Program tiers

[moqui]

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

alphabetical
power 5 conferences alphabetically, then each school within those conferences alphabetically, then the non-power 5 conferences, etc

 

[Chip]

Arkansas in the second tier is weird

Arkansas deserves to be there based on this alone.

 

[HOFCeluck]

The Boneyard is saying Boneyard-caliber things.

 

[Wrinkle]

UCLA deserves it's placement. UCONN sucks

 

[MSOrange]

Arkansas deserves to be there based on this alone.

Those commercials cracked me up. Sometimes you had to listen a couple times to understand what Goulet was rambling about but they were silly funny.

 

[Chip]

Those commercials cracked me up. Sometimes you had to listen a couple times to understand what Goulet was rambling about but they were silly funny.

To this day if I see or hear the word Arkansas, I sing this song.

 

[Orange87]

I don’t know you can discount National Championships if you are ranking teams in term of historical program success when putting them in ‘tiers’.

Most Championships:

1. UCLA - 10
2. Kentucky - 8
3. UNC - 6
4. Duke - 5
4. IU - 5

6. UConn - 4
7. Kansas - 3

8. Louisville - 2
8. Michigan State - 2
8. Florida - 2
8. Cincinnati - 2
8. NC State - 2
8, Oklahoma State - 2
8. University of San Francisco - 2

After that there are 20 schools in 15th place that each have one trophy, including Syracuse. Indiana has not won a championship since ‘87 but to say that discounts them is ludicrous. Granted they’ve not lived up to their tradition of greatness but they have not been irrelevant either.

UConn won their last one only 6 years ago.

Tell me how Syracuse is in the same tier as UConn and Indiana. Final Fours & winning seasons should absolutely be considered when ranking but even so, championships are the ultimate goal so in my opinion they should carry much more weight.

If the situation were reversed and Syracuse had UConn or IU’s pedigree and UConn/IU had SU’s, everybody would be screaming about how SU is 100% top tier and those other schools were far behind.

I’m not saying that just because a school has 1 or even 2 more NCs Than SU, that they should be in a higher tier than SU, but when you’re talking about 3 or 4 more, that‘s a big deal.

 

[Alsacs]

I don’t know you can discount National Championships if you are ranking teams in term of historical program success when putting them in ‘tiers’.

Most Championships:

1. UCLA - 10
2. Kentucky - 8
3. UNC - 6
4. Duke - 5
4. IU - 5

6. UConn - 4
7. Kansas - 3

8. Louisville - 2
8. Michigan State - 2
8. Florida - 2
8. Cincinnati - 2
8. NC State - 2
8, Oklahoma State - 2
8. University of San Francisco - 2

After that there are 20 schools in 15th place that each have one trophy, including Syracuse. Indiana has not won a championship since ‘87 but to say that discounts them is ludicrous. Granted they’ve not lived up to their tradition of greatness but they have not been irrelevant either.

UConn won their last one only 6 years ago.

Tell me how Syracuse is in the same tier as UConn and Indiana. Final Fours & winning seasons should absolutely be considered when ranking but even so, championships are the ultimate goal so in my opinion they should carry much more weight.

If the situation were reversed and Syracuse had UConn or IU’s pedigree and UConn/IU had SU’s, everybody would be screaming about how SU is 100% top tier and those other schools were far behind.

I’m not saying that just because a school has 1 or even 2 more NCs Than SU, that they should be in a higher tier than SU, but when you’re talking about 3 or 4 more, that‘s a big deal.

Prior to this last season UConn had 3 straight losing seasons.
That isn’t mediocre seasons like we have had they have lost more games than they won 3 straight seasons.

UConn’s program is showing that Jim
Calhoun was a true hall of famer. He made the program elite. Once he left and the players he recruited cycled out the team became one that couldn’t even win more games than they lost 3 years in a row while playing in an easy league.

Syracuse will face this exact scenario with Jim Boeheim. If JB retires and our program has 3 straight losing seasons then our program will go down in the tiers.

UConn is exactly where they belong and we are exactly where we belong.

Titles carry a lot of weight but UConn had little history prior to Calhoun. Gonzaga is a wagon right now they aren’t higher than they should be.

 

[Dave85]

I don’t know you can discount National Championships if you are ranking teams in term of historical program success when putting them in ‘tiers’.

Most Championships:

1. UCLA - 10
2. Kentucky - 8
3. UNC - 6
4. Duke - 5
4. IU - 5

6. UConn - 4
7. Kansas - 3

8. Louisville - 2
8. Michigan State - 2
8. Florida - 2
8. Cincinnati - 2
8. NC State - 2
8, Oklahoma State - 2
8. University of San Francisco - 2

After that there are 20 schools in 15th place that each have one trophy, including Syracuse. Indiana has not won a championship since ‘87 but to say that discounts them is ludicrous. Granted they’ve not lived up to their tradition of greatness but they have not been irrelevant either.

UConn won their last one only 6 years ago.

Tell me how Syracuse is in the same tier as UConn and Indiana. Final Fours & winning seasons should absolutely be considered when ranking but even so, championships are the ultimate goal so in my opinion they should carry much more weight.

If the situation were reversed and Syracuse had UConn or IU’s pedigree and UConn/IU had SU’s, everybody would be screaming about how SU is 100% top tier and those other schools were far behind.

I’m not saying that just because a school has 1 or even 2 more NCs Than SU, that they should be in a higher tier than SU, but when you’re talking about 3 or 4 more, that‘s a big deal.

I hate Keith Smart! DAAAMMMMNNN HIMMMMM!!!!

 

[Dave85]

Syracuse will face this exact scenario with Jim Boeheim. If JB retires and our program has 3 straight losing seasons then our program will go down in the tiers.

There is a chance JB will never retire (genetic engineering sci-fi solutions). But assuming at some point JB retires, which I am not doing, my thinking is the Orange powers that be will go out and hire the best college basketball coach available for a HUGE amount of money. This will keep our program in the near highest tier level. This is my thinking.

 

[sufandu]

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.

Read my whole post and one I responded to. I did not say we should drop a tier.

 

[nzm136]

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.

Arkansas’ last Sweet Sixteen was 1996. They aren’t high and mighty. Saying Vandy is solid isn’t off base. They’ve consistently been mid to upper half SEC. I get that the SEC isn’t the ACC, but I’m not exactly calling them elite.

UCLA has lost an incredible amount of luster over the decades. Their program is good, no doubt, but they aren’t close to UK, UNC, Duke, or Kansas. Yes, I know they were unstoppable 50 years ago, but there is a strong recency bias In strengths of programs. The won the title in ‘95. We won it in ‘03. They lost it in ‘06(?), we lost it in ‘96. They have a long, rich history. We’ve made FF’s for 5 straight decades and are ~#5 in all time wins. They have occasional great years, we had #1 rankings in ‘09-10 and (I believe) ‘11-12. They’ve made ~2 FF’s in the 00’s (not counting the NCG already referenced). We made 2 (not counting the NCG already referenced).

I fail to see how they’re on a different level than us, and I fail to see how a school that can’t consistently win the Pac is on the same level as Duke, UNC, and Kansas.

**EDIT: I forgot to mention UC. The last time they made a FF was 1992. The time before that was 1963. Calling them anything higher than “good” is wishful thinking.

 

[Todoubled23]

Does UVA really belong in tier 2? I know they've won a title recently, however all-time they are 47th in total wins. Plus, they had London Perrantes, which should penalize them at least 1 slot..

Legend says he's still smelling his fingers to this day.

 

[Todoubled23]

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Arkansas’ last Sweet Sixteen was 1996. They aren’t high and mighty. Saying Vandy is solid isn’t off base. They’ve consistently been mid to upper half SEC. I get that the SEC isn’t the ACC, but I’m not exactly calling them elite.

UCLA has lost an incredible amount of luster over the decades. Their program is good, no doubt, but they aren’t close to UK, UNC, Duke, or Kansas. Yes, I know they were unstoppable 50 years ago, but there is a strong recency bias In strengths of programs. The won the title in ‘95. We won it in ‘03. They lost it in ‘06(?), we lost it in ‘96. They have a long, rich history. We’ve made FF’s for 5 straight decades and are ~#5 in all time wins. They have occasional great years, we had #1 rankings in ‘09-10 and (I believe) ‘11-12. They’ve made ~2 FF’s in the 00’s (not counting the NCG already referenced). We made 2 (not counting the NCG already referenced).

I fail to see how they’re on a different level than us, and I fail to see how a school that can’t consistently win the Pac is on the same level as Duke, UNC, and Kansas.

**EDIT: I forgot to mention UC. The last time they made a FF was 1992. The time before that was 1963. Calling them anything higher than “good” is wishful thinking.

"All time" means you take the recency bias out of the equation. Their Championships weigh very heavily in these rankings. That's all. No more words needed.

 

[dasher]

UConn has 4 NCs, Indiana has 5. Sorry, but Syracuse doesn’t belong in the same tier as those two.

Huskies & Hoosiers getting shafted by being in tier 2.

Syracuse has the best record in the history of the Big east. No one was all that close. And the second place team wasn't UConn. Thye also have terrific head to head records against many of the top teams in the history of the college game. the one title is not a strong suit. No question. But the level of being good just can't be ignored. 50 years without a losing season. Let's see if anyone does that again.

 

[nzm136]

"All time" means you take the recency bias out of the equation. Their Championships weigh very heavily in these rankings. That's all. No more words needed.

No. All time means you consider all time. It doesn’t mean you throw recency out of the window and blindly weight everything equally. It’s a program ranking, not a history ranking.

 

[dasher]

UConn is >>> Cuse sorry we haven't capitalized on our good teams but facts are facts.

other than the fact that we dominated them head to head and we have a far better league record than they do while playing in the same league. yeah sure. We have also been to more final fours. We also never got to play a title game against a team as weak as G Tech was.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

No. All time means you consider all time. It doesn’t mean you throw recency out of the window and blindly weight everything equally. It’s a program ranking, not a history ranking.

No. You're wrong.

 

[Orange87]

other than the fact that we dominated them head to head and we have a far better league record than they do while playing in the same league. yeah sure. We have also been to more final fours. We also never got to play a title game against a team as weak as G Tech was.

I don’t know about you, but a program with 4 NCs poses a better argument to me than a team who’s got ‘the best record in the history of the Big East’

And btw - UConn & Georgetown have 7 BE tourney titles. Syracuse has 5.

Regular season BE titles - UConn - 10, Syracuse, 10.

And really? Knocking who the opponent was in an NC game as a way to diminish the accomplishment? C’mon, That’s a lame argument.

 

[Cusefan0307]

We are 5th(Not you Temple) all time in wins, 7th in Sweet 16's, 11th in FF. That carries a huge amount of weight, but keep on self-loathing.

 

[nzm136]

No. You're wrong.

That certainly seems like a coherent argument.

Sure. Recency doesn’t matter when discussion programs. That’s why Yale football is an unstoppable powerhouse.

 

[Briancuse]

Arkansas’ last Sweet Sixteen was 1996. They aren’t high and mighty. Saying Vandy is solid isn’t off base. They’ve consistently been mid to upper half SEC. I get that the SEC isn’t the ACC, but I’m not exactly calling them elite.

UCLA has lost an incredible amount of luster over the decades. Their program is good, no doubt, but they aren’t close to UK, UNC, Duke, or Kansas. Yes, I know they were unstoppable 50 years ago, but there is a strong recency bias In strengths of programs. The won the title in ‘95. We won it in ‘03. They lost it in ‘06(?), we lost it in ‘96. They have a long, rich history. We’ve made FF’s for 5 straight decades and are ~#5 in all time wins. They have occasional great years, we had #1 rankings in ‘09-10 and (I believe) ‘11-12. They’ve made ~2 FF’s in the 00’s (not counting the NCG already referenced). We made 2 (not counting the NCG already referenced).

I fail to see how they’re on a different level than us, and I fail to see how a school that can’t consistently win the Pac is on the same level as Duke, UNC, and Kansas.

**EDIT: I forgot to mention UC. The last time they made a FF was 1992. The time before that was 1963. Calling them anything higher than “good” is wishful thinking.

It's not off base. Vandy has 15 ncaa tourney appearances. Zero final fours. One elite Eight in 1965. How is that solid?

 

[miamicuse]

I think Louisville, Indiana, UConn, Michigan State should be in tier 1.5.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Uconn is not a blueblood. They’re fine where they are.
Unreal to be having this discussion.