NCAA Tournament

[Mark Vader]

Once again I have to resign myself that Michigan continues to come up short in basketball. Yes they won it all in 1989, but they have had other opportunities to win the championship and they just can't seem to pull it off.

 

Oh well, it was a helluva run and I did not expect them to be the last Big 10 team standing or even make it to the title game. Beilein has brought respect back to Michigan basketball and has made the Wolverines serious contenders.

 

As for the game, I could not believe the shots that Albrecht was making, it was unreal. Neither team played bad and it was a very good game. Congratulations to Louisville, they came back late in the 1st half and gutted it out towards the end. They were the better team.

[BuffOrange]

Winning a national championship is hard dude. It was L'ville's first since '86. Kansas went 20 years w/out one, Indiana 27&counting - those are probably two of the top five blue bloods - and they were lucky to win those games, which you almost have to be.

I'm pretty greedy too though; really want 'Cuse to win another one as they're probably the best program with just 1 (Arizona & G'town are right there too I guess). Oh well better than the best by far with none, which is probably Illinois now.

[Just Jack]

Look who won ESPN's Bracket Challenge...

 

http://games.espn.go.com/tournament-challenge-bracket/en/entry?entryID=971878

[bbb]

Winning a national championship is hard dude. It was L'ville's first since '86. Kansas went 20 years w/out one, Indiana 27&counting - those are probably two of the top five blue bloods - and they were lucky to win those games, which you almost have to be.

I'm pretty greedy too though; really want 'Cuse to win another one as they're probably the best program with just 1 (Arizona & G'town are right there too I guess). Oh well better than the best by far with none, which is probably Illinois now.

 

I love this kind of list. I think there are 6 blue bloods. Who would you leave off?:

Kentucky

UNC

Kansas

Duke

UCLA

Indiana

 

BTW, speaking of Georgetown and it's only championship, they would not have one it without Michael Graham, and he just one a million dollar lottery!:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/wp/2013/04/05/morning-pixels-michael-graham-wins-the-lottery/

[Mark Vader]

Winning a national championship is hard dude. It was L'ville's first since '86. Kansas went 20 years w/out one, Indiana 27&counting - those are probably two of the top five blue bloods - and they were lucky to win those games, which you almost have to be.

I'm pretty greedy too though; really want 'Cuse to win another one as they're probably the best program with just 1 (Arizona & G'town are right there too I guess). Oh well better than the best by far with none, which is probably Illinois now.

Those are all great points. Winning a national championship is very difficult to achieve.

 

It's incredible when you look back at when UCLA won 7 basketball championships in a row.

Edited April 10, 2013 by Mark Vader

[bbb]

It is incredible and I hated them as a kid............But, it was easier for them then that it would be today. The seeding system just wasn't the same. Everybody stayed in their regions. I remember them playing Tark's Long Beach State team in the Western Regional finals a couple of times...........But, yeah, once they got the the Final Four, they still had to beat the best teams left.

[Gordio]

 

Those are all great points. Winning a national championship is very difficult to achieve.

 

It's incredible when you look back at when UCLA won 7 basketball championships in a row.

 

It was a different time back then. You got a kid for the full 4 years & you could really build a team. now it is tough sustaining that success with kids leaving so early. Michigan is in good shape for the next few years even if Burke leaves. They should be ranked in the top 5 next year & be one of the favorites to win it. I love Belien also. I was at Canisius for grad school when he took that team to the tournament that got beat in the first round to Utah when Van Horn was playing there.

 

It is incredible and I hated them as a kid............But, it was easier for them then that it would be today. The seeding system just wasn't the same. Everybody stayed in their regions. I remember them playing Tark's Long Beach State team in the Western Regional finals a couple of times...........But, yeah, once they got the the Final Four, they still had to beat the best teams left.

 

That is also a great point. That was before my time but the tournament was not the 5 headed monster that it is today.

[BuffOrange]

 

I love this kind of list. I think there are 6 blue bloods. Who would you leave off?:

Kentucky

UNC

Kansas

Duke

UCLA

Indiana

 

BTW, speaking of Georgetown and it's only championship, they would not have one it without Michael Graham, and he just one a million dollar lottery!:

http://www.washingto...ns-the-lottery/

 

I think that's right. The first 4 are the bluest of the blue imo (and hey they all wear blue).

Then Indiana/UCLA.

Then the blue chippers: Cuse/Arizona/Mich St/G'town/Ohio St./L'ville maybe a couple others.

Uconn is the tough one to place given their unknown future.

[bbb]

I think that's right. The first 4 are the bluest of the blue imo (and hey they all wear blue).

Then Indiana/UCLA.

Then the blue chippers: Cuse/Arizona/Mich St/G'town/Ohio St./L'ville maybe a couple others.

Uconn is the tough one to place given their unknown future.

 

Yeah, UConn is very hard to place. It could just all be a Calhoun thing...............Time just flies so fast. When I was going for my MBA at SU, I went to the UConn game and it was really the first time they were a contender - 89-90. And, I go into the men's room and run into Dick McPherson, who was still the SU football coach. I asked him about a few of the WNY recruits he just signed and then he says about the actual game we were at "UConn?!? Who'd have ever thought this!"

 

Two decades later, and I'm sure most kids think of them as higher than some of those teams we are calling blue chippers.

[BuffOrange]

Yeah, UConn is very hard to place. It could just all be a Calhoun thing...............Time just flies so fast. When I was going for my MBA at SU, I went to the UConn game and it was really the first time they were a contender - 89-90. And, I go into the men's room and run into Dick McPherson, who was still the SU football coach. I asked him about a few of the WNY recruits he just signed and then he says about the actual game we were at "UConn?!? Who'd have ever thought this!"

 

Two decades later, and I'm sure most kids think of them as higher than some of those teams we are calling blue chippers.

 

Yes I would have too a couple years ago. Their biggest recruiting pitch for a while has been having the most guys in the NBA. Maybe that will still help; I have no idea.

Interesting you mention 1990 - I always compare their 90-98 teams to Pitt '02-present. Big East powerhouse, no F4's. Unless Calhoun woke up a good tournament coach in '99, it shows you how much of a factor luck is. I mean that to be more complimentary to Dixon than a knock on Calhoun fwiw.

 

I still think 'Cuse is a bigger brand name even post Boeheim. We like complain about ESPN calling MSG a home court for SU since it's 4+ hours away, but in the end it probably helps that everyone thinks of them as NY's team (and it's not because of Daryl Gross' stupid branding). I hope moving to the ACC doesn't hurt that.

[bbb]

Good comparison of Pitt and UConn.

 

I don't know if Cuse will be a bigger brand name than UConn post Boeheim, just because I don't know what UConn will be...........But, they will be a big brand name, no doubt. I know it's been forever, but they were a big brand name before he was head coach. The Dave Bing days, the Final Four in the 70s with Jimmy Williams from Buffalo, etc..........UConn was nothing before Calhoun.

[Johnny Hammersticks]

 

I love this kind of list. I think there are 6 blue bloods. Who would you leave off?:

Kentucky

UNC

Kansas

Duke

UCLA

Indiana

 

I don't know what the criteria is for consideration as a "blue blood" NCAA basketball program....perhaps the main criteria is national championships. I will say, however, that if you take into account the entire resume, IMO Syracuse at least belongs in that conversation. Taking into consideration the following stats:

 

1. Syracuse is the 5th winningest program in D1 basketball history, trailing only Kentucky, UNC, Kansas, and Duke.

2. Syracuse has the 6th highest winning percentage in D1 basketball history.

3. Syracuse has 43 consecutive winning seasons, the longest active streak in D1 basketball.

4. Only Syracuse, Duke, and Kansas have been to at least one final 4 in each of the last 5 decades.

 

Pretty impressive.

[bbb]

It IS impressive that they can all that and yet have only one national championship! (Sorry my Bona fandom jealousy just took over).

 

I didn't know all that. Bona actually had at least 25 winning seasons in a row, all though the time I graduated. And, the year after I graduated, they had their first losing one............Of course, that's the least impressive out of those four things, as you can feast on early season chumps.

 

But, to answer your question, I think it is a matter of national championships to determine those blue bloods. Indiana might not have one in quite a while but they had them starting in the 40s. Kansas is pretty much where it all got started.