And for what it's worth before someone thinks I only feel this way cause I'm a Kentucky fan, I'd rather have 5 championships that I vividly remember that 3 and a lot of history well before my time that makes the program I cheer for a Blue Blood.

Honestly, Blue Blood is just a dumb term. Especially now that people toss it around and have completely taken "Blue Blood" out of the true historical context that it came from outside of basketball.

45 minutes ago, MJAlltheWay24 said:

The problem is, people have redefined what it meant already.

Saying "has XYZ earned blue blood status", in my mind it's not possible to earn. Whoever was defined as the original blue bloods when the term was coined in college bball is all there can ever be.

Blue Blood and Elite are two different things.

I will ask anyone cause I don't know, who was the first to use the term "Blue Blood" in regards to college bball programs? When was "Blue Blood" first used? Who was defined at the time as being a Blue Blood program? I don't believe UConn was, thus they can't be a Blue Blood now cause they never were and you can't just become Blue Blood, even after 30 years of great basketball cause in historical context, you don't obtain it. You have it and hold onto it.

Saying Uconn is now a Blue Blood program goes against what the term "Blue Blood" truly means outside of college bball.

So no, UConn is not a Blue Blood. They are an Elite or Powerhouse program that has done great things in the last 25-30 years but you can't earn a "Blue Blood" status in my eyes.

In my eyes "Blue Blood" needs to stop being a term that is used if you can earn your way into it, cause you can't earn your way into a bloodline.

Agreed. 
 

Kinda like saying Carnegies, Gettys and Rockefellers are titans of industry, but Waltons and Gatses aren’t and never can be. 

UConn has been on some kind of a run in the 21st century with regard to titles.  What makes them odd is that in the non-title years, they haven't been much to write home about.  Or at least it seems that way.

As it stands, they make a VERY strong case for top program of the 21st century.

4 minutes ago, Randy Parker said:

UConn has been on some kind of a run in the 21st century with regard to titles.  What makes them odd is that in the non-title years, they haven't been much to write home about.  Or at least it seems that way.

As it stands, they make a VERY strong case for top program of the 21st century.

It's probably been stated in this thread or another, but 15 of the past 25 years UConn has either been eliminated the opening weekend or not made the NCAA tournament.

Up until UConn's title against Duke in '99, they were always considered to be one of college basketball's biggest choke teams that could never break through. They would garner a lot of attention because they were just up the road from Bristol, yet they'd never advanced to a Final Four until that time.

On 4/5/2023 at 10:00 AM, bugatti said:

It's probably been stated in this thread or another, but 15 of the past 25 years UConn has either been eliminated the opening weekend or not made the NCAA tournament.

Have they ever been to the Final Four and not won the championship?

On 4/6/2023 at 9:50 AM, Randy Parker said:

Have they ever been to the Final Four and not won the championship?

2009.

Career record in the Final Four is 10-1.