UConn is a Blue Blood

[bendm]

ok last one. i included every school that has won a chip since '75. chips count for 60%, final 4s 30%, and sweet 16s 10%:

1) UNC- 10.2
2) Duke- 10
3) UK- 8.2
4) KU- 7.2
5) Lville- 6.3
6) UConn- 5.9
6) UCLA- 5.9
8) MSU- 5.8
9) Indiana- 5
10) Nova- 4.6
11) Cuse- 4.5
12) Florida- 3.8
12) Michigan- 3.8
14) Zona- 3.7
15) Arkansas- 3.1
16) Gtown- 2.9
17) UNLV- 2.8
18) UVA- 2.5
19) Marquette- 2
20) NC St- 1.6
21) Baylor- 1.4

*if UConn wins it all they jump Lville into 5th place.

 

[tzznandrew]

The tourney appearances argument makes no sense to me. Nobody cares if you make it and lose in the first weekend. Dukes loss to Lehigh and Kentucys to St. Peter’s may as well be equivalent to missing the tournament. They don’t get extra credit for those games imo.

They. make sense to every other major school but us. I wonder why? Is it because it is our weakest metric?

Having successful enough season to make the NCAA is meaningful. How many fans did we turn away or not win over from 2015-2020? How many people on this board stopped watching games religiously because of the bad seasons?

I'd rather have had Arizona or Purdue's season rather than our 2017 or 2018 years. At least they were good enough to be disappointed in something.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

@bendm was snubbed in the NERD bracket dam

Good catch!

 

[FfldCntyFan]

ok last one. i included every school that has won a chip since '75. chips count for 60%, final 4s 30%, and sweet 16s 10%:

1) UNC- 10.2
2) Duke- 10
3) UK- 8.2
4) KU- 7.2
5) Lville- 6.3
6) UConn- 5.9
6) UCLA- 5.9
8) MSU- 5.8
9) Indiana- 5
10) Nova- 4.6
11) Cuse- 4.5
12) Florida- 3.8
12) Michigan- 3.8
14) Zona- 3.7
15) Arkansas- 3.1
16) Gtown- 2.9
17) UNLV- 2.8
18) UVA- 2.5
19) Marquette- 2
20) NC St- 1.6
21) Baylor- 1.4

*if UConn wins it all they jump Lville into 5th place.

 

[Zissou]

The tourney appearances argument makes no sense to me. Nobody cares if you make it and lose in the first weekend. Dukes loss to Lehigh and Kentucys to St. Peter’s may as well be equivalent to missing the tournament. They don’t get extra credit for those games imo.

Although the conference does get payout credits for appearances

 

[tzznandrew]

Although the conference does get payout credits for appearances

Those games were major upsets because those teams had very good seasons. They didn't stick the landing, but to pretend that the season was vacated is absurd.

 

[Waquoit]

Those games were major upsets because those teams had very good seasons. They didn't stick the landing, but to pretend that the season was vacated is absurd.

All the "vacated" stuff is nonsense.

 

[diggerfoot]

The fact that we had recent down years is more a testimony than a detraction to the blue blood claim. The confluence of two extraordinary things happened to cause those down years:

Conference realignment shenanigans that were beyond the basketball program’s control.

Personal problems with a coach, namely a divorce, that likely turned a good coach into an apathetic one.

The confluence of those two events might have buried a program that did not have blue blood potential. Why did the BE take us back despite our recent mediocracy? Why were we able to hire a promising, up and coming coach despite our recent mediocracy? Why was that coach able to recruit well despite the recent mediocracy?

The answer to those questions is a residual impression that we are the basketball capital, an impression that not even prolonged mediocracy could bury.

 

[Zissou]

All the "vacated" stuff is nonsense.

Joe Paterno, winningest coach, then he wasn’t, then he was again.

 

[Zissou]

Why did the BE take us back despite our recent mediocracy?

To strengthen the second tier of the conference while Jay closed out his career.

 

[Billy Jack]

Agree with many of your points.. Additionally.. When the Tournament expanded to 64 teams in 1985..Making winning the Trophy much more difficult.. The argument about UConn's legacy/status since that point in time really breaks down quickly when compared to the "blue bloods" over that same period of time.Even though we had to wait a few years for our first championship trophy.

Yes. And there’s 2 ways of looking at that. Sure, it takes more wins to get to the top in an expanded tournament, but it’s easier to make the tournament to begin with. You can’t win the tournament if you don’t get into it, so in that sense the pre-expansion tournament was harder to win.

Let’s face it, the modern expanded tournament was not created to provide a better test of who is the true champion. It’s a money grab. More teams = more games = more interest = more viewers = more money.

The expanded tournament is the result of the resentment by schools from power conferences toward lower tier conferences gaining access to the tournament with inferior teams. The NCAA tournament was originally created to be a tournament of (conference) champions. Then they allowed independent teams to get in via at-large bids because they realized that sometimes the best team in the country was an independent. Then they allowed limited expansion because sometimes the best team in the country was eliminated in a conference tournament. That was all in the interests of getting a “true” champion at the end of the process. By that time the tournament had become so popular that it was really lucrative. And then expansion was all about the money.

 

[phillionaire]

Joe Paterno, winningest coach, then he wasn’t, then he was again.

Paterno knows a lot about vacating (his bowels) (of poo) (into his pants) (allegedly)

 

[jostar1]

 

[HuskyBaggins]

Nice of them to let UCLA to join UConn in the "10+" championships category. Only one school has 15.

 

[tzznandrew]

Nice of them to let UCLA to join UConn in the "10+" championships category. Only one school has 15.

And only one school in Tier 1-2 has championships on for both men and women.

 

[Dove]

 

[Umami Zen]

Respect from Coach K.. A great compliment to UConn/JC legacy and all that has followed.

 

[Dove]

Respect from Coach K.. A great compliment to UConn/JC legacy and all that has followed.

"Maybe give them a different color." said he.

 

[ElGreco]

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.

It was much much easier way back with fewer teams and less parity. We are new Blue Blood for sure with one more win

 

[ElGreco]

"Maybe give them a different color." said he.

But our color is blue

 

[ElGreco]

ok last one. i included every school that has won a chip since '75. chips count for 60%, final 4s 30%, and sweet 16s 10%:

1) UNC- 10.2
2) Duke- 10
3) UK- 8.2
4) KU- 7.2
5) Lville- 6.3
6) UConn- 5.9
6) UCLA- 5.9
8) MSU- 5.8
9) Indiana- 5
10) Nova- 4.6
11) Cuse- 4.5
12) Florida- 3.8
12) Michigan- 3.8
14) Zona- 3.7
15) Arkansas- 3.1
16) Gtown- 2.9
17) UNLV- 2.8
18) UVA- 2.5
19) Marquette- 2
20) NC St- 1.6
21) Baylor- 1.4

*if UConn wins it all they jump Lville into 5th place.

5th on this list is reasonable

 

[Richmondhsky]

Need another one and the detractors can go to h$ll…come to think about…

 

[wingsfan055]

The whole AAC/Big East conference shift then Ollie disaster were the only reason for the lull this century. We're still a Blue Blood on any measure since 1990.

 

[WeAreUCONN]

Last night Nantz mentioned that he said that there were no blue bloods in the final 4. Then he said maybe he was wrong and that UConn might be “the blue blood” was cool to hear.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I could give two $h!ts about what others think about our blood.. It's their blood that will be spilled in the arena, not ours.