Author Topic: Blue Bloods  (Read 742 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Shooter Jones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4108
    • View Profile
Blue Bloods
« on: April 02, 2019, 08:54:58 AM »
Conversation comes up every year around tourney time, and especially during the Final 4/Natty. Who do you consider the blue bloods as of today, April 2nd 2019?

I think these are the 4, but what do we think of UCLA today?

UCLA: 11 titles
Kentucky: 8 titles
North Carolina: 6 titles
Duke: 5 titles

Teams to be considered today, but have some near future work to do?

Villanova: 3 titles, 2 in the last 4 years.
UCONN: 4 titles in the last 20 years.
Indiana: 5 titles, 0 in the last 25 years.


Teams pretty far out of it, but could be in the conversation in the next 5-10 years with a couple Nattys:

Michigan St: 2 nattys, going for 3rd this year.
Louisville: 3 nattys, 1 in the last 25 years.
Kansas: 3 nattys, 1 in the last 30 years.
Florida: 2 nattys in the last 15 years.

Let's hear your thoughts.


(Want to get rid of the ad? Register now for free!)

Offline 8manpick

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15790
  • A top quartile binger, poster, and friend
    • View Profile
Blue Bloods
« Reply #1 on: April 02, 2019, 09:09:08 AM »
Michigan State has been to 5 of the last 15 Final Fours, Duke has only been to 2. I think Sparty is in.
:adios:

Offline pissclams

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 41055
  • (worst non-premium poster at goEMAW.com)
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #2 on: April 02, 2019, 09:18:53 AM »
i disagree.  playing to play in the national championship shouldn't qualify you as elite. 


Cheesy Mustache QB might make an appearance.

New warning: Don't get in a fight with someone who doesn't even need to bother to buy ink.

Offline HerrSonntag

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3393
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #3 on: April 02, 2019, 09:31:20 AM »
i disagree.  playing to play in the national championship shouldn't qualify you as elite.
I disagree with your disagreeing

Sent from my LG-US998 using Tapatalk


Offline kslim

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 10437
  • THANKS BREONTAE!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #4 on: April 02, 2019, 09:56:00 AM »
I dont think you can base this metric off of titles alone or you would have some random teams on this list, i think its more about consistently being in the running year in and year out. I mean San Fransisco, Oklahoma a&m, and Cincinnati have as many titles as KU but obviously you cant put them in the same argument. I would say the true 5 blue bloods are

Duke
Kentucky
Kansas
UCLA
North Carolina

HM
Indiana
Uconn
Villanova
Michigan State
Florida
Louisville (before the titles are vacated)
@kslimlb3

Offline meow meow

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 8694
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #5 on: April 02, 2019, 10:19:55 AM »
in this thread, kslim makes a huge ass out of himself

Offline WildcatNkilt

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5412
  • Had the worst birthday ever on Dec. 5th of '98.
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #6 on: April 02, 2019, 10:59:34 AM »
Redo the statistics to incorporate the last 30 years and lets see how it looks. 
Kansas City Blue Barbecue fan.

Offline kslim

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 10437
  • THANKS BREONTAE!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #7 on: April 02, 2019, 11:24:46 AM »
Redo the statistics to incorporate the last 30 years and lets see how it looks.
top 5 are
duke with 5
UNC with 4
UK with 3
Uconn with 3
florida with 2

bunch of teams with 1
@kslimlb3

Offline nicname

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9695
  • Deal with it.
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #8 on: April 02, 2019, 12:55:49 PM »
Bluest aka True Bluebloods and will always be bluebloods
Kansas
Kentucky
North Carolina

Duke: Currently =/> the top group but without the historical significance

UCLA/Indiana: historical significance, but current has beens

UCONN, L’Ville, Michigan St, Cuse, Ohio State, Michigan: a rung below for one reason or another
If there was a gif of nicname thwarting the attempted-flag-taker and then gesturing him to suck it, followed by motioning for all of Hilton Shelter to boo him louder, it'd be better than that auburn gif.


Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 26380
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #9 on: April 02, 2019, 01:01:05 PM »
LOL at UCLA

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 9900
  • Not a huge gin guy...
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #10 on: April 02, 2019, 01:24:22 PM »
Redo the statistics to incorporate the last 30 years and lets see how it looks.
Interesting decision on that 30 years.

Offline WildcatNkilt

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5412
  • Had the worst birthday ever on Dec. 5th of '98.
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #11 on: April 02, 2019, 01:34:13 PM »
Redo the statistics to incorporate the last 30 years and lets see how it looks.
Interesting decision on that 30 years.

My 30-year comment was random, but I now see your concern.  Lets to 40 years for Spracs. 
Kansas City Blue Barbecue fan.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 26380
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #12 on: April 02, 2019, 01:35:54 PM »
Redo the statistics to incorporate the last 30 years and lets see how it looks.
Interesting decision on that 30 years.

Pretty transparent but really who gives a crap about 1988? When having discussions of this nature, anything beyond the current generation isn't particularly relevant.

Offline meow meow

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 8694
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #13 on: April 02, 2019, 01:36:31 PM »
yes, nothing is more relevant than short shorts/no 3 point line era basketball

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 9900
  • Not a huge gin guy...
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #14 on: April 02, 2019, 01:46:50 PM »
Yeah, I'm not really trying to inject myself in the conversation, for obvious reasons. But I do join MIR's opinion regarding UCLA.

Offline Brock Landers

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5238
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #15 on: April 02, 2019, 02:10:54 PM »
Yeah you're both right about UCLA, they might as well have 1 title instead of 11 since most of the world's population has died of old age since the end of their 60's-70's run.

Offline Shooter Jones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4108
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #16 on: April 02, 2019, 03:31:23 PM »
Kentucky only won 1 title over like a 30-some year stretch before being good off and on over the last 20 or so years.

UCLA only needs to win another one and they're the bluest of blues and it's not close. 2 and they're light years ahead of everyone. If Indiana can win 1 or 2 more, they're up there too.

Obviously their programs are in no position to do that, but the right coaching hire can make it happen quickly (appears neither will make the needed hire, though)

To me, there are currently 3 True Blue Bloods, I'll categorize the others.

True Blue: PEOPLE KNOW
Kentucky: 8 titles
North Carolina: 6 titles
Duke: 5 titles

Faded Blue: No recent success, need a resurrection
UCLA: 11 titles
Indiana: 5 titles

Sky Blue: Not enough historical or recent success, but you know they're there.
Louisville: 3 nattys, 1 in the last 25 years.
Kansas: 3 nattys, 1 in the last 30 years.
Michigan St: 2 nattys, going for 3rd this year.

Bright Blue: Mostly recent success, high school recruits see them.
Villanova: 3 titles, 2 in the last 4 years.
UCONN: 4 titles in the last 20 years.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2019, 03:36:38 PM by Shooter Jones »

Offline Shooter Jones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4108
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #17 on: April 02, 2019, 03:49:02 PM »
I mean San Fransisco, Oklahoma a&m, and Cincinnati have as many titles as KU but obviously you cant put them in the same argument.

Well, for beginners, that's just not true at all. Those teams all have 2, and KU has 3.

But anyway, there have been what, over 80 tourney's now? Blue Blood means Elite, and teams with 3 or less tourney titles are not what I would consider Elite.

Even without recent success, UCLA has won over 13% of NCAA tourneys. That's crazy to think about.

Offline 8manpick

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15790
  • A top quartile binger, poster, and friend
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #18 on: April 02, 2019, 05:08:52 PM »
Guys KU has 5 what are you talking about?
:adios:

Offline kslim

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 10437
  • THANKS BREONTAE!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Blue Bloods
« Reply #19 on: April 03, 2019, 07:42:21 AM »
I mean San Fransisco, Oklahoma a&m, and Cincinnati have as many titles as KU but obviously you cant put them in the same argument.

Well, for beginners, that's just not true at all. Those teams all have 2, and KU has 3.

But anyway, there have been what, over 80 tourney's now? Blue Blood means Elite, and teams with 3 or less tourney titles are not what I would consider Elite.

Even without recent success, UCLA has won over 13% of NCAA tourneys. That's crazy to think about.
we are obviously using different websites for these stats. point remains and i agree with you for the most part
@kslimlb3