UConn is such an under appreciated Blue Blood…

#51
#51
Or hey, said differently:

Duke
2,300 wins (4th)
.712 win % (4th)
17 Final Fours (T-3rd)
5 national titles (T-5th)

UConn
1,837 wins (23rd)
.645 win % (11th)
7 Final Fours (10th)
6 national titles (T-3rd)

“uCoNn Is LiKe DuKe” lol. Is UConn a better program than Kansas too because only titles matter?
 
Last edited:
#52
#52
NashVol11 said:
Or hey, said differently:

Duke
2,300 wins (4th)
.712 win % (4th)
17 Final Fours (T-3rd)
5 national titles (T-5th)

UConn
1,837 wins (23rd)
.645 win % (11th)
7 Final Fours (10th)
6 national titles (T-3rd)

“uCoNn Is LiKe DuKe” lol
Click to expand...
Leaving UCLA on the board but not allowing UConn onto the board is simply moronic. It’s like saying Emmitt Smith is the greatest RB of all time
 
#53
#53
volfanbill said:
Leaving UCLA on the board but not allowing UConn onto the board is simply moronic. It’s like saying Emmitt Smith is the greatest RB of all time
Click to expand...
Leave in UCLA, take them out, do whatever you want, none of it will make UConn a blue blood lol
 
#55
#55
volfanbill said:
So now you’re moving the limit to what 75 years? Or just locking the doors for blue bloods for the rest of eternity?
Click to expand...
How is that a limit or lock? Duke won its first title in 1991 and is a blue blood, because they have the 2300+ wins and 15+ Final Fours and .700+ winning percentage to belong there unlike UConn.

Claiming UConn (and Indiana) has now passed Kansas because national championships are the sole barometer is not any more reasonable lol
 
#56
#56
NashVol11 said:
How is that a limit or lock? Duke won its first title in 1991 and is a blue blood, because they have the 2300+ wins and 15+ Final Fours and .700+ winning percentage to belong there unlike UConn
Click to expand...
OkAy.

UConn has six natties spanning 25 years via 3 coaches. Unlike Duke, whom I actually have a thing for
 
#58
#58
NashVol11 said:
That’s a big accomplishment. Doesn’t have to make them a blue blood but ESPN is looking for storylines
Click to expand...
And just about any other college basketball insider. But they’re not “old” so they can’t garner proper attention. Got it
 
  • Like
Reactions: brockytop
#61
#61
volfanbill said:
And just about any other college basketball insider. But they’re not “old” so they can’t garner proper attention. Got it
Click to expand...
Duke isn’t “old” either other than 4 Final Fours in the 60s. UConn hasn’t had the same consistent success and that’s okay
 
#62
#62
SGMVols said:
Who really gives a damn what schools were winning 70 years ago when all the players were white and only 8 teams even got a chance to play in the NCAAT?
Click to expand...
We could cut it off at 1980 or even 1990 and UConn would still trail Kentucky/Duke/Kansas/UNC in wins, Final Fours and winning percentage in that period too. UConn’s case as a “blue blood” consists of looking at only one category and blowing it up into the only thing that matters
 
#65
#65
NashVol11 said:
So based on “the” category, Indiana is more of a blue blood than Kansas. Right?

…right?

Lol
Click to expand...
Conveniently forgetting a large portion of my argument is relative to current time. But nice move when you’ve got so little.
 
#66
#66
volfanbill said:
Conveniently forgetting a large portion of my argument is relative to current time. But nice move when you’ve got so little.
Click to expand...
“So little” meaning “literally everything other than the casual fan ‘ringz’ argument” 😭😭
 
#68
#68
SGMVols said:
Duke didn’t win their first title until 1991 and everybody agrees they’re a blue blood. UConn is a blue blood now. You will see when Hurley decides to turn down more money from Kentucky to stay there.
Click to expand...

Titles aren't the only piece of it. Duke moves the meter more than any school. They get the highest profile players. They get the most media coverage. Love them or hate them, people care about Duke, and it's been that way for almost 40 years. Nobody cares that much about UConn. They're not in a relevant conference. They don't have relevant rivals. They don't have famous players.

If any of the actual blue bloods just won back-to-back natty's, it'd be a story that gets way more attention.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11 and RDU VOL#14
#69
#69
n_huffhines said:
Titles aren't the only piece of it. Duke moves the meter more than any school. They get the highest profile players. They get the most media coverage. Love them or hate them, people care about Duke, and it's been that way for almost 40 years. Nobody cares that much about UConn. They're not in a relevant conference. They don't have relevant rivals. They don't have famous players.

If any of the actual blue bloods just won back-to-back natty's, it'd be a story that gets way more attention.
Click to expand...
And somewhat related to your point, Duke didn’t become Duke just because of the 5 seasons where they won titles. Having a bunch of 1-seed seasons and 30+ win seasons and 17 Final Fours is a big part of it. If UConn isn’t winning a title, more often than not they have double digit losses and lose early
 
#70
#70
NashVol11 said:
To your point, Duke didn’t become Duke just because of the 5 seasons where they won titles. Having a bunch of 1-seed seasons and 30+ win seasons and 17 Final Fours is a big part of it. If UConn isn’t winning a title, more often than not they have double digit losses and lose early
Click to expand...

Their all-time all-NBA team...I love Ray Allen. One of my top 5 favorite players, but when he's by far your best pro ever, and there are no good ones currently in the league, you're not on the same tier as Kentucky, Duke, UNC, and Kansas.

Kemba Walker
Rip Hamilton
Ray Allen
Donyell Marshall
Cliff Robinson
 
#71
#71
05_never_again said:
The tournament itself is a crap shoot. Making it 20 years in a row with no title is more impressive than a team that made it 50% of the time, but won a couple of titles.
Click to expand...

You are off your rocker. The tournament is played to be won and not just compete in, especially for major programs.
 
#73
#73
NashVol11 said:
Or hey, said differently:

Duke
2,300 wins (4th)
.712 win % (4th)
17 Final Fours (T-3rd)
5 national titles (T-5th)

UConn
1,837 wins (23rd)
.645 win % (11th)
7 Final Fours (10th)
6 national titles (T-3rd)

“uCoNn Is LiKe DuKe” lol. Is UConn a better program than Kansas too because only titles matter?
Click to expand...

UConn isn’t like Duke—they have more national titles.
 
#74
#74
brockytop said:
You are off your rocker. The tournament is played to be won and not just compete in, especially for major programs.
Click to expand...

If you make the tournament every year for 20 years in a conference like the ACC, then that is probably a stronger indicator of your program's status than how many titles you have in that same span. To give you an idea of how hard that is, not one ACC team even has 5 straight years appearing in the NCCAT right now. Only 2 schools in the entire country have more than 8 straight appearances. On the other hand, 6 schools have multiple titles in the last 20 years.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top