Can Syracuse become a blueblood over the next decade? | Syracusefan.com

Can Syracuse become a blueblood over the next decade?

Orange2389

2nd String
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
678
Like
608
Syracuse is an elite program, no question about it. With Indiana, UNC, UCLA, Kentucky, Duke, and Kansas being the blue bloods of college basketball, what does Syracuse need to do to join them?


We have a brand new practice facility that has already been positive for our recruiting. Our alumni have been stepping it up in the NBA and the success of MCW has been great to watch. We are defiantly in a golden age right now. I'm curious to see how the program responds when JB steps down. I think we have a real shot at winning two championships over the next decade. Lots of momentum building right now in our program. How many championships will it take to take us to the next level?

I can see us winning 2 titles with 3 final fours over the next 10 years.
 
Gotta win one championship before we can win two.

One thing that needs to happen for Cuse to move into the blueblood category is for JB to get more top 5 recruits. We are going thru our best recruiting age in recent memory but we are still not getting those elite NBA out of HS prospects. Since Melo we haven't had one. UNC, Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, etc. get those guys every other year. It's great that we are consistently a top 10 team now. But to get over the hump in March/April it would help to have a Jabari Parker or Andrew Wiggins to compliment our 4 year program players.
 
If you want to jump into that next level I think it comes down to whether or not Hopkins is able to sustain this current level of play.
 
Does Indiana qualify as basketball blue blood anymore? Storied program, sure, with 5 national titles, but they haven't won one in almost 30 years, and only one Final 4 appearance in the last 20. I'd say they are no longer in the class of those other programs anyway.

As for SU joining the level of those other programs, frankly it will take a few more titles and several more Final 4s. Probably the kind of work that can't be accomplished in one decade.
 
I've never considered Indiana a blue blood. They've barely been relevant in the past decade. Had some great seasons under Bobby Knight but other than that I don't think they qualify.
 
Cuse is a blueblood. Are they top 3? No. but they are clearly among the elite programs in the country. Except for a gap in the early nineties, Cuse has a track record over JB's tenure that is surpassed by 1 maybe 2 programs. Don't have the NC's to prove it (though they are a whisker away from 4- thanks to a last second shot, an injury and a player who decided to skip class). They've appeared in final fours in the last 4 decades. They've probably more wins than all but a handful of schools. Not sure what more can be expected to be in the "blueblood" class.
 
Cuse is a blueblood. Are they top 3? No. but they are clearly among the elite programs in the country. Except for a gap in the early nineties, Cuse has a track record over JB's tenure that is surpassed by 1 maybe 2 programs. Don't have the NC's to prove it (though they are a whisker away from 4- thanks to a last second shot, an injury and a player who decided to skip class). They've appeared in final fours in the last 4 decades. They've probably more wins than all but a handful of schools. Not sure what more can be expected to be in the "blueblood" class.
As much as I would like this to be true, it isn't.
 
i think syracuse hoops is a bit of an oxymoron program on the schedule.
while nobody really wants to play us yet it's been proven that anybody can beat us
 
I just looked up the term "blue blood" and all I get is a tv show on cbs. I don't think it's that big of a deal unless you live down south and are still pissed about the war.
 
I'm confused. Why do we need more top 5 recruits, exactly? Seems like we keep winning 25-30 games every year without them, just went to a Final Four, have had a couple 1-seeds, a couple #1 rankings, probably would have at least one more Final Four appearance and maybe a title were it not for an injury and an idiot at center, and are currently ranked #2 in the country.

Over the past 5 years, how many teams have fit "blue blood" better than us? Maybe 2 or 3?
 
One difference I have noticed: The blue bloods seem to regularly schedule some tough OOC matchups, often against other blue bloods, and often relatively early(something often bemoaned on here). Some of them even do this multiple times in the same season. If we're lucky, we generally get to face someone decent in one of those early tournaments(not the Carrier Classic lol). Not sure exactly what this has to do with anything, but it is one glaring difference I have noticed between us and the so called blue bloods.

On a different note, what exactly is a blue blood? If there were specific requirements, it would seem that it just happens or it doesn't. When subjectivity comes into play, hardened formulas fly out the window. So I guess a better question is WHO anoints the so called blue bloods, and what the pros and cons of being considered such are.
 
Last edited:
5 National Championships and they (Indiana) are not BlueBlood? OMG. We have 1. Christ UConn has 3. Are they BlueBlood then? Just asking.
 
To me, blue blood means that basketball is ingrained in the culture of the school, as well as the citizens of the state. It's more than just success on the court, though that certainly helps. I would list UNC, Kentucky, Kansas, and Indiana as the true blue bloods. Those are states, especially Indiana and Kentucky, where basketball = life, or at least that's the public perception. As for Kansas, heck they are credited with inventing the damn game. I'd discard UCLA, as their aura is simply built on on-court success, albeit unprecedented, and though it's a state school, the fan base does not encompass the entire state like the others mentioned. At times, the fan base doesn't even seem to exist locally. Duke, meanwhile, is a private school that generates more fan interest outside of the state than inside, by most accounts. Incredibly successful program, and one of the top jobs around, but I think it's lacking in the unbridled passion of the four above mentioned.
 
5 National Championships and they (Indiana) are not BlueBlood? OMG. We have 1. Christ UConn has 3. Are they BlueBlood then? Just asking.
I would suggest they are brown blood. Very old and dried up for decades.
 
5 National Championships and they (Indiana) are not BlueBlood? OMG. We have 1. Christ UConn has 3. Are they BlueBlood then? Just asking.
I'm not saying we're blue blood. I'm just saying IU isn't either. Two of IU's championships came in the 40's and 50's. I don't place a ton of emphasis on those. Hell, are Cinci, Okie A&M (OSU) and San Francisco blue blood?

IU has been largely irrelevant for the past 25 years. Bluebloods don't become irrelevant. Take away the Bobby Knight era and you have Cinci or San Francisco.

One thing I do know is that Syracuse is #5 in all time wins, behind only UK, KU, UNC and Duke.
 
To me, blue blood means that basketball is ingrained in the culture of the school, as well as the citizens of the state. It's more than just success on the court, though that certainly helps. I would list UNC, Kentucky, Kansas, and Indiana as the true blue bloods. Those are states, especially Indiana and Kentucky, where basketball = life, or at least that's the public perception. As for Kansas, heck they are credited with inventing the damn game. I'd discard UCLA, as their aura is simply built on on-court success, albeit unprecedented, and though it's a state school, the fan base does not encompass the entire state like the others mentioned. At times, the fan base doesn't even seem to exist locally. Duke, meanwhile, is a private school that generates more fan interest outside of the state than inside, by most accounts. Incredibly successful program, and one of the top jobs around, but I think it's lacking in the unbridled passion of the four above mentioned.
It (Duke) may be lacking in the unbridled passion of the four above mentioned but I think more people hate Duke than the 4 mentioned (OK maybe not UK but take Calipari out of the equation...) The 'hate' has to account for something. (?) Heck. we (SU) are playing Duke and UNC at home this year but Duke is the *chosen* new rival?
 
I'm not saying we're blue blood. I'm just saying IU isn't either. Two of IU's championships came in the 40's and 50's. I don't place a ton of emphasis on those. Hell, are Cinci, Okie A&M (OSU) and San Francisco blue blood?

IU has been largely irrelevant for the past 25 years. Bluebloods don't become irrelevant. Take away the Bobby Knight era and you have Cinci or San Francisco.

One thing I do know is that Syracuse is #5 in all time wins, behind only UK, KU, UNC and Duke.
OK, fair enough. Just one of my favorite movies is 'Hoosiers'. Not sure they would make a move entitled 'Orange'. ;) Of course one of my fav documentaries is 'Hoop Dreams' and Lord knows Illinois/DePaul ain't a blue blood. ;)
 
The term blue blood is being used to connote top echelon, ie no one above in terms of basketball prowess which is a combination of consistency, fan support, recruiting and NC's. Kansas, NC, Duke and Kentucky are above us in recruiting defined as getting the highest ranked players (not necessarily the best for the team). We just barely count in terms of NC's. Excuses don't count.

We are not blue blood but we are knocking on the door, and might just be ready to let ourselves in.
 
Can't stand these arguments... Woah awesome you have 11 national championships or five... Fantastic that's great... But how exactly is that working out/helping for you this year? That's all I honestly care about at the moment. Obviously national championships are what all of us avidly root for year in and year out and when you win one it's amazing, but honestly who cares about national championships in the 1950s? If u count the 1950s might as well count the 1918 and 1924 national chip because basketball wasn't much different.. I care about consistency, and that's Syracuse basketball. JB, oh that's right, has like 35 20-win seasons. CONSISTENCY. I'll take that over a 1950 national championship any day
 
Can't stand these arguments... Woah awesome you have 11 national championships or five... Fantastic that's great... But how exactly is that working out/helping for you this year? That's all I honestly care about at the moment. Obviously national championships are what all of us avidly root for year in and year out and when you win one it's amazing, but honestly who cares about national championships in the 1950s? If u count the 1950s might as well count the 1918 and 1924 national chip because basketball wasn't much different.. I care about consistency, and that's Syracuse basketball. JB, oh that's right, has like 35 20-win seasons. CONSISTENCY. I'll take that over a 1950 national championship any day

That's the thing...the blue blood programs have both.
 
Is blue blood status something you carry with you for eternity? If so, that's the only reason UCLA and Indiana would be considered that right now. Those two schools aren't even in the second tier which consists of Cuse, L'Ville and Zona.

The only teams I consider "blue bloods" in terms of history and current relevance are Kentucky, Kansas, Duke and UNC.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,141
Messages
4,682,255
Members
5,900
Latest member
DizzyNY

Online statistics

Members online
310
Guests online
1,602
Total visitors
1,912


Top Bottom