Final Fours

[SWC75]

Mike Lindsley said that we are not an elite program because we haven’t been to the number of Final Fours elite programs have gone to. That’s also the reason we don’t have multiple national championships- you have to get to the Final Four to do that and we don’t get there enough. I decided to see how many Final Fours each program has been to an how we compared. (I’ll use the last two digits to designate a year: this is ’12’)

By number of Final Fours:
(the number next to each school is their all time number of wins, per BasketballReference.com)

18- North Carolina (2065), UCLA (1731)
15- Duke (1971), Kentucky (2090)
13- Kansas (2069)
9- Louisville (1662)
8- Indiana (1687), Michigan State (1523), Ohio State (1607)
6- Arkansas (1537), Cincinnati (1623), Michigan (1429), Oklahoma State (1532)
5- Georgetown (1544), Houston (1071), Illinois (1665)
4- Arizona (1592), Connecticut (1513), Florida (1262), Kansas State (1507), Louisiana State (1426), Oklahoma (1540), Syracuse (1847), UNLV (1347), Utah (1670), Villanova (1568)
3- California (1501), Iowa (1508), Marquette (1493), Memphis (1144), North Carolina State (1593), San Francisco (1258), Texas (1658)
2- Baylor (1190), Bradley (1575), CCNY (517), Colorado (1176), Dartmouth (1237), DePaul (1384), Georgia Tech (1253), Holy Cross (1308), LaSalle (1270), Maryland (1400), NYU (725), Oregon State (1655), Purdue (1660), St. John’s (1783), Southern California (1495), Temple (1790) , Virginia (1431), West Virginia (1621), Wisconsin (1438)
1- Charlotte (674), Dayton (1491), Drake (1149), Duquesne (1307), Florida State (947), George Mason (557), Georgia (1299), Indiana State (1006), Iowa State (1215), Jacksonville (654), Loyola-Chic (1189), Massachusetts (830), Minnesota (1518), Mississippi State (1310), New Mexico State (1357), Notre Dame (1725), Oregon (1477), Pennsylvania (1692), Penn State (1361), Pittsburgh (1485), Princeton (1619), Providence (1088), Rutgers (1152), St. Bonaventure (1226), St. Joseph’s (1522), Santa Clara (1380) , Seattle (507), Seton Hall (1378), Southern Methodist (1190), UTEP (1290), VCU (745), Wake Forest (1442), Washington (1670), Washington State (1512), Western Kentucky (1652), Wichita State (1387), Wyoming (1409)

Comment: We have more wins in program history than anyone who has less that 13 Final Four appearances. And of the 5 teams that have been to that many Final Fours, we have more wins that one of them as well, (primarily because UCLA didn’t begin playing until 1919 and we started in 1901). Here are all the teams that have been to at least 4 Final Fours with their total program wins, (rounded to the nearest whole number), divided by the number of Final Fours:

UCLA 96
North Carolina 115
Duke 131
Kentucky 139
Kansas 159
Louisville 185
Michigan State 190
Ohio State 201
Indiana 211
Houston 214
Michigan 238
Oklahoma State 255
Arkansas 256
Cincinnati 271
Georgetown 308
Florida 316
Illinois 333
UNLV 337
Louisiana State 357
Kansas State 377
Connecticut 378
Oklahoma 385
Villanova 392
Arizona 398
Utah 418
Syracuse 462

Comment: We are an elite program by several measures. We have the largest arena and the biggest crowds. We are in contention for top recruits every year. We have the longest number of current consecutive winning seasons with 42, (UCLA has the all-time record with 55). We are the winningest team in the history of the Big East, the toughest conference in America. We’ve won that conference outright, been ranked #1 and been a #1 seed in 2 of the last 3 years. I think we are an elite program without the record in the NCAAs you would expect of an elite program. I don’t know what we do to fix that, but there is definitely a gap between expectation and achievement for this program in the NCAA tournament.
　
　
Alphabetical:

Arizona 88, 94, 97, 01 (4)
Arkansas 41, 45, 78, 90, 94, 95 (6)
Baylor 48, 50 (2)
Bradley 50, 54 (2)
Butler 10,11 (2)
California 46, 59, 60 (3)
Charlotte 77 (1)
Cincinnati 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 92 (6)
CCNY 47, 50 (2)
Colorado 42, 55 (2)
Connecticut 99, 04, 09, 11 (4)
Dartmouth 42, 44, (2)
Dayton 67 (1)
DePaul 43, 79 (2)
Drake (1)
Duke 63, 64, 66, 78, 86, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 99, 01, 04, 10 (15)
Duquesne 40 (1)
Florida 94, 00, 06, 07 (4)
Florida State 72 (1)
George Mason 06 1)
Georgetown 43, 82, 84, 85, 07 (5)
Georgia 83 (1)
Georgia Tech 90, 04 (2)
Holy Cross 47, 48 (2)
Houston 67, 68, 82, 83, 84 (5)
Illinois 49, 51, 52, 89, 05 (5)
Indiana 40, 53, 73, 76, 81, 87, 92, 02 (8)
Indiana State 79 (1)
Iowa 55, 56, 80 (3)
Iowa State 44 (1)
Jacksonville 70 (1)
Kansas 40, 52, 53, 57, 71, 74, 86, 88, 91, 93, 02, 08, 12 (13)
Kansas State 48, 51, 58, 64 (4)
Kentucky 42, 48, 49, 51, 58, 66, 75, 78, 84, 93, 96, 97, 98, 11, 12 (15)
LaSalle 54, 55 (2)
Louisiana State 53, 81, 86, 06 (4)
Louisville 59, 72, 75, 80, 82, 83, 86, 05, 12 (9)
Loyola (Chic) 63 (1)
Marquette 74, 77, 03 (3)
Maryland 01, 02 (2)
Massachusetts 96 (1)
Memphis 73, 85, 08 (3)
Michigan 64, 65, 76, 89, 92, 93 (6)
Michigan State 57, 79, 99, 00, 01, 05, 09, 10 (8)
Minnesota 97, (1)
Mississippi State 96 (1)
New Mexico State 70 (1)
NYU 45, 60 (2)
North Carolina 46, 57, 67, 68, 69, 72, 77, 81, 82, 91, 93, 95, 97, 98, 00, 05, 08, 09 (18)
North Carolina State 50, 74, 83 (3)
Notre Dame 78 (1)
Ohio State 39, 44, 46, 60, 61, 62, 68, 99, 07, 12 (8)
Oklahoma 39,47, 88, 02 (4)
Oklahoma State 45, 46, 49, 51, 95, 04 (6)
Oregon 39 (the first champs and they’ve never been back-1)
Oregon State 49, 63 (2)
Pennsylvania 79 (1)
Penn State 54 (1)
Pittsburgh 41 (1)
Princeton 65 (1)
Providence 77 (1)
Purdue 69, 80 (2)
Rutgers 76 (1)
St. Bonaventure 70 (1)
St. John’s 52, 85 (2)
St. Joseph’s 61 (1)
San Francisco 55, 56, 57 (3)
Santa Clara 52 (1)
Seattle 58 (1)
Seton Hall 89 (1)
Southern California 40, 54 (2)
Southern Methodist 56 (1)
Stanford 42, 98 (2)
Syracuse 75, 87, 96, 03 (4)
Temple 56, 58 (2)
Texas 43, 47, 03 (3)
UCLA 62, 64, 65, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 80, 95, 06, 07, 08 (18)
UNLV 77, 87, 90, 91 (4)
UTEP (Texas Western) 66 (1)
Utah 44, 61, 66, 98 (4)
Villanova 39, 71, 85, 09 (4)
Virginia 81, 84 (2)
Virginia Commonwealth 11 (1)
Wake Forest 62 (1)
Washington 53 (1)
Washington State 41 (1)
West Virginia 59, 10 (2)
Western Kentucky 71 (1)
Wichita State 65 (1)
Wisconsin 41, 00 (2)
Wyoming 43 (1)

 

[orangenirvana]

Should a championship or Final Four appearance from, say, 1939 even count at this point? You'd have to think these things depreciate over time.

 

[newmexicuse]

Your usual great job in compiling info.

Part of our problem is flat out bad luck. You gotta think if not for the AO injury & the Fab situation that we make the FF at least one of the last three years if not two of the last three years. This year, even wo Fab, our bad luck got compounded by being in a scratch regional. We did not get to play a 4 seed or a 7 seed for a FF berth. Also, thank Mr. Smart for stealing a second championship from us.

The other part of the problem may well be that Jimmy is simply a below average tournament coach. No question we under-achieve in the tourney compared to our regular season accomplishments. However, the criticisms of Jimmy that many posters have simply may be amplified in a tournament setting. I think a great example is Louisville & how they had the flexability to switch up D's to turn their game around. Against OSU, playing it Jimmy's way, we certainly had our chances, but that being said, he did not throw any wildcards into the mix such as a little man or a little MCW or a little, of well, anything else that wasn't to be expected. Maybe, Jimmy's going by his book simply makes us relatively easy to prepare for in a tournament setting,

 

[SWC75]

Your usual great job in compiling info.

Part of our problem is flat out bad luck. You gotta think if not for the AO injury & the Fab situation that we make the FF at least one of the last three years if not two of the last three years. This year, even wo Fab, our bad luck got compounded by being in a scratch regional. We did not get to play a 4 seed or a 7 seed for a FF berth. Also, thank Mr. Smart for stealing a second championship from us.

The other part of the problem may well be that Jimmy is simply a below average tournament coach. No question we under-achieve in the tourney compared to our regular season accomplishments. However, the criticisms of Jimmy that many posters have simply may be amplified in a tournament setting. I think a great example is Louisville & how they had the flexability to switch up D's to turn their game around. Against OSU, playing it Jimmy's way, we certainly had our chances, but that being said, he did not throw any wildcards into the mix such as a little man or a little MCW or a little, of well, anything else that wasn't to be expected. Maybe, Jimmy's going by his book simply makes us relatively easy to prepare for in a tournament setting,

One thing to look at was his insistence on playing Joseph when he was sub-par, (whether it was for physical or other reasons). If CJ Fair was playing well, we never saw Southerland, who played very well in the post season. Why not go with Fair and Southerland vs. Ohio State? And, as long as we were pressing, why not go with a three guard look so Scoop, who was playing great in the tournament, could get in there along with Brandon or Dion? He was watching his career end from the bench but Kris was out there.

 

[SWC75]

Should a championship or Final Four appearance from, say, 1939 even count at this point? You'd have to think these things depreciate over time.

Where would you cut it off? We never went to the Final Four until 1975 and the "elite" teams at the top have been to more Final Fours since then than we have. I'm not sure it changes much.

 

[newmexicuse]

One thing to look at was his insntance on playing Joseph when he was sub-par, 9whether it was for physical or other reasons). If CJ Fair was playing well, we never saw Southerland, who played very well in the post season. Why not go with Fair and Southerland vs. Ohio State? And, as long as we were pressing, why not go with a three guard look so Scoop, who was playing great in the tournament, could get in there along with Brandon or Dion? He was watching his career end from the bench but Kris was out there.

I'm on board with you.

Jimmy believes in the Zone and that it will eventually work. He believes that his seniors will eventually make plays. Problem is that in a one & done setting you don't have until "eventually."

Jimmy has been at it long enough that he should have a sixth sense about whether what we are presently doing will work or not. If not, I would rather risk losing by 20 instead of by 7 if shaking things up increases our chances to change a negative trend.

 

[joct]

One thing to look at was his insntance on playing Joseph when he was sub-par, 9whether it was for physical or other reasons). If CJ Fair was playing well, we never saw Southerland, who played very well in the post season. Why not go with Fair and Southerland vs. Ohio State? And, as long as we were pressing, why not go with a three guard look so Scoop, who was playing great in the tournament, could get in there along with Brandon or Dion? He was watching his career end from the bench but Kris was out there.

I think he wanted to go with Southerland, but he fouled out in 11 minutes of playing time.

 

[BuffOrange]

I've always thought we were very similar to Arizona & I guess this sorta confirms it; didn't realize we had the same # of F4s.
At least we didn't blow a 15pt lead with 4 minutes left Saturday like they did vs Illinois...

 

[CorduroyG]

i dont consider us elite. we're on a level just below the kentuckys and kansas and dukes and north carolinas. we simply dont have the tourny success to match those schools. we can have all the 20 win seasons we want, but college hoops success is mostly measured by final 4s and national championships. we're severely lacking in those categories. if keith smart misses that shot, and ao and fab dont miss the tourny, then id put us in the elite category with 6 final 4s and at least 2 titles. but 4 and 1 isnt elite to me, and only 3 f4s in boeheim era.

Sent from my SCH-R720 using Tapatalk

 

[pfister1]

i dont consider us elite. we're on a level just below the kentuckys and kansas and dukes and north carolinas. we simply dont have the tourny success to match those schools. we can have all the 20 win seasons we want, but college hoops success is mostly measured by final 4s and national championships. we're severely lacking in those categories. if keith smart misses that shot, and ao and fab dont miss the tourny, then id put us in the elite category with 6 final 4s and at least 2 titles. but 4 and 1 isnt elite to me, and only 3 f4s in boeheim era.

Sent from my SCH-R720 using Tapatalk

Agreed. If we had UNC, Duke, UK, KU's pedigree and a program with our 4 final fours and 1 National Championship wanted to put itself in the category of elite with us, we'd laugh them out of the discussion.

 

[Garbs]

we are elite in all except one very important category, Final Four/Championships

 

[KaiserUEO]

Where would you cut it off? We never went to the Final Four until 1975 and the "elite" teams at the top have been to more Final Fours since then than we have. I'm not sure it changes much.

id say the cutoff should either be when the tourney went to 64, 1985 i think, or after Magic beating Bird.

this was a neat post.

 

[kingottoiii]

IMO we are the 10th best program all time. However we could easily take a big fall if we do not get to the FF in the next few years.

 

[kingottoiii]

id say the cutoff should either be when the tourney went to 64, 1985 i think, or after Magic beating Bird.

this was a neat post.

I think Final Fours should count twice as much since 1985 vs prior. It is much harder to get there. And UCLA used to have a cake walk only playing a few games to win a title going through the weak Western teams. They still likely win anyway because they were that good. But winning a title was a lot easier for them than any team has it now.

 

[44cuse]

we are elite in all except one very important category, Final Four/Championships

Finally, someone agrees Dan Marino was elite.

44cuse

 

[44cuse]

i dont consider us elite. we're on a level just below the kentuckys and kansas and dukes and north carolinas. we simply dont have the tourny success to match those schools. we can have all the 20 win seasons we want, but college hoops success is mostly measured by final 4s and national championships. we're severely lacking in those categories. if keith smart misses that shot, and ao and fab dont miss the tourny, then id put us in the elite category with 6 final 4s and at least 2 titles. but 4 and 1 isnt elite to me, and only 3 f4s in boeheim era.

Sent from my SCH-R720 using Tapatalk

Good post.

44cuse

 

[Sgt Cuse]

Your usual great job in compiling info.

Part of our problem is flat out bad luck. You gotta think if not for the AO injury & the Fab situation that we make the FF at least one of the last three years if not two of the last three years. This year, even wo Fab, our bad luck got compounded by being in a scratch regional. We did not get to play a 4 seed or a 7 seed for a FF berth. Also, thank Mr. Smart for stealing a second championship from us.

The other part of the problem may well be that Jimmy is simply a below average tournament coach. No question we under-achieve in the tourney compared to our regular season accomplishments. However, the criticisms of Jimmy that many posters have simply may be amplified in a tournament setting. I think a great example is Louisville & how they had the flexability to switch up D's to turn their game around. Against OSU, playing it Jimmy's way, we certainly had our chances, but that being said, he did not throw any wildcards into the mix such as a little man or a little MCW or a little, of well, anything else that wasn't to be expected. Maybe, Jimmy's going by his book simply makes us relatively easy to prepare for in a tournament setting,

I disagree with your assessment of JB underacheiving in the tourney. I think your opinion of our regular season accomplishments are influenced by recent team success. SU has not been a Top 5 team in the country outside of the last 3 years and maybe a couple years in the late 80s. So, I think the sample size is quite small to base the elite team vs elite success in the tourney comparison. And he made it one of those years. And of course, two of those recent teams that did not live up to your expectations in the tourney did not have the same personnel as the team that played so well during the regular season. I know a lot of people don't want to hear that, but it's true.

There have been times he over-achieved. Obviously '96 and '03 come to mind. And the ESPN PASE numbers also indicated JB had outperformed his seed expectations. There should be no shame in losing in the Elite Eight, and we were underdogs in our loss according to Vegas.

As for the OSU game it's easy to second guess, but don't you really have to look at how many close games were won this year? And how many other times he came back, just this year? What if he tried what you are suggesting and they lost? Wouldn't this board (and you) be all over him, saying why go away from what has worked throughout a historic season? They had just shut down Wisky in the last 5 mins to pull out that game. Didn't hear you mention how he should have thrown a wildcard in there.
What if he threw MCW in for the UNCA game and we lost? Would you be calling for JB to resign?

And now we're easy to prepare for? It had been mentioned before that the good Elite Eight record was because of the quick turnaround, and that the other teams didn't have as long to prepare for the zone. Now with one loss, as the underdog, it's the opposite?

 

[newmexicuse]

I disagree with your assessment of JB underacheiving in the tourney. I think your opinion of our regular season accomplishments are influenced by recent team success. SU has not been a Top 5 team in the country outside of the last 3 years and maybe a couple years in the late 80s. So, I think the sample size is quite small to base the elite team vs elite success in the tourney comparison. And he made it one of those years. And of course, two of those recent teams that did not live up to your expectations in the tourney did not have the same personnel as the team that played so well during the regular season. I know a lot of people don't want to hear that, but it's true.

There have been times he over-achieved. Obviously '96 and '03 come to mind. And the ESPN PASE numbers also indicated JB had outperformed his seed expectations. There should be no shame in losing in the Elite Eight, and we were underdogs in our loss according to Vegas.

As for the OSU game it's easy to second guess, but don't you really have to look at how many close games were won this year? And how many other times he came back, just this year? What if he tried what you are suggesting and they lost? Wouldn't this board (and you) be all over him, saying why go away from what has worked throughout a historic season? They had just shut down Wisky in the last 5 mins to pull out that game. Didn't hear you mention how he should have thrown a wildcard in there.
What if he threw MCW in for the UNCA game and we lost? Would you be calling for JB to resign?

And now we're easy to prepare for? It had been mentioned before that the good Elite Eight record was because of the quick turnaround, and that the other teams didn't have as long to prepare for the zone. Now with one loss, as the underdog, it's the opposite?

Sorry, Sarge, but the tournament record speaks for itself. We are something like 5 & 12 in the Sweet Sixteen round, which is certainly a round that we should not be bounced from with that much regularity.

I did post above that I also think part of the problem is flat out bad luck.

In an earlier post in this thread I also mentioned that Jimmy should have some sort of a sixth sense about when to stick with the norms & when to depart from them. I do not thinks it takes any special insight to realize that we were easily outplaying Wiscy other than their incredible trey shooting. I was in agreement with what Jimmy did in that game, that shooting just HAD to cool down a bit sooner or later & eventually it did. Whereas in the OSU game, it seemed pretty obvious to me that what we were doing simply wasn't working very well. IMHO, neither of those situations even required the 6th sense. So, in summation, I will not pretend to know what should have been done against OSU, but I felt that something should have been done. I wanted our HOF coach to shake up that applecart a bit. Had he played MCW or gone to the three guard set as SWC suggested or done anything else, I for one, would have been OK with that.

And yes, I have consistantly clamored for more MCW throughout the season. I do not mean to say that he would have been the difference, but simply that if Jimmy played him more & had more confidence in him that it would have been another club in the bag. Same for some man-to-man. I have clamored for that as well over the years. I would have gladly traded a couple of our regular season W's to have had those & other clubs available for when we really needed them.

Fact is, taking a thirty plus year body of work, there can really be no argument that Jimmy's teams have underperformed in the NCAAs.

 

[PoppyHart]

If you want to be mentioned in the same breath as the biggies, there is only one thing to do about it: Win in March and April.

 

[Sgt Cuse]

Sorry, Sarge, but the tournament record speaks for itself. We are something like 5 & 12 in the Sweet Sixteen round, which is certainly a round that we should not be bounced from with that much regularity.

I did post above that I also think part of the problem is flat out bad luck.

In an earlier post in this thread I also mentioned that Jimmy should have some sort of a sixth sense about when to stick with the norms & when to depart from them. I do not thinks it takes any special insight to realize that we were easily outplaying Wiscy other than their incredible trey shooting. I was in agreement with what Jimmy did in that game, that shooting just HAD to cool down a bit sooner or later & eventually it did. Whereas in the OSU game, it seemed pretty obvious to me that what we were doing simply wasn't working very well. IMHO, neither of those situations even required the 6th sense. So, in summation, I will not pretend to know what should have been done against OSU, but I felt that something should have been done. I wanted our HOF coach to shake up that applecart a bit. Had he played MCW or gone to the three guard set as SWC suggested or done anything else, I for one, would have been OK with that.

And yes, I have consistantly clamored for more MCW throughout the season. I do not mean to say that he would have been the difference, but simply that if Jimmy played him more & had more confidence in him that it would have been another club in the bag. Same for some man-to-man. I have clamored for that as well over the years. I would have gladly traded a couple of our regular season W's to have had those & other clubs available for when we really needed them.

Fact is, taking a thirty plus year body of work, there can really be no argument that Jimmy's teams have underperformed in the NCAAs.

As to the highlighted part, are you saying we can't use the ESPN created PASE numbers which came to the conclusion that JB outperformed his seed? Why not? Reread the article, this was ESPN (no friends of JBs) who produced the number. And they tried to downplay it by throwing out the years he did well. So, what I'm saying is, there certainly can be an argument that JB has underperformed in the NCAA. ESPN produced one.

As for the bit about being 5-11 in the sweet sixteen, SU has been rated in the top 8 in the country only a handful of times. Two out of the last 3 years and the late 80s. So why were you expecting so many more trips to the Elite Eight?

It seems the reason you and others are expecting so much more is because of the recent team success. Now after 2 out of 3 seasons with 30 plus wins, you start to take that for the norm and reassess the other bench marks. Now with the new rise in win totals you start to compare us to teams that have been at that level for some time - Duke, UNC, UK, and Kansas. We've only been in that company for 3 years - that's why KJo had the most wins of anyone in SU history- plus that stretch in the 80s. It's nice company to now be in, but don't pretend that we've been there all along, and then use that as a reason to proclaim JB can't coach in the tourney. The lengths some people will go to try and bash JB.

 

[skurey]

If you want to be mentioned in the same breath as the biggies, there is only one thing to do about it: Win in March and April.

And this is the problem I have with many on here. They complain about all the press Duke, UNC, UK etc receive compared to us and when someone points out we aren't in that category they go on a rant about regular season wins, winning a title within the last 10 years blah blah blah. Syracuse is a very good program. I would say we are around the 10-13 range. But there is a huuuuge gap between us and the upper echelon. And no facts anyone will try to skew in Syracuse's favor will make up for that.

 

[newmexicuse]

As to the highlighted part, are you saying we can't use the ESPN created PASE numbers which came to the conclusion that JB outperformed his seed? Why not? Reread the article, this was ESPN (no friends of JBs) who produced the number. And they tried to downplay it by throwing out the years he did well. So, what I'm saying is, there certainly can be an argument that JB has underperformed in the NCAA. ESPN produced one.

As for the bit about being 5-11 in the sweet sixteen, SU has been rated in the top 8 in the country only a handful of times. Two out of the last 3 years and the late 80s. So why were you expecting so many more trips to the Elite Eight?

It seems the reason you and others are expecting so much more is because of the recent team success. Now after 2 out of 3 seasons with 30 plus wins, you start to take that for the norm and reassess the other bench marks. Now with the new rise in win totals you start to compare us to teams that have been at that level for some time - Duke, UNC, UK, and Kansas. We've only been in that company for 3 years - that's why KJo had the most wins of anyone in SU history- plus that stretch in the 80s. It's nice company to now be in, but don't pretend that we've been there all along, and then use that as a reason to proclaim JB can't coach in the tourney. The lengths some people will go to try and bash JB.

Nobody is bashing JB, we are just discussing facts. If you look at the OP in this thread you will see SIXTEEN programs that have more FF's than we do (plus another nine programs with the same number of FFs). If we even eliminate the top Five - elite of the elite - that still leaves 11 programs w more FFs. I would venture a guess that during the Jimmy era that we have a better overall record than just about all of those 11 (+9) programs, and probably a better record than even a couple of the UBER programs. So, it begs the question, why hasn't our overall success translated on a relative basis to tournament success ???

 

[sufandu]

I can say that I've never considered us as part of the elite, and I don't think there's anything wrong with us not being in that group. I've always thought of UCLA, UNC, Duke, Kansas, and Kentucky as the only members of that group. I think when you talk about elite, history has to play a huge part in it, and ours just doesn't add up to those 5. I think of us as being in that next tier that's made up of about 10-15 programs.

I love where the program sits right now. We're consistently in the running for the best recruits, we've spent our fair share of time in the top 10 over the past few years, and when people talk about the current top teams we're often in the discussion. Hopefully in the future some of that will add up more final fours and possibly another championship or two. If we can keep the ball rolling, maybe we'll get to where there's no debate on whether we're in the elite club.

 

[BuffOrange]

As for the bit about being 5-11 in the sweet sixteen, SU has been rated in the top 8 in the country only a handful of times. Two out of the last 3 years and the late 80s. So why were you expecting so many more trips to the Elite Eight?

It seems the reason you and others are expecting so much more is because of the recent team success. Now after 2 out of 3 seasons with 30 plus wins, you start to take that for the norm and reassess the other bench marks. Now with the new rise in win totals you start to compare us to teams that have been at that level for some time - Duke, UNC, UK, and Kansas. We've only been in that company for 3 years - that's why KJo had the most wins of anyone in SU history- plus that stretch in the 80s. It's nice company to now be in, but don't pretend that we've been there all along, and then use that as a reason to proclaim JB can't coach in the tourney. The lengths some people will go to try and bash JB.

I agree with your thesis that luck in the tournament is grossly underrated, and that we just flat out have not been as good as people would like to believe prior to 2yrs ago - 1991 being the only outright BE reg. season title up until then speaks to that.

But I'm also not exactly sure what you're arguing. Recruiting is 90%+ of college coaching. I mean we saw a guy on Sunday who has been to a million F4's and won 2 NC's not know what defense the other team was playing for the last 8 minutes. A Rick Majerus or Gary Williams could and would run circles around any of these guys in the F4 with comparable talent.

So the fact that our talent from 92-02 wasn't up to snuff is to me, more of an indictment on JB than a defense of him; particularly as our primary competition for players in Uconn had little to no history/tradition to speak of at the time.

I do think we would likely have ~3 more F4's and another NC if we were getting the same players in that 10yr stretch that we were getting from 87-91 and 08-now. Because just like anything else, luck tends to even out with a larger sample size.

Nobody is bashing JB, we are just discussing facts. If you look at the OP in this thread you will see SIXTEEN programs that have more FF's than we do (plus another nine programs with the same number of FFs). If we even eliminate the top Five - elite of the elite - that still leaves 11 programs w more FFs. I would venture a guess that during the Jimmy era that we have a better overall record than just about all of those 11 (+9) programs, and probably a better record than even a couple of the UBER programs. So, it begs the question, why hasn't our overall success translated on a relative basis to tournament success ???

It just as easily begs the question, why would Nolan Richardson or Denny Crum or Steve Fischer ever be forced out of those programs if they were in fact "good tournament coaches" (if there is such a thing)? I don't know who the Cincy & Houston coaches were back in the day, but I don't believe they ever re-surfaced elsewhere as tournament terrors either.

 

[omniorange]

This is how I see it - Kentucky, UNC, UCLA, Duke, and Kansas are elite. Indiana needs to have some more seasons like this one to get back to being elite. Louisville is one NC away from becoming elite.

The rest are a notch below, with UConn being the next likely to join the above if they can get to a few more Elite 8s. We need two more NCs to become elite. At that point (assuming it happens this decade), even though we won't have the large number of FFs or Elite 8s the other elites have, we will join by the strength of every other criteria - wins, winning%, winning seasons, fanbase, etc.

Cheers,
Neil