(09-20-2020 10:05 PM)johnintx Wrote:  Agreed that Kentucky, UNC, Duke, and KU are bluebloods.

My school, Oklahoma, is not a blueblood, but is not chopped liver. OU, since 1949, has 29 NCAA appearances and 19 top 25 rankings. Oklahoma State is listed above in a third tier, while Oklahoma has more NCAA appearances and more top 25 rankings. Oklahoma leads the all-time series 140-100. The only thing OSU has on OU is two national championships from 1944 and 1945, during World War II and when the NCAA tournament was a new event. OU basketball fans especially take pride in this, as OU is a football school where basketball is second banana. OSU is considered a basketball school, and OU leads them in all historical categories except national championships (1988 vs. KU will always hurt).

Again, we're not a blueblood, but we're a top 20-30 all-time basketball program. And we're on at least the same level as Oklahoma State, if not higher.

I definitely agree that they are at least on the same level as OK State.

Glad that you wrote to make sure Oklahoma gets added to the mix. I'll update the categories I didn't have time to include every school, but let's update it now:

Marquette (33 NCAA bids; 20 top 25 teams since 1955)
Utah (29 NCAA bids; 20 top 25 teams since 1949)
Purdue (30 NCAA bids; 19 top 25 teams since 1955)
Oklahoma (29 NCAA bids; 19 top 25 teams since 1949)

- - (gap) - -

Oklahoma State (28 NCAA bids; 17 top 25 teams since 1949)
NC State (25 NCAA bids; 17 top 25 teams since 1949)

Oklahoma's all-time accomplishments are very nearly as impressive as Utah's and Purdue's, and not far behind Marquette's. I consider Marquette a blueblood of the "legends" type, and had suggested that Purdue ("current elite") and Utah ("legends") might be viewed by some as "marginal" bluebloods. In Purdue's case, they meet the "current elite" criteria so fully that it may be considered problematic to keep them out of the ranks of the bluebloods.

Applying those criteria the Sooners' all-time accomplishments are so close behind those of Purdue and Utah that Oklahoma would probably belong in the same "marginal" or "possible" blueblood category with those two schools.

An almost equally persuasive case could be made that Oklahoma might fit better into either the "very recent or current elite" or "legends" category, because they don't fit perfectly into one or the other.

Perhaps the categorizations would be simpler if there were 3, rather than only 2 types of BB "blueblood" schools: (a) Current elite, (b) recent elite, and © "legends." In that case, Oklahoma would belong in the "recent elite" group as a "marginal" or "possible" blueblood.

The term "possible" blueblood may be more appropriate than "marginal," because the way BB programs are regarded tends to change from year to year.

In other words, if Oklahoma were to make a few NCAA appearances and to finish in the AP Top 20 a couple more times by 2006, they might well begin to be considered by more and more fans to be consensus BB bluebloods of the "current elites" type.