Would be 5 titles since 99 , with three different coaches winning a title.
Plus, if they win it all next week , most dominant team since 21 Baylor?
Plus, if they win it all next week , most dominant team since 21 Baylor?
Uconn - 2 games away from blue blood status?
- Thread starter Noahtogo24
- Start date
By the way, with all that being said , rooting for Miami or FAU to take it down !!!
Kansas was considered a blueblood when they had 3.
Here is the current list of most championships:
- UCLA — 11
- Kentucky — 8
- North Carolina — 6
- Duke — 5
- Indiana — 5
- Kansas — 4
- UConn — 4
- Villanova — 3
Because of their all time wins. It's more than just championships.
Clearly there are other factors at play, but it is interesting how unwaveringly Duke has Blue Blood status while their qualifying run started less than a decade before UCONN’s.
Of course Duke’s been more consistent, but that’s also throughout the tenure of one legendary coach. The craziest stat, to me, is that this would be the 4th consecutive decade in which Connecticut has a championship. It’s a different kind, but it’s that sustained level of success you look for in a Blue Blood.
I also think the narrative would be a resounding “yes” if the old Big East was still kicking.
Of course Duke’s been more consistent, but that’s also throughout the tenure of one legendary coach. The craziest stat, to me, is that this would be the 4th consecutive decade in which Connecticut has a championship. It’s a different kind, but it’s that sustained level of success you look for in a Blue Blood.
I also think the narrative would be a resounding “yes” if the old Big East was still kicking.
What was duke prior to 1990? Uconn has basically done what duke did under coach K and to have 3 different coaches win it would be big. Believe only Kentucky has that many do it
Literally if you just read my post you would understand.
| 1 | Kansas | 1898 | 124 | 2,357 | 877 | 0 | .729 |
| 2 | Kentucky | 1903 | 119 | 2,353 | 736 | 1 | .762 |
| 3 | North Carolina | 1910 | 112 | 2,323 | 839 | 0 | .735 |
| 4 | Duke | 1906 | 117 | 2,246 |
Uconn is 27th. There is a reason Kansas and duke are bluebloods. It's a combination of all winning metrics.
Nah. It titles that matter. Uconn belongs there
You aren't a blueblood so I get why you don't get it. No shortcuts to being a blueblood. Takes more than some lucky runs.
But, you have your answer. Whether you wanna ignore it or not.
I have a degree from IU which is probably more than you have. Also LOl at you thinking only sidewalk fans at places like unc, Kansas, Kentucky, and duke get to decide what a blueblood is. Thanks for the laugh. Duke is just basically 1 coach and that’s it
Here we go with the you have to attend a school to be a fan shit. UConn won't be a blueblood because they haven't won on a consistent basis, all time they're not close to the bluebloods but if they happen to win it all this topic will come up again.
I have 2 degrees, not that it really matters in regards to this.
However, your degree is obviously as worthless as your Alma Mater is at basketball anymore. You can't understand simple concepts even when they are explained to you like you are 5.
All time wins
Championships
Final fours
Sweet sixteen
Tournament wins
They all matter in being a blueblood.
You can’t have a school with less titles as a blueblood than one that’s not. That’s idiotic
Uconn had more than Kansas just a year ago. And Kansas is unanimously a blueblood and uconn isn't. What are you even talking about?
Again. You can’t have a school with less titles being a blueblood than someone that’s not one
Uconn has been a blueblood since its last title. Your criteria basically says no one will ever else become a blue blood. That’s just beyond dumb
You are no more an authority on this topic than me. This question is why I laugh at you guys so much. You chose a winning program that’s as already good to cheer for. Then label yourself as an expert because you took the east way out in choosing a program to cheer for
Consistently over decades upon decades.
Seems pretty simple if you think about it.
I remember years ago you claimed Auburn was on the same level as the bluebloods when you they were in the FF, what happened? Consistency makes you a blueblood, along with titles, UConn hasn't been consistent, just like Auburn.
Uconn wit they win it all will have won titles in the last 4 decades. What are you talking about? No one else matches that
LoL beyond trolling your balls if I never put auburn at the blue blood level. ROFLMAO
Being consistent don't matter? If that's the case your grandkids may see Auburn as a blueblood.
4 titles in four straight decades pretty impressive also.
Winning a title in 4 straight decades is consistent
So by that logic you can be under 500, miss the tournament every 3-5 years, win a title and do that again for a period of time and that makes you consistent?
By this logic you don’t ever have to win a title to be a blueblood then. I mean Gonzaga is on track to basically be a blue blood then
I have 5 but Gonzaga is basically what you are saying a blu loos could be. 8 straight sweet 16’s. Multiple final 4’s. Tons of 30 plus win seasons
You actually have none unless your commuter school you went to has some?
Similar threads
