Louisville is not on the list to pick from??? Why?

I'm not even up to asking why Stanford is on that list but not U of L. Since the framing of the question is Elite NOW, none of the local schools deserve to be in the running IMO.

I'm not even up to asking why Stanford is on that list but not U of L. Since the framing of the question is Elite NOW, none of the local schools deserve to be in the running IMO.

To me elite doesn't simply imply the top ten from last year, it implies varied combinations of recent success and historical success and consistant competitive teams plus a viable program for the future. For instance UConn Syracuse and Florida would not be on my list in the 1980's but now they are because of recent success, and whereas Ohio State has had recent success there is not enough meat in the middle between when they had success in the 1960's till now to qualify them as elite. Yet Marquette has recently been to a final four and has the history and the sustained competitiveness over the past 40 years.

If you are looking at elite programs period like historically UL is easily in the top 10 IMO.

Probably won the 3rd or 4th most ball games during that time. Been to 3 Elite 8s. And hey if you want to go back 1 more year you see a National Title. Also UK has won several conference titles during that time.

 

That is basically what I did for this list. I took the past 10 years as well as programs who had been very good in the recent past (Florida and UCLA) and made my list.

 

Since those accomplishments are considered elite, how can people be so hypocritical of OTS?

If you are looking at elite programs period like historically UL is easily in the top 10 IMO.

Yeap. Most the sports magazines rate them around 7 give or take 2 spots.

UK, Duke, NC, KU and UCLA are the 5 elite teams in College basketball.. There are alot of other great programs such as IU, Syracuse, Uconn, Mich St, UL, ect, but, over the long haul, I would not consider them elite, because there are so many others who have accomplished as much as they have...

Since those accomplishments are considered elite, how can people be so hypocritical of OTS?

 

I think Tubby Smith did a very good job. But he slacked in recruiting his last couple years and did not have as good of a staff as needed. Lacking another inside player or 2 really hurt the team. Had he stayed at UK I believe he could have adjusted and weathered the storm, but he chose not to.

UF and OSU don't make it to elite status yet. I need to see more!

No Virginia Cavaliers on this list.

 

So they have a haven't had many winning seasons the last few years.

Rarely go to the NCAA tournament.

Haven't been to the Final Four in over 20 years.

 

THEY ARE STILL ELITE IN MY EYES! :lol:

UL should be on there. My mistake.

I picked historically over recently... Therefore I chose:

 

Indiana, Kentucky, Kansas, Duke, North Carolina, Michigan State, and UCLA.

Any surprise the top 5 vote getters have well below average football prestige???

Any surprise the top 5 vote getters have well below average football prestige???

 

I'm gonna assume you overlooked top #5 UCLA, not a bad football program over the years and by no means are they well below average in football prestige

The others I agree with you on

I voted, UK, IU, UNC, Duke, Kansas, syracuse, Michigan St., Arizona, and I guess UL would be on that list too.