ADVERTISEMENT

Is purdue a "Blue blood program"?

I agree we aren't a blue blood program yet, but over the past 2 years we have probably gotten more attention (some good, some bad) than any other team. Can't say I agree with your list of comparable programs. Cincinnati, Temple and Notre Dame. Temple hasn't had a good team in 20 years. And Notre Dame has had only one decent season in the past 8 years. And Cincinnati hasn't gotten to the Sweet 16 in a dozen years. I would say you set the bar pretty low when listing comparable programs.
That's certainly true of Temple. That program has fallen off noticably since John Chaney retired. But history matters in this discussion, and all three of those programs have histories similar to Purdue. Cincinnati twice won the national championship with Oscar Robertson. Notre Dame has played in three more NCAA tournaments than Purdue.
 
No. Only 15 teams have multiple championships, so that's probably the bare minimum requirement.

Per ChatGPT:

"Blue blood" programs in NCAA men's basketball are traditionally the most prestigious, successful, and storied teams in the history of the sport. These teams typically have a long history of winning, large fan bases, and a significant impact on college basketball. As of my last update in April 2023, the generally recognized blue blood programs are:

  1. University of Kentucky (Kentucky Wildcats): Known for their many NCAA tournament appearances and championships, Kentucky has a storied history and a passionate fan base.
  2. University of North Carolina (UNC Tar Heels): With multiple national championships, UNC is known for its consistent success and the production of NBA talent.
  3. University of Kansas (Kansas Jayhawks): Kansas has a long tradition of basketball excellence, including numerous conference titles and national championships.
  4. Duke University (Duke Blue Devils): Duke is renowned for its many national championships and tournament appearances under coach Mike Krzyzewski.
  5. University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA Bruins): UCLA holds the record for the most NCAA Men's Basketball Championships, largely thanks to the dynasty built under coach John Wooden.
These programs are considered the elite and have a significant influence on the sport's history and culture. However, it's worth noting that the list of blue bloods can evolve slightly over time as programs rise and fall in prominence."

For what it's worth, "what have you done for me lately" counts - so I would swap in UConn for UCLA at #5.
1-3 were big-time cheaters at various times in their blue bloodied history, and 5 was suspected of same. 4 was clean as far as I know, although it was alledged the Zion family lived in a giant house in Durham for his one year. It was also alleged that the sociology program many of the dooks majored in was frivoulous, intended to keep players eligible.

Do you want Purdue to be part of this blue bloodied group?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boiler8285
1-3 were big-time cheaters at various times in their blue bloodied history, and 5 was suspected of same. 4 was clean as far as I know, although it was alledged the Zion family lived in a giant house in Durham for his one year. It was also alleged that the sociology program many of the dooks majored in was frivoulous, intended to keep players eligible.

Do you want Purdue to be part of this blue bloodied group?
I want us to win a national championship. Do you?
 
The question should be what do you call us after we win two nattys in the next four years?
We then are the same as a Villanova. IMO Nova isn't quite a blue blood. Blue bloods are 7 schools that can be considered as "Blue Bloods", UCLA, UK, Duke, UNC, IU (Yea sorry guys), UConn and Kansas. Kansas squeak in due to their absolute dominance of the Big 12, 4 championships and back to back HOF coaches... Purdue has a VERY long way to go to be considered a blue blood. Getting to your first final four since 80 would just be a start... Getting a championship would immediately boost Purdue's standing but would not make us a "blue blood"... Think immediate post 2000 MSU championship type space, that's where CMP and Purdue would be... Which is pretty well thought of...
 
We then are the same as a Villanova. IMO Nova isn't quite a blue blood. Blue bloods are 7 schools that can be considered as "Blue Bloods", UCLA, UK, Duke, UNC, IU (Yea sorry guys), UConn and Kansas. Kansas squeak in due to their absolute dominance of the Big 12, 4 championships and back to back HOF coaches... Purdue has a VERY long way to go to be considered a blue blood. Getting to your first final four since 80 would just be a start... Getting a championship would immediately boost Purdue's standing but would not make us a "blue blood"... Think immediate post 2000 MSU championship type space, that's where CMP and Purdue would be... Which is pretty well thought of...
Pretty well thought of if that is all you think of.

I think of the schools with crooked histories as crooks, and the clean schools, whatever their records, as worthy of respect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boiler8285
Pretty well thought of if that is all you think of.

I think of the schools with crooked histories as crooks, and the clean schools, whatever their records, as worthy of respect.
I mean that's fine but this isn't about that... Clearly cheating is swept aside for these monikers.. I get your point but that's not the question...
 
Relax, I'm just giving you crap. I just think "blue blood" is a relative term. There have been plenty of times throughout history programs have established themselves as a "blue blood".
MSU, Villanova, Michigan, Arizona..etc have done this in my mind. I don't believe there's a threshold of how many championships a program needs to win in order to have that status.

Now, I do agree we need to win a championship in the modern era. I also think programs like IU, Kentucky, UCLA are failing their programs because of that status.
Holy smokes, Michigan and Arizona are not Blue Bloods hahaha.
 
I mean that's fine but this isn't about that... Clearly cheating is swept aside for these monikers.. I get your point but that's not the question...
True, you are correct. I was just rejecting the premise as I understood it that being a 'blue blood' is something to strive for. I shall henceforth cease and desist on this topic.

Boiler UP
 
We then are the same as a Villanova. IMO Nova isn't quite a blue blood. Blue bloods are 7 schools that can be considered as "Blue Bloods", UCLA, UK, Duke, UNC, IU (Yea sorry guys), UConn and Kansas. Kansas squeak in due to their absolute dominance of the Big 12, 4 championships and back to back HOF coaches... Purdue has a VERY long way to go to be considered a blue blood. Getting to your first final four since 80 would just be a start... Getting a championship would immediately boost Purdue's standing but would not make us a "blue blood"... Think immediate post 2000 MSU championship type space, that's where CMP and Purdue would be... Which is pretty well thought of...
I know you guys are biased by instate hysteria … but I’d argue to the other 49 states, Indiana and Louisville are attached at the hip and deserve the same all-time category. If one is a Blue Blood, the other is.
 
I know you guys are biased by instate hysteria … but I’d argue to the other 49 states, Indiana and Louisville are attached at the hip and deserve the same all-time category. If one is a Blue Blood, the other is.
How about “Current Blue Blood” (Duke, UK, KU, UConn, Nova (maybe)), “Somewhat Current Blue Blood” (UCLA, Louisville, MSU (maybe)), “Blue Blood that hasn’t been relevant for a whole generation, maybe even 2 generations” (IU). Do those categories work?? 😂 😂
 
Holy smokes, Michigan and Arizona are not Blue Bloods hahaha.
You are a confused Illinois fan. Michigan has been to 7....7 NC games, 1 NC, 8 F4 and 15 E8's. Say what you want, but in the modern day era they're IMO considered a "blue blood". If you consider IU to be one. A simple google search will tell you the success of each program in the last 30 years.

Our programs Purdue vs Illinois essentially mirror each other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rgarlitz
You are a confused Illinois fan. Michigan has been to 7....7 NC games, 1 NC, 8 F4 and 15 E8's. Say what you want, but in the modern day era they're IMO considered a "blue blood". If you consider IU to be one. A simple google search will tell you the success of each program in the last 30 years.

Our programs Purdue vs Illinois essentially mirror each other.
I almost never hear Michigan mentioned as a college basketball blue blood.
 
Lol. No. Not even close. Kentucky, Kansas, North Carolina, Indiana and UCLA are the staple Blue Bloods. The old men. Duke and UConn are the New Bloods of the Blue Bloods. It stops there but there is a group of programs like Michigan State, Villanova, Louisville and others that are above Purdue.
 
That's certainly true of Temple. That program has fallen off noticably since John Chaney retired. But history matters in this discussion, and all three of those programs have histories similar to Purdue. Cincinnati twice won the national championship with Oscar Robertson. Notre Dame has played in three more NCAA tournaments than Purdue.

Cincinnati actually won those two championships in '61 and '62 after Robertson graduated, beating Ohio State both times. Robertson's Bearcats lost in the National Semi-finals in both '59 and '60 to California.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rgarlitz
You are a confused Illinois fan. Michigan has been to 7....7 NC games, 1 NC, 8 F4 and 15 E8's. Say what you want, but in the modern day era they're IMO considered a "blue blood". If you consider IU to be one. A simple google search will tell you the success of each program in the last 30 years.

Our programs Purdue vs Illinois essentially mirror each other.
I think you’re being WAY too liberal with that term then. I’d go with this all-time:

Clear Blue Bloods
Kentucky, North Carolina, Kansas, UCLA, Duke

Elite But Not Blue Blood
Indiana, Louisville, UConn, Villanova, Michigan State, etc.

Next Tier
Huge group of traditionally good-to-great programs that span a pretty wide range … all the way from Arizona and Syracuse to Purdue and Illinois to Michigan and Arkansas, etc.

Decent Historically But Major Flaw(s)
These are your Iowa or Alabama programs.

Everyone Else

That third tier has some programs like Michigan that have excelled in March but been unimpressive as far as all-time winning percentages, NCAAT appearances, weeks in the AP poll, conference championships, etc …. And it includes programs like Illinois and Purdue that look elite in some categories (e.g., Purdue having the most Big Ten titles or Illinois being in the top 10 all-time AP appearances) but mediocre in others (e.g., Illini having only 18 Big Ten titles compared to PU or PU only having 2 Final Fours).

To me, it’s honestly the TRUE Blue Bloods and then the rest of us … one three-pointer falls in the 2005 National Championship Game and all of a sudden Illinois has the same number of championships and MORE Final Fours than Arizona. A miracle putback by Virginia doesn’t fall, and Purdue has 3 Final Fours and maybe a title and they’re talked about in an entirely different right. Splitting hairs below the Blue Bloods, IMO!
 
I think you’re being WAY too liberal with that term then. I’d go with this all-time:

Clear Blue Bloods
Kentucky, North Carolina, Kansas, UCLA, Duke

Elite But Not Blue Blood
Indiana, Louisville, UConn, Villanova, Michigan State, etc.

Next Tier
Huge group of traditionally good-to-great programs that span a pretty wide range … all the way from Arizona and Syracuse to Purdue and Illinois to Michigan and Arkansas, etc.

Decent Historically But Major Flaw(s)
These are your Iowa or Alabama programs.

Everyone Else

That third tier has some programs like Michigan that have excelled in March but been unimpressive as far as all-time winning percentages, NCAAT appearances, weeks in the AP poll, conference championships, etc …. And it includes programs like Illinois and Purdue that look elite in some categories (e.g., Purdue having the most Big Ten titles or Illinois being in the top 10 all-time AP appearances) but mediocre in others (e.g., Illini having only 18 Big Ten titles compared to PU or PU only having 2 Final Fours).

To me, it’s honestly the TRUE Blue Bloods and then the rest of us … one three-pointer falls in the 2005 National Championship Game and all of a sudden Illinois has the same number of championships and MORE Final Fours than Arizona. A miracle putback by Virginia doesn’t fall, and Purdue has 3 Final Fours and maybe a title and they’re talked about in an entirely different right. Splitting hairs below the Blue Bloods, IMO!
How you not puttin uconn as a blue blood?!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Poprudy
I think you’re being WAY too liberal with that term then. I’d go with this all-time:

Clear Blue Bloods
Kentucky, North Carolina, Kansas, UCLA, Duke

Elite But Not Blue Blood
Indiana, Louisville, UConn, Villanova, Michigan State, etc.

Next Tier
Huge group of traditionally good-to-great programs that span a pretty wide range … all the way from Arizona and Syracuse to Purdue and Illinois to Michigan and Arkansas, etc.

Decent Historically But Major Flaw(s)
These are your Iowa or Alabama programs.

Everyone Else

That third tier has some programs like Michigan that have excelled in March but been unimpressive as far as all-time winning percentages, NCAAT appearances, weeks in the AP poll, conference championships, etc …. And it includes programs like Illinois and Purdue that look elite in some categories (e.g., Purdue having the most Big Ten titles or Illinois being in the top 10 all-time AP appearances) but mediocre in others (e.g., Illini having only 18 Big Ten titles compared to PU or PU only having 2 Final Fours).

To me, it’s honestly the TRUE Blue Bloods and then the rest of us … one three-pointer falls in the 2005 National Championship Game and all of a sudden Illinois has the same number of championships and MORE Final Fours than Arizona. A miracle putback by Virginia doesn’t fall, and Purdue has 3 Final Fours and maybe a title and they’re talked about in an entirely different right. Splitting hairs below the Blue Bloods, IMO!
I actually agree to most of this.

My version changes per era.
 
Right but we are nowhere near the conversation. And won’t be until multiple natty championships have been won.
Perhaps, depending on your definition but I would agree there are only a select few that fall into this category in the first place. Purdue has had a pretty solid program for over a century (minus about 20 years in the mid 40s to mid 60s) and to me that is pretty good. I don't care if we are ever considered a blue blood program as long as we can at least get that modern day National Championship someday.
 
For some perspective on how hard it is to be, stay or become a "Blue Blood"... to my count there are only SEVEN active NCAA MBB coaches with a National Championship. It sure would help the discussion to have Coach Painter there but "apparently" it's kind of hard to win a national title. :)


418519687_18254774968229107_6239531307882092201_n.jpg
 
For some perspective on how hard it is to be, stay or become a "Blue Blood"... to my count there are only SEVEN active NCAA MBB coaches with a National Championship. It sure would help the discussion to have Coach Painter there but "apparently" it's kind of hard to win a national title. :)


418519687_18254774968229107_6239531307882092201_n.jpg
Gus Malzahn won at Auburn when Cam was there…isn’t he the coach at UCF?
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT