Blue Bloods?

[No Hoyas]

Now we're officially part of the basketball aristocracy.
As a fan I've always felt we are one of the top 10 teams as far as winning, history, and fan support.
Its nice that other "blue bloods" and the media are finally acknowledging it.
and blue goes so well with orange!

 

[Oakland]

Now we're officially part of the basketball aristocracy.
As a fan I've always felt we are one of the top 10 teams as far as winning, history, and fan support.
Its nice that other "blue bloods" and the media are finally acknowledging it.
and blue goes so well with orange!

I think most still think that group is UCLA, Duke, UNC, IU, KU, and UK.

 

[Guinness]

For my money in order to be a blue blood you have to have been successful and won national titles in different generations with different coaches. I put schools like UNC, UCLA, Kansas, Indiana and Kentucky on that list. I would put Duke, Syracuse, UConn, etc on the next tier down.

 

[Alsacs]

We need atleast 2 more rings before we are a "blue" blood we are a top 10 program, but we aren't in Kansas, Duke, North Carolina,UCLA, Kentucky league right now. If we get 2 more rings then maybe.

 

[CorduroyG]

we at least need a final 4 this year to get in the discussion

 

[No Hoyas]

For my money in order to be a blue blood you have to have been successful and won national titles in different generations with different coaches. I put schools like UNC, UCLA, Kansas, Indiana and Kentucky on that list. I would put Duke, Syracuse, UConn, etc on the next tier down.

I agree with everything except Uconn- sure they have the titles, but like Florida, dont really have the pedigree .

 

[Oakland]

For my money in order to be a blue blood you have to have been successful and won national titles in different generations with different coaches. I put schools like UNC, UCLA, Kansas, Indiana and Kentucky on that list. I would put Duke, Syracuse, UConn, etc on the next tier down.

By that definition, Mich St is a blue blood

 

[jec1521]

For my money in order to be a blue blood you have to have been successful and won national titles in different generations with different coaches. I put schools like UNC, UCLA, Kansas, Indiana and Kentucky on that list. I would put Duke, Syracuse, UConn, etc on the next tier down.

Duke a tier down? Seriously?

 

[HarrisonJBounel]

For my money in order to be a blue blood you have to have been successful and won national titles in different generations with different coaches. I put schools like UNC, UCLA, Kansas, Indiana and Kentucky on that list. I would put Duke, Syracuse, UConn, etc on the next tier down.

Excellent point about the multiple titles, generations, and coaches. Objectively, we aren't quite there yet. Our early titles don't really count - I think they still had peach baskets in those days.

 

[NKR1978]

If college basketball was British peerage:
Dukes: Kentucky, UCLA, Kansas, UNC, Duke, Indiana
Marquess: Connecticut (new money bastards), MSU, Ohio State
Earl: Syracuse, Arizona, Florida,

 

[Oakland]

Duke a tier down? Seriously?

Maybe he was drinking.

 

[anomander]

We need atleast 2 more rings before we are a "blue" blood we are a top 10 program, but we aren't in Kansas, Duke, North Carolina,UCLA, Kentucky league right now. If we get 2 more rings then maybe.

UCLA can't even find someone to coach them. I wouldn't qualify them as a blue blood they have had way too many down years since Wooden.

Syracuse is 5th I believe in all-time wins, and has a national following like few other. That has to count for something.

At very worst it's UNC, Duke, Kentucky, Kansas...Syracuse.

 

[HarrisonJBounel]

Duke a tier down? Seriously?

By Guinness's definition, yes. Their 4 titles, while impressive, have all been since 1991 under Der Fuehrer. If they win one 10 years from now under Coach Wojo or Coach Dawkins, then yes.

Duke is arguably the best program of THIS generation, but the definition calls for multiple generations, multiple coaches.

 

[Alsacs]

UCLA can't even find someone to coach them. I wouldn't qualify them as a blue blood they have had way too many down years since Wooden.

Syracuse is 5th I believe in all-time wins, and has a national following like few other. That has to count for something.

At very worst it's UNC, Duke, Kentucky, Kansas...Syracuse.

Indiana 5 championships, Florida 3 championships, UConn 3 championships are ahead of us, and UCLA is WAY ahead of us Ben Howland took UCLA to 3 STRAIGHT Final Fours before last night Syracuse had never been to back to back Elite 8's. We aren't a blue blood when we only have 4 Final 4 Appearances. We need 2 more Championships to be an Elite Blue Blood program. We are a top 10 program, but we aren't in the discussion without more rings.

 

[anomander]

Indiana 5 championships, Florida 3 championships, UConn 3 championships are ahead of us, and UCLA is WAY ahead of us Ben Howland took UCLA to 3 STRAIGHT Final Fours before last night Syracuse had never been to back to back Elite 8's. We aren't a blue blood when we only have 4 Final 4 Appearances. We need 2 more Championships to be an Elite Blue Blood program. We are a top 10 program, but we aren't in the discussion without more rings.

Those are all fair points. Syracuse has been much more consistent then all those schools, the only thing holding us back in national championships. At this date and time though I would definitely rank Syracuse ahead of all those schools. Just have to work on program history.

 

[moqui]

It doesn't make any sense to compare the old NCAA tournament to the modern era. In the hey dey of UCLA (and other long time powers like Kentucky and UNC), it only took 2 wins to get to the Final Four, and the tournament made no effort to balance the regions. I don't mean to take anything away from those teams - those were the rules of the tourney, and they won the games they had to win - but it is a much more difficult hill to climb since the tournament (a) began in the late 70s moving good teams to different regions in an attempt at competitive balance and (b) expanded to 64 teams in 1984, ending the era of "byes" for seeded teams and making so that everyone would have to win at least 4 games to get to the FF and at least 6 to earn an NC. I take 1984 as the beginning of the Modern Era. In that time, a few schools have separated themselves from teh pack. In particular, there are 9 schools that have advanced to the Final Four at least 4 times; those are the modern blue bloods. And, among that group, there is a group at the top that is clearly a cut above the others.

The Modern Era Blue Bloods
(School, Final Fours since 1984, National Titles since 1984)

Duke 11 4
North Carolina 9 3
Kansas 8 2
Kentucky 7 3

Michigan St. 6 1
Connecticut 4 3

Florida 4 2
Arizona 4 1
UCLA 4 1

There are 4 teams still alive in this tournament field who are vying for their 4th FF in the modern era:
Louisville 3 1
Michigan 3 1 *
Syracuse 3 1
Ohio State 3 0 *

There are four other teams sitting at 3 FFs in the modern era who are out of it.
UNLV 3 1
Arkansas 3 1
Indiana 3 1 (ha ha)
Georgetown 3 1 (double ha ha)

There are another 9 schools with 2 FF appearances; of those, only Maryland and Villanova have also won a title

* officially, Michigan had to vacate the 92 and 93 FF appearances, and Ohio St. its 1999 appearance, but I'm going by what happened on the court.

 

[OttosBestFriend]

Who the funk cares about "blue" bloods???

I bleed ORANGE.

 

[Guinness]

Duke a tier down? Seriously?

For me they are similar to UConn and to us. They have had one outstanding coach who has been there for years. For me they will move to blue blood status when K retires and the next guy wins a title.

Again my definition is different coaches in different eras with titles. Others are allowed to think differently.

 

[No Hoyas]

Indiana 5 championships, Florida 3 championships, UConn 3 championships are ahead of us, and UCLA is WAY ahead of us Ben Howland took UCLA to 3 STRAIGHT Final Fours before last night Syracuse had never been to back to back Elite 8's. We aren't a blue blood when we only have 4 Final 4 Appearances. We need 2 more Championships to be an Elite Blue Blood program. We are a top 10 program, but we aren't in the discussion without more rings.

It all depends on your definition.
It cant be just the championships.
Florida has twice as many as SU. Doesnt make them the better program, or make Donovan a better coach. More successful? sure, but as a fan, I dont see a problem when others view your program as "elite". That being said, we could win the next 10 championships and we would still be considered an outsider and somewhat beneath Duke & North Carolina in the ACC.

 

[Jasoncuse]

Indiana shouldn't be mentioned with Duke, UK, UNC, Kansas and maybe UCLA/Michigan St anymore. They are a step down for the top, IMO. Right there with UConn, Florida, Louisville, maybe Ohio State and ourselves.

 

[Alsacs]

It all depends on your definition.
It cant be just the championships.
Florida has twice as many as SU. Doesnt make them the better program, or make Donovan a better coach. More successful? sure, but as a fan, I dont see a problem when others view your program as "elite". That being said, we could win the next 10 championships and we would still be considered an outsider and somewhat beneath Duke & North Carolina in the ACC.

Florida went to the Final Four in 1994, 2000, 2006, 2007 they have as many Final Fours as Syracuse, they made the Elite in 2011, 2012 and could make it again tonight. We are all Orange fans, but Florida has already caught Syracuse IMO. We have a longer history, but the program of Florida is Elite now and while they aren't a blue blood they have as much a claim as Syracuse. We need more Final Fours and atleast 2 more titles before I will consider us in the same breath as Kansas, Duke, North Carolina, Kentucky.

 

[cuserulesall]

It all depends on your definition.
It cant be just the championships.
Florida has twice as many as SU. Doesnt make them the better program, or make Donovan a better coach. More successful? sure, but as a fan, I dont see a problem when others view your program as "elite". That being said, we could win the next 10 championships and we would still be considered an outsider and somewhat beneath Duke & North Carolina in the ACC.

No , We would rule the ACC , You can't beat 10 in a row .