50 Greatest Programs of All-Time

duckboy33

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2009
39,049
11,905
113
Eugene, OR
Team
Oregon
Let's compare the numbers for Kansas State and Iowa.

NCAA Tournaments: 31-26, K-State leads
Sweet 16's: 17-8, K-State leads
Elite 8's: 13-4, K-State leads
Final 4's: 4-3, K-State leads
Title Games: 1-1, Tie
Conference Titles: 12-6, K-State leads

The numbers are not very close. No objective person would say that Iowa has accomplished more than Kansas State. So, either you're being obtuse, or you're just wildly lazy with how you examine actual data.
Kansas State's program is far superior
 

Yellow Man

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 15, 2001
12,685
69
48
Might make sense if the NCAA wasn't so arbitrary with how they enforce the rule-breakers.

And a school is already punished for being placed on probation. Kentucky, for example, won the SEC outright with a 14-4 record in 1991. But, Miss. State and LSU, who both finished at 13-5, are given credit for being the regular season champs.
You have done a wonderful job (with a lot or work) on this. One thing I want throw out there... Before segregation in the South a lot of SEC schools would not participate in the NCAA Tournament. Several years UK went when other schools would not. I don't know if that would impact your ratings any more than UNC creating classes for athletes and acting like they are as pure as the driven snow though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dukedevilz

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2002
4,920
6,234
113
You have done a wonderful job (with a lot or work) on this. One thing I want throw out there... Before segregation in the South a lot of SEC schools would not participate in the NCAA Tournament. Several years UK went when other schools would not. I don't know if that would impact your ratings any more than UNC creating classes for athletes and acting like they are as pure as the driven snow though.
This is true. Don't know if it would materially effect the numbers. I think Mississippi State was hit the hardest. They won the SEC in '59, '61, and '62. They didn't compete in the NCAAT in any of those years. Easily could have been a Final Four team that was competing for a national title.
 

Bert Higginbotha

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jan 9, 2003
17,751
3,488
113
Smiths Grove, Kentucky
kentucky.rivals.com
This is true. Don't know if it would materially effect the numbers. I think Mississippi State was hit the hardest. They won the SEC in '59, '61, and '62. They didn't compete in the NCAAT in any of those years. Easily could have been a Final Four team that was competing for a national title.
Mississippi State did not win the SEC in 1962. They shared the title with UK.

Kentucky is not responsible for racism in Mississippi.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dukedevilz

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2002
4,920
6,234
113
Mississippi State did not win the SEC in 1962. They shared the title with UK.

Kentucky is not responsible for racism in Mississippi.
Didn't say they won it outright, but it's still an SEC Title. And I think they would have received the automatic bid, as they had the head-to-head edge on Kentucky.

Still gotta feel for that program a little. They were ranked #3 in the final poll in '59, and #4 in '62. Those are the only two years in program history where they finished in the top five. So, I think they suffered more than any other program from the segregation laws.
 

Bert Higginbotha

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jan 9, 2003
17,751
3,488
113
Smiths Grove, Kentucky
kentucky.rivals.com
Didn't say they won it outright, but it's still an SEC Title. And I think they would have received the automatic bid, as they had the head-to-head edge on Kentucky.

Still gotta feel for that program a little. They were ranked #3 in the final poll in '59, and #4 in '62. Those are the only two years in program history where they finished in the top five. So, I think they suffered more than any other program from the segregation laws.
As I said it was not Kentucky's problem and no I don't feel for them.

Why did they turn down the invite? We know the answer. It is not UK's fault that they did not go, so they screwed themselves.

What about the other 45 UK titles?
 

Yellow Man

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 15, 2001
12,685
69
48
This is true. Don't know if it would materially effect the numbers. I think Mississippi State was hit the hardest. They won the SEC in '59, '61, and '62. They didn't compete in the NCAAT in any of those years. Easily could have been a Final Four team that was competing for a national title.
Bailey Howell was a great player at MSU. Bama stayed home at lease once that I remember. I think... Hell, I'm old...
 
Last edited:

Yellow Man

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 15, 2001
12,685
69
48
As I said it was not Kentucky's problem and no I don't feel for them.

Why did they turn down the invite? We know the answer. It is not UK's fault that they did not go, so they screwed themselves.

What about the other 45 UK titles?
Well, you do have to feel sorry for the players. They were denied a trip of a lifetime. I would bet if you polled them and every individual associated with the program they didn't agree with the decisions a bunch of politicians made.
 

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2002
4,920
6,234
113
Colorado has been to 6 Elite 8's and 2 Final Fours - and they still didn't make the cut for the top 50. A pedestrian program over the course of a half century will do that to you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yellow Man

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2002
4,920
6,234
113
Maryland had some great teams when Lefty was there. Problem was UNC, Duke, and Virginia were really good also. JMO, but they have to be close to top 25.
Maryland obviously would have had a good run in '74 (that was the only time they had a top 10 team to miss the tournament). Their complete body of work over the past 80 years isn't overly impressive, however. They've only been to the Elite 8 four times (73, 75, 01, 02). A lot of the same players on the 73 & 75 squads - and the 01 & 02 squads. No other school in my top 25 has less than six Elite 8 appearances. They've been in the top 10 of the final AP Poll just 8 times. Certainly a very competitive basketball school, they've just not been elite for long periods of time.
 

Yellow Man

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 15, 2001
12,685
69
48
Maryland obviously would have had a good run in '74 (that was the only time they had a top 10 team to miss the tournament). Their complete body of work over the past 80 years isn't overly impressive, however. They've only been to the Elite 8 four times (73, 75, 01, 02). A lot of the same players on the 73 & 75 squads - and the 01 & 02 squads. No other school in my top 25 has less than six Elite 8 appearances. They've been in the top 10 of the final AP Poll just 8 times. Certainly a very competitive basketball school, they've just not been elite for long periods of time.
That ACC tournament knocked a lot of good teams out of the tournament back in the day. Some of those schools played great basketball all year, stumbled in the tournament and stayed home.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bert Higginbotha

Yellow Man

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 15, 2001
12,685
69
48
That ACC tournament knocked a lot of good teams out of the tournament back in the day. Some of those schools played great basketball all year, stumbled in the tournament and stayed home.
I'm gonna bump this up. I think that from 1950 until around 1970 the NCAA tournament was an exclusive deal. There were a lot of schools that had great teams, but to qualify was far more diificult than today's, watered down bunch of posers.

I do know that Kentucky State University (an NAIA school at that time) had Travis Grant, and Elmore Smith. They went something like 33-0. Beat the dog crap of any team put in front of them, and both guys ended up in the NBA. Grant was 6'8" and if he passed mid-court would kill you with a jumper. Ended up playing serverl year in the league. Elmore would not allow a shot anywhere near the paint. 7 foot, ran like a deer and had a lot of bad ass. At one time he held the single game shot blocking record for the NBA.

I went to Frankfort, KY to watch them seveal times. No doubt they were the best team in Kentucky during their time there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GE Nole

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2002
4,920
6,234
113
I'm gonna bump this up. I think that from 1950 until around 1970 the NCAA tournament was an exclusive deal. There were a lot of schools that had great teams, but to qualify was far more diificult than today's, watered down bunch of posers.

I do know that Kentucky State University (an NAIA school at that time) had Travis Grant, and Elmore Smith. They went something like 33-0. Beat the dog crap of any team put in front of them, and both guys ended up in the NBA. Grant was 6'8" and if he passed mid-court would kill you with a jumper. Ended up playing serverl year in the league. Elmore would not allow a shot anywhere near the paint. 7 foot, ran like a deer and had a lot of bad ass. At one time he held the single game shot blocking record for the NBA.

I went to Frankfort, KY to watch them seveal times. No doubt they were the best team in Kentucky during their time there.
So back to Maryland, they really haven't missed out on that many opportunities. In 1954, they finished 20th in the AP Poll. With only 24 teams in the tournament, they would have been the underdog in just about every game. The ACC Champ also lost in the regional semifinals.

The 1972 Maryland team could have done damage. They finished 14th in the AP Poll. So maybe a Sweet 16 or Elite 8? Obviously the '74 team missing the tournament was a big deal, as that was largely the reason why multiple bids from the same conference were allowed in the NCAAT the next year. The '74 Maryland team was too good to not be in the tournament. Legitimate Final Four/Title contender. Overall, though, no. I wouldn't say missing the tournament three times, when ranked, has largely impacted Maryland's overall resume. A little bit, yes. But, they weren't consistently ranked.
 

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2002
4,920
6,234
113
I've added a few metrics to my database. It now includes NIT points, 2 points for a top 10 finish (AP Final Poll), 1 point for top 25, 1 point for a winning percentage of .800 or better, -1 for below .500, and -2 for below .300. Probably still not perfect, but it will do for now. I went 75-deep, just for the heck of it. I evaluated 90 teams total, so perhaps I'm missing a few teams in the 51-75 range.

Double-click on the screenshots to enlarge.





The above table doesn't explain how the NIT points were calculated. I included the NIT results for the years between 1939-1956. Here are the top 20 NIT teams from that period of time.

 

lurkeraspect84

Well-Known Member
Mar 4, 2014
20,548
17,388
113
Team
Kentucky
I've added a few metrics to my database. It now includes NIT points, 2 points for a top 10 finish (AP Final Poll), 1 point for top 25, 1 point for a winning percentage of .800 or better, -1 for below .500, and -2 for below .300. Probably still not perfect, but it will do for now. I went 75-deep, just for the heck of it. I evaluated 90 teams total, so perhaps I'm missing a few teams in the 51-75 range.

Double-click on the screenshots to enlarge.





The above table doesn't explain how the NIT points were calculated. I included the NIT results for the years between 1939-1956. Here are the top 20 NIT teams from that period of time.

Looks legit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dukedevilz

jace4655555

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2018
1,266
686
113
also, how much credit are you giving them for the majority of their conference championships, are from when they were in a 2nd, or 3rd tier conference like the Metro?

I'm just struggling to understand how they could have more points in the conference championship portion then IU does. When all of IU's was from the B1G, but almost all of UL's are from the Metro, or conference USA?
 

IUfanBorden

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2011
24,269
9,106
113
Team
Indiana
also, how much credit are you giving them for the majority of their conference championships, are from when they were in a 2nd, or 3rd tier conference like the Metro?

I'm just struggling to understand how they could have more points in the conference championship portion then IU does. When all of IU's was from the B1G, but almost all of UL's are from the Metro, or conference USA?
Don't sell the Metro Conference so short. It was a really good conference. UL, Cincy, Memphis, FLorida State ....Tulane, So.Miss, VaTech had some good teams. During its heyday, the Metro was consider a major conference...

Also, C-USA wasn't chopped liver, either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GE Nole

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2002
4,920
6,234
113
Question....why are you still giving UL credit for 3 championships?
I don't believe in revisionist history. All vacated stats are given full credit.

also, how much credit are you giving them for the majority of their conference championships, are from when they were in a 2nd, or 3rd tier conference like the Metro?

I'm just struggling to understand how they could have more points in the conference championship portion then IU does. When all of IU's was from the B1G, but almost all of UL's are from the Metro, or conference USA?
Conference champs from power conferences receive the full 5 points. If a conference champ from a non-power conference isn't a top 25 team - AND if there's not at least one other school that's in the top 25, then they only receive 4 points. Hence, Louisville actually had 13 points deducted. This was the 2nd post in the thread.

Conference Champions that weren't nationally ranked, and didn't have another conference member that was also ranked (1 point deduction):
28- Western Kentucky
22- Gonzaga
21- Saint Joseph's
20- UConn
19- BYU
17- Utah
16- Butler
15- Temple, San Francisco, Xavier
13- Louisville
12- West Virginia
11- UTEP
10- Cincinnati, Memphis
9- Wyoming
8- Arizona, Arizona State, UNLV, Wichita State
6- Loyola Chicago
4- Houston
3- Villanova, Dayton
2- Florida State, Baylor
 

Bert Higginbotha

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jan 9, 2003
17,751
3,488
113
Smiths Grove, Kentucky
kentucky.rivals.com
I don't believe in revisionist history. All vacated stats are given full credit.
Louisville won that title fair and square. In fact they won it after losing a man to a broken leg. If anyone doubts it I have most of those games on Bluray. Eyeroll

I suppose that is the only basketball title removed by the crooked NCAA. Many should have been if the same standards had been applied evenly. Whores, ACT tests, jewelry and academics are treated differently.