April 17, 20179 yr To say a handful of successful years prior to K means they're a blue blood isn't accurate either Just noting that they're success stretches back to the 60's and late 70's. Success not tied to K. For the record I would say Blue Bloods are: Kentucky, UNC, Kansas, Duke, UCLA IU used to be but with only two FF's since 1987 bumps them down for me. UL has a great resume but not sure if they are in the top Five.
April 17, 20179 yr Blue Bloods to me- Kentucky, Duke, UNC, Kansas, and UCLA (only because of the 11 Nattys). UofL, IU, Michigan St., and UCONN are next in line but just aren't considered "Blue Bloods" to me. If you give IU the recent success of UofL or UCONN then yes they would definitely, but they lack the long term success to be a blue blood. You give Mich St., UCONN, or UofL the history of IU then they're a blue blood or give IU the recent success of one of those 3 then they are. Blue Bloods have down stretches but not 20+ year stretches like IU has. Edited April 17, 20179 yr by Mike Baxter
April 17, 20179 yr Just noting that they're success stretches back to the 60's and late 70's. Success not tied to K. For the record I would say Blue Bloods are: Kentucky, UNC, Kansas, Duke, UCLA IU used to be but with only two FF's since 1987 bumps them down for me. UL has a great resume but not sure if they are in the top Five. I get what you're saying but outside of K, Duke was never a real major threat in college hoops. UK, UNC, Kansas date back to the beginning of times of being successful. Duke had a few years but really took off when K came on board is all I'm getting at. And IMO IU and UCLA are in the same boat
April 17, 20179 yr Yea, I keep going back to UCLA. I just don't think they are there anymore. 11 titles yes, but out of those 11 titles 10 of them were in a 10 year span from 64-75. Outside of that 10 year span they won 1. That's far from sustaining greatness. There's a 40 year span of only 1 title.
April 17, 20179 yr Yea, I keep going back to UCLA. I just don't think they are there anymore. 11 titles yes, but out of those 11 titles 10 of them were in a 10 year span from 64-75. Outside of that 10 year span they won 1. That's far from sustaining greatness. There's a 40 year span of only 1 title. KY had a 20 yr gap once and an 18 year gap. UNC had a 25 year gap. KU went from 1952 to 1988 between titles. Titles aren't the only issue on the table IMO.
April 17, 20179 yr I get what you're saying but outside of K, Duke was never a real major threat in college hoops. UK, UNC, Kansas date back to the beginning of times of being successful. Duke had a few years but really took off when K came on board is all I'm getting at. And IMO IU and UCLA are in the same boat Duke was the favorite vs UCLA in the 1964 title game. They were ranked #2 in 1966 and lost in the FF. ACC tourney champs n runner up in 1978. How can you say they were never a threat before K? Honest question: Do you remember Duke before K or is your lifespan only since K has been coach?
April 17, 20179 yr Blue Bloods to me- Kentucky, Duke, UNC, Kansas, and UCLA (only because of the 11 Nattys). UofL, IU, Michigan St., and UCONN are next in line but just aren't considered "Blue Bloods" to me. If you give IU the recent success of UofL or UCONN then yes they would definitely, but they lack the long term success to be a blue blood. You give Mich St., UCONN, or UofL the history of IU then they're a blue blood or give IU the recent success of one of those 3 then they are. Blue Bloods have down stretches but not 20+ year stretches like IU has. See my post #35.
April 17, 20179 yr One thing for UCLA is from 1962 to 1980 they were in 14 FF's and won 10 titles. They floundered in the 80's and had a few good teams in 90's. also made a FF or two in the 00's. I would still keep them in the blue blood discussion but like IU they are on the ledge.
April 17, 20179 yr KY had a 20 yr gap once and an 18 year gap. UNC had a 25 year gap. KU went from 1952 to 1988 between titles. Titles aren't the only issue on the table IMO. UK and UNC are the 2 programs with the most wins ever. That pretty much trumps all. UK UNC DUKE and Kansas are the 4 top winningest teams. That pretty much is your list of blue bloods imo.
April 17, 20179 yr Duke was the favorite vs UCLA in the 1964 title game. They were ranked #2 in 1966 and lost in the FF. ACC tourney champs n runner up in 1978. How can you say they were never a threat before K? Honest question: Do you remember Duke before K or is your lifespan only since K has been coach? Only K era. But you've named 3 separate occasions where they were legit. Nothing either one of us say will sway the others opinion.
April 17, 20179 yr I consider these five beyond reproach (in line with what others have mentioned): Duke - #4 overall wins, T-#4 NCAA Titles, #4 Final Fours Kansas - #2 overall wins, T-#7 NCAA Titles, #5 Final Fours Kentucky - #1 overall wins, #2 NCAA titles, T-#2 Final Fours North Carolina - #3 overall wins, #3 NCAA Titles, #1 Final Fours UCLA - #8 overall wins, #1 NCAA Titles, T-#2 Final Fours The others with a case: Indiana - #10 overall wins, T-#4 NCAA Titles, #9 Final Fours Louisville - #11 overall wins, T-#7 NCAA Titles, T-#6 Final Fours I believe these have some flaws that keep them from consideration: UConn - While they are #2 in the 64-team+ era for titles, they're only made five Final Fours (for reference, Arkansas has been to more), and are #27 overall in wins. They would be considered ultra-elite if you looked at only the last 30 years. But blue blood typically means "old money", while UConn is most definitely "new money". Michigan State - They're #8 in Final Fours, but have just two titles, and are #28 overall in wins. Ohio State - Not a team that has been mentioned, but they are tied for #6 in Final Fours with Louisville, and are in the same area as both UConn and Michigan State for wins (#29). Of course, they last won a title 57 years ago so...... Syracuse - If Syracuse converted their titles more, no team in this area would be more likely to be on the list. Syracuse is tied for #10 in Final Fours and are #6 all-time in wins. But they just have the one title. Cincinnati - The Bearcats are also tied for #10 in Final Fours, and are #20 in wins, with a pair of titles. To me, they're in the same group as Michigan State.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.