Is UCON now
- Thread starter Anon1629994708
- Start date
Here is the list I put in another thread on the same topic. I think people get Blueblood mixed up with success. Blueblood means you’ve been relevant and good for maaaany years. I’m not taking away anything from what UConn had accomplished…it’s very impressive, but they don’t fit that category.
Here are mine:
TIER ONE
Kentucky
National Championships in the 40's, 50's, 70's, 90's and 2010's.
Final Fours in the 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's 90,s, 2010's
UNC
National Championships in the 50's, 80's, 90's, 2000's, 2010's
Final Fours in the 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's 80's, 90's, 2000's, 2010's, 2020's
Kansas
National Championships in the 50's, 80's, 2000's, 2020's
Final Fours in the 40's, 50's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 2000's, 2010's, 2020's
TIER TWO
UCLA
National Championships in the 60's, 70's, 90's
Final Fours in the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 2000's, 2020's
Duke
National Championships in the 90's, 2000's, 2010's
Final Fours in the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 2000's, 2010's, 2020's
Indiana
National Championships in the 40's, 50's, 70's and 80's
Final Fours in the 40's, 50's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 2000's
Do they deserve to be on the Mt. Rushmore of MCBB programs historically?
No? Then please just end this silly nonsense! It’s rather embarrassing
No? Then please just end this silly nonsense! It’s rather embarrassing
You’re the worst kinda troll, don’t make it SO obvious.
The term 'blue blood' does suggest over numerous generations and decades. I'll give them 'elite program' for now.
If you want to go back to horse and buggy days, no. But 5 titles in 19 years certainly gets them in the club. If they win they are certainly the premier program of the last 20 years.
Agreed, but they were cheating and there was very little parody in the game. I’d argue that UConn is more of a blue blood than UCLA.
They only have 6 Final fours. Duke, UK, UNC, UCLA, and KU all have 16+.
You can't overlook their accomplishments over the past 2 decades. Uconn has consistently been a top tier program despite going through several coaching changes. However, my disdain grows deeper for them not only for their success but them keeping UK from the hardware.
I’m not sure the relevance of the bottom feeder IU has to do with blue bloods since IU sure as hell isn’t a blue blood, but I appreciate the statistics.
Don’t really care except I hate the term blue blood. Not sure why but it is really cringe.
To answer the question I say yes. They have had sustained success at a high level. What else matters?
To answer the question I say yes. They have had sustained success at a high level. What else matters?
I just figured IU would be a good comparison since the Hoosiers and Huskies both started playing in 1901 and IU used to be considered a Blue Blood, way back before the program got Crean'd.
They may not be one of the OG BlueBloods but what they’ve done in the last 25 years is as much or more impressive than any other program out there. Harder to win during that period than any other imo.
The blue bloods cannot be added to. They can be subtracted from. That's about it.
UConn is the NEW Blue Blood. No small accomplishment given the seismic upheavals in college basketball over the last decade.
While UK has been trending downward and toward mediocrity, UConn has been moving upward. The college basketball world abhors a vacuum.
While UK has been trending downward and toward mediocrity, UConn has been moving upward. The college basketball world abhors a vacuum.
Yeah, and I bet they don't have as many 5 stars as UK and don't pay their coach $10 million per year and do not give him a lifetime contract for $100 million. A common sense approach to college basketball.
If things continue ours will just become honorary because of our past.