Where does 2003 rank?

[PoppyHart]

These are tough to rank obviously.

55. Florida Gators, 2006 (33-6)

All eyes were on Duke and UConn in 2006, and on a bracket drawn up perfectly for the two to meet in the finals. Then LSU shocked the Blue Devils in the Sweet 16 and George Mason eliminated the Huskies in the Elite Eight. With MOP Joakim Noah leading the way, Billy Donovan's No. 3 seed Gators beat the Patriots and then UCLA by 15 and 16 points, respectively.

54. Syracuse Orange, 2003 (30-5)

Jim Boeheim's No. 3 seed was ready for honorary Big 12 membership after defeating four of that league's teams on the way to a title. In addition to wins against Manhattan and Auburn, the Orange beat Oklahoma State, Oklahoma, Texas and Kansas to cut down the nets. The scoring of freshman sensation Carmelo Anthony made the difference, as did a potentially game-saving block against KU by Hakim Warrick.

53. Michigan State Spartans, 1979 (29-6)

Magic Johnson and Greg Kelser scored a combined 43 points to lead MSU to a 75-64 win over Larry Bird and previously undefeated Indiana State. The 1979 championship final remains the highest-rated telecast of any basketball game, pro or college, in the United States.

 

[HOFCeluck]

54 seems low?

 

[texascpa]

No. 1, no question.

 

[SWC75]

People are talking about the ease with which Connecticut went through this year’s tournament but also how the waves seemed to part for them as nobody in the top three seed lines made the Final Four. I thought of a quick way to assess and compare it to other national championship teams: Simply add up the margins of victory and then add up the seeds of the opposition, then divide the first by the second. Here’s Syracuse’s 2003 run as an example:
We beat #14 seed Manhattan 78-65. I’ll record that as ‘13/14’
We beat #6 seed Oklahoma State 68-56 = 12/6
We beat #10 seed Auburn 79-78 = 1/10
We beat #1 seed Oklahoma 63-47 = 16/1
We beat #1 seed Texas 95-84 = 11/1
We beat #2 seed Kansas 81-78 = 3/2
TOTAL: 56/34 = 1.65

The tournament was first seeded in 1979. At that time, it had 40 teams and not everyone played in what we would now call the “round of 64”. It expanded to 48 the next year and then to 64 in 1985. One pre 1985 national champion played in the round of 64 and had to win 6 games for the title, (NC State in ’83): the others all won 5. In 2011 four preliminary games were added, the “First Four”. Nobody’s ever come from the First Four to win the title. It doesn’t really matter if the national champion won 5 games or 6: both numbers will tend to be less with 5 games but the ratio should be the same or comparable.

My source for the seedings and scores: NCAA Tournament Brackets
In a couple of spots they forgot to put the score down – just click on the school name and you’ll get all their scores for that year.

Here the national championship runs, ranked by this method:
1979 Michigan State 4.54
1981 Indiana 4.52
2016 Villanova 4.00
2009 North Carolina 3.74
1996 Kentucky 3.58
2023 Connecticut 3.47
2018 Villanova 3.42
2006 Florida 2.87
1993 North Carolina 2.85
2001 Duke 2.70
2021 Baylor 2.56
1991 Duke 2.55
2015 Duke 2.38
2007 Florida 2.36
2002 Maryland 2.33
1990 UNLV 2.33
1995 UCLA 2.32
2010 Duke 2.29
2008 Kansas 2.24
2012 Kentucky 2.22
1998 Kentucky 2.15
2000 Michigan State 2.14
2004 Connecticut 2.00
2017 North Carolina 1.97
2013 Louisville 1.90
1984 Georgetown 1.81
1987 Indiana 1.74
2011 Connecticut 1.72
2022 Kansas 1.71
2005 North Carolina 1.69
2003 Syracuse 1.65
1989 Michigan 1.64
1980 Louisville 1.63
1992 Duke 1.62
2014 Connecticut 1.61
1986 Louisville 1.58
1999 Connecticut 1.56
1994 Arkansas 1.52
1985 Villanova 1.50
1988 Kansas 1.36
1983 North Carolina St. 1.07
1982 North Carolina 1.00
2019 Virginia 0.98
1997 Arizona 0.89

You don’t have to have been a steam-roller all year to have a great tournament run: Michigan State ’79 was a 26-6 team, Indiana ’81 a 26-9 team and this year’s UCONN team was 31-8. None of these are bad or mediocre teams: they’re all national champions. In the end, it doesn’t matter how much you win by: it’s ‘survive and advance’. Sometimes it helps to “bottom out” just before the tournament starts so you can get better as your opponents get better and play your greatest game in the national title game. But some teams make it clear that nobody’s going to stop them early on and they manage to maintain their level of play through six games. Those are special teams and this year’s Connecticut team was one of them.

 

[SWC75]

Fun Facts: I had a friend who graduated from Niagara, which was in the same conference with Northeastern when Jim Calhoun coached there. When Calhoun went to Connecticut, my friend told me that he was a real good coach and that it would be interesting to see how he would do in the Big East.

Calhoun's first a season in Storrs was 1986-7. Since, (and including) that year, we are 886-364 and they are 886-377. We've beaten them 32 times and lost 29 times.

And we have one national championship and they have five.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

People are talking about the ease with which Connecticut went through this year’s tournament but also how the waves seemed to part for them as nobody in the top three seed lines made the Final Four. I thought of a quick way to assess and compare it to other national championship teams: Simply add up the margins of victory and then add up the seeds of the opposition, then divide the first by the second. Here’s Syracuse’s 2003 run as an example:
We beat #14 seed Manhattan 78-65. I’ll record that as ‘13/14’
We beat #6 seed Oklahoma State 68-56 = 12/6
We beat #10 seed Auburn 79-78 = 1/10
We beat #1 seed Oklahoma 63-47 = 16/1
We beat #1 seed Texas 95-84 = 11/1
We beat #2 seed Kansas 81-78 = 3/2
TOTAL: 56/34 = 1.65

The tournament was first seeded in 1979. At that time, it had 40 teams and not everyone played in what we would now call the “round of 64”. It expanded to 48 the next year and then to 64 in 1985. One pre 1985 national champion played in the round of 64 and had to win 6 games for the title, (NC State in ’83): the others all won 5. In 2011 four preliminary games were added, the “First Four”. Nobody’s ever come from the First Four to win the title. It doesn’t really matter if the national champion won 5 games or 6: both numbers will tend to be less with 5 games but the ratio should be the same or comparable.

My source for the seedings and scores: NCAA Tournament Brackets
In a couple of spots they forgot to put the score down – just click on the school name and you’ll get all their scores for that year.

Here the national championship runs, ranked by this method:
1979 Michigan State 4.54
1981 Indiana 4.52
2016 Villanova 4.00
2009 North Carolina 3.74
1996 Kentucky 3.58
2023 Connecticut 3.47
2018 Villanova 3.42
2006 Florida 2.87
1993 North Carolina 2.85
2001 Duke 2.70
2021 Baylor 2.56
1991 Duke 2.55
2015 Duke 2.38
2007 Florida 2.36
2002 Maryland 2.33
1990 UNLV 2.33
1995 UCLA 2.32
2010 Duke 2.29
2008 Kansas 2.24
2012 Kentucky 2.22
1998 Kentucky 2.15
2000 Michigan State 2.14
2004 Connecticut 2.00
2017 North Carolina 1.97
2013 Louisville 1.90
1984 Georgetown 1.81
1987 Indiana 1.74
2011 Connecticut 1.72
2022 Kansas 1.71
2005 North Carolina 1.69
2003 Syracuse 1.65
1989 Michigan 1.64
1980 Louisville 1.63
1992 Duke 1.62
2014 Connecticut 1.61
1986 Louisville 1.58
1999 Connecticut 1.56
1994 Arkansas 1.52
1985 Villanova 1.50
1988 Kansas 1.36
1983 North Carolina St. 1.07
1982 North Carolina 1.00
2019 Virginia 0.98
1997 Arizona 0.89

You don’t have to have been a steam-roller all year to have a great tournament run: Michigan State ’79 was a 26-6 team, Indiana ’81 a 26-9 team and this year’s UCONN team was 31-8. None of these are bad or mediocre teams: they’re all national champions. In the end, it doesn’t matter how much you win by: it’s ‘survive and advance’. Sometimes it helps to “bottom out” just before the tournament starts so you can get better as your opponents get better and play your greatest game in the national title game. But some teams make it clear that nobody’s going to stop them early on and they manage to maintain their level of play through six games. Those are special teams and this year’s Connecticut team was one of them.

That kind of seems like a random way to rank teams.

Our 2003 title the median seed we played was a 4 seed. After our 1st game (where you play a high seed) the median was a 2 seed. And our last three games the median was a 1 seed! Our avg seed played was a 5.67 seed and 4 seed after the first game. The last three games was a 1.33 seed.

UConn only played ONE Top 4 seed. Their median seed played was a 5 seed. After the first game it was still a 5 seed. The last three it was again a 5 seed. Their average was a 6.5 seed. After the first game it was a 5.2 seed! The last three it was a 4.3 seed!

They had the luck of not playing top teams but also didn't have the luxury of playing higher seeded teams. Give them credit for blowing through everyone they played. But it is easier to blow through teams when the median is a 5 seed and the average is a 6.5 seed.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Greatest year ever. Can’t believe my son will be 20 in august.

 

[Eric15]

If I made a personal list of the greatest college basketball teams of my lifetime, about half of them would be non-title winners, e.g. 1985 Georgetown, 1991 UNLV, 1999 Duke, 2006 UConn, 2010 and 2012 Cuse, 2015 Kentucky, etc.

 

[NKR1978]

If I made a personal list of the greatest college basketball teams of my lifetime, about half of them would be non-title winners, e.g. 1985 Georgetown, 1991 UNLV, 1999 Duke, 2006 UConn, 2010 and 2012 Cuse, 2015 Kentucky, etc.

That's a great list. I'd throw in 96 UConn as well.

 

[Fly Rodder]

Greatest year ever. Can’t believe my son will be 20 in august.

He wasn't a premy was he?

 

[SWC75]

That kind of seems like a random way to rank teams.

Our 2003 title the median seed we played was a 4 seed. After our 1st game (where you play a high seed) the median was a 2 seed. And our last three games the median was a 1 seed! Our avg seed played was a 5.67 seed and 4 seed after the first game. The last three games was a 1.33 seed.

UConn only played ONE Top 4 seed. Their median seed played was a 5 seed. After the first game it was still a 5 seed. The last three it was again a 5 seed. Their average was a 6.5 seed. After the first game it was a 5.2 seed! The last three it was a 4.3 seed!

They had the luck of not playing top teams but also didn't have the luxury of playing higher seeded teams. Give them credit for blowing through everyone they played. But it is easier to blow through teams when the median is a 5 seed and the average is a 6.5 seed.

Random? It's based on who they played and how much they beat them by. What's 'random'?

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Random? It's based on who they played and how much they beat them by. What's 'random'?

That margin of victory is a good indicator of how strong your 6 game run was. That there is any correlation at all between your formula and how good that run was.


Edit

Your formula says that 2023 UConn is the 4th most impressive run in the 64 team era. 1985 Nova was the 4th least impressive. That Nova team had to run through a 9 seed, a 1 seed, a 5 seed, a 2 seed, a 2 seed, and a 1 seed to win. That to me is way more impressive. I don't care how much they won by.

 

[721Comstock]

Greatest year ever. Can’t believe my son will be 20 in august.

Ditto my kid in May.

Time flies.

 

[nnyorange]

Greatest year ever. Can’t believe my son will be 20 in august.

My oldest son was born in the early morning hours of 3/15/03. I watched SU lose to UConn in the Big East semis on Friday night while waiting in a hospital room. We didn’t lose again that season

 

[CuseFaninVT]

He wasn't a premy was he?

Nope! Would have been an interesting explanation as I was in missouri that night, and week.

 

[orange79]

Nope! Would have been an interesting explanation as I was in missouri that night, and week.

{wracks brain for Mom jokes...}

 

[SWC75]

That margin of victory is a good indicator of how strong your 6 game run was. That there is any correlation at all between your formula and how good that run was.


Edit

Your formula says that 2023 UConn is the 4th most impressive run in the 64 team era. 1985 Nova was the 4th least impressive. That Nova team had to run through a 9 seed, a 1 seed, a 5 seed, a 2 seed, a 2 seed, and a 1 seed to win. That to me is way more impressive. I don't care how much they won by.

When people talk about impressive runs, they tend to be talking about margin of victory. That has to compared to who they played for context. You can't ignore one or the other.

 

[Orangepace]

Simply add up the margins of victory and then add up the seeds of the opposition, then divide the first by the second. Here’s Syracuse’s 2003 run as an example:
We beat #14 seed Manhattan 78-65. I’ll record that as ‘13/14’
We beat #6 seed Oklahoma State 68-56 = 12/6
We beat #10 seed Auburn 79-78 = 1/10
We beat #1 seed Oklahoma 63-47 = 16/1
We beat #1 seed Texas 95-84 = 11/1
We beat #2 seed Kansas 81-78 = 3/2
TOTAL: 56/34 = 1.65

Sir, I appreciate all that you bring to the forum. That said, your maths aren’t mathing. These fractions actually add up to ~31.53 for Cuse. I think if you rerun the numbers, the algorithm you developed with result in a very different ranking overall for the Champions.

 

[SWC75]

Sir, I appreciate all that you bring to the forum. That said, your maths aren’t mathing. These fractions actually add up to ~31.53 for Cuse. I think if you rerun the numbers, the algorithm you developed with result in a very different ranking overall for the Champions.

13 + 12 + 1 + 16 + 11 + 3 = 56

14 + 6 + 10 + 1 + 1 + 2 = 34

56/34 = 1.65

I don't do the division for each game and then add up the fractions. Maybe it would have bene cleared if I'd recorded each game, then the totals and then the final division for each team but it was quicker to just list the end result.

 

[PoppyHart]

13 + 12 + 1 + 16 + 11 + 3 = 56

14 + 6 + 10 + 1 + 1 + 2 = 34

56/34 = 1.65

I don't do the division for each game and then add up the fractions. Maybe it would have bene cleared if I'd recorded each game, then the totals and then the final division for each team but it was quicker to just list the end result.

Fwiw, the Manhattan win was by 11 points.

 

[SWC75]

Fwiw, the Manhattan win was by 11 points.

You're right. Looking through my orange-colored glasses, I thought that was a '78' but it's a '76'.

2003 NCAA Basketball Tournament

That makes it 54/34 = 1.59 and knocks us down below Connecticut 2014. But, hey, we won the darn thing!