Blue bloods...

[Midwestfella12]

Blue bloods are royalty... and royalty is defined by lineage... there is no greater lineage that that of KU... Naismith to Allen/Hamilton/Allen. From that lineage, sprang Rupp to UK in '30 and Smith to UNC in '66. The Royal Family (= blue bloods) are KU (starting 1898), UK (1903), and UNC (1910). There have other significant lineages that have sprang up independently (IU, UCLA, UL, UCONN, etc.), some multiple times, but they've ended... gone extinct.
Among all coaches, Rupp's performance is unprecedented (especially the rate at which he won from '47 to '67). During which we eclipsed KU and then UNC in all-time wins and won 4 championships. We are the gold-standard from Rupp on... our only deductions being the short tenures of Sutton and Gillespie.

Facts

 

[TeoJ]

UCLA has more titles than anyone by a good margin.

Indiana has two coaches with multiple titles.

UCLA did it in the sixty's,pretty much that's it.They did have one hell of a decade I will give you that.

 

[TomTFan]

Blue bloods are royalty... and royalty is defined by lineage... there is no greater lineage that that of KU... Naismith to Allen/Hamilton/Allen. From that lineage, sprang Rupp to UK in '30 and Smith to UNC in '66. The Royal Family (= blue bloods) are KU (starting 1898), UK (1903), and UNC (1910). There have other significant lineages that have sprang up independently (IU, UCLA, UL, UCONN, etc.), some multiple times, but they've ended... gone extinct.
Among all coaches, Rupp's performance is unprecedented (especially the rate at which he won from '47 to '67). During which we eclipsed KU and then UNC in all-time wins and won 4 championships. We are the gold-standard from Rupp on... our only deductions being the short tenures of Sutton and Gillespie.

In 2012 ESPN ranked the 50 greatest teams of the last 50 years. According to their criteria, which is kinda strange. I would have had UCLA, Kentucky, UNC, Kansas, Dook.........

http://www.espn.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/tag/_/name/50-in-50-series

 

[MegaBlue05]

For me it's UK, UNC, KU meeting and setting the historical standard of sustained excellence under numerous coaches; Duke for its recent dominance from the mid 80s to present; UCLA for its never-again to be replicated super decade of absolute dominance of the sport in mid 60s-mid 70s. There's 5 blue bloods.

Indiana used to be on the list, but their last title was 31 years ago, last final four was 16 years ago and they have been past the Sweet 16 3 times (92, 93, 02) in 31 years and just once post-Knight. They've reached relic status.

Tier 2 to me, which are the really good programs with a championship history and a level of consistency over the past 25 years or so OR decent old history and decent modern success: UConn, UL, Michigan St., Michigan, Nova, Syracuse, Arizona, NC State, Cincinnati, Ohio State.

Tier 3 are schools that have had success but only in patches with long droughts of irrelevancy: Arkansas, LSU, Houston, Marquette, Oregon, Wisconsin, St. Johns, Georgetown, Temple, Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St.

 

[thepip]

Matt “fishing for votes” Jones???

His truely

 

[thepip]

In your first post, you stated that you think you heard. You seem pretty confident now. Did he say this on the radio show?

 

[420grover]

That's still the radio show, doesn't matter if it's through the air, streamed, or podcast. Just wanted to make sure you didn't hear it on the tv show or periscope or something else. Now that we've established where you think you heard it, I'm gonna go ahead and call b.s. on that one. Ryan said UL was a top 7 job, Matt only said it was a better job than Xavier.