"Blue Blood" Replacement Criteria

[upj87]

Duke, North Carolina, Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana, and UCLA seem to be universally considered college basketball's Blue Blood programs. If 6 programs is the written in stone number, how does UCONN go about having Indiana justifiably removed from this list such that they take their rightful place on it?

 

[PittMan2003]

Duke, North Carolina, Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana, and UCLA seem to be universally considered college basketball's Blue Blood programs. If 6 programs is the written in stone number, how does UCONN go about having Indiana justifiably removed from this list such that they take their rightful place on it?

I don't see UCLA and Indiana as blue bloods anymore. They are far too removed from winning titles. UCLA last won in 95 and Indiana hasn't won one since 87. UCONN is as much of a blue blood as these schools if not more these days.

 

[pittchagg]

I think the nature of “blue blood” either in football or basketball is that it’s a status that you don’t really ever lose.

 

[upj87]

I don't see UCLA and Indiana as blue bloods anymore. They are far too removed from winning titles. UCLA last won in 95 and Indiana hasn't won one since 87. UCONN is as much of a blue blood as these schools if not more these days.

Championships not the only criteria...Near champions (ie final fours) over a couple decades keeps your status afloat...No comparison between UCLA and Indiana in this regard. UCLA has four final four appearances since 2006 compared to Indiana's none and a more recent national championship...

 

[Upg bobcat]

I think the nature of “blue blood” either in football or basketball is that it’s a status that you don’t really ever lose.

You do lose it though, at least once you get a generation or two out. I'm sure there are many folks from the pre-WWII era that still considered some Ivy schools as blue bloods for football through the 50s, and into the 60s and 70s ... nobody considers them blue bloods now.

I find it interesting that two Indiana schools are probably in the conversation of no longer being blue bloods ... ND in football and Indiana in basketball.

 

[PittMan2003]

Championships not the only criteria...Near champions (ie final fours) over a couple decades keeps your status afloat...No comparison between UCLA and Indiana in this regard. UCLA has four final four appearances since 2006 compared to Indiana's none and a more recent national championship...

Yeah, I think you’re right about recency to an extent. UCLA is definitely above Indiana and they definitely have more all time cache.

 

[thebadby2]

I think the nature of “blue blood” either in football or basketball is that it’s a status that you don’t really ever lose.

Exactly--blue blood status is based on history and tradition, not what you've done for me lately. That's why Notre Dame and USC are football bluebloods for example, while Clemson and Oklahoma never will be, despite being far more successful programs in modern times.

 

[CaptainMurphy]

Indiana isn’t a blue blood anymore. UCLA probably isn’t either but they’ve had more success over the last 20 years.

 

[Gep Dawg]

I think true blue bloods win national championships under multiple coaches. UNC, Kentucky, UCONN have all done that. UCLA, Louisville, and Villanova have done it the era of TV. Indiana has done it but on Knight since TV made sports a big deal.

For all its success the once school who hasn't yet proven it is Duke. They did make a couple of final fours and then lose the NCAA championship game a couple years before Coach K. But it will be interesting to see if Duke can climb the mountain and win more national championships in the next 20-30 years.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

Indiana Basketball = Nebraska Football

 

[Gep Dawg]

Exactly--blue blood status is based on history and tradition, not what you've done for me lately. That's why Notre Dame and USC are football bluebloods for example, while Clemson and Oklahoma never will be, despite being far more successful programs in modern times.

Um I agree with your point but Oklahoma absolutely is a blue blood. The have won 7 nationals titles across numerous decades (1950, 1955, 1956, 1974, 1986 and 2000) and 7 Heisman winners across the same time frame. There also third all time being ranked and being ranked number one all time. They line win 10 games every year and have been in almost of the the 4 game playoffs since it started.

They are as blue blood as you can get.

 

[Pitt2009]

I think true blue bloods win national championships under multiple coaches. UNC, Kentucky, UCONN have all done that. UCLA, Louisville, and Villanova have done it the era of TV. Indiana has done it but on Knight since TV made sports a big deal.

For all its success the once school who hasn't yet proven it is Duke. They did make a couple of final fours and then lose the NCAA championship game a couple years before Coach K. But it will be interesting to see if Duke can climb the mountain and win more national championships in the next 20-30 years.

I agree with this. Duke is not a Blue Blood and Kansas is the bluest of bloods going strictly by the definition. If you’re looking at a college basketball royalty family tree, you trace it from Kansas with James Naismith and move down to Adolph Rupp and Dean Smith taking Kansas’ basketball to Kentucky and UNC.

 

[303vND]

I don't see UCLA and Indiana as blue bloods anymore. They are far too removed from winning titles. UCLA last won in 95 and Indiana hasn't won one since 87. UCONN is as much of a blue blood as these schools if not more these days.

I agree regarding Indiana - but UCLA is absolutely still a blue blood.

 

[upj87]

I agree with this. Duke is not a Blue Blood and Kansas is the bluest of bloods going strictly by the definition. If you’re looking at a college basketball royalty family tree, you trace it from Kansas with James Naismith and move down to Adolph Rupp and Dean Smith taking Kansas’ basketball to Kentucky and UNC.

"going strictly by the definition"...which does not apply to the college basketball analogy of the term...longevity of continued success over a long long period of time is the general standard in sports and noble birth has nothing to do with it if said success is not ongoing...
Saying Duke who has made final 4's in the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's, 10's and 20's is not a blue blood program because James Naismith did not deliver them out of his whoo-ha borders on the absurd...

 

[Pitt2009]

"going strictly by the definition"...which does not apply to the college basketball analogy of the term...longevity of continued success over a long long period of time is the general standard in sports and noble birth has nothing to do with it if said success is not ongoing...
Saying Duke who has made final 4's in the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's, 10's and 20's is not a blue blood program because James Naismith did not deliver them out of his whoo-ha borders on the absurd...

Fair enough

 

[Pitt2009]

Indiana Basketball = Nebraska Football

I agree to an extent but Indiana can get back to a championship level with the right coach. Nebraska will never be the Nebraska of old.

 

[PITTstorm]

I agree to an extent but Indiana can get back to a championship level with the right coach. Nebraska will never be the Nebraska of old.

This makes no sense.

 

[Pitt2009]

This makes no sense.

Please explain.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

I agree to an extent but Indiana can get back to a championship level with the right coach. Nebraska will never be the Nebraska of old.

It’s been 21 years since they last made a Final 4 and 36 years since they won a title.

 

[Pitt2009]

It’s been 31 years since they last made a Final 4 and 36 years since they won a title.

Your math is off but point taken.

 

[str61166]

Exactly--blue blood status is based on history and tradition, not what you've done for me lately. That's why Notre Dame and USC are football bluebloods for example, while Clemson and Oklahoma never will be, despite being far more successful programs in modern times.

Agree on Clemson but disagree on Oklahoma never being a blue blood. Top 5-10 in most major categories and only 5 programs have more all-time wins (and Notre Dame only has 4 more).

 

[BballinsiderfromPitt]

It’s been 31 years since they last made a Final 4 and 36 years since they won a title.

Weren’t they in the championship in 2002 with Mike freaking Davis as head coach?

If Kelvin Sampson doesn’t get a show cause for text messages they probably have 2 titles in the last 20 years.

 

[Sam Young 23]

Agree Kelvin had IU rolling

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

UConn has been as good or better than anyone. But my definition of blue blood goes beyond that. Its whether or not your program has a national reach and turns on TV sets and fills arena with bandwagon fans in other regions of the country. Its Duke, UNC, Kentucky, and Kansas. That's it. UCLA was another but after Wooden, they lost that national status. A big problem of theirs is they werent real good when TV started doing a lot of games so they never gained that bandwagon fan base. Duke built its bandwagon fanbase largely due to TV in the 80s and 90s

 

[Pitt79]

I don't see UCLA and Indiana as blue bloods anymore. They are far too removed from winning titles. UCLA last won in 95 and Indiana hasn't won one since 87. UCONN is as much of a blue blood as these schools if not more these days.

THIS^^^

 

[Pitt79]

UConn has been as good or better than anyone. But my definition of blue blood goes beyond that. Its whether or not your program has a national reach and turns on TV sets and fills arena with bandwagon fans in other regions of the country. Its Duke, UNC, Kentucky, and Kansas. That's it. UCLA was another but after Wooden, they lost that national status. A big problem of theirs is they werent real good when TV started doing a lot of games so they never gained that bandwagon fan base. Duke built its bandwagon fanbase largely due to TV in the 80s and 90s

Indiana hasn't been really big time since Bobby Knight left for the most part.

 

[happjack]

Indiana hasn't been really big time since Bobby Knight left for the most part.

They stopped being big time while he was still there, his last 6 seasons they were bounced in the 1st round four times and twice in the 2nd round.

 

[JS School]

Having a well known movie named Hoosiers doesn't hurt. The general public's perception probably matters more than expert opinion.

 

[MarshallGoldberg]

I do think you can lose blue blood status in extreme examples -- the Ivy League in football for instance. But it by definition would have to be a very slow process. Indiana as people are mostly agreeing is the furthest along in that process.

Villanova and UConn are clearly the tops of "new wealth" but UConn may have just taken the overall edge.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

What's kind of amazing is since 1999, the other 350 teams are only leading UConn 19-5 in national titles. What's equally amazing is that 3 of those UConn teams really werent that great but got hot and got easy paths.

 

[Pitt79]

What's kind of amazing is since 1999, the other 350 teams are only leading UConn 19-5 in national titles. What's equally amazing is that 3 of those UConn teams really werent that great but got hot and got easy paths.

But you still have to have the players to win the "easy" path, we had teams that where 1 overall seeds, you'd think we had some easy paths too.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

But you still have to have the players to win the "easy" path, we had teams that where 1 overall seeds, you'd think we had some easy paths too.

Pitt only had a few easy paths. The Kent State loss and the Bradley loss. When we were a 1 seeds, we lost to an 8 who lost in the National Championship the year before and made the Final Four again. The other time, we lost to a 3 seed who beat us in the regular season. I was rooting so hard for Duke to beat Nova because I felt Nova was the much tougher game.

UConn's paths were some of the easiest in history. But credit to them for winning the games that mattered.