I was 16 and wanted to go out to watch that game. My excuse was "Who knows when IU will be in another title game?", which I almost laughed afterwards not believe those words that came out of my mouth.
Who are the top 5 programs in order?
- Thread starter rollsroyce8420
- Start date
It's funny that UCLA has won more than 3 times as many titles as Kansas has, yet some believe Kansas has been a better program.
So within this post, one can extrapolate the knowledge that Roy has won as many titles in the last 14 years as Kansas has in its existence.
Cause the douche canoe refused to recruit players UNC recruited, including the east coast. Roy didn't give his all. I resent that, even though overall I appreciate his 15 years.
You must be a Louisville fan. Louisville does qualify as the dirtiest program of all time. You might as well claim that title. You own it. The only school to ever have a title vacated by the NCAA.
Kansas is a better "program" for sure. Program in my book is top to bottom greatness of the basketball team to facilities to following to history.
The only thing that UCLA has on Kansas is that they can cheat a lot better when Mr. Gilbert is around.
If you’re talking current powers then IU is no where to be found. I have to even question UCLA. If you want a history lesson then include both of them. Duke is probably at the top. Ky, UNC, Kansas, and Gonzaga have to be up there as far as significant recent success. I don’t know how many of these programs cheat. I suspect most do. I guess it’s just coincidental that Coach K and Coach Calipari manage to get the top players every year. Success breeds success but so do the shoe companies!!
Beat up a mid-major conference. 0 titles 1 final four. POWER. Purdue fan going to Purdue.
I get that but how many top 10 programs all time are small private schools?
Definitely a strange comment for sure. If I was going to include a team with significant recent success, I'd include Nova long before I'd include Gonzaga.
You probably don't even know that prior to '75 (the end of the UCLA dynasty, btw), the tourney only included one team per conference. Teams that were ranked #2 or 3 in the nation or went undefeated in conference play were left out.
Nevermind that over 40 years of basketball were played before the NCAA tourney began, or that the field has evolved from 8 to 68 teams.
Then you have the fact that the NIT was at one time the prominent tourney, and some years neither tourney had clear dominance. For example, in 1948, Kentucky won the NCAA tournament, while the #2, 4, 5, 6 and 7th ranked teams played in the NIT.
Then you have the fact that the game evolved into keep-away for a long stretch before the shot clock era, taking away the advantage of superior athletes/skilled players.
Just a few reasons why determining the top programs over 120 years by NCAA titles alone is for simpletons.
Nova is quickly moving up the list, IMO. I think they'll tie Kansas this year with their 3rd natty.
This is the AP Top 100, published almost exactly a year ago.
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketbal...op-100-college-basketball-programs-based-poll
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketbal...op-100-college-basketball-programs-based-poll
3 titles though, 10 years ago they only had 2....2! Up until 10 years ago they had the same amount of titles as OK St, San Francisco, UofL, MSU, etc.
Is it really “choking” if a team loses in the FF?
I mean, I understand Self has a certain reputation of falling to lower seeds in the tourney. We all know the history. But is losing to Nova in the FF, or losing in the championship game, is that considered “choking?”
Seems like a lot of posters are basically saying, “if Self wins this weekend, then he’s good and KU is #3. If Self “chokes” then he’s no good and firmly behind Duke.”
Not sure I follow the logic of “choking” in the FF.
Only idiots would call it choking when talking about a F4 loss this season for Kansas.
More like the rest of the 347 teams choked from Day 1. This season was Prime for a Final Four grab.
Chokers
More like the rest of the 347 teams choked from Day 1. This season was Prime for a Final Four grab.
Chokers
**dont be fooled by reported attendance (tickets sold). There is a significant difference between reported and actual attendance. The balconies, and upper lower level, are consistently empty.
I like that list due to it takes in account of people who were witnessing the past seasons.
It's easy for younger people to give more credit to what they've witnessed.
It's easy for younger people to give more credit to what they've witnessed.
When looking at it isolated no but in the grand scheme of things it basically embodies KU basketball.
Hardly. Out of 64 teams, only 1 can win it. I recognize our early exits to lesser ranked teams, but that should stop once the FF is reached. Otherwise we need to start looking at some of the other “choke jobs” by every other school that doesn’t win it every year.
When was the last time KU was in the NIT? How about UK?
UCLA should be getting more credit if you think about it. They've made 4 Final 4s and a won a national title including making back to back to back Final 4s in 2006, 2007 and 2008.
There's probably a Midwest and East Coast bias on this site but I could see the argument for declaring UCLA to be the greatest CBB program of all time over Kentucky (titles).
There's probably a Midwest and East Coast bias on this site but I could see the argument for declaring UCLA to be the greatest CBB program of all time over Kentucky (titles).
And 10 yrs ago Duke had 3 and UNC 4. The difference between KU and UNC at that point was a 1 point triple OT game in 57.
The pissing contests are silly, considering how much the game and tournament have changed over 120 years. Is the winner of an 8 team field that doesn't include several of the best teams really a national champ? Some of those early titles are barely above Helms. And a tournament didn't even exist for a third of the game's history.
An order of Kentucky, UNC, KU, Duke, UCLA seems about right. Could make an argument for UNC #1, or Duke over KU, or even Duke #1 or 2 (given their success in the era that best determines champions and final fours).
You sound very angry about UCLA having more than 3 times as many titles as Kansas. BTW, I was at the 1975 title game in San Diego. Just be glad that UCLA lucked out and beat Louisville in the semis when a guy (Terry Howard) who never missed a free throw, missed a three throw. The Cardinals would have likely beaten Kentucky in the title game and they would be alongside UConn and Indiana as teams having more NCs than Kansas.
I've been trying to come up with a way of determining the all time best college basketball programs for a while. I wanted a way of sorting out the flash in the pan schools/periods from the teams that have consistently performed at a high level over an extended period of time. I've basically created a metric involving 10 categories. Each team is ranked in each category by their NCAA rank within that category. The totals are summed, averaged, and then sorted from best to worst.
For categories, I started with all time wins. Essentially if you aren't in the top 50 in all time wins, you have no business being in consideration for "best college basketball program". From there I added 9 additional categories. I selected these categories because I feel they represent a healthy mixture of regular season performance and NCAA tournament performance. Originally I started out with 5 categories and have expanded it from there...each category I've added has basically tightened up the top 5 and created a larger divide between that group and the rest of the college basketball world.
Categories
Results (data through 2016-17 season)
For categories, I started with all time wins. Essentially if you aren't in the top 50 in all time wins, you have no business being in consideration for "best college basketball program". From there I added 9 additional categories. I selected these categories because I feel they represent a healthy mixture of regular season performance and NCAA tournament performance. Originally I started out with 5 categories and have expanded it from there...each category I've added has basically tightened up the top 5 and created a larger divide between that group and the rest of the college basketball world.
Categories
- All time wins
- Overall winning percentage
- NCAA championships
- Championship game appearances
- Final Four's
- Tournament appearances
- AP #1 appearances
- AP Top 10 appearances
- AP Top 25 appearances
- Consensus 1st-Team All-Americans
Results (data through 2016-17 season)
- Kentucky-1.6
- North Carolina-2.6
- Duke-3.8
- Kansas-3.9
- UCLA-4.0
- Indiana-8.6
- Syracuse-10.5
- Cincy-13.4
- Arizona-13.8
- Louisville-14
- tOSU-16.3
- UConn-16.7
- Nova-18
- Georgetown-18.7
- Michigan State 19.1
4 Final Fours and 2 title game appearances isn’t child’s play, but that said program you are poking at is doing just fine now. Thanks for asking. My #4 hasn't faired to well vs #3 of late. Nobody in the top 5 has the last I checked.
Last edited:
Roy is the difference maker between KU and UNC.
My post was just to reel in the mentally challenged....it worked
Spoken like a true KU fan. I'm hoping you can win this year and get on UCONN's level.
I'm in no way poking KU, just saying Roy wasn't exactly coaching some D2 team before he came to UNC so the 15 year timeline is arbitrary.
