Gonzaga, Baylor, Tennessee, Iowa, Texas, Villanova and more...
The streets flow with blueblood!
Vive la révolution !
The Year 2021, the year of the New Bloods!
- Thread starter della
- Start date
Gonzaga, Baylor, Tennessee, Iowa, Texas, Villanova and more...
The streets flow with blueblood!
Vive la révolution !
They aren't a "new" blood. Houston can probably fit in with that motley crew though.
They aren't but that doesn't make them a new blood, either. IU, Louisville, Michigan State, UConn, all schools that have had good success throughout their history but aren't blue bloods. Nova fits right in with that category.
Duke, Kentucky, UNC, and UCLA are a combined 10-0 in 2021. Just saying.
You appear to be wanting to argue for argument's sake. If they are not blue bloods, then they are new bloods.
This year appears to be shaping up into a breath of fresh air.
These half truths are exactly why the blue bloods have been carried from the throne. Repent for your sins in late 2020 as judgement is upon you.🏀
Not half-truths. That is, in fact, the combined record in the 2021 calendar year for those four programs.
Most of the schools you listed are sustainable for repeat top 10 years. Iowa, however, almost certainly will not be an elite team post-Garza (i.e. Dayton and SDSU w/ Obi Toppin and Malachi Flynn). Duke will be back. Kentucky and UNC will be back, too. Kansas is already there. And I think UCLA is looking a lot better with Cronin at the helm. At least 3 of those 5 blue bloods will be top 10 next year, IMO.
With any success in college basketball, I'd say enjoy the run while it lasts. Ridiculous turnover rates can transform any elite team into mediocrity overnight.
Houston was one half of maybe the greatest college basketball game ever played
At least the most important CBB game.
Houston vs UCLA in 1968
Thought you BlueBlood fans new your history
Doesn't make them a blue blood. Hell we could go find a couple dozen programs with Houston's history.
Maybe you will and maybe you won't, but this thread is about this year.
The fact is that you blue bloods have fallen and you can't get up. UK is below .500 and Duke has a coach that doesn't even want to play.
Just like in football, it's been fun to see the blue blood programs struggle and some other programs emerge for this pandemic influenced season. I don't expect it to be a trend, but it's still fun. Plus, it brings out the fun Kentucky fans like the one that created a post about Indiana being an overrated program just to feel better about Kentucky's season.
I generally assume most, if not all, threads are about the current year. However, when you start talking about blue blood/new blood status, that seems to imply a sustained success, whether historical, or as an up-and-coming program.
Houston has had some fantastic seasons, no question. Not exactly a top-tier team on the historical level, however. I have them coming in at #39 in my greatest programs of all-time table. If they have a decent tourney run this year, they could pass both Virginia and Temple.
BlueBlood is and always will be relative to the person.
Historically Houston has been involved in some of the biggest games in history. All I was saying
Regarding the rest ..
Matters where you live and how young you are
Someone under 30 thinks Gonzaga is a big name.
They have been there almost every year since about 1999
I'm 42. The first memory I have of college basketball is in 1981. Indiana was playing in Assembly Hall (maybe the tournament but I can't remember). I'm the son of an Indiana high school basketball coach. The game has been a large part of my life since the day I was born. I'm aware of the history. If Houston is a blue blood, CCNY is blue blood.
You sound like a Nebraska football fan.
Who cares about being a BlueBlood.
I say that as a Texas fan. We are a BlueBlood athletic department.
End of the day doesn't mean shit.
Point was Houston carved a huge place in the history of CBB.
This isn't mentioning even the 1968 game .
Do you believe that NC State NC game is probably the most important NC in the 1980's...
In a way it is. They played Houston.
They were the Goliath
Yeah, but that's what we're talking about here on this internet message board.
Compared to Tennessee, Iowa, Texas, Villanova as "new" bloods in the context of this post? Houston is behind 3 dozen programs as far as being historically relevant.
You do believe all National Championships or Final 4s are equal
I don't
There are certain games in basketball that carry more importance.
Reason why people will talk about NC State beating Houston that night at The Pit for the next 50 years
Anytime that story is told UH is the Goliath.
You really don't have to assume in a thread that is clearly labelled, do you?
I thought the thread was pretty straight forward. This year the New Bloods rule.
In this year, your historically relevant is irrelevant.
Vive la Revolution.
Houston had a few great years. They were anything but consistent, however. Only four top 10 finishes in program history.
Not sure it's clearly labeled. I mean, you also posted this...
Never thought of a revolution being on a one-year basis. Always thought it was fundamentally changing the dynamics of the power structure.
History is weird...
Only history that is important is the history people know
This is very important in college sports.
A lot of schools have history but most of it is unknown to the average person.
With this. Not every NC is equal
Not every FF is equal
You have to also add in...
How many people watched?
How long is it talked about?
This is where the difference comes in with college sports
If you go by straight numbers you are correct.
But that isn't how the human mind works
Only history that is important is the history people know
This is very important in college sports.
A lot of schools have history but most of it is unknown to the average person.
With this. Not every NC is equal
Not every FF is equal
You have to also add in...
How many people watched?
How long is it talked about?
This is where the difference comes in with college sports
If you go by straight numbers you are correct.
But that isn't how the human mind works
You realize that means, "long live the Revolution". It does not imply a timetable. If you study history you will note revolutions can be won for a time and then lost only to be won again and on and on.
Seeings how you appear to need a reference, for UK this would be the period known as the Orange Terror.
No timeline, sure, but I think many would interpret it as resetting the status-quo or significantly altering who has the upper hand. Blue bloods, minus Kansas, are mostly average this year. Next year should be different.
Of course it is resetting the status quo this year. Next year remains to be seen.
Do you pay attention to what you even say? How the **** did Houston carve a HUGE place in the history of CBB? By losing to NC State? Then to GTown? I am sure you are aware that their loss to Gtown in 1984 National title game, was their LAST trip to the FF.......Or the Elite 8...MOF, until 2019, it(1984) was also their last trip to the SW 16...
But since they played UCLA in 1968, and lost to a HUGE underdog in the NC game----they somehow have carved out a huge place in CBB history?
The 1983 title game was very important....For about 2 years-----then Villanova beat Georgetown. Which, tbh, really wasn't THAT big of an upset---but that's another discussion.
Houston played in some big games-----But other than that, they are nothing special overall..
Yeah, guys, quit caring about blueblood status and start caring about Texas’s swim team.
All that shit is besides the point.
Like some of you forget how history becomes known and history doesn't....
The community is much smaller. But anyone who knows about swimming and diving knows Eddie Reese is one of the best coaches to train under...
Basketball is the same way
Especially now with the G League
Naaaah....We are well aware of UCLA vs Houston.....We are all aware of Houston vs NC State. We just don't depict that as , "Houston carving out a HUGE piece of CBB history". More like, Houston being a part of a couple of historic games....Ok, great. So was Indiana State...So was Michigan St......So was Notre Dame.....So was Villanova....So was Chaminade...So on and so on...
True...
But the question becomes how much CBB history do you know.
Everyone has a different knowledge of the game. Some people accept narratives. Others question then. Ultimately it becomes either if it triggers you or you quest for information
When you hear the 1968 game when almost 60K turned up and became the first primetime regular season basketball game you take notice
Especially when it is Elvin Hayes vs Kareem or at the time Lew Alcindor.
This was 1968 in Houston. As crazy it sounds even a school like them on the Gulf Coast has a hand in civil rights.
Guy Lewis didn't care what color you were. Just as long as you can play
Fair...Very, fair...
Edit:
I guess to most, it really depends on when you grew up---Or if like me, a basketball nut/self-proclaimed historian, it really does not matter. I understand the influence the Houston/UCLA game , played in the Astrodome had----First public view of a non-regional game. 50,000 people....#1 vs #2----Hayes vs Kareem(Alcindor at the time)....It played a huge role in the advancement of the game...
But then someone could say the same about Indiana St vs Michigan St. It gave the NCAAT juice; it was an afterthought before that game. Rarely on TV. And even then, taped delayed. Then of course the early 1980's----NC State----then Nova....
So I can your view, and certainly call it fair.
College sports like basketball became a business....
Football is the same way.
Ultimately at the end of the day it is what college sports has became about
Why a school like Texas has a big dick regardless
Why a school like Houston can be promoted as a somebody. Everyone for the most part who watches ESPN knows who Phi Slama Jama.
Definitely knows that NC State game
Similar threads
