UConn is a Blue Blood | Page 6 | The Boneyard
.

UConn is a Blue Blood

Status
Not open for further replies.
ConnHuskBask said:
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.
Expand ...
Great points!
 
BigErnMcCracken said:
We are shooting the eyes out of the ball right now. I think I read 44% from 3 as a team for the tourney.

I am going to probably have a meltdown if Alleyne or Calcaterra clank their first three. But this group strikes me as one that’s going to keep hammering until they fall.
Expand ...
Agree with you.. I have a minor concern with the sight lines when shooting from long distance in a football stadium.. Tougher perspective.. But both teams will have the same challenge and I'm sure Dan Hurley will try to get as many reps in on the court as possible for the guys.. Thinking corner threes might be an easier viewpoint than top of key threes.. Some of the football arenas use curtains to help with the visual for shooters but guessing they want to sell the seats.

No question our shooters are in a nice Tournament rhythm..
 
ConnHuskBask said:
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.
Expand ...

I would break the NCAA Tournament into the following eras:

1) Pre 1960 - Basketball was heavily segregated and the tournament was only 8 teams until the early 50's, then expanding to 22. The Tournament was heavily regionalized, so East played East, Midwest played Midwest, etc., until the Final 4. Also, the NIT was considered the more prestigious tournament to some schools so teams would occasionally choose the NIT over the NCAA. These championships basically don't count.

2) 1960-1974 - Integration came to college basketball, and the NCAA forbid teams to play in the NIT if they got an NCAA bid starting in 1970. There was still a "one team per conference" rule until 1975 and the NCAA Tournament was regional until the early 70's. This is how UCLA would play UC Santa Barbara and New Mexico State almost every year in the Sweet 16 and Elite 8. These Championships get an asterisk.

3) 1975-1984 - Near modern era. Tournament was expanding (32 teams in 1975, 40 in 1979), and allowed multiple teams per conference. There were still byes and some other weird stuff (regional teams got seeding preference through 1978), but it was getting closer to the modern tournament format. These championships basically count.

4) 1985-Present -Modern era. 64 team tournament starting in 1985, Shot clock starting in 85-86 season, and 3 point shot started in the 1987 tournament (although some conferences had been using it for league games since 1980). Other than the haircuts and some conditioning, the game that was played in the late 80's had fundamentally the same rules as the game played today. These championships DEFINITELY count.
 
I was listening to XSM 84 college sports and Coach K was on. He stated people have been debating the question is UConn a Blue Blood, in his opinion there is no question of course they are. They have 4 ships in the last 25 years or so. He also said two of them came against his Duke team.
 
AzHusky said:
I was listening to XSM 84 college sports and Coach K was on. He stated people have been debating the question is UConn a Blue Blood, in his opinion there is no question of course they are. They have 4 ships in the last 25 years or so. He also said two of them came against his Duke team.
Expand ...
There you go, Coach K himself. The man, the myth, the legend. Of course, what else could he say when the Goat owned him. The only reason it's not universally acknowledged is Husky fans craven validation craving from others. Goat's 3 wins in 4 FF's...legend.

74-71
Dooooomed!
 
Last edited:
At my local on Sunday and sitting next to an Alabama guy. When I told him I was a UConn fan he immediately says you guys are a blue blood. These SEC fans and Alabama fans don't understand that your DNA is bb. Yes Bama had a vg team this year, but not like the pedigree of UConn.

I'm hoping for another naty and AD David Benedict having to make the choice between a SEC and an ACC bid.

Yes, I've been drinking, but so what.
 
So, ranking schools by Championships in the Near-Modern and Modern Era:

1) Duke - 5 - 1991, 1992, 2001, 2010, 2015
1) UNC - 5 - 1982, 1993, 2005, 2009, 2017
3) UConn - 4 - 1999, 2004, 2011, 2014
3) Kentucky - 4 - 1978, 1996, 1998, 2012
5) Kansas - 3 - 1988, 2008, 2022
5) Villanova - 3 - 1985, 2016, 2018
5) Indiana - 3 - 1976, 1981, 1987
5) Louisville - 3 - 1980, 1986, 2013
9) UCLA - 2 - 1975, 1995 (plus most of the championships from the "asterisk" era)
9) Florida - 2 - 2006, 2007
9) Michigan State - 1979, 2000

Those are the championships in the era of basketball that approximates the game played today, covering almost the last 50 years.

Rupp's championships and whoever was coaching Indiana in the 40's championships simply don't count. The game and the tournament were so different back then that it is apples and pumpkins to compare a championship in the early 50's to today.

That said, the first 8 schools on that list have 30 of the 48 championships during this era. They are definitely a class above over a long period of time.
 
Larranaga called UConn a blue blood on PTI today as well. Of course that helps Miami’s cause too

BTW he seems like good dude. Also says one of the keys to game is shooting in a large space like George Mason did at RCA dome in Final Four in 2006. Need to be confident in your shot. He also respects the toughness of the Hurley family.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
So, ranking schools by Championships in the Near-Modern and Modern Era:

1) Duke - 5 - 1991, 1992, 2001, 2010, 2015
1) UNC - 5 - 1982, 1993, 2005, 2009, 2017
3) UConn - 4 - 1999, 2004, 2011, 2014
3) Kentucky - 4 - 1978, 1996, 1998, 2012
5) Kansas - 3 - 1988, 2008, 2022
5) Villanova - 3 - 1985, 2016, 2018
5) Indiana - 3 - 1976, 1981, 1987
5) Louisville - 3 - 1980, 1986, 2013
9) UCLA - 2 - 1975, 1995 (plus most of the championships from the "asterisk" era)
9) Florida - 2 - 2006, 2007
9) Michigan State - 1979, 2000

Those are the championships in the era of basketball that approximates the game played today, covering almost the last 50 years.

Rupp's championships and whoever was coaching Indiana in the 40's championships simply don't count. The game and the tournament were so different back then that it is apples and pumpkins to compare a championship in the early 50's to today.

That said, the first 8 schools on that list have 30 of the 48 championships during this era. They are definitely a class above over a long period of time.
Expand ...

I completely understand if someone wants to make the UNC Duke Kentucky Kansas only argument. Hell, even UCLA as a 5th due to the absolute dominance of the sport under Wooden.

To me there's just simply no way you can rank Indiana higher than UConn, Villanova, or Louisville. Same tier, sure if you heavily weight the prehistoric era, but no way ahead.
 
Pretty soon..We're gonna have to come up with a different color other than blue because we are knocking on the door of exiting blue blood status to a newer more impressive color YTD
 
National Championships over the past 24 years:
UConn: 4.....
Duke: 3
Kansas: 2
North Carolina: 2
Villanova: 2

Dun-dun-dun.....
 
The most important factor is the continuation of success from one coach to another. 1 coach doesn't make a program. Even 2 coaches doesn't really make a program. You need sustained success across 3 or more coaches and multiple decades to really establish yourself.

Those 3+ coaches need final fours and national championships. Anyone like a Gonzaga can beat up on a bad conference a get a preferential seed to enjoy an easy path through the 2nd weekend. A final four is a minimum standard that means that you're playing and beating championship caliber teams along the way consistently.

I think the modern/post-modern era is what really matters when laying this out. Different game, more talent, and a significantly larger tourney field. With that, these are the programs that anyone would consider by those metrics:

UCLA, Kansas, Kentucky, North Carolina, UConn. 2+ decades. 3+ coaches. 6+ final fours. 4+ titles.

Duke, Indiana, Nova - 2 coach programs, mainly made relevant by 1 coach.

Some may say that rating scale is completely slanted towards UConn being included. Probably true, but this is the boneyard. Sue me.
 
NEforceUConn said:
At my local on Sunday and sitting next to an Alabama guy. When I told him I was a UConn fan he immediately says you guys are a blue blood. These SEC fans and Alabama fans don't understand that your DNA is bb. Yes Bama had a vg team this year, but not like the pedigree of UConn.

I'm hoping for another naty and AD David Benedict having to make the choice between a SEC and an ACC bid.

Yes, I've been drinking, but so what.
Expand ...
We want a B1G bid.
 
AzHusky said:
I was listening to XSM 84 college sports and Coach K was on. He stated people have been debating the question is UConn a Blue Blood, in his opinion there is no question of course they are. They have 4 ships in the last 25 years or so. He also said two of them came against his Duke team.
Expand ...
Any chance someone can post a clip of him saying that. It would go a long way in silencing a bunch of annoying Dukies down my way who somehow have anointed themselves as the keeper of the holy grail known as blue blood status.
 
The blue blood discussion is a bit pointless. Lists like this basically never change. Ask the American Film Institution what the 10 best movies of all time are. I suspect the list has barely budged in decades. The same is true for this basketball "blue blood" list. I'm not even sure I'd want to be on the list.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
338
Guests online
5,927
Total visitors
6,265
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
164,682
Messages
4,406,402
Members
10,222
Latest member
Stronga12


.
..
Top Bottom