Program tiers

[sufandu]

When you win 7 championships in a row and have the longest winning streak in the history of the men's game, I think you build up a lot of cushion before you have to bump down to the next tier that's full of teams with fewer F4's than you have championships.

 

[sufandu]

So we're one of the best 19 programs in the country. I hope we start playing like it again.

 

[Briancuse]

There’s been a lot of basketball played besides those final 4s

I realize that but they deserve to be in our tier.

 

[JoeySimz]

Good list. Syracuse has been more consistently good than most programs. I’d say we’re in the top of tier 2. Another title, firmly in top of tier 2 close to tier 1.

 

[nzm136]

ELITE
Kansas, Duke, Kentucky, UNC
ALMOST ELITE
Syracuse, Nova, UCLA, Arizona, MSU, UL
GREAT
Michigan, UF, tOSU, ND, UVA, IU, UMD
GOOD/SOLID
Vandy should be here
Cincy should be here
Arkansas should be here
Most of the unlisted ACC belongs here (mostly in “good”)
BELOW AVERAGE
BC
BASEMENT
Rutgers, Penn State (one year doesn’t make a program)

UNKNOWN/OTHER
UCONN <— no idea where to put them
Georgetown <— they still suck
Zags <— they don’t play anyone, so they’re hard to rank

everybody else is probably mostly in the right place

 

[nzm136]

Princeton probably needs to be in there.
But I digress...back to basketball.

The basketball tiers are interesting.
Historically, Indiana should be a blue blood.
Louisville may be borderline.

But Arkansas is not a great program.
Neither is Cincinnati...unless you want to just fixate on the Oscar Robertson era.

And I thought that "G" stood for Georgia.
Because G-town belongs in Tier 8.
I LOOOOOAAAAATHE G-town!

As for Syracuse greatness: 51 seasons without a losing record.
Case closed.

Agree on Princeton.

SU - JHU - UVA - Princeton are without a doubt T1

UMD - Cornell - Duke - UNC are T2

 

[Jzsshuttles]

I realize that but they deserve to be in our tier.

I disagree. Don’t think either of them are on Syracuse’s level. Michigan state and maybe Indiana are. Ohio st and UM a solid notch below

 

[sufandu]

Good list. Syracuse has been more consistently good than most programs. I’d say we’re in the top of tier 2. Another title, firmly in top of tier 2 close to tier 1.

You think 1 more NC gets us close to the top tier?

Duke 16 FF's 5 NC's
Kansas 15 FF's 3 NC's
North Carolina 20 FF's 6 NC's
Kentucky 17 FF's 8 NC's
UCLA 18 FF's 11 NC's

Kansas is low bar on that list. One more NC doesn't even get us close to them. We need that second NC and double digit FF's before we can be considered. There are a few teams in our tier that probably have stronger arguments with double the FF's. I'm pretty happy we're solidly in the 2nd tier. We'll need JB's successor to be great, if we're ever going to make it to that next tier.

 

[pfister1]

ELITE
Kansas, Duke, Kentucky, UNC
ALMOST ELITE
Syracuse, Nova, UCLA, Arizona, MSU, UL
GREAT
Michigan, UF, tOSU, ND, UVA, IU, UMD
GOOD/SOLID
Vandy should be here
Cincy should be here
Arkansas should be here
Most of the unlisted ACC belongs here (mostly in “good”)
BELOW AVERAGE
BC
BASEMENT
Rutgers, Penn State (one year doesn’t make a program)

UNKNOWN/OTHER
UCONN <— no idea where to put them
Georgetown <— they still suck
Zags <— they don’t play anyone, so they’re hard to rank

everybody else is probably mostly in the right place

Vanderbilt in the same tier as Cincy and Arkansas? Based on what, their 15 all time NCAA bids and single Elite Eight appearance in 1965?

Syracuse is not at the same level as UCLA, just isn't.

 

[rrlbees]

Uconn is trash I am sorry I will not be checking replies.

Hi

 

[pfister1]

You think 1 more NC gets us close to the top tier?

Duke 16 FF's 5 NC's
Kansas 15 FF's 3 NC's
North Carolina 20 FF's 6 NC's
Kentucky 17 FF's 8 NC's
UCLA 18 FF's 11 NC's

Kansas is low bar on that list. One more NC doesn't even get us close to them. We need that second NC and double digit FF's before we can be considered. There are a few teams in our tier that probably have stronger arguments with double the FF's. I'm pretty happy we're solidly in the 2nd tier. We'll need JB's successor to be great, if we're ever going to make it to that next tier.

If Kansas is the low bar, its a pretty damn high low bar. Don't ignore that they are

- 2nd All Time in Wins
- 3rd All Time in winning percentage
- Have won 62 regular season conference championships, including 14 consecutive between '05 and '18.
- 9 NCAA championship game appearances
- 48 All time NCAA appearances, including 30 consecutive between '90 and '19

 

[sufandu]

ELITE
Kansas, Duke, Kentucky, UNC
ALMOST ELITE
Syracuse, Nova, UCLA, Arizona, MSU, UL
GREAT
Michigan, UF, tOSU, ND, UVA, IU, UMD
GOOD/SOLID
Vandy should be here
Cincy should be here
Arkansas should be here
Most of the unlisted ACC belongs here (mostly in “good”)
BELOW AVERAGE
BC
BASEMENT
Rutgers, Penn State (one year doesn’t make a program)

UNKNOWN/OTHER
UCONN <— no idea where to put them
Georgetown <— they still suck
Zags <— they don’t play anyone, so they’re hard to rank

everybody else is probably mostly in the right place

What's your logic? You put the team with the most NC's in the second tier. You put teams with more FF's and a championship below us. This doesn't make sense.

 

[MSOrange]

Vanderbilt in the same tier as Cincy and Arkansas? Based on what, their 15 all time NCAA bids and single Elite Eight appearance in 1965?

Syracuse is not at the same level as UCLA, just isn't.

I was going to look up Vandy's history to see if there was something I didn't know about. That seemed off for sure.

 

[sufandu]

If Kansas is the low bar, its a pretty damn high low bar. Don't ignore that they are

- 2nd All Time in Wins
- 3rd All Time in winning percentage
- Have won 62 regular season conference championships, including 14 consecutive between '05 and '18.
- 9 NCAA championship game appearances
- 48 All time NCAA appearances, including 30 consecutive between '90 and '19

That's my point. It is a high low bar that we're not close too. I'm not ignoring any of the other stuff. It's relevant but less so than the tournament success because it's based on conference and schedule strength. I think, historically, the teams listed as Blue Bloods have separated themselves from the next tier by a wide margin. Anyone in tier two has a lot of work to do to even be considered for moving up. One more NC isn't enough to get us in the conversation. It would have to be at least another NC and 5 more FF's.

 

[Niastri]

If Indiana has moved to tier 2 then UCLA should as well.

UCLA last won a championship in 95 and had three Final Fours in the 00's. Indiana was 87 and one in those categories. Throw in the vast difference in their ancient history, and you can make a case for UCLA.

However, I agree only four programs are truly tier 1. I think the tier 2 should have been more selective, but <shrugs>

 

[44Jack]

Long past the time UCLA should be dropped from that top tier list

 

[sufandu]

UCLA last won a championship in 95 and had three Final Fours in the 00's. Indiana was 87 and one in those categories. Throw in the vast difference in their ancient history, and you can make a case for UCLA.

However, I agree only four programs are truly tier 1. I think the tier 2 should have been more selective, but <shrugs>

But the list is alltime. Success is irrespective of when it happened.

If we make a list of current relevance, it should look very different. That gets more complicated though. How far back is "relevant?" Is the last 5 years weighted more heavily than 10 years ago, 15 years ago?

There's a chance we drop a tier, depending on how things are weighted. It's hard to be considered one tier below elite when you haven't finished in the top 25 in the last 6 seasons and completely missed the tournament in 3 of those.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Hi

Ugh

 

[DoctahLexus]

I was about to say that Baylor seems low at tier 5 since they have been pretty relevant lately, but daaaayum before 2008 they only made the tourney in 88, then all the way back to 50, 48, 46?? Crazy.

 

[Eric15]

The graphic literally says "all-time."

I feel like this post needs to be bumped just as a reminder.

 

[Briancuse]

I disagree. Don’t think either of them are on Syracuse’s level. Michigan state and maybe Indiana are. Ohio st and UM a solid notch below

If you don't count vacated final fours osu has been to 10 final fours. Michigan has been to 6 both deserve to be in tier 2.

 

[Briancuse]

But the list alltime. Success is irrespective of when it happened.

If we make a list of current relevance, it should look very different. That gets more complicated though. How far back is "relevant." Is the last 5 years weighted more heavily than 10 years ago, 15 years ago?

There's a chance we drop a tier, depending on how things are weighted. It's hard to be considered one tier below elite when you haven't finished in the top 25 in the last 6 seasons and completely missed the tournament in 3 of those.

We were in the ff in 16. Sweet 16 in 18 and made the tourney last year. Unless we hit a Rutgers like streak the next 10 years we aren't dropping a tier.

 

[Orange87]

The self-loathing Syracuse fan is my personal favorite.

What about the objective Syracuse fan - you like that one?

Personally, I've always been fond of the delusional one.

 

[Cusefan0307]

What about the objective Syracuse fan - you like that one?

Personally, I've always been fond of the delusional one.

Looks like I struck a nerve. My work here is complete.

 

[TexanMark]

Good list. Syracuse has been more consistently good than most programs. I’d say we’re in the top of tier 2. Another title, firmly in top of tier 2 close to tier 1.

The way I interpreted the tiers...you were ranked within the tier. So we are #2 in tier 2