Basketball programs by tiers

[all4theillini]

What are your chances of winning a NC? Lolol

And your whole AD is dog shit.

I think we hung 60 + on your football team a couple years ago. RollLaugh

1) incomplete. If Ayo and Kofi return then quite good....heck of a lot better then ICJC

2) Lets assume UI’s AD is dog shit. Then why does UI own the historical series lead on Iowa in baseball, basketball AND football? Riddle me that.

3) nice deflection! Did you grow up playing goalie?

John Belushi was still alive and Diet Coke had not yet been invented since the mighty Hawkeyes made a FF.

 

[hawkit3113]

1) incomplete. If Ayo and Kofi return then quite good....heck of a lot better then ICJC

2) Lets assume UI’s AD is dog shit. Then why does UI own the historical series lead in Iowa in baseball, basketball AND football? Riddle me that.

3) nice deflection! Did you grow up playing goalie?

John Belushi was still alive and Diet Coke had no yet been invented since the mighty Hawkeyes made a FF.

The Illini are dog shit. RollLaugh

 

[dukedevilz]

Its time to move UCLA down .... if Indiana isnt in the top tier then UCLA shouldnt be either.

We need to look at this from a historical basis. The complete body of work. UCLA is better than Indiana in EVERY metric. Not close at all.

Tournament Appearances: UCLA leads 49-39
Round of 32: UCLA leads 27-23
Sweet 16: UCLA leads 34-22
Elite 8: UCLA leads 22-11
Final Four: UCLA leads 18-8
Title Games: UCLA leads 13-6
Championships: UCLA leads 11-5
Conference Championships: UCLA leads 31-19 (1939-present)
Top 10 seasons in final AP Poll: UCLA leads 26-17

Indiana is the best team in the second tier, but I wouldn't say they're that far ahead of Louisville. They have more titles than Louisville. However, UL has been to tournament more (43-39), the round of 32 more (31-23), the Sweet 16 more (28-22), the Elite more (14-11) and they've been to the Final Four more than Indiana (10-8). Indiana is much closer to being on par with Louisville than any of the 5 schools in tier 1, IMO.

 

[Fox Glove Tiger]

As a long time suffering Clemson basketball fan who went to my first game in person in 1976 (11 years old), sadly we are placed exactly where we should be.

Thank God for football.

 

[MileHighSpartan]

Michigan State hasn't even been close to having the stretch IU had under Knight let alone UCLA's success under Wooden. Hell they haven't won a title in over 20 years.

Actually, it's pretty close except for Knight winning 3 titles to Izzo's 1 (which is definitely a big factor). But I just looked it up and:

Knight: 29 seasons, 24x NCAA appearances, 3 National Titles (last title was 13 seasons before he left IU), 5x Final Fours, 11x B1G Reg Titles, and 0 BTT (but BTT only existed for his last 3 seasons at IU)

Izzo: 25 seasons, 22x NCAA appearances (would've been 23 if not for Covid19), 1 National Title, 8x Final Fours, 10x B1G Reg Titles, 6x BTT titles


Pretty similar stats, and Izzo still has 4 more seasons before he equals Knight's tenure at IU. Obviously the NCAA titles are the big difference here and give IU the edge, but I wouldn't really say it hasn't even been close. MSU's last title was 20 seasons ago, IU's last title was 33 years ago.

 

[SIhoosier26]

Actually, it's pretty close except for Knight winning 3 titles to Izzo's 1 (which is definitely a big factor). But I just looked it up and:

Knight: 29 seasons, 24x NCAA appearances, 3 National Titles (last title was 13 seasons before he left IU), 5x Final Fours, 11x B1G Reg Titles, and 0 BTT (but BTT only existed for his last 3 seasons at IU)

Izzo: 25 seasons, 22x NCAA appearances (would've been 23 if not for Covid19), 1 National Title, 8x Final Fours, 10x B1G Reg Titles, 6x BTT titles


Pretty similar stats, and Izzo still has 4 more seasons before he equals Knight's tenure at IU. Obviously the NCAA titles are the big difference here and give IU the edge, but I wouldn't really say it hasn't even been close. MSU's last title was 20 seasons ago, IU's last title was 33 years ago.

Agreed and I think Izzo is a great coach, but 2 more titles is a big deal and it should be, considering how hard they are to come by.

 

[1Tripoda]

Thoughts???

Is all of tier 3 teams won at least one National Championship? Tier won 2 NC’s? UConn program should be in tier one

 

[MileHighSpartan]

Agreed and I think Izzo is a great coach, but 2 more titles is a big deal and it should be, considering how hard they are to come by.

I agree, was just surprised that is was so close in nearly every other aspect.

I consider IU as a Tier 1 blueblood, even with a title drought. I also think that there should be a Tier between 1 and 2, as there are too many teams on Tier 2 that aren't up to par IMO.

Tier 1.5 should be: Nova, Louisville, UConn, MSU


Tier 2 can be the rest.

- Not sure Virginia should be on that T1.5 level (1 title, 3 F4 ever)

- Arkansas (1 title, good chunk of F4's - but literally haven't done anything since 1995)

- Arizona (1 title, 4 F4 all within a 13 year period and haven't been back to the F4 in 19+ years)

- Georgetown (1 title, last F4 was 35 years ago, only 4 conf titles in last 30 years)

- Florida (2 titles back to back, but entire resume falls within last 26 years and they were trash for the 80+ years prior to that)

 

[1Tripoda]

UNLV have 4 FF and a NC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNLV_Runnin'_Rebels

 

[1Tripoda]

I agree, was just surprised that is was so close in nearly every other aspect.

I consider IU as a Tier 1 blueblood, even with a title drought. I also think that there should be a Tier between 1 and 2, as there are too many teams on Tier 2 that aren't up to par IMO.

Tier 1.5 should be: Nova, Louisville, UConn, MSU
Florida need to be higher. Next to UNLV, the Horford and Joachi


Tier 2 can be the rest.

- Not sure Virginia should be on that T1.5 level (1 title, 3 F4 ever)

- Arkansas (1 title, good chunk of F4's - but literally haven't done anything since 1995)

- Arizona (1 title, 4 F4 all within a 13 year period and haven't been back to the F4 in 19+ years)

- Georgetown (1 title, last F4 was 35 years ago, only 4 conf titles in last 30 years)

- Florida (2 titles back to back, but entire resume falls within last 26 years and they were trash for the 80+ years prior to that)

 

[dukedevilz]

I included a few more metrics in my greatest programs of all-time database. Just for the heck of it, I went 75-deep. The thread is pinned, but here is the link to my updated figures.

 

[GE Nole]

I included a few more metrics in my greatest programs of all-time database. Just for the heck of it, I went 75-deep. The thread is pinned, but here is the link to my updated figures.

Is there any accounting for different number of years played? What if Team A has 250 points total across 70 years, but Team B has 245 points totaled across 50 years (maybe they didn’t join D1 until later). Wouldn’t Team B have a good argument for being “better” but just with 40% less time playing?

 

[dukedevilz]

Is there any accounting for different number of years played? What if Team A has 250 points total across 70 years, but Team B has 245 points totaled across 50 years (maybe they didn’t join D1 until later). Wouldn’t Team B have a good argument for being “better” but just with 40% less time playing?

There's not a perfect way to do this, obviously. FSU started playing in the 56-57 season, is that correct? My data begins in the 1938-39 season, to align with the inauguration of the NCAA Tournament. I'm open for suggestions, on how to refine this system, however.

So, FSU is missing out on 18 seasons. Yes, theoretically, you could be a little higher. It's also possible you'd have several losing seasons - and your cumulative score would be worse. As it was, the first 12 years of the NCAAT only had 8 schools qualify. The first time a school from the state of Florida made the tournament was in 1960. I'm doubtful FSU having an additional 18 years would have made much of a difference.

If there's any school that's being short-changed for a shorter history, it's UNLV. No question. Their first D1 season was 1969-70, and they've still managed 20 NCAAT appearances, 16 top 25 finishes, 12 conference titles, and 4 Final Fours. As it is, there are only a handful of schools that haven't been playing since the '39 season. FSU, Miami, VCU, UNLV... I may have come across 2-3 others. Not very many at all. I evaluated every program with 10+ NCAA Tournament wins, and everyone with a Final Four appearance.

 

[GE Nole]

There's not a perfect way to do this, obviously. FSU started playing in the 56-57 season, is that correct? My data begins in the 1938-39 season, to align with the inauguration of the NCAA Tournament. I'm open for suggestions, on how to refine this system, however.

So, FSU is missing out on 18 seasons. Yes, theoretically, you could be a little higher. It's also possible you'd have several losing seasons - and your cumulative score would be worse. As it was, the first 12 years of the NCAAT only had 8 schools qualify. The first time a school from the state of Florida made the tournament was in 1960. I'm doubtful FSU having an additional 18 years would have made much of a difference.

If there's any school that's being short-changed for a shorter history, it's UNLV. No question. Their first D1 season was 1969-70, and they've still managed 20 NCAAT appearances, 16 top 25 finishes, 12 conference titles, and 4 Final Fours. As it is, there are only a handful of schools that haven't been playing since the '39 season. FSU, Miami, VCU, UNLV... I may have come across 2-3 others. Not very many at all. I evaluated every program with 10+ NCAA Tournament wins, and everyone with a Final Four appearance.

Honestly, I wasn’t thinking about FSU as I doubt we would have been any better in the 50s even if we had started in 1939. Was more thinking about programs like Miami who weren’t a major program until sometime in the 80s I think? Or wondering if there was a basketball equivalent to Boise State in football, who changed divisions recently?

You could have a metric that is basically the number of made NCAAT divided by the possible number that school was playing D1 basketball for? But that would take some extra work I’m sure.

 

[dukedevilz]

Honestly, I wasn’t thinking about FSU as I doubt we would have been any better in the 50s even if we had started in 1939. Was more thinking about programs like Miami who weren’t a major program until sometime in the 80s I think? Or wondering if there was a basketball equivalent to Boise State in football, who changed divisions recently?

You could have a metric that is basically the number of made NCAAT divided by the possible number that school was playing D1 basketball for? But that would take some extra work I’m sure.

The closest example would probably be UNLV. They made the leap to D1 in the 1969-70 season. If you simply take the past 50 years, UNLV may very well be a top 15 program... VCU has been around since the 73-74 season. But they've only made it to the Sweet 16 once. UAB's first season was in 79-80. They have 3 Sweet 16's and 1 Elite 8 in four decades of play. So yes, there are a few schools. Not sure it's enough for me to want to add another metric like that.

It would be a huge disadvantage for the likes of UNLV and FSU, if other schools weren't already being deducted points for miserable seasons. Take Florida, for example. If you look at their seasons from 1939-1986, their net score would be -30. Had the program started in the mid 80's, their overall rank would be 20th, instead of 24th. Also, there's the issue that the tournaments weren't even. At-large bids didn't start til 1975. Only 8 teams in the tournament initially. And there weren't as many schools competing in D1 back in the early days. In 1939, there were 162 schools in college basketball. So a truer measure, would be a metric that weights more for a year where it's against your odds to make the tournament.

If there are any issues I'm concerned with correcting, it's probably the points awarded for conference championships. Western Kentucky, Princeton, and Penn are all in the top 10 for most conference titles. That's a big reason why all three cracked the top 50. My system awarded 5 points for a conference title from a power conference (Power 6+ I also included the Southwest, Big 8, and the Pacific Coast) - and 4 points for all other conferences. However, I stipulated that if a school was in top 25 team, and there was one other top 25 team (final poll) in the league that year, they receive the full 5 points. So, Idk. That could probably be re-tweaked a bit. It will never be perfect. But, I'm relatively content with it for now.

 

[TechFan88]

Thoughts???

So we are Tier 5 which is fine but is Alabama really Tier 4?

Alabama
1 - Elite 8
8 - Sweet 16
7 - Conference Tournament Champions
8 - Conference Regular Season Champions

Texas Tech
1 - NCAA Tournament Runner-Up
1 - Final Four
2 - Elite Eight
7 - Sweet 16
5 - Conference Tournament Champions
12 - Conference Regular Season Champions

 

[GE Nole]

So we are Tier 5 which is fine but is Alabama really Tier 4?

Alabama
1 - Elite 8
8 - Sweet 16
7 - Conference Tournament Champions
8 - Conference Regular Season Champions

Texas Tech
1 - NCAA Tournament Runner-Up
1 - Final Four
2 - Elite Eight
7 - Sweet 16
5 - Conference Tournament Champions
12 - Conference Regular Season Champions

Pretty compelling point. Move Bama down a tier.

 

[SheriffBufordTJustice]

All time wins does make a difference with Alabama. Third most all time in the SEC

For awhile they were the second most consistent team in the SEC behind Kentucky. Hadn't been the same since about 2000.
Only reason they don't have the second most wins is because of Arkansas.

 

[TechFan88]

All time wins does make a difference with Alabama. Third most all time in the SEC

For awhile they were the second most consistent team in the SEC behind Kentucky. Hadn't been the same since about 2000.
Only reason they don't have the second most wins is because of Arkansas.

I mean does it? If it does should FU and LSU be penalized since they are behind Alabama in all-time wins? They are ahead of Bama on the chart.

Their highs have been higher than Bama's 1 Elite Eight. But are we rewarding winning in the tournament or Bama's consistency of having the 3rd all-time wins in the SEC?

If all-time wins in conference matter then Iowa State needs to move up at least a tier. They have 1 more win than Kansas St does. Fifth behind KU, UT, OU, and OSU. They should at least be on the solid program tier.