before he retires. The days of 3-4 teams dominating every year are coming to an end.

 

[bigdog1002]

UConn made its 6th Final Four in the last 25 years. UConn has been in 24% of the Final Fours starting with the 1998-1999 season. UConn has done this with three different coaches, which is just as impressive. Most programs that have made Final Fours with more than one or two coaches have needed decades and decades to do it. Indiana is an example.

UConn has been in 11 of the last 34 Elite 8's. That is an amazing statistic going back a long way. UConn has finished the season with one of the 8 best teams in the country about 1/3 of the time.

If this team can win two more games, UConn would join UNC, Kentucky and Kansas as the only programs to have won Championships with three different coaches. Kansas and UNC have to look back to the 1950's to find their third coach's championship. Kentucky has an impressive 5 different coaches winning championships, although not surprisingly, Calipari only has one ring.

UConn is in pretty rarified company with this track record. UConn is a Blue Blood.

And they don't go to just go to Final Fours. They win national titles. This will be the 6th trip, and if they take care of business, it will be the 5th title. Tied for 4th all time.

 

[DblCrossbar]

Seth Greenberg, former coach and current ESPN analysis seems to consider UConn to be a Blue Blood. He even said so on ESPN radio this morning.

41:10 into the broadcast seals it.
Keyshawn, JWill & Max - Hour 2: The Cubes

 

[uconnfan68]

I think that with NIL and the Transfer Portal, the era of the Blue Blood program is probably ending. Talent will be spread out, and there are a lot more FAU's and SDSU's or Creighton's making the Final 8 and Final 4 in the future.

Disagree. The $$ will be consolidated into ~20 schools. Not even every school in the top P2 will keep up.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Same argument I had about Indiana applies to some of the other schools in that you count final 4snas a raw number... but wouldn't context matter? Id guess most people say winning 4 games to get to a final 4 is more impressive than winning 1 or 2 games?

The degree or difficulty, luck and random variance in making a final 4 or a title in the modern 64+ era to me is a whole hell lot more impressive than say Indianas's 1940 title when 8 teams were in the tournament, not to mention the sport was either fully segregated or essentially segregated.