Blue Blood versus National Prominence versus Elite

[Shocker1976]

I attended a soiree last evening where college basketball was a major point of discussion, with attendees drawing distinctions between "blue blood" programs, nationally prominent teams and current Elite Teams. Good discussion with some consensus reached by participants but clear lines of separation of opinions regards each grouping. Salient points for your consideration and comment follow:

Blue blood (sangre azul) was commonly thought to have originated centuries ago in Spain with the oldest and proudest Castille families claiming to be pure bred. Applying this concept to college basketball teams, produced the following list of “blue blood” teams:

1. Kansas – due to coaches Naismith, Phog Allen, Brown, Williams and Self
2. Kentucky – due primarily to Adolph Rupp, a protégé of Phog Allen
3. North Carolina – due primarily to Dean Smith, a protégé of Phog Allen
4. Duke – due primarily to Coach K, a protégé of Bobby Knight
5. UCLA – due primarily to Coach Wooden
6. Indiana – due primarily to Coach Knight

Caveats to consider in this ranking of the Blue Bloods:

• Indiana’s presence on this list could be questioned due to their level of success since the departure of Bobby Knight.
• UCLA could be at risk of being dropped from this list due to a decline in results since the departure of John Wooden. IMO only the remarkable run of National Championships produced by the Bruins keeps them ahead of Indiana
• Louisville and UConn are missing from this list, why?

Determinants of national prominence:

1. Achievements in the previous three years are the most valuable.
2. Achievements 4-6 years ago are half as valuable as the most recent events.
3. Achievements 7-10 years ago are half as valuable as 2.
4. Achievements more than 10 years ago are half as valuable 3.

Using these determinants produced the following ranking of Top 15 Nationally Prominent teams:

1. Kentucky
2. Duke
3. North Carolina
4. Louisville
5. Connecticut
6. Arizona
7. Kansas
8. Michigan
9. Ohio State
10. Michigan State
11. Syracuse
12. UCLA
13. Indiana
14. Georgetown
15. Oklahoma

Determinants of elite status:

1. Achievements in the previous three years are the most valuable.
2. Achievements 4-6 years ago are less valuable than the most recent events.
3. Achievements 7-10 years ago are less valuable than #2.

Using these determinants produced the following ranking of Top 15 Elite teams:

1. Duke
2. Connecticut
3. Kentucky
4. Louisville
5. North Carolina
6. Wisconsin
7. Michigan State
8. Florida
9. Virginia
10. Kansas
11. Wichita State
12. Arizona
13. Michigan
14. Gonzaga
15. Villanova

[ShockdaWorld]

I guess my question would be what is considered an "achievement"? Is this an NCAA tournament appearance? an undefeated regular season? a conference championship? Sweet 16? Final 4? National Championship? NIT Championship? I'd have to know what exactly is considered an achievement before I could have any real opinion on the rankings. Also, does anything count AGAINST any team? For example, probation, scandal, missing tournament (either by not being good enough or by being banned).

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

I'm not sure I would establish blue blood status based solely on coaching. Tradition and sustained high level of success over a long period of time would be factors I would consider. I would get the same results you did, so maybe it's a moot point. However, surely Louisville needs to finally be added to the list of blue bloods.

To me, the term "elite" evokes a higher standing than "nationally prominent", but it appears your methodology does the opposite. When I think of elite teams, I think of teams that aren't quite blue bloods but are on the threshold, such as UConn or Michigan State. When I think of nationally prominent teams, I think of teams that are usually relevant in March and/or consistently top 25--Arizona, GTown, Michigan, Gonzaga, etc.

Just my $0.02. This thread will make a fascinating discussion no doubt!

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

I could nit-pick a few minor things, but overall, I like the thought process and think these are some pretty good lists.

Louisville is an interesting case for the title of "blue blood". Their last decade has been top notch, but 1980-2005 was a bit short of the standard set by Duke, UNC, UK, and KU, and Louisville doesn't have anything amazing to point to from their pre-1980 era. I would say there is a "power 4", and then after that their is a second tier with teams like Louisville, UConn, UCLA, and maybe Indiana. Indiana would not even be in the conversation as a blueblood if it were not for their championships in 1940 and 1953, which boosts their overall total to 5. They had a nice run under Knight, but have gone the past 2 decades with a mere 1 trip beyond the Sweet 16. UCLA sometimes gets criticized as a "has-been", but I think people often forget their run of 3 straight Final Fours from '06-'08 along with 5 other trips to the Sweet 16 since 2000.

Louisville
- 3 National Championships since 1980. (Duke - 5, UNC - 4, UK - 3, KU - 2)
- 22 NCAA Wins in the last decade. (KU - 24, UNC - 24, UK - 24, Duke - 22)
- 61 NCAA Wins since 1980. (Duke - 90, UNC - 89, UK - 80, KU - 77
-

[Dave Stalwart]

side note: my view of the entire blue concept has taken a big hit the older I've gotten and the more I've seen. It's pretty hard to respect UK and UNC like their blue nature means anything at all when you learn how they do it. I'd be inclined to define "blue" as nothing more than semi-pro when you really get down to the truth.

[shockmonster]

I attended a soiree

76
Soiree? Seriously? How about Party? Do you really talk like that? You sound like Bruce Heartl (vocabulary elitist). Well maybe if the shoe fits ............. J/K :)

Actually a good discussion.

[Dave Stalwart]

76
Soiree? Seriously? How about Party? Do you really talk like that? You sound like Bruce Heartl (vocabulary elitist). Well maybe if the shoe fits ............. J/K :)

Bruce's vocabulary is palpable.




...forgive me if the context isn't quite right. Since, he used that word every time he spoke, I just assumed it was like a "wild card" word that means basically anything and applies in all situations :)

[Shocker1976]

I guess my question would be what is considered an "achievement"? Is this an NCAA tournament appearance? an undefeated regular season? a conference championship? Sweet 16? Final 4? National Championship? NIT Championship? I'd have to know what exactly is considered an achievement before I could have any real opinion on the rankings. Also, does anything count AGAINST any team? For example, probation, scandal, missing tournament (either by not being good enough or by being banned).

Valid criticisms as the issues you raised (and others) were discussed but no agreement reached by the group. Most only wanted to recognize on court performances by the teams, (such as won/loss records, National Championships, Conference Championships) while a smaller but very vocal contingent wanted to also recognize and assign deductions for cheating (current UNC debacle), NCAA penalties (ie Syracuse sanctions) and not being invited to the NCAA tournament.

[Shocker1976]

I'm not sure I would establish blue blood status based solely on coaching. Tradition and sustained high level of success over a long period of time would be factors I would consider. I would get the same results you did, so maybe it's a moot point. However, surely Louisville needs to finally be added to the list of blue bloods.

To me, the term "elite" evokes a higher standing than "nationally prominent", but it appears your methodology does the opposite. When I think of elite teams, I think of teams that aren't quite blue bloods but are on the threshold, such as UConn or Michigan State. When I think of nationally prominent teams, I think of teams that are usually relevant in March and/or consistently top 25--Arizona, GTown, Michigan, Gonzaga, etc.

Just my $0.02. This thread will make a fascinating discussion no doubt!

I am in agreement that if Duke is a "Blue Blood" based on one coaches performance, then Louisville has to be a "Blue Blood" given what Denny Crum and Rick Pitino have accomplished since 1980 at Louisville.

[WstateU]

76
Soiree? Seriously? How about Party? Do you really talk like that? You sound like Bruce Heartl (vocabulary elitist). Well maybe if the shoe fits ............. J/K :)

Actually a good discussion.

Bruce's vocabulary is palpable.




...forgive me if the context isn't quite right. Since, he used that word every time he spoke, I just assumed it was like a "wild card" word that means basically anything and applies in all situations :)

Insert 'Little Johnny' joke here...

A teacher asks her students to give her a sentence with the word "fascinate" in it. A little girl says, "Walt Disney World is fascinating." The teacher says, "No, I said, fascinate." Another little girl says, "There's so much fascination when it comes to sea life." The teacher again says, "No, the word is fascinate." Little Johnny yells from the back of the room, "My mom has such big boobs that she can only fasten eight of the 10 buttons on her shirt."

[Shocker1976]

76
Soiree? Seriously? How about Party? Do you really talk like that? You sound like Bruce Heartl (vocabulary elitist). Well maybe if the shoe fits ............. J/K :)

Actually a good discussion.

In the South when the "Southern Belles" host an evening function held at one of their Plantation Homes for purposes of conversation and listening to live music, they call the event a Soiree. No beer and chips were served and the "gentlemen" attending the event had to withdraw to a separate room to smoke their cigars and engage in sports conversation.

This Kansas boy raised on a wheat farm was expecting Rhett Butler to appear with brandy and cuban cigars, lol!:calm:

[Dave Stalwart]

In the South when the "Southern Belles" host an evening function held at one of their Plantation Homes for purposes of conversation and listening to live music, they call the event a Soiree. No beer and chips were served and the "gentlemen" attending the event had to withdraw to a separate room to smoke their cigars and engage in sports conversation.

This Kansas boy raised on a wheat farm was expecting Rhett Butler to appear with brandy and cuban cigars, lol!:calm:

That sounds like a great kind of party. I'm adding Soiree to my vocabulary. The fun would be palpable...

[ShockdaWorld]

That sounds like a great kind of party. I'm adding Soiree to my vocabulary. The fun would be palpable...

Word of the day...