Blue Bloods

[SWC75]

Watching the Kansas- Duke game, I realized that this was the one "blue blood" confrontation in the Elite 8. It made me wonder exactly where we draw the "blue blood" line. I thought I'd look up the total victories in the NCAA tournament by school:
NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament all-time team records - Wikipedia
(click on the word 'wins' and the arrow to get the list by victories)

The list is up to date through last year's tournament and has not been updated, (Maryland Baltimore County was in the 2008 tournament and lost to Georgetown: the list has their record as 0-1). Kentucky now has 128 wins, North Carolina 124, Duke 112, Kansas 107 and Syracuse 68.

Is 100 wins the cut-off point? If not what should it be? Is this the best way to measure "blue bloods"?

 

[OrlandoCuse]

I heard Syracuse referenced as a Blue Blood on a few separate occasions during the tournament, FWIW.

 

[orangenauburn]

Watching the Kansas- Duke game, I realized that this was the one "blue blood" confrontation in the Elite 8. It made me wonder exactly where we draw the "blue blood" line. I thought I'd look up the total victories in the NCAA tournament by school:
NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament all-time team records - Wikipedia
(click on the word 'wins' and the arrow to get the list by victories)

The list is up to date through last year's tournament and has not been updated, (Maryland Baltimore County was in the 2008 tournament and lost to Georgetown: the list has their record as 0-1). Kentucky now has 128 wins, North Carolina 124, Duke 112, Kansas 107 and Syracuse 68.

Is 100 wins the cut-off point? If not what should it be? Is this the best way to measure "blue bloods"?

So we are behind
Kentucky
UNC
Duke
UCLA
Kansas
Louisville (76)

Then it is
Syracuse (68)
Indiana (66)
Michigan State (65)
Nova (62)

UConn (59)
Michigan (58)
Arizona (56)
Ohio State (55)

Florida (49)
Georgetown (47)
Cincy (46)
Arkansas (42)
Marquette (41)
Maryland (41)
Oklahoma (41)
Illinois (40)

 

[OrlandoCuse]

So we are behind
Kentucky
UNC
Duke
UCLA
Kansas
Louisville (76)

Then it is
Syracuse (68)
Indiana (66)
Michigan State (65)
Nova (62)

UConn (59)
Michigan (58)
Arizona (56)
Ohio State (55)

Florida (49)
Georgetown (47)
Cincy (46)
Arkansas (42)
Marquette (41)
Maryland (41)
Oklahoma (41)
Illinois (40)

Louisville’s 76 doesn’t reflect their vacated wins from 2012 to ‘15. They’re currently at 61.

 

[orangenauburn]

Louisville’s 76 doesn’t reflect their vacated wins from 2012 to ‘15. They’re currently at 61.

I don't recognize wins removed by a phony association

As far as I am concerned, they have those just as JB has his

 

[OrlandoCuse]

I don't recognize wins removed by a phony association

As far as I am concerned, they have those just as JB has his

You need to add back a bunch of ours then. I think we end up ahead.

 

[orangenauburn]

You need to add back a bunch of ours then. I think we end up ahead.

I gladly will. How many did we lose? Like 6?

 

[Cuseroc]

Theres an asterisk next to SU and a few others. At the bottom it says something about NCAA tourney vacated wins. So it seems that they already updated any wins from SU as part of its punishment.

 

[Cusefan95]

I think Indiana had “blue-blood” status - but basically doing nothing for two decades has put them into some weird purgatory-like status.

I also think it’s weird that UConn has four titles, but generally aren’t viewed as peers to Kansas/UNC-Duke etc. Not really sure why that is, but I’m OK with it.

 

[orangenauburn]

I think Indiana had “blue-blood” status - but basically doing nothing for two decades has put them into some weird purgatory-like status.

I also think it’s weird that UConn has four titles, but generally aren’t viewed as peers to Kansas/UNC-Duke etc. Not really sure why that is, but I’m OK with it.

Id say 100 is true blue bloods, but UCLA imo is not a current blue blood.

Then Ville Cuse Mich State Nova lead 2nd tier

Indiana ... Meh

Im too lazy right now, but wonder what Syracuse, Indiana, Maryland records and post season success look like compared against each other since 2001

 

[Cusefannotindc]

Front page of ESPN says:
Three blue bloods, a miracle and the Final Four no one saw coming

So apparently they consider Nova and Michigan blue bloods

 

[OrlandoCuse]

I think Indiana had “blue-blood” status - but basically doing nothing for two decades has put them into some weird purgatory-like status.

I also think it’s weird that UConn has four titles, but generally aren’t viewed as peers to Kansas/UNC-Duke etc. Not really sure why that is, but I’m OK with it.

If they were a blue blood they wouldn’t have been relegated to mid-major conference status.

 

[Cusefan95]

If they were a blue blood they wouldn’t have been relegated to mid-major conference status.

Conference realignment had absolutely nothing to do with hoops. Realignment (and KO I guess) have left them in the dust on the hoops side, but even if they had 11 national championships in hoops I think they were screwed due to football/markets.

 

[cuseattle]

We're nine blue blood points ahead of UConn. Probably because they only started playing in 1990.

 

[Cusefan95]

We're nine blue blood points ahead of UConn. Probably because they only started playing in 1990.

Fortunately that’s when the NCAA tournament started being played...or at least that what my UConn fan acquaintances seem to believe.

 

[bballbeadle]

I don't recognize wins removed by a phony association

As far as I am concerned, they have those just as JB has his

YES. Total b.s.

And if Nova and Michigan are blue bloods, then we are as well. Fair is fair.

 

[HakAttack]

YES. Total b.s.

And if Nova and Michigan are blue bloods, then we are as well. Fair is fair.

Michigan is not a blue blood.

 

[ScrabbCuse]

I think we are in a tier below the blue bloods based on the number of titles we have won. I’d put Kentucky, UNC, Duke and Kansas as 1A, Indiana and UCLA as 1B and Syracuse, Nova, UConn, Arizona etc as tier 2. UConn isn’t tier 1 because their success has been limited to a small period in history. Indiana and UCLA have dropped off in recent years, hence their designation being a bit lower.

I’d love for Syracuse to be considered a true blue blood, but unless a few more championships are won, it’s not happening in my opinion.

 

[HakAttack]

I think we are in a tier below the blue bloods based on the number of titles we have won. I’d put Kentucky, UNC, Duke and Kansas as 1A, Indiana and UCLA as 1B and Syracuse, Nova, UConn, Arizona etc as tier 2. UConn isn’t tier 1 because their success has been limited to a small period in history. Indiana and UCLA have dropped off in recent years, hence their designation being a bit lower.

I’d love for Syracuse to be considered a true blue blood, but unless a few more championships are won, it’s not happening in my opinion.

IMO the current ELITE 1% blue bloods are: UNC, Kansas, Kentucky & Duke.

The next five just outside the circle (rich but not wealthy) are: Nova, Cuse, Florida, UConn & Michigan State.

Classic blue bloods but not recently relevant (0ld money, not powerful now) are:Louisville, UCLA, Indiana, & Georgetown.

 

[HakAttack]

Florida and UConn are blue bloods to millennials because of their titles.

 

[SWC75]

The 2017-18 SU Media Guide has our NCAA record as 61-38 with an asterisk saying that reflects the vacated wins. So apparently Wikipedia doesn't care what the NCAA thinks, either.

 

[SWC75]

National champions won by teams with more than 50 NCAA wins:

Kentucky -8
UNC - 6
Duke - 5
UCLA -11
Kansas - 3
Louisville - 3
Syracuse -1
Indiana - 3
Michigan State - 2
Nova - 2
UConn - 4
Michigan -1
Arizona -1
Ohio State -1

We are over due.

 

[omniorange]

I don't think the meaning of "Blue Blood" is something one can attain at this stage, but it is a status one can lose. UK, UNC, Duke, and KU are the current true blue bloods, imho. Indiana was a "blue blood" but has now lost it. UCLA is in a nebulous area due to their 11 titles. Some still consider them blue blood, while others like myself feel they may have lost that status at this point. A good argument can be made either way.

Elite is a range that one can still attain, which is where I see all the blue bloods as well as UCLA, Indiana, Louisville, Syracuse, Michigan State and UConn (four titles will do that for you).

In the next level down from elite I would have Nova (and a third title will make them elite in my eyes), Arizona, Michigan, and Ohio State. Florida has a case to be at this level as well.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[longislandcuse]

I think UNC, Duke, Kentucky and Kansas when someone says "blue bloods".

Then we're the next tier with teams like Louisville.

I definitely don't view UCLA and Indiana as blue blood and I don't put them in the next tier with us either. Maybe older folks do but anyone 35 and under hasn't seen those programs do much of anything.

 

[HOFCeluck]

If you have to ask, you aren’t one.