Why do I defend Indiana? I am stupid, but I understand the sport.
Or, because they scare me and most Kentucky fans.
Indiana is a power house folks. Anyone who thinks that is not the case don't know basketball.
Blue blood qualifications
- Thread starter JayhawkinGeorgia
- Start date
Or, because they scare me and most Kentucky fans.
Indiana is a power house folks. Anyone who thinks that is not the case don't know basketball.
They scare you?
Do you still check under your bed for big, bad black-haired Bobby Knight?
I'm thinking you are misunderstanding what Bert means by powerhouse. Pretty sure it's not in the context of, "national title comtemders". It's rather, "A", he's being sarcastic, or "B" meaning Indiana is a powerhouse whennit comes to job status.
Or it could be "C":
He's drunk as fvck...Laughing
Let me try to be nicer.
You can't play that game because literally every other blueblood has missed opportunities in NCAAT history that they can latch on to in order to artificially boost their "deserved" title count.
Under this logic, Duke should have won national titles in 1994, 1998, 1999, 2002, 2004 and 2011.
If only Duke held on to double digit 2nd half leads vs Arky in 1994, Indiana in 2002 and UConn in 2004...
If only Coach K had put William Avery on Wayne Turner in 1998 in the 2nd half...
If only the best Duke team ever didn't choke against UConn in 1999...
If only Kyrie didn't get his toe stepped on in 2010...
Of all the blue bloods, I think Kentucky has the fewest "what ifs" when it comes to missed title chances.
Kansas got super lucky to win in 2008 and didn't really have a chance in 2012 vs UK or vs Nova this year. I don't know much about the earlier championships.
Man if a few things go differently, Coach K could have more titles than UK Basketball by himself which is crazy to think about it.
What an incredible 38 run by K and counting, simply incredible.
Kansas got super lucky to win in 2008 and didn't really have a chance in 2012 vs UK or vs Nova this year. I don't know much about the earlier championships.
Man if a few things go differently, Coach K could have more titles than UK Basketball by himself which is crazy to think about it.
What an incredible 38 run by K and counting, simply incredible.
Every school has their share. A former IU beat writer actually wrote a book called 'Missing Banners' about all the one's they missed out on due to various injuries (May '75, Woodson '80, Kitchel '83, Henderson '93, and a few others). We as fans always remember the near misses but the one point wins (Kansas '53 and Cuse '87) are conveniently forgotten.
In modern memory, 97, 03, 2010, 2014, 2015, 2017. So nah you're wrong. Every single school can play the what if game. A couple different things possibly go different ways and Cal has more titles than K because he doesn't win in 2010 or 2015.
But that wasn't the point.
If Indiana had 3 titles (matching KU), they wouldn't even be in the blueblood conversation. Period. Yet KU is universally considered a blueblood with only 3, because they check a lot of other boxes that Indiana can't. This was the point. You would think someone as smug as DaBull could grasp it.
Folks I meant what I said. Indiana has all the ingredients to be a powerhouse. Maybe not in 2019 but it could happen soon.
In state talent, check, fan base/facialites, check, history,check.
Young energetic coach. check, but....IU is one of those schools where Final Fours/Championships matter. IU would get tired of Sean Miller's level of success.
Which is what I thought you meant. Indiana is as close as they have been in a long, long time, to bring not only what they were. But consistently.
Miller lands Brooks AND TJD? Oh, boy. Heck if he lands just one of them; Which in think.we do. Still going to be a couple years out. But expect us to get better and better each year.
Just being in the title game or having a strong season doesn't make it a "near miss".
2010 UK wasn't considered better than 2010 Duke, UK or Syracuse before the tournament. This wasn't really a championship miss, it would have required some luck and good bounces for UK to win it.
2014 UK completely overachieved in the tournament and was one of the weakest NCAAT Finals teams in memory along with 2014 UConn that year. They peaked at the end of the year but UK was lucky as hell to make it far with those Aaron Harrison buzzer beaters.
2015 UK was unbeaten and this is probably your best case but a lot of us were never convinced that they were the clear best team with the weak SEC schedule. 2015 Wisconsin and 2015 Duke were absolute juggernauts as well.
2017 UK? They were just another very strong team that wasn't considered meaningfully stronger or weaker than Gonzaga, Carolina or Villanova that year.
I warned Kentucky fans after 2015 who were heartbroken after that loss and were screaming at me in Indianapolis that Cal would keep going to Final 4s year after year that regression was coming.
In the OAD era, the top teams' rosters are too volatile for them to have the type of run that Coach K and Wooden had who had multiple All-Americans who were upperclassmen on their roster.
I"ll give you 1997 though, UK should have beaten Arizona in that title game.
Last edited:
That's a lot to dive into. I appreciate the effort and time spent on each angle.
I haven't read such a thought out opinionated post like that in while.
I haven't read such a thought out opinionated post like that in while.
38-1 is just a normal team! The weak SEC gave them that; I understand.
Are you talking about UK 2015? I never said they were a normal team-they were a super elite team. There just happened to be 2 other super elite teams that year.
KU's biggest "what ifs" would be losing the 1953 title game to Indiana by 1 point, losing the 1957 title game to North Carolina in 3 OT by 1 point and in 2003 when they lost to Syracuse by 3 points but shot 12-30 from the FT line. McNamara also hit six 3 point shots in the first half of that 2003 game, something he was completely capable of doing but at that point he was only a freshman and averaged 13 PPG. He was just unstoppable to start that game.
They did get super lucky in 2008 though.
Lol if you wanna nitpick we can go back to your examples and tear them apart as well. Every single team of that were among the best in the country save the 2014 team. So yes, what it scenarios work for them as well.
If we're being honest here, the "what if" game on this board would result in about 75 champions only going back about 30 years. We all know what years the blueblood fans think they could've/should've won it but every now and then you see a Purdue guy try and claim 2010 or Borden try and claim 1993 for Indiana. The reality is, we all think we're winners when we're all actually a bunch of losers.
Well, a few of your examples were pretty big stretches. I mean Kentucky wasn't even in the Final Four in 2003, 2010 and 2017. I have no idea why you would include 2017, by the way. Weren't they only a 2 seed? Your 2014 overachieved and really were just lucky to be there.
If I used similar logic for Kansas the what ifs would be 2002, 2003, 2007, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2016, 2017 and 2018 and that's just going back to the year 2000. All are years where they were highly seeded and won 30+ games while being one of the favorites to win it all.
I developed a spreadsheet that accounts for total wins, total losses, winning % ,# titles, Bonus for multiple coaches at a single school
This is what I came up with. the value to the right considers all of the above.
1 Kentucky 3628
2 North Carolina 3078
3 UCLA 3025
4 Kansas 2726
5 Duke 2572
6 Indiana 2120
7 Villanova 1983
8 Connecticut 1879
9 Louisville 1876
10 Syracuse 1869
11 Arizona 1724
12 Cincinnati 1719
13 North Car State 1678
14 Utah 1657
15 Michigan State 1618
16 Western Ky 1611
17 Notre Dame 1606
18 Temple 1574
19 Arkansas 1571
20 St. John's 1560
equation
value = (total wins = total losses) + (winning % *1000) + (titles *100) + (# coaches * 100)
I made the winning % a whole number, and the 100 was bonus points
I think its a pretty good indicator for determining blue bloods. longevity, titles, wins-losses, win % plus bonuses.
What would be the cutoff? Top 6? Right now I would Say Indiana, which it looks as it has for sometime.
This is what I came up with. the value to the right considers all of the above.
1 Kentucky 3628
2 North Carolina 3078
3 UCLA 3025
4 Kansas 2726
5 Duke 2572
6 Indiana 2120
7 Villanova 1983
8 Connecticut 1879
9 Louisville 1876
10 Syracuse 1869
11 Arizona 1724
12 Cincinnati 1719
13 North Car State 1678
14 Utah 1657
15 Michigan State 1618
16 Western Ky 1611
17 Notre Dame 1606
18 Temple 1574
19 Arkansas 1571
20 St. John's 1560
equation
value = (total wins = total losses) + (winning % *1000) + (titles *100) + (# coaches * 100)
I made the winning % a whole number, and the 100 was bonus points
I think its a pretty good indicator for determining blue bloods. longevity, titles, wins-losses, win % plus bonuses.
What would be the cutoff? Top 6? Right now I would Say Indiana, which it looks as it has for sometime.
Not sure how the hell UK 2017 could be considered a near-miss.
The near-misses I'm talking about are title games that should've/could've easily gone the other way. Definitely not elite 8 teams. KU's had about twenty elite 8 teams that were capable of winning it all.
Not factoring in injuries either. I don't blame the 03 title loss on losing Wayne Simien. I blame it on the team uncharacteristically shooting 40% at the FT line. Shoot a halfway decent % and it's another title.
In 1957, KU lost by a point in 3 OT because the ball was tipped away from Wilt under the basket. 1 point loss in 53. Those are near-misses.
Ummm, I was with you brother. UNTIL the Purdue reference. I mean., really?? Laughing
