UConn Not included in list of "Best programs since the turn of the century"

[Dream Jobbed 2.0]

He's a turd.

 

[jleves]

Someone needs to tell him with that logic, he needs to take Florida off the list - they made one before 2000 as well.

 

[SubbaBub]

Or show him the 2014 tape.

 

[SubbaBub]

4>3
3>2

Someday I need to get a Twitter account.

 

[SouthBayHusky]

Everybody with a Twitter account needs to relentlessly troll this idiot. I know I will be

 

[UConnfan8]

You guys know who this guy is, right? He's a known SEC troll.....I didn't even know anyone watched his show.

 

[MexicoHusky]

Shittiest "analyst" since the turn of the century:

1. Paul Finebaum
2. Diggger Phelps
3. Mike & Mike
4. Barles Charkley

 

[TheChamps990411]

This is one of those statements where someone thinks theyre being clever but actually expose how stupid they really are. This is one of the dumbest things ive ever heard and in complete contradiction to his original post. him! We dont need his approval.

 

[huskyniner]

Can't wait for more ESPN layoffs.

Some of us work there, jerk.

 

[huskyniner]

I agree this was a pretty egregious omission, but anyone who actually thinks Paul Finebaum himself is creating that on-screen graphic - or even dictating which teams should be included - is pretty dumb. It was likely just a poor job by the researcher for his show.

 

[intlzncster]

I agree this was a pretty egregious omission, but anyone who actually thinks Paul Finebaum himself is creating that on-screen graphic - or even dictating which teams should be included - is pretty dumb. It was likely just a poor job by the researcher for his show.

It's a Conspiracy with a capital C against UCONN!!!!!!!

 

[BUConn10]

I agree this was a pretty egregious omission, but anyone who actually thinks Paul Finebaum himself is creating that on-screen graphic - or even dictating which teams should be included - is pretty dumb. It was likely just a poor job by the researcher for his show.

maybe, until you double down with an even dumber argument that is really only based around making uconn appear as "new money" as the core of the jab, and then you are right back to a mix of stupidity and malice.

 

[NielsisGood]

Someone needs to tell him with that logic, he needs to take Florida off the list - they made one before 2000 as well.

He's an SEC guy specifically comparing Florida to the historical blue bloods of CBB. He's not discounting UConn's more modern success, he just left them off because the program isn't a multi generational power the same way UNC, UK, and the rest of that list have been.

 

[SouthBayHusky]

He's an SEC guy specifically comparing Florida to the historical blue bloods of CBB. He's not discounting UConn's more modern success, he just left them off because the program isn't a multi generational power the same way UNC, UK, and the rest of that list have been.

I like how he draws an arbitrary line in the sand with what he deems as blue blood in comparison to Florida, and then draws another arbitrary line by omitting Indiana from the Blue blood list by limiting this now to just "Florida compared to the 'recent successful blue bloods' of CBN" I mean with that many caveats and distinctions, it starts looking silly.

 

[Nostical]

Dear UConn fans, This was made to compare UF to CBB blue-bloods. These teams made a combined 63.

@finebaum Sorry, but in last 20 yrs-most competitive era in MBB-UConn won 4 NC's, Duke 3, N.Car/KY/FL 2 No one else more than 1

 

[NielsisGood]

I like how he draws an arbitrary line in the sand with what he deems as blue blood in comparison to Florida, and then draws another arbitrary line by omitting Indiana from the Blue blood list by limiting this now to just "Florida compared to the 'recent successful blue bloods' of CBN" I mean with that many caveats and distinctions, it starts looking silly.

Indiana was omitted because they've been even less successful than UCLA over that span. I can't tell you to stop looking for reasons to be agitated over this, all I can say is that the graphic makes sense within the context of trying to show off Florida's success since 2000 compared to the big time historical blue bloods.

 

[willie99]

the most Final Fours and the most National Championships can't be ignored, but idiots can and do say anything

throw in 1 more year, only Dook ties us for Final Fours and we're all alone at the top of the class in NC



PS: Florida is not "Blue Blood" either, poor dude was simply uninformed and ill prepared

 

[uconnfan68]

Wow, what a d__k.

 

[mauconnfan]

I agree this was a pretty egregious omission, but anyone who actually thinks Paul Finebaum himself is creating that on-screen graphic - or even dictating which teams should be included - is pretty dumb. It was likely just a poor job by the researcher for his show.

Anyone who thinks he didn't have a hand on it isn't thinking straight. A guy who is a mouthpiece for the SEC throwing Florida out there as a program who ranks up there with the elite teams has ties to the league - it's on him for the most part not a researcher.

 

[UConnTrumbull]

Some of us work there, jerk.

Sorry. Obviously I don't mean you. I'm talking about the overpaid talking heads that crap on UConn any chance possible.

 

[JellyBean]

How you gonna ignore what our program has been able to do over the last 15 years? Dude lost credibility with me.

 

[auror]

This is a bad, bad graphic.

Not because it leaves UConn out, but because it's title and wording doesn't reflect what it is attempting to show.

The graphic answers the question: How has Florida and the best of the still successful college basketball programs of history fared since 00-01? It's a very specific question.

"Cream of the Crop" should say something like "Historic Powers & Florida" because there is a distinction between the best and the old money. Michigan St., Louisville, UConn are on the former list, certainly ahead of UCLA in terms of accomplishment this millennium. I understand leaving out Indiana if you want to highlight Florida's accomplishment's by only listing both currently & consistently elite programs.

"Notable College Programs Since 2000-'01" needs to stress they are notable programs and the data is since '00, not that they are the notable programs since '00. "Notable College Programs' Records post 2000-'01" or something would work in the context of the new title.

 

[RayIsTheGOAT]

His "justification" literally made it 10x worse. What a tool.

 

[thatguyed]

Let me get this straight. He leaves UConn of the list of best programs since the turn off the century because of their record in the previous century. That's some prime southern logic right there.

"Southern logic" is an oxymoron. I know. I recently moved from CT to SC.

 

[huskyniner]

Sorry. Obviously I don't mean you. I'm talking about the overpaid talking heads that crap on UConn any chance possible.

Fair enough. According to some recent reports, you may get your wish soon!