Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
College Basketball Tiers
Author Message
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 44,725
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1628
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #221
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(11-21-2020 09:58 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  
(11-20-2020 04:30 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(11-19-2020 10:30 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  
(11-19-2020 08:18 PM)schmolik Wrote:  CBS Sports ranked their best teams

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...-all-time/

1. Kentucky
2. North Carolina
3. Duke
4. UCLA
5. Kansas

The author developed a real complex formula to calculate an order for best programs. His top 5 programs stand-out for having many more points than the next tier. These top 5 seem to be the universal “blue bloods”.

The points formula calculates performance evenly over the past 80 years. Would probably be better if success over the past 40 years (since the NCAA tournament was expanded) was weighted more heavily.

I disagree, because the CBS article is focusing on the GREATEST TEAMS OF ALL-TIME.

The issue is that success over the past 40 years is not as compelling as "all-time" success AND WHAT EVERYONE WANTS THE MOST IS TO BE ONE OF THE GREATEST TEAMS OF "ALL-TIME" (i.e., the truest of the true "blue bloods").

Anyone who wants to compile a list of the greatest teams over the past 40 years is, of course, free to do so, as could anyone who wants to compile a list of the greatest over the past 10 or 20 or 30 years, or over the past 50 or 75 years, or since the first NCAA tournament was held. But all of these are arbitrary dates, and all of them will only capture a segment of the audience (e.g., the past 40 years list would appeal mainly to people who are 16 to 50 years old).

The farther back the list goes in time, the more interesting it tends to be.

Why? Because most people are fascinated with the history of the game, and all the interesting and wonderful things that happened in those fabled times.

Also, because the older that you get, the more fascinated you're going to be with our nation's history. I guarantee it!
I believe that the criteria of success in college basketball really changed when the NCAA decided to expand the tournament. Specifically, the expanded tournament made college basketball into a big business. The NCAA made incredible monies on media rights and needed to distribute the wealth. It encouraged universities to align into conferences so that it could “systematically” select tournament participants and distribute revenues.

In my hometown, the Big 5 competition was the big deal...but the standard of success quickly transformed to conference alignment. For Villanova, winning the Big East and being selected for the NCAA tournament are now major annual goals.

For the elite, blue bloods, the expanded role of the NCAA only had modest impact. UK, UNC, KU, UCLA and Duke have always targeted national recruits, competition and branding. Their focus had already shifted from the NIT to the NCAA post season a few decades earlier.

The impact of the expanded NCAA tournament was on the tier below the blue bloods. The classic example is the 1974 Maryland Terrapins...who I believe were one of the top 2 teams in the entire nation. Yet these Terps get zero points for winning their conference, zero points making the NCAA tournament and zero points for making the Final Four.

The author is using today’s standard of basketball excellence and retroactively applying it to an age where it didn’t apply. Admittedly, I’m not as familiar with the storied history of schools like Western Kentucky. I’m surprised that schools like Maryland, Virginia and Florida didn’t score much higher.

Florida is a Johnny come lately. Its all Billy Donovan, the former Pitino disciple, playing at Providence and being an assistant at UK.
11-23-2020 11:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 44,725
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1628
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #222
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(11-21-2020 10:07 AM)schmolik Wrote:  
(11-21-2020 09:58 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  
(11-20-2020 04:30 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(11-19-2020 10:30 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  
(11-19-2020 08:18 PM)schmolik Wrote:  CBS Sports ranked their best teams

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...-all-time/

1. Kentucky
2. North Carolina
3. Duke
4. UCLA
5. Kansas

The author developed a real complex formula to calculate an order for best programs. His top 5 programs stand-out for having many more points than the next tier. These top 5 seem to be the universal “blue bloods”.

The points formula calculates performance evenly over the past 80 years. Would probably be better if success over the past 40 years (since the NCAA tournament was expanded) was weighted more heavily.

I disagree, because the CBS article is focusing on the GREATEST TEAMS OF ALL-TIME.

The issue is that success over the past 40 years is not as compelling as "all-time" success AND WHAT EVERYONE WANTS THE MOST IS TO BE ONE OF THE GREATEST TEAMS OF "ALL-TIME" (i.e., the truest of the true "blue bloods").

Anyone who wants to compile a list of the greatest teams over the past 40 years is, of course, free to do so, as could anyone who wants to compile a list of the greatest over the past 10 or 20 or 30 years, or over the past 50 or 75 years, or since the first NCAA tournament was held. But all of these are arbitrary dates, and all of them will only capture a segment of the audience (e.g., the past 40 years list would appeal mainly to people who are 16 to 50 years old).

The farther back the list goes in time, the more interesting it tends to be.

Why? Because most people are fascinated with the history of the game, and all the interesting and wonderful things that happened in those fabled times.

Also, because the older that you get, the more fascinated you're going to be with our nation's history. I guarantee it!
I believe that the criteria of success in college basketball really changed when the NCAA decided to expand the tournament. Specifically, the expanded tournament made college basketball into a big business. The NCAA made incredible monies on media rights and needed to distribute the wealth. It encouraged universities to align into conferences so that it could “systematically” select tournament participants and distribute revenues.

In my hometown, the Big 5 competition was the big deal...but the standard of success quickly transformed to conference alignment. For example, Villanova winning the Big East and being selected for the NCAA tournament are now major annual goals.

For the elite, blue bloods, the expanded role of the NCAA only had modest impact. UK, UNC, KU, UCLA and Duke have always targeted national recruits, competition and branding. Their focus had already shifted from the NIT to the NCAA post season a few decades earlier.

The impact of the expanded NCAA tournament was on the tier below the blue bloods. The classic example is the 1974 Maryland Terrapins...who I believe were one of the top 2 teams in the entire nation. Yet these Terps get zero points for winning their conference, zero points making the NCAA tournament and zero points for making the Final Four.

The author is using today’s standard of basketball excellence and retroactively applying it to an age where it didn’t apply. Admittedly, I’m not as familiar with the storied history of schools like Western Kentucky. I’m surprised that schools like Maryland, Virginia and Florida didn’t score much higher.

That's why although they say "greatest of all time" I will never respect the champions before the expansion of the tournament as much as the teams today. Sure it was a great accomplishment for John Wooden to win all those tournaments. No way he wins seven straight national championships today. Nine of his ten championships UCLA only had to win four games to win the title and nine of his ten championships only one team per conference were allowed to make it in. Imagine if only one ACC, one Big Ten, one Big East, etc, made the NCAA Tournament vs. the multiple teams from those conferences today.

Those UCLA teams would have won. He was that far ahead of everyone else. An extra 2 games wouldn't have stopped him.

Now where it is more difficult now has been broached by several others. With the money, there are more strong programs. UCLA had no competition in the west except for maybe the WAC champ. The midwest was some of the Big 8 schools and MVC schools. The Mideast was tough with Marquette, several Big 10 schools and Kentucky. The East did have a number of strong programs between the ACC and eastern independents.
11-23-2020 11:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TexanMark Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,279
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 938
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: St. Augustine, FL
Post: #223
RE: College Basketball Tiers
Syracuse at #11 is a joke. They should be no worse than #9. Owning attendance records and 50 years of winning seasons has to mean something more than awarding points for winning sh!t conferences.
11-23-2020 12:09 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,428
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 175
I Root For: VUMemIUDePaulNC
Location: Tower Crane Town
Post: #224
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(11-23-2020 10:46 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  
(11-23-2020 10:06 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(11-22-2020 11:52 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(11-22-2020 11:27 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  A league breakdown for Norlander/CBS Sports Top 68 all-time men's hoops programs (counted based on program membership as of 2020-21)

As to be expected, the seven major conferences offer the most programs.

Tie

1. ACC and Big Ten: 10 programs

Tie

3. Big East and SEC: Eight programs

Tie

5. Big 12 and Pac-12: Six programs

7. American: five programs



Others

8. West Coast (WCC): Three programs

Tie

9. A10, C-USA, Ivy and Mountain West (MWC): Two programs



Four other schools included in the top 68, one each from mid-major league

True:

20 of the "greatest 68" are from non-P5/non-BE conferences

ACC: #10 Cincy, #24 Temple, #34 Memphis, #42 Houston, #60 Wichita St.

WCC: #32 Gonzaga (WCC), #36 BYU (WCC), #50 San Francisco (WCC)

A-10: #45 St. Joseph's & #49 Dayton

C-USA: #21 WKU & #62 UTEP

MWC: #30 UNLV, #63 Utah State

Ivy League: #37 Princeton, #47 Penn

Ohio Valley Conference: #44 Murray State

Missouri Valley Conference: #57 Bradley (MVC)

Big Sky Conference: #61 Weber State

WAC: #64 New Mexico State


Jed,

Another strong program not on the list: New Mexico of the Mountain West. Kind of a surprise.

New Mexico had a real nice program back in 70s. The Pit was one of the toughest places to win at. Jim Boehiem had one his first huge wins there in late 1977. At Louisville in 1976 was his first big win as HC.

Sat about 18K for basketball. Fun fact: one of the last small arenas to host the Final Four (1983)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pit_(arena)

Interesting tidbit about UNM having hosted a Final Four.
11-23-2020 12:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,428
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 175
I Root For: VUMemIUDePaulNC
Location: Tower Crane Town
Post: #225
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(11-23-2020 11:42 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(11-21-2020 10:07 AM)schmolik Wrote:  
(11-21-2020 09:58 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  
(11-20-2020 04:30 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(11-19-2020 10:30 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  The author developed a real complex formula to calculate an order for best programs. His top 5 programs stand-out for having many more points than the next tier. These top 5 seem to be the universal “blue bloods”.

The points formula calculates performance evenly over the past 80 years. Would probably be better if success over the past 40 years (since the NCAA tournament was expanded) was weighted more heavily.

I disagree, because the CBS article is focusing on the GREATEST TEAMS OF ALL-TIME.

The issue is that success over the past 40 years is not as compelling as "all-time" success AND WHAT EVERYONE WANTS THE MOST IS TO BE ONE OF THE GREATEST TEAMS OF "ALL-TIME" (i.e., the truest of the true "blue bloods").

Anyone who wants to compile a list of the greatest teams over the past 40 years is, of course, free to do so, as could anyone who wants to compile a list of the greatest over the past 10 or 20 or 30 years, or over the past 50 or 75 years, or since the first NCAA tournament was held. But all of these are arbitrary dates, and all of them will only capture a segment of the audience (e.g., the past 40 years list would appeal mainly to people who are 16 to 50 years old).

The farther back the list goes in time, the more interesting it tends to be.

Why? Because most people are fascinated with the history of the game, and all the interesting and wonderful things that happened in those fabled times.

Also, because the older that you get, the more fascinated you're going to be with our nation's history. I guarantee it!
I believe that the criteria of success in college basketball really changed when the NCAA decided to expand the tournament. Specifically, the expanded tournament made college basketball into a big business. The NCAA made incredible monies on media rights and needed to distribute the wealth. It encouraged universities to align into conferences so that it could “systematically” select tournament participants and distribute revenues.

In my hometown, the Big 5 competition was the big deal...but the standard of success quickly transformed to conference alignment. For example, Villanova winning the Big East and being selected for the NCAA tournament are now major annual goals.

For the elite, blue bloods, the expanded role of the NCAA only had modest impact. UK, UNC, KU, UCLA and Duke have always targeted national recruits, competition and branding. Their focus had already shifted from the NIT to the NCAA post season a few decades earlier.

The impact of the expanded NCAA tournament was on the tier below the blue bloods. The classic example is the 1974 Maryland Terrapins...who I believe were one of the top 2 teams in the entire nation. Yet these Terps get zero points for winning their conference, zero points making the NCAA tournament and zero points for making the Final Four.

The author is using today’s standard of basketball excellence and retroactively applying it to an age where it didn’t apply. Admittedly, I’m not as familiar with the storied history of schools like Western Kentucky. I’m surprised that schools like Maryland, Virginia and Florida didn’t score much higher.

That's why although they say "greatest of all time" I will never respect the champions before the expansion of the tournament as much as the teams today. Sure it was a great accomplishment for John Wooden to win all those tournaments. No way he wins seven straight national championships today. Nine of his ten championships UCLA only had to win four games to win the title and nine of his ten championships only one team per conference were allowed to make it in. Imagine if only one ACC, one Big Ten, one Big East, etc, made the NCAA Tournament vs. the multiple teams from those conferences today.

Those UCLA teams would have won. He was that far ahead of everyone else. An extra 2 games wouldn't have stopped him.

Now where it is more difficult now has been broached by several others. With the money, there are more strong programs. UCLA had no competition in the west except for maybe the WAC champ. The midwest was some of the Big 8 schools and MVC schools. The Mideast was tough with Marquette, several Big 10 schools and Kentucky. The East did have a number of strong programs between the ACC and eastern independents.


It is also worth noting that UCLA had Black players (typically at least four per team per season) in the mid- to late-1960s. The SEC and ACC teams of that era had zero. If fact, many programs of that era nationwide lacked African-American players.

So you combine the genius of John Wooden with top-notch Black players and UCLA likely was going to win the NCAA title even if it had required winning 10 straight games.

Now, by the early to mid-1970s, the dynamic began to change. Full racial integration was unfolding and college hoops was becoming a "big deal," thus yielding the need for more quality coaches.

I know a lot of Indiana fans will argue Bob Knight is the greatest ever, and as a long-time Hoosier fan, I tremendously respected The General's success (while admitting he had multiple negative personality traits).

But John Wooden is the GOAT in my book.
11-23-2020 01:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Captain Bearcat Offline
All-American in Everything
*

Posts: 6,864
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 487
I Root For: UC
Location: IL & Cincinnati, USA
Post: #226
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(11-20-2020 09:15 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(11-20-2020 05:26 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  
(11-20-2020 05:02 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(11-19-2020 08:18 PM)schmolik Wrote:  CBS Sports ranked their best teams

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...-all-time/

1. Kentucky
2. North Carolina
3. Duke
4. UCLA
5. Kansas

My Cincinnati Bearcats come in at #10.

Here are the metrics used by CBS:


NCAA Tournament championships (20 points)
Final Four appearances without a national title (10 points)
Regular-season titles (5 points)
Elite Eights without making the Final Four (3 points)
NIT titles (3 points)
NCAA Tournament bids (2 points)
Wins (0.5 points)
Losses (-0.5 points)
Wins over ranked opponents (0.5 points)
Weeks ranked (0.1 point)
Top-10 NBA picks (5 points)
11-30 NBA picks (3 points)
31-60 NBA picks (1 point)

The top 25

1. Kentucky
2. North Carolina
3. Duke
4. UCLA
5. Kansas
6. Louisville
7. Indiana
8. UConn
9. Villanova
10. Cincinnati
11. Syracuse
12. Ohio State
13. Arizona
14. Michigan State
15. Illinois
16. Utah
17. St. John's
18. Michigan
19. North Carolina St
20. Georgetown
21. Western Kentucky
22. Arkansas
23. Notre Dame
24. Temple
25. Oklahoma St

I would still place North Carolina ahead of Kentucky.

No one has pissed away more talent than John Calipari the last decade. One title with nearly 40 McDonald’s All Americans. That’s nearly 4 per team per season and he has one title to show for it.

The NCAA and the sports media kisses Calipari’s backside when someone should be calling Calipari out for underachieving.


C-Jim,

I'm a North Carolina fan, but I would not be so quick to reverse UK and UNC. Based on the formula the journalist used, Kentucky simply came out on top. I'm cool with that.

As to Cal, I often feel he unfairly gets a bad rap and has not "underachieved" as much as you and other fans contend. But that's subjective, admittedly.

Also, despite Kentucky underachieving under Cal, Kentucky still has outperformed UNC in the last 10 years:

National Titles: UK 1, UNC 1
Final Fours: UK 4, UNC 2
Sweet 16: UK 8, UNC 6
NCAA tourney bids: UK 9, UNC 9 (Also, UNC would not have made 2020 tourney)

On the bottom side, here are the worst seasons:
UNC 14-19 (2020)
UNC 20-17 (2010) (16-16 regular season before going to NIT championship)
Kentucky 21-12 (2013)
UNC 24-10 (2014)
UNC 25-11 (2013)
Kentucky 26-11 (2018)
11-23-2020 01:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,428
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 175
I Root For: VUMemIUDePaulNC
Location: Tower Crane Town
Post: #227
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(11-23-2020 01:50 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(11-20-2020 09:15 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(11-20-2020 05:26 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  
(11-20-2020 05:02 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(11-19-2020 08:18 PM)schmolik Wrote:  CBS Sports ranked their best teams

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...-all-time/

1. Kentucky
2. North Carolina
3. Duke
4. UCLA
5. Kansas

My Cincinnati Bearcats come in at #10.

Here are the metrics used by CBS:


NCAA Tournament championships (20 points)
Final Four appearances without a national title (10 points)
Regular-season titles (5 points)
Elite Eights without making the Final Four (3 points)
NIT titles (3 points)
NCAA Tournament bids (2 points)
Wins (0.5 points)
Losses (-0.5 points)
Wins over ranked opponents (0.5 points)
Weeks ranked (0.1 point)
Top-10 NBA picks (5 points)
11-30 NBA picks (3 points)
31-60 NBA picks (1 point)

The top 25

1. Kentucky
2. North Carolina
3. Duke
4. UCLA
5. Kansas
6. Louisville
7. Indiana
8. UConn
9. Villanova
10. Cincinnati
11. Syracuse
12. Ohio State
13. Arizona
14. Michigan State
15. Illinois
16. Utah
17. St. John's
18. Michigan
19. North Carolina St
20. Georgetown
21. Western Kentucky
22. Arkansas
23. Notre Dame
24. Temple
25. Oklahoma St

I would still place North Carolina ahead of Kentucky.

No one has pissed away more talent than John Calipari the last decade. One title with nearly 40 McDonald’s All Americans. That’s nearly 4 per team per season and he has one title to show for it.

The NCAA and the sports media kisses Calipari’s backside when someone should be calling Calipari out for underachieving.


C-Jim,

I'm a North Carolina fan, but I would not be so quick to reverse UK and UNC. Based on the formula the journalist used, Kentucky simply came out on top. I'm cool with that.

As to Cal, I often feel he unfairly gets a bad rap and has not "underachieved" as much as you and other fans contend. But that's subjective, admittedly.

Also, despite Kentucky underachieving under Cal, Kentucky still has outperformed UNC in the last 10 years:

National Titles: UK 1, UNC 1
Final Fours: UK 4, UNC 2
Sweet 16: UK 8, UNC 6
NCAA tourney bids: UK 9, UNC 9 (Also, UNC would not have made 2020 tourney)

On the bottom side, here are the worst seasons:
UNC 14-19 (2020)
UNC 20-17 (2010) (16-16 regular season before going to NIT championship)
Kentucky 21-12 (2013)
UNC 24-10 (2014)
UNC 25-11 (2013)
Kentucky 26-11 (2018)


Interesting stats. And they suggest Cal (who often gets unfairly criticized) has been "better" the past 10 years than Roy Williams. I give John C. full credit.
11-23-2020 02:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardinalJim Offline
Welcome to The New Age
*

Posts: 10,897
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 1254
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Staffordsville, KY
Post: #228
RE: College Basketball Tiers
I still believe North Carolina should be ahead of Kentucky.

UNC has got it done playing in a “basketball conference” while many of Kentucky’s wins were against SEC teams who used intramural level basketball talent to pass the time between the only two seasons that really matter in The SEC: football and spring practice.
11-23-2020 03:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wahoowa84 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 440
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 68
I Root For: UVa
Location:
Post: #229
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(11-23-2020 11:38 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(11-21-2020 09:58 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  
(11-20-2020 04:30 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(11-19-2020 10:30 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  
(11-19-2020 08:18 PM)schmolik Wrote:  CBS Sports ranked their best teams

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...-all-time/

1. Kentucky
2. North Carolina
3. Duke
4. UCLA
5. Kansas

The author developed a real complex formula to calculate an order for best programs. His top 5 programs stand-out for having many more points than the next tier. These top 5 seem to be the universal “blue bloods”.

The points formula calculates performance evenly over the past 80 years. Would probably be better if success over the past 40 years (since the NCAA tournament was expanded) was weighted more heavily.

I disagree, because the CBS article is focusing on the GREATEST TEAMS OF ALL-TIME.

The issue is that success over the past 40 years is not as compelling as "all-time" success AND WHAT EVERYONE WANTS THE MOST IS TO BE ONE OF THE GREATEST TEAMS OF "ALL-TIME" (i.e., the truest of the true "blue bloods").

Anyone who wants to compile a list of the greatest teams over the past 40 years is, of course, free to do so, as could anyone who wants to compile a list of the greatest over the past 10 or 20 or 30 years, or over the past 50 or 75 years, or since the first NCAA tournament was held. But all of these are arbitrary dates, and all of them will only capture a segment of the audience (e.g., the past 40 years list would appeal mainly to people who are 16 to 50 years old).

The farther back the list goes in time, the more interesting it tends to be.

Why? Because most people are fascinated with the history of the game, and all the interesting and wonderful things that happened in those fabled times.

Also, because the older that you get, the more fascinated you're going to be with our nation's history. I guarantee it!
I believe that the criteria of success in college basketball really changed when the NCAA decided to expand the tournament. Specifically, the expanded tournament made college basketball into a big business. The NCAA made incredible monies on media rights and needed to distribute the wealth. It encouraged universities to align into conferences so that it could “systematically” select tournament participants and distribute revenues.

In my hometown, the Big 5 competition was the big deal...but the standard of success quickly transformed to conference alignment. For Villanova, winning the Big East and being selected for the NCAA tournament are now major annual goals.

For the elite, blue bloods, the expanded role of the NCAA only had modest impact. UK, UNC, KU, UCLA and Duke have always targeted national recruits, competition and branding. Their focus had already shifted from the NIT to the NCAA post season a few decades earlier.

The impact of the expanded NCAA tournament was on the tier below the blue bloods. The classic example is the 1974 Maryland Terrapins...who I believe were one of the top 2 teams in the entire nation. Yet these Terps get zero points for winning their conference, zero points making the NCAA tournament and zero points for making the Final Four.

The author is using today’s standard of basketball excellence and retroactively applying it to an age where it didn’t apply. Admittedly, I’m not as familiar with the storied history of schools like Western Kentucky. I’m surprised that schools like Maryland, Virginia and Florida didn’t score much higher.

Florida is a Johnny come lately. Its all Billy Donovan, the former Pitino disciple, playing at Providence and being an assistant at UK.

Norm Sloan (2 stints sandwiching an excellent run at NC State), Lon Kruger and Mike White were/are also very good coaches. Florida has been very good for many decades. Billy Donovan took the Gators to the top, but the program has been very solid for a long time.

It’s only when judging the Gators against the standard of the Kentucky Wildcats that they fall short.
11-23-2020 04:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,428
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 175
I Root For: VUMemIUDePaulNC
Location: Tower Crane Town
Post: #230
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(11-23-2020 03:44 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  I still believe North Carolina should be ahead of Kentucky.

UNC has got it done playing in a “basketball conference” while many of Kentucky’s wins were against SEC teams who used intramural level basketball talent to pass the time between the only two seasons that really matter in The SEC: football and spring practice.


There is some truth to watch you say, C-Jim. But it's worth noting that many (perhaps even more than 75 percent) UNC and UofL fans strongly dislike UK (I'm not suggesting you do). As such, they likely struggle to give the Wildcat program full credit. I'm a Tar Heel fan and loosely root for Louisville (sister in law attended and maintains lots of friends who still live in Louisville). But I always try to be fair-minded about it. To me, the numbers give UK a slight advantage over UNC.
11-23-2020 04:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,428
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 175
I Root For: VUMemIUDePaulNC
Location: Tower Crane Town
Post: #231
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(11-23-2020 04:30 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  
(11-23-2020 11:38 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(11-21-2020 09:58 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  
(11-20-2020 04:30 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(11-19-2020 10:30 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  The author developed a real complex formula to calculate an order for best programs. His top 5 programs stand-out for having many more points than the next tier. These top 5 seem to be the universal “blue bloods”.

The points formula calculates performance evenly over the past 80 years. Would probably be better if success over the past 40 years (since the NCAA tournament was expanded) was weighted more heavily.

I disagree, because the CBS article is focusing on the GREATEST TEAMS OF ALL-TIME.

The issue is that success over the past 40 years is not as compelling as "all-time" success AND WHAT EVERYONE WANTS THE MOST IS TO BE ONE OF THE GREATEST TEAMS OF "ALL-TIME" (i.e., the truest of the true "blue bloods").

Anyone who wants to compile a list of the greatest teams over the past 40 years is, of course, free to do so, as could anyone who wants to compile a list of the greatest over the past 10 or 20 or 30 years, or over the past 50 or 75 years, or since the first NCAA tournament was held. But all of these are arbitrary dates, and all of them will only capture a segment of the audience (e.g., the past 40 years list would appeal mainly to people who are 16 to 50 years old).

The farther back the list goes in time, the more interesting it tends to be.

Why? Because most people are fascinated with the history of the game, and all the interesting and wonderful things that happened in those fabled times.

Also, because the older that you get, the more fascinated you're going to be with our nation's history. I guarantee it!
I believe that the criteria of success in college basketball really changed when the NCAA decided to expand the tournament. Specifically, the expanded tournament made college basketball into a big business. The NCAA made incredible monies on media rights and needed to distribute the wealth. It encouraged universities to align into conferences so that it could “systematically” select tournament participants and distribute revenues.

In my hometown, the Big 5 competition was the big deal...but the standard of success quickly transformed to conference alignment. For Villanova, winning the Big East and being selected for the NCAA tournament are now major annual goals.

For the elite, blue bloods, the expanded role of the NCAA only had modest impact. UK, UNC, KU, UCLA and Duke have always targeted national recruits, competition and branding. Their focus had already shifted from the NIT to the NCAA post season a few decades earlier.

The impact of the expanded NCAA tournament was on the tier below the blue bloods. The classic example is the 1974 Maryland Terrapins...who I believe were one of the top 2 teams in the entire nation. Yet these Terps get zero points for winning their conference, zero points making the NCAA tournament and zero points for making the Final Four.

The author is using today’s standard of basketball excellence and retroactively applying it to an age where it didn’t apply. Admittedly, I’m not as familiar with the storied history of schools like Western Kentucky. I’m surprised that schools like Maryland, Virginia and Florida didn’t score much higher.

Florida is a Johnny come lately. Its all Billy Donovan, the former Pitino disciple, playing at Providence and being an assistant at UK.

Norm Sloan (2 stints sandwiching an excellent run at NC State), Lon Kruger and Mike White were/are also very good coaches. Florida has been very good for many decades. Billy Donovan took the Gators to the top, but the program has been very solid for a long time.

It’s only when judging the Gators against the standard of the Kentucky Wildcats that they fall short.


Good points, Wahoowa84.

But I've been following SEC hoops since about 1972. And from that points until roughly the early 1990s, most Florida fans had minimal interest in the program.

So even though Gator hoops were probably better than given credit during that era, the program suffered from lack of attention and passion. Billy D. changed the dynamic.
11-23-2020 04:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
schmolik Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,209
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation: 40
I Root For: UIUC, PSU, Nova
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
Post: #232
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(11-23-2020 03:44 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  I still believe North Carolina should be ahead of Kentucky.

UNC has got it done playing in a “basketball conference” while many of Kentucky’s wins were against SEC teams who used intramural level basketball talent to pass the time between the only two seasons that really matter in The SEC: football and spring practice.

Now you know even more why I say Kentucky and Clemson should switch conferences. Not only would UNC and UK play in men's basketball and UK and Duke as well (is it 1992 again?) but UK and UL would be a conference game! They could be as big as UNC-Duke!
(This post was last modified: 11-23-2020 04:40 PM by schmolik.)
11-23-2020 04:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 44,725
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1628
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #233
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(11-23-2020 04:35 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(11-23-2020 03:44 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  I still believe North Carolina should be ahead of Kentucky.

UNC has got it done playing in a “basketball conference” while many of Kentucky’s wins were against SEC teams who used intramural level basketball talent to pass the time between the only two seasons that really matter in The SEC: football and spring practice.


There is some truth to watch you say, C-Jim. But it's worth noting that many (perhaps even more than 75 percent) UNC and UofL fans strongly dislike UK (I'm not suggesting you do). As such, they likely struggle to give the Wildcat program full credit. I'm a Tar Heel fan and loosely root for Louisville (sister in law attended and maintains lots of friends who still live in Louisville). But I always try to be fair-minded about it. To me, the numbers give UK a slight advantage over UNC.

And nobody gives the SEC credit for how good they were starting in the 80s. Haven't been particularly strong the last 4 or 5 years, but were the 30 years in between. Florida has a couple MNCs. Georgia went to the final 4 with Dominique Wilkins. Auburn had Chuck Person and Charles Barkley (on the same team!). Alabama had some good teams. LSU made it to the final 4. Tennessee was always strong. Arkansas won a title in the SEC.
11-23-2020 08:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardinalJim Offline
Welcome to The New Age
*

Posts: 10,897
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 1254
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Staffordsville, KY
Post: #234
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(11-23-2020 04:38 PM)schmolik Wrote:  
(11-23-2020 03:44 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  I still believe North Carolina should be ahead of Kentucky.

UNC has got it done playing in a “basketball conference” while many of Kentucky’s wins were against SEC teams who used intramural level basketball talent to pass the time between the only two seasons that really matter in The SEC: football and spring practice.

Now you know even more why I say Kentucky and Clemson should switch conferences. Not only would UNC and UK play in men's basketball and UK and Duke as well (is it 1992 again?) but UK and UL would be a conference game! They could be as big as UNC-Duke!

There was actually some discussion about Kentucky joining The ACC. CM Newton spoke quietly with The ACC a few years ago.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...o-the-acc/
Yesterday 11:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,428
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 175
I Root For: VUMemIUDePaulNC
Location: Tower Crane Town
Post: #235
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(11-23-2020 08:41 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(11-23-2020 04:35 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(11-23-2020 03:44 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  I still believe North Carolina should be ahead of Kentucky.

UNC has got it done playing in a “basketball conference” while many of Kentucky’s wins were against SEC teams who used intramural level basketball talent to pass the time between the only two seasons that really matter in The SEC: football and spring practice.


There is some truth to watch you say, C-Jim. But it's worth noting that many (perhaps even more than 75 percent) UNC and UofL fans strongly dislike UK (I'm not suggesting you do). As such, they likely struggle to give the Wildcat program full credit. I'm a Tar Heel fan and loosely root for Louisville (sister in law attended and maintains lots of friends who still live in Louisville). But I always try to be fair-minded about it. To me, the numbers give UK a slight advantage over UNC.

And nobody gives the SEC credit for how good they were starting in the 80s. Haven't been particularly strong the last 4 or 5 years, but were the 30 years in between. Florida has a couple MNCs. Georgia went to the final 4 with Dominique Wilkins. Auburn had Chuck Person and Charles Barkley (on the same team!). Alabama had some good teams. LSU made it to the final 4. Tennessee was always strong. Arkansas won a title in the SEC.


I would not use "nobody," bullet. But your general point is sound. SEC hoops in the 1980s were likely better than many folks either 1. were willing to admit or 2. realized.
Yesterday 12:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardinalJim Offline
Welcome to The New Age
*

Posts: 10,897
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 1254
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Staffordsville, KY
Post: #236
RE: College Basketball Tiers
Just read where former WKU Coach Johnny Oldham passed away yesterday. He was the WKU coach when they beat UK 107 - 83.

Knowing that Coach Rupp had told Oldham he wasn’t good enough to play at UK made that victory sweeter for the WKU Coach. Rupp retired the next season.
Yesterday 01:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,428
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 175
I Root For: VUMemIUDePaulNC
Location: Tower Crane Town
Post: #237
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(Yesterday 01:14 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Just read where former WKU Coach Johnny Oldham passed away yesterday. He was the WKU coach when they beat UK 107 - 83.

Knowing that Coach Rupp had told Oldham he wasn’t good enough to play at UK made that victory sweeter for the WKU Coach. Rupp retired the next season.

Worth noting: He was 97 and an ex-military man. May his memory always humble us.

From NYTimes and WKU Herald off Wiki:

The 1971 Western Kentucky Hilltoppers NCAA Final-4 basketball team was the first Kentucky collegiate basketball team to start five African-American players. Coach Oldham started Clarence Glover, Jim McDaniels, Jim Rose, Jerry Dunn and Rex Bailey. Oldham was highly pressured not to start all five together, but said "they are my best five players."[7][8]
(This post was last modified: Yesterday 03:57 PM by bill dazzle.)
Yesterday 03:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardinalJim Offline
Welcome to The New Age
*

Posts: 10,897
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 1254
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Staffordsville, KY
Post: #238
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(Yesterday 03:57 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(Yesterday 01:14 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Just read where former WKU Coach Johnny Oldham passed away yesterday. He was the WKU coach when they beat UK 107 - 83.

Knowing that Coach Rupp had told Oldham he wasn’t good enough to play at UK made that victory sweeter for the WKU Coach. Rupp retired the next season.

Worth noting: He was 97 and an ex-military man. May his memory always humble us.

From NYTimes and WKU Herald off Wiki:

The 1971 Western Kentucky Hilltoppers NCAA Final-4 basketball team was the first Kentucky collegiate basketball team to start five African-American players. Coach Oldham started Clarence Glover, Jim McDaniels, Jim Rose, Jerry Dunn and Rex Bailey. Oldham was highly pressured not to start all five together, but said "they are my best five players."[7][8]

My buddy played for Oldham at WKU from ‘66 - ‘68. He was a starting guard on the ‘67 team that made the Elite 8. They had 5 starters drafted by the NBA and ABA.

That team had Clem Haskins, who played in the NBA and would go on to coach at WKU, Wayne Chapman (Rex Chapman’s Dad) who played in the NBA and would coach at Kentucky Wesleyan, Greg Smith that played in the NBA for nearly 10 seasons. Dwight Smith and my buddy Butch Kaufman, both also got drafted by the NBA and ABA.

I don’t recall any UofL or UK teams have had 5 starters drafted into the pro leagues. Coach Oldham was a heck of a coach. The game lost an amazing talent. RIP Coach Oldham
Yesterday 06:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,428
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 175
I Root For: VUMemIUDePaulNC
Location: Tower Crane Town
Post: #239
RE: College Basketball Tiers
(Yesterday 06:45 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  
(Yesterday 03:57 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(Yesterday 01:14 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Just read where former WKU Coach Johnny Oldham passed away yesterday. He was the WKU coach when they beat UK 107 - 83.

Knowing that Coach Rupp had told Oldham he wasn’t good enough to play at UK made that victory sweeter for the WKU Coach. Rupp retired the next season.

Worth noting: He was 97 and an ex-military man. May his memory always humble us.

From NYTimes and WKU Herald off Wiki:

The 1971 Western Kentucky Hilltoppers NCAA Final-4 basketball team was the first Kentucky collegiate basketball team to start five African-American players. Coach Oldham started Clarence Glover, Jim McDaniels, Jim Rose, Jerry Dunn and Rex Bailey. Oldham was highly pressured not to start all five together, but said "they are my best five players."[7][8]

My buddy played for Oldham at WKU from ‘66 - ‘68. He was a starting guard on the ‘67 team that made the Elite 8. They had 5 starters drafted by the NBA and ABA.

That team had Clem Haskins, who played in the NBA and would go on to coach at WKU, Wayne Chapman (Rex Chapman’s Dad) who played in the NBA and would coach at Kentucky Wesleyan, Greg Smith that played in the NBA for nearly 10 seasons. Dwight Smith and my buddy Butch Kaufman, both also got drafted by the NBA and ABA.

I don’t recall any UofL or UK teams have had 5 starters drafted into the pro leagues. Coach Oldham was a heck of a coach. The game lost an amazing talent. RIP Coach Oldham


Interesting info, C-Jim. Thanks for sharing.
Yesterday 07:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: DFW HOYA, 2 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.