UConn is such an under appreciated Blue Blood…

#126
#126
NashVol11 said:
Your own words. This comparison is a crime against humanity
Click to expand...
Yeah I know. KU has 2 less titles in twice the time. And they play Big 12 schedules and not Big East.

You obviously didn't get the meaning of the post, homer. THat in no way said Conn is better than KU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brockytop
#128
#128
GVF said:
BTW, where was Kansas this year while Conn was winning their 6th title, and 2nd back to back ?? Righhhttt...Watching the tourney with UK after the 2nd round.
Click to expand...
Winning a title and immediately trying to trash talk Kansas is probably part of why people think UConn fans are annoying
 
#130
#130
GVF said:
And they've only been D1 since the inception of the Big East in the late 70's.
Click to expand...
GVF said:
UCONN's D1 history only goes to 1979.
Click to expand...
GVF said:
Why has it took them 85 years of NCAA dances to win 4 titles and only took UCONN 45 to get 6 when they moved up to D1
Click to expand...
GVF said:
KU has 2 less titles in twice the time.
Click to expand...
This is made up. UConn has been playing basketball since 1901 and was in the 1951 NCAA Tournament, for example. They didn't join D-1 in 1979 lol
 
#131
#131
NashVol11 said:
You're proving mine when "your points" that "don't matter" are just a teenager screaming RINGZ!!!!!!!

Final Fours matter though, right? Wins matter, right? Not being 19-12 every year matters, right? Or are you doing the exact thing you're complaining about
Click to expand...
do they?

At some point you have to admit that the Ringzzz matter more than FF, or 30 win seasons. Every single school, every single fanbase would absolutely trade a 30 win FF season for a 25 win Championship season.

The wins and FF only matter when you don't win. Its a d*ck measuring contest, while someone else takes home the super model. Like Georgia having a perfect season this year, no one cares. they didn't make the playoffs, they didn't win a championship. no one cares unless you bring home a ring.

Championships matter more. will always matter more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GVF
#132
#132
LouderVol said:
do they?

At some point you have to admit that the Ringzzz matter more than FF, or 30 win seasons. Every single school, every single fanbase would absolutely trade a 30 win FF season for a 25 win Championship season.

The wins and FF only matter when you don't win. Its a d*ck measuring contest, while someone else takes home the super model. Like Georgia having a perfect season this year, no one cares. they didn't make the playoffs, they didn't win a championship. no one cares unless you bring home a ring.

Championships matter more. will always matter more.
Click to expand...
Like I said earlier, Duke isn't Duke just because of 5 seasons. Being a contender year in and year out instead of being a 19-13 8 seed or NIT team half the time is absolutely a part of that.

Indiana has more championships than Kansas and no one in their right mind would say Indiana is more of a blue blood
 
#133
#133
NashVol11 said:
Like I said earlier, Duke isn't Duke just because of 5 seasons. Being a contender year in and year out instead of being a 19-13 8 seed or NIT team half the time is absolutely a part of that.

Indiana has more championships than Kansas and no one in their right mind would say Indiana is more of a blue blood
Click to expand...
So what you're really saying is KU is a blue blood that can't win championships like they should.
 
#134
#134
NashVol11 said:
Also said this lol. Man just discovered basketball in like 2010
Click to expand...
That was a counter to you saying the same about UCONN and the year of their first title. Devil's advocate. You're in HS or MS ??

Either way you're DAF and a KU homer.
 
#135
#135
NashVol11 said:
You're proving mine when "your points" that "don't matter" are just a teenager screaming RINGZ!!!!!!!

Final Fours matter though, right? Wins matter, right? Not being 19-12 every year matters, right? Or are you doing the exact thing you're complaining about
Click to expand...
How many coaches in all sports have lost jobs because they did win, and won alot, just not the right games. Like championships, and conference titles, and big rivals. Happens all the time.
 
#137
#137
NashVol11 said:
This is made up. UConn has been playing basketball since 1901 and was in the 1951 NCAA Tournament, for example. They didn't join D-1 in 1979 lol
Click to expand...
Told you I wasn't into BB and that I'm just in this cause you're a douche and I was just countering you're garbage with your same garbage. End of day...UCONN 6...KU 4...Duke 5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanbill
#139
#139
GVF said:
That was a counter to you saying the same about UCONN and the year of their first title. Devil's advocate. You're in HS or MS ??

Either way you're DAF and a KU homer.
Click to expand...
But you didn’t even know Kansas had a title before 1988 lol. Hard to say that and then accuse others of being in middle school
 
#141
#141
NashVol11 said:
But you didn’t even know Kansas had a title before 1988 lol. Hard to say that and then accuse others of being in middle school
Click to expand...
I did know they only had 4 and that's sad considering their total wins and #trips to final four.
 
#143
#143
NashVol11 said:
Like I said earlier, Duke isn't Duke just because of 5 seasons. Being a contender year in and year out instead of being a 19-13 8 seed or NIT team half the time is absolutely a part of that.

Indiana has more championships than Kansas and no one in their right mind would say Indiana is more of a blue blood
Click to expand...
So you would consider Duke a Blue Blood? Duke was Duke cause of Coach K. He was in a league all his own. Maybe Dean Smith with him.

Duke all-time win percentage 2273-920 (.712) 5 NC
Coach K Era 1129-309 (.785) 5 NC
Historical w/o Coach K 1144-611 (.652) 0 NC

By your assertions, if one coach or one era does not/cannot define a blue blood then Duke can only be considered mediocre sans Coach K.

Don't get me wrong I watched CBB because of Coack K and Dean Smith. But let's be real. Anybody other than Coack K goes to Duke in 1980...
 
Last edited:
#144
#144
GVF said:
So you would consider Duke a Blue Blood? Duke was Duke cause of Coach K. He was in a league all his own. Maybe Dean Smith with him.

Duke all-time win percentage 2273-920 (.712) 5 NC
Coach K Era 1129-309 (.785) 5 NC
Historical w/o Coach K 1144-611 (.652) 0 NC

By your assertions, if one coach or one era does not/cannot define a blue blood then Duke can only be considered mediocre sans Coach K.
Click to expand...
Your cherry-picked .652 is still better than UConn’s winning percentage but it’s “mediocre” 😭
 
#145
#145
NashVol11 said:
Your cherry-picked .652 is still better than UConn’s winning percentage but it’s “mediocre” 😭
Click to expand...
So your saying Duke would have 5 NC's and be in top 10 all time without Coach K? They had Zero before Coach K. And a bit above average win%. They certainly wouldn't be 4th. Everything you say that makes a blue blood over their history only started for Duke in 1980. They only had 4 final fours before Coach K. Only 7 NCAA appearances prior to Coach K. Using your own requirements one can say Duke basketball as we know it never came on the scene as a true power until 1980. And they've been darn good at it since, but your definition of a blue blood prohibits Duke from being a blue blood.

My very first comment on the subject was I didn't get this blue blood stuff cause they had just got their 6th title in 25 years, and then you went all offended on me. There are as many opinions as there are people. I don't have a dog in the hunt. I don't like UCONN. I barely tolerate BB in general. Watching golf is way more fun.
 
#146
#146
GVF said:
So your saying Duke would have 5 NC's and be in top 10 all time without Coach K? They had Zero before Coach K. And a bit above average win%. They certainly wouldn't be 4th. Everything you say that makes a blue blood over their history only started for Duke in 1980. They only had 4 final fours before Coach K. Only 7 NCAA appearances prior to Coach K. Using your own requirements one can say Duke basketball as we know it never came on the scene as a true power until 1980. And they've been darn good at it since, but your definition of a blue blood prohibits Duke from being a blue blood.

My very first comment on the subject was I didn't get this blue blood stuff cause they had just got their 6th title in 25 years, and then you went all offended on me. There are as many opinions as there are people. I don't have a dog in the hunt. I don't like UCONN. I barely tolerate BB in general. Watching golf is way more fun.
Click to expand...
.652 which would be top 10 is “a bit above average” while UConn’s .644 which is lower than Murray State is blue blood material, people talking just to talk
your definition of a blue blood prohibits Duke from being a blue blood.
Click to expand...
My definition was top-5 in wins, titles, FFs and win percentage and Duke is all of those things. I need to stop getting dragged into nonsensical ramblings from people who don’t follow the sport
 
#147
#147
NashVol11 said:
.652 which would be top 10 is “a bit above average” while UConn’s .644 which is lower than Murray State is blue blood material, people talking just to talk

My definition was top-5 in wins, titles, FFs and win percentage and Duke is all of those things. I need to stop getting dragged into nonsensical ramblings from people who don’t follow the sport
Click to expand...

1. .652-.644 = .08 edge to Duke ( To be Fair Murray State = OVC. UCONN = Big East. Mighty different schedule.)

2. Only since 1980, Not historical. Without Coach K, Duke's appearances dwindle dramatically, and their titles disappear completely. New coach off to pretty good start if he can get deeper in the tourney.

3. Never said I don't follow the sport (though not an expert). Just said I don't watch it or particularly care for it. It's not my thing per se. Using Quigly as an analogy. Never said I didn't know how to use a pistol. Just said I don't have a need for one.

4. This nonensical rambling began with your inability to see any further than your own opinion/definition and the need to voice that. I just kept countering your attack with their accomplishments the last 25 years being pretty dang elite. I just happen to think any team in any sport that can post 6 titles over a 25 year run is pretty elite and blue blood. No one else comes close in that time frame, especially with multiple coaches.
 
#148
#148
GVF said:
1. .652-.644 = .08 edge to Duke ( To be Fair Murray State = OVC. UCONN = Big East. Mighty different schedule.)
Click to expand...
You are cherrypicking to remove Duke's most successful 40-year period and stack the deck in UConn's favor and they still lose. Saying .08 is dishonest as hell. If you remove UConn's last 40 years or even remove just Calhoun they're likely .600 or below.
GVF said:
2. Only since 1980, Not historical.
Click to expand...
Again, this is just a lie. Duke is top-5 in all of those measures period, not "since 1980".
GVF said:
3. Never said I don't follow the sport (though not an expert). Just said I don't watch it or particularly care for it.
Click to expand...
Someone who doesn't watch CBB or particularly care for it is comparing UConn to Kansas and trying every method of dishonest cherry-picking possible to compare them to Duke. Proving my point as to why this is a complete waste of time
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top