OT: Blue Bloods

[Do Dah Day]

Over the past year or so, there have been several listings of the "best" NCAAM programs. I have kept a list of most of them. They generally consider NCAA Tournament success, overall records, recruiting success (not as accurate), and program income. I am not going to rank them.... I am going to group them... remember, this is not my opinon - it is a composite ranking based on several rankings I've found ... none of which is probably worth a damn, but hey ...
Group A: Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, Arizona, No. Carolina
Group B: Louisville, UConn, UCLA, MSU, FSU
Group C: Syracuse, Gonzaga, Oregon, Wisconsin, Villanova
Group D: IU, Virginia, Florida, Washington (Butler kind of)

I think the value in this is how the "world" views NCAAM ...

 

[jadeezra]

Lol.... come on

 

[Cleanface]

FSU, ORE, UVA, WASH....huh?

 

[Do Dah Day]

H

FSU, ORE, UVA, WASH....huh?

Hey, I just compiled the rankings ... Maybe bluebloods isn't a good term because it indicates long-term ... but these are the programs that statistically are succeeding.

 

[delish1]

H

Hey, I just compiled the rankings ... Maybe bluebloods isn't a good term because it indicates long-term ... but these are the programs that statistically are succeeding.

You keep saying you compiled rankings. To be objective you need a numerical value not just your self made tiers.

That being said the list isn't totally off. Fsu, Washington and florida are too high. nova, Virginia too low. Oregon and Gonzaga are probably too high too. Butler as well

 

[Do Dah Day]

You keep saying you compiled rankings. To be objective you need a numerical value not just your self made tiers.

That being said the list isn't totally off. Fsu, Washington and florida are too high. nova, Virginia too low. Oregon and Gonzaga are probably too high too. Butler as well

I just took where different schools were ranked on different lists. They were all over the place. Don't forget that basketball income was included, as well as ranks of recruiting classes ... which may have never panned out, but it does show where top recruits are going. I didn't invest a lot of time in this, just found it interesting. I didn't feed all the data into a spreadsheet and determine the combined ranks to the 5th decimal point.

 

[Do Dah Day]

So, here's one - (http://www.cheatsheet.com/sports/college-basketballs-10-best-programs.html/15/)
1-Duke, 2-KY, 3-NoC, 4-KS, 5-L'ville, 6-UConn, 7-AZ, 8-IU (!!!!), 9-UCLA, 10-MSU, 11-Syracuse, 12-Gonzaga, 13-Oregon, 14-Wisc., 15-Villanova

 

[Do Dah Day]

FSU's last three recruiting classes have been 2015-11th, 2016-12th, 2017-18th

 

[FirstDownB]

Most of these programs beyond your Group A are highly dependent on who the coach is. Even some of the Group A's are only there because of one legendary coach.

I'm not sure "blue blood school" is still a thing. Maybe historically, but not so much in how it pertains to the present and future. Players can get national exposure anywhere now. The main predictors of success are the coach, his recruiting, and a budget to make it all happen. That formula can come together at dozens of high major schools.

If "blue blood" is still a relevant term it would seem to apply only to programs that have shown the ability to roll from coach to coach with no significant change in results. Kentucky, Kansas, and North Carolina are the only clear cuts. With Duke, Krzy has been there so long it is hard to differentiate him from the Duke brand. Same could be said for Izzo.

 

[arcb102000]

Here is the key point: actual bluebloods, i.e. European nobility, were in-bred, often ill and idiotic, and basically good for nothings. Who wants to be in that group?

Past history is no guarantee of the future. History demonstrates that dynasties rise, fall and then are forgotten. Georgetown used to be a power. They are not even in the NIT. Remember UNLV?

 

[Do Dah Day]

Washington's last three recruiting classes: 2015-7th, 2016-34th, 2017-4th.

 

[TwinDegrees2]

You keep saying you compiled rankings. To be objective you need a numerical value not just your self made tiers.

That being said the list isn't totally off. Fsu, Washington and florida are too high. nova, Virginia too low. Oregon and Gonzaga are probably too high too. Butler as well

I don't consider Gonzaga or Oregon blue bloods or elite programs. Right now, Oregon is the best team money can buy with Phil Knight's money buying everything from arena's to planes to uniforms to.....name it.

Gonzaga is a good program, that can't get over the hump.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Over the past year or so, there have been several listings of the "best" NCAAM programs. I have kept a list of most of them. They generally consider NCAA Tournament success, overall records, recruiting success (not as accurate), and program income. I am not going to rank them.... I am going to group them... remember, this is not my opinon - it is a composite ranking based on several rankings I've found ... none of which is probably worth a damn, but hey ...
Group A: Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, Arizona, No. Carolina
Group B: Louisville, UConn, UCLA, MSU, FSU
Group C: Syracuse, Gonzaga, Oregon, Wisconsin, Villanova
Group D: IU, Virginia, Florida, Washington (Butler kind of)

I think the value in this is how the "world" views NCAAM ...

This list needs to be vetted by my DCPI

 

[Do Dah Day]

This list needs to be vetted by my DCPI

OMG, what have we come to .... I'll go back to my cave and never post again.