Is UCON now
- Thread starter Anon1629994708
- Start date
Thought the same thing.
UConn is the best program in CBB right now. Just facts. When they beat the snot out of San Diego State on Monday night--and bad news for those with hope on the Aztecs...they lost to Arkansas this year a team that UConn humiliated to the point of making Musselman put on a sweater..they'll have 5 National Titles since 1999 with 3 different coaches. Also of note, they win when Final Four is in Texas. This would be 2 in Houston, 1 in San Antonio and 1 in Dallas. Other was in Tampa. Know you can't assume, but I see nothing that SDSU can do to be in the game. They suck offensively and defensively they'll not be able to handle to the interior duo.
If Arizona is a blue blood, might as well through Cincinnati, San Fransisco and UNLV in there
This has been beat to death.
If you’re using “blueblood” meaning they are a top 5 program historically or and elite program then yes.
But that isn’t the origin of the term blueblood. Blueblood directly refers to “the purest of blood” and in the beginning of the bloodline. The founding programs. They’re in the beginning and each decade between up to now. That isn’t something you earn with 23 good years in a cbb timeline dating back over 100 years. In another 50 to 100 years (if UConn is still a top/relevant program) then those generations will likely see them as a founding program that’s been good since inception since pre 70s basketball will be a much smaller part of the timeline of the sport
If you’re using “blueblood” meaning they are a top 5 program historically or and elite program then yes.
But that isn’t the origin of the term blueblood. Blueblood directly refers to “the purest of blood” and in the beginning of the bloodline. The founding programs. They’re in the beginning and each decade between up to now. That isn’t something you earn with 23 good years in a cbb timeline dating back over 100 years. In another 50 to 100 years (if UConn is still a top/relevant program) then those generations will likely see them as a founding program that’s been good since inception since pre 70s basketball will be a much smaller part of the timeline of the sport
Definitely a blue blood. Having said that 
I’ve thought a lot about this. As of now, no. They are still “new money”. But if they win the next game then in 15-20 years they will be considered a blue blood based on what they have done to this point. Provided they don’t SMU themselves somehow.
If they win Monday, that would be 5 titles since 1999. They’ve also missed the tournament 9 times in that span. That’s a crazy stat.
ARZ LMFAO
1 title. with DA out and in OT. Blueblood WTF. I guess AUB is too really?
No. A blueblood is a program that has had success over decades and generations. UCONN's first Final Four was 24 years ago. That just doesn't do it for me.
You can be a successful program with multiple titles and not be a blueblood.
You can be a successful program with multiple titles and not be a blueblood.
UConn is such a weird anomaly when it comes to basketball, that I almost think you have to exclude them as their own little thing.
Assuming they win on Monday, then in the past 24 years they've won 5 titles.
However, also in that timeframe they've missed the tournament 9 times and lost in the 1st weekend 7 times, with most of those 7 being upsets where they were the better seed.
They have had the highest of highs, but also the lowest of lows.
Assuming they win on Monday, then in the past 24 years they've won 5 titles.
However, also in that timeframe they've missed the tournament 9 times and lost in the 1st weekend 7 times, with most of those 7 being upsets where they were the better seed.
They have had the highest of highs, but also the lowest of lows.
People saying UConn is a blueblood don’t understand what a blueblood is.
This is how some of UConn's notable all-time accomplishments currently stack up to UK and Indiana over the past ~120 years:
UK: 2,377 wins since 1903 -- 2nd all-time. .760 winning % -- 1st.
Indiana: 1,909 wins since 1901 -- 10th. .634 winning % -- 21st.
UConn: 1,800 wins since 1901 -- 25th. .640 winning % -- 16th.
UK: 53 conference regular season championships.
Indiana: 22 conference regular season championships.
UConn: 29 conference regular season championships.
UK: ranked in final AP polls 54 times, ranked 948 weeks total.
Indiana: ranked in final AP polls 29 times, ranked 576 weeks total.
UConn: ranked in final AP polls 18 times, ranked 378 weeks total.
UK: 59 NCAA Tournament appearances -- 1st.
Indiana: 41 NCAA Tournament appearances -- 6th.
UConn: 36 NCAA Tournament appearances -- tied for 13th. Only two appearances from 1966-1967 to 1989-1990.
UK: 17 Final Fours, spanning 73 years, from 1942 to 2015 -- tied for 3rd.
Indiana: 8 Final Fours over 62 years, from 1940 to 2002 -- tied for 8th.
UConn: 6 Final Fours over 24 years, from 1999 to 2023 -- tied for 10th.
UK: 8-4 NCAA tournament championship record over 66 years, 1948 to 2014. 2 NIT championships.
Indiana: 5-1 NCAA tournament championship record over 47 years, 1940 to 1987. 1 NIT championship.
UConn: 4-0 NCAA Tournament championship record over 15 years, 1999 to 2014. 1 NIT championship.
UK: 3 AP Coach of the Year; 2 Naismith Player of the Year.
Indiana: 3 AP Coach of the Year; 2 Naismith Player of the Year.
UConn: 1 AP Coach of the Year; 0 Naismith Player of the Year.
UK: 9 men's Naismith Hall of Fame inductees.
Indiana: 7 men's Naismith Hall of Fame inductees.
UConn: 2 men's Naismith Hall of Fame inductees.
I'm not sure if the I'm finding the correct number of All-Americans for UConn, but regardless, both UK and Indiana tower over the Huskies in that category.
UConn's an all-time great program -- but still way behind the Blue Bloods.
UK: 2,377 wins since 1903 -- 2nd all-time. .760 winning % -- 1st.
Indiana: 1,909 wins since 1901 -- 10th. .634 winning % -- 21st.
UConn: 1,800 wins since 1901 -- 25th. .640 winning % -- 16th.
UK: 53 conference regular season championships.
Indiana: 22 conference regular season championships.
UConn: 29 conference regular season championships.
UK: ranked in final AP polls 54 times, ranked 948 weeks total.
Indiana: ranked in final AP polls 29 times, ranked 576 weeks total.
UConn: ranked in final AP polls 18 times, ranked 378 weeks total.
UK: 59 NCAA Tournament appearances -- 1st.
Indiana: 41 NCAA Tournament appearances -- 6th.
UConn: 36 NCAA Tournament appearances -- tied for 13th. Only two appearances from 1966-1967 to 1989-1990.
UK: 17 Final Fours, spanning 73 years, from 1942 to 2015 -- tied for 3rd.
Indiana: 8 Final Fours over 62 years, from 1940 to 2002 -- tied for 8th.
UConn: 6 Final Fours over 24 years, from 1999 to 2023 -- tied for 10th.
UK: 8-4 NCAA tournament championship record over 66 years, 1948 to 2014. 2 NIT championships.
Indiana: 5-1 NCAA tournament championship record over 47 years, 1940 to 1987. 1 NIT championship.
UConn: 4-0 NCAA Tournament championship record over 15 years, 1999 to 2014. 1 NIT championship.
UK: 3 AP Coach of the Year; 2 Naismith Player of the Year.
Indiana: 3 AP Coach of the Year; 2 Naismith Player of the Year.
UConn: 1 AP Coach of the Year; 0 Naismith Player of the Year.
UK: 9 men's Naismith Hall of Fame inductees.
Indiana: 7 men's Naismith Hall of Fame inductees.
UConn: 2 men's Naismith Hall of Fame inductees.
I'm not sure if the I'm finding the correct number of All-Americans for UConn, but regardless, both UK and Indiana tower over the Huskies in that category.
UConn's an all-time great program -- but still way behind the Blue Bloods.
UConn UNC Kansas and Duke all on our heels for #1 spot overall history in the sport.
U-Conn? If they win on Monday--yes. Five titles in the last quarter century of modern-basketball. Quite a feat.
Arizona? No way Shoot -- 'Nova is better as a program than Arizona, and Villanova isn't a blue blood (although they are a noteworthy program of late (3 titles)).
GBB!
Surprised people aren’t laughing more at Auburn than Arizona.
I assume “my boogs” means Auburn. They aren’t even a blue blood of the SEC.
I assume “my boogs” means Auburn. They aren’t even a blue blood of the SEC.
FINALLY someone rcognizes that this troll included his lame *** auburn war tigers.ARZ LMFAO
1 title. with DA out and in OT. Blueblood WTF. I guess AUB is too really?
What about Indiana? I know they haven't won one in awhile, but they ( historically ) have 5 championships
I think we found Denim's burner account. 367 messages in 16 years.
People keep bringing up ancient history to put UCONN down and prop other programs up. 5 titles in 24 years? Must be nice.
I know everyone on here likes to act like 2015 for last final four or 2012 for last title or 2019 since last elite 8 are ancient history but then at the same time brag about titles from the 40s and 50s and act like those are as impressive as uconn winning 5 the last 24 years.
I know everyone on here likes to act like 2015 for last final four or 2012 for last title or 2019 since last elite 8 are ancient history but then at the same time brag about titles from the 40s and 50s and act like those are as impressive as uconn winning 5 the last 24 years.
Guys it's not even a question.
They have the titles and ffs.
More specifically, they are a current/modern day blue blood...6 ffs with 4 titles since 1999...basically every 4-5 years they're in the hunt late into the year...
Most impressively, when they get to a final 4...they pretty much win it all.
Then, you take into account their women's program which even more blue blood...
Huskies are basketball royalty.
They have the titles and ffs.
More specifically, they are a current/modern day blue blood...6 ffs with 4 titles since 1999...basically every 4-5 years they're in the hunt late into the year...
Most impressively, when they get to a final 4...they pretty much win it all.
Then, you take into account their women's program which even more blue blood...
Huskies are basketball royalty.
1 thing forsure, their athletics department cares more bout winning titles and championships than uk's. Kentucky's blue blood status is more a reflection of its past than its present. Conversely uconns status is a reflection of its present status moreso than its past accomplishments as a program.
Kentucky may be a blue blood, but the blood is getting watered down quite a bit
Kentucky may be a blue blood, but the blood is getting watered down quite a bit
I just don’t think it matters with a small school that doesn’t even have a football team. Over the next decade the schools in power 5 leagues will make tens of millions more and eventually that money difference will be impossible to overcome. You can’t compete with competition that eventually makes 10 times as much money as you. You can’t pay coaches the same, players the same with NIL, build comparable facilities, etc. So let them enjoy now, it just won’t make a difference in the long term.
So, they can’t be a blue blood because they weren’t good 50 years ago? Assuming they win it this year, they will have titles under 3 different coaches.
Is UCLA still a blue blood? They’ve only won 1 title in the past 50 years.
No one will ever match the Bruins feats from 60's and 70's no matter how you dice it. They're blue though it might be fading a bit
I'm not sure what you'd call them. I'd call Cal a fat slob that has destroyed our program though.
