Elite Programs

[4everwarriors]

So Billy Packer was right, hey?

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I would put UW ahead of any team on the near elite list. They will probably win 30 games again this year, which will be the third time they have done that under Bo Ryan. MU has never won more than 28 games.

Again, I'm not looking at just the last decade. I'm looking at the last 50 years (did college bball even exist before then?). Bo Ryan has the Badgers humming in the right direction but before that they were hot garbage. It's the same reason I don't have Florida on my list.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

No way Indiana is Elite, or Marquette Near Elite.

From 1970-1999 Indiana was a top 10 basketball program. They've fallen hard in the last decade but that's why I put them in elite instead of Blue Blood. Many still consider them to have blue blood status.

If you look at the last 50 years of basketball, Marquette is a top 20 program. Did most of their heavy lifting come in the 1970s? Yes. But you've got to take that history into account. Most other schools that I have heard people throw out there are teams that have been good recently but have no history of success. You'll have hard time finding a team not on my list that has had more consistent success than Marquette.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Or Memphis either. And Syracuse is falling fast... that load of bricks is the Syracuse program headed for irrelevancy

Michigan ehhhhhhh.

NO WAY UCLA is a blueblood. They are a faded glory at best

Memphis was the last one to make my cut and I think they've been consistent enough to warrant conversation.

Syracuse has been elite for the past 30 years. A national championship, three final fours, no losing season since 1969, ranked in the top six for winning percentage and NCAA berths. These recent infractions may kill their program, but they are elite as of right now. Top 10 program all time, I'd argue.

Michigan has sucked in the last decade but were dominate in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s. Fab 5 makes the case for elite IMHO.

If UCLA isn't a blue blood, I don't know who is. There has never been a more dominate program in the history of college basketball. In the 60s and 70s UCLA was unbeatable. They have 11 national titles, more than any other school. They have 17 final fours. 20 consensus all-americans (more than any other school). In the last 10 years they have 9 tournament berths, 1 sweet 16, 2 final fours, and 1 national championship appearance. That doesn't seem like faded glory.

[Shark]

I thought this guy did a great job breaking it down.

http://fansided.com/2014/10/21/75-greatest-college-basketball-programs-time-statistically-ranked/

It's a nice try at it...but they award way too much to mid-major programs that have just been beating up on scrub programs for decades. A conference title in a bottom feeding conference shouldn't be used to measure greatness.

[breadtree]

Memphis was the last one to make my cut and I think they've been consistent enough to warrant conversation.

Syracuse has been elite for the past 30 years. A national championship, three final fours, no losing season since 1969, ranked in the top six for winning percentage and NCAA berths. These recent infractions may kill their program, but they are elite as of right now. Top 10 program all time, I'd argue.

Michigan has sucked in the last decade but were dominate in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s. Fab 5 makes the case for elite IMHO.

If UCLA isn't a blue blood, I don't know who is. There has never been a more dominate program in the history of college basketball. In the 60s and 70s UCLA was unbeatable. They have 11 national titles, more than any other school. They have 17 final fours. 20 consensus all-americans (more than any other school). In the last 10 years they have 9 tournament berths, 1 sweet 16, 2 final fours, and 1 national championship appearance. That doesn't seem like faded glory.

Why isn't Cincinnati above Marquette?  One fewer tournament win, but 2 national championships, a 3rd Final Four, and over 100 more wins overall.  Also sitting on a 4 year tourney streak and projected to be in this year for a 5th. 

[LA]

Marquette has not been elite since Al roamed the sidelines. We fell fast and hard and had pretty much bottomed out just 10 years after Al left. We have had 2 good runs in the NCAA tournament in the past 38 years, where we have advanced past the Sweet 16. That is not elite or even near elite.

Marquette recruited zero McDonalds All-Americans from 1982-2014. Most elite teams bring some in most every year if not every other, and the near elite teams bring one or two in every 5-7 years.

Marquette does have a good commitment to basketball, and it usually has attendance that ranks in the top 25 throughout the nation, give or take a couple years like this one. It has great facilities, supports it student athletes in the classroom, and graduates its players a a fairly high level. Since finding its bearings again under Kevin O'Neill, and having some good-to-great years under Tom Crean and Buzz Williams, Marquette is a good program that occasionally can have a breakout year.

I love Marquette and follow every game. But I would have to say in reality Marquette is not close to being an elite or near elite program. We are a good program that has had two down years in a row after a nice eight year run. I hope we can catch lightening in a bottle again like the run in the 1970's under Al - let's see if Wojo can right this ship and lead us up the college basketball ranks.

This is spot on Norm. When looking without the blue and gold goggles on, this is a very fair assessment.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

Marquette has not been elite since Al roamed the sidelines. We fell fast and hard and had pretty much bottomed out just 10 years after Al left. We have had 2 good runs in the NCAA tournament in the past 38 years, where we have advanced past the Sweet 16. That is not elite or even near elite.

Marquette recruited zero McDonalds All-Americans from 1982-2014. Most elite teams bring some in most every year if not every other, and the near elite teams bring one or two in every 5-7 years.

Marquette does have a good commitment to basketball, and it usually has attendance that ranks in the top 25 throughout the nation, give or take a couple years like this one. It has great facilities, supports it student athletes in the classroom, and graduates its players a a fairly high level. Since finding its bearings again under Kevin O'Neill, and having some good-to-great years under Tom Crean and Buzz Williams, Marquette is a good program that occasionally can have a breakout year.

I love Marquette and follow every game. But I would have to say in reality Marquette is not close to being an elite or near elite program. We are a good program that has had two down years in a row after a nice eight year run. I hope we can catch lightening in a bottle again like the run in the 1970's under Al - let's see if Wojo can right this ship and lead us up the college basketball ranks.

Agreed with this assessment. After 2012-2013, MU was playing at a near elite level, and this program by all means can return to that - but until it happens for 25/30 seasons, you're not elite.

I wasn't an MU fan before I started school in 2008, but the program was pretty bad for decently long stretches over the past 30 years. Hopefully Wojo can make this year the last in the new streak, and get us back to the tourney and winning Big East basketball next season.

[bilsu]

To me it only matters what a recruit sees. They are 17/18 years old when they are being recruited and their fathers are probably under 45. So from a recruit's stand point they might have been watching college basketball the last 10 years and maybe their father has been watching the last 30 years. Prior to that nothing really matters.

[RushmoreAcademy]

I haven't been here near as long as a lot if you, but this feels like the 10th time we've done this. 

[keefe]

Blue Bloods
North Carolina
UCLA
Kentucky
Duke
Kansas
Louisville

Elite
Indiana
Syracuse
UConn
Arizona
Michigan State
Georgetown
Michigan

Near Elite
UNLV
Ohio State
Villanova
Marquette
Temple
Memphis

Where the hell is Wisconsin??

[Warrior Code]

Where the hell is Wisconsin??

90 miles west of Near Elite.

[Johnny B]

Nova is not on that level.

[dgies9156]

No way.  They have Miami (Ohio) ranked ahead of MU

Must have seen that NCAA tournament game in 1978.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Why isn't Cincinnati above Marquette?  One fewer tournament win, but 2 national championships, a 3rd Final Four, and over 100 more wins overall.  Also sitting on a 4 year tourney streak and projected to be in this year for a 5th. 

I looked at the last 50 years. Both of Cincy's championships were over 50 years ago. The 80s were also brutal for the Bearcats.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Where the hell is Wisconsin??

Nowhere near this list, where they belong. Teams that miss the tournament for 47 straight seasons don't get to call themselves above average, let alone elite.

[Groin_pull]

Blue Bloods
North Carolina
UCLA
Kentucky
Duke
Kansas
Louisville

Elite
Indiana
Syracuse
UConn
Arizona
Michigan State
Georgetown
Michigan

Near Elite
UNLV
Ohio State
Villanova
Marquette
Temple
Memphis

Sorry, but there is no way MU can be on this list and not UW. As much as it pains me to say it.

[AirPunches]

Sorry, but there is no way MU can be on this list and not UW. As much as it pains me to say it.

Believe the list was over the course of 50 years. Not weighing one year (more recent ones) more heavily than the others. If the list was the last 15 years, then the Badgers would be ahead of MU probably. Although, in the last 12 years MU has a final four, 2 sweet 16s, and an elite eight to go with a conference usa championship and a big east championship. These last two years have been rough, but it's not like MU has been irrevelent.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Sorry, but there is no way MU can be on this list and not UW. As much as it pains me to say it.

Does it pain you? You bring up the Badgers every chance you get.

The Badgers missed the tournament from 1947 to 1994. They can't be considered elite. Not yet at least. The Badgers aren't even in the top 50 college programs.

[JWags85]

Does it pain you? You bring up the Badgers every chance you get.

The Badgers missed the tournament from 1947 to 1994. They can't be considered elite. Not yet at least. The Badgers aren't even in the top 50 college programs.

I wouldn't go that far.  They've been to 2 Final Fours (3 if you count the peach basket in 1941), even at 2, that puts then behind only about 30 teams and the other schools with 2, they are ahead of a number of them, including Lasalle, Depaul, Oregon St, Witchita St, and Bradley.  I don't like Wisconsin in any way, but they are in the top 50.

[jakeec]

Some television ratings which show how the elite schools rank and where the Big East schools are at.


College Basketball

Saturday
0.91 rating CBS 12:00 pm Georgetown at St John's
1.31 rating CBS 2:00 pm #15-North Carolina at Miami
1.96 rating CBS 4:00 pm #18-Arkansas at #1-Kentucky
0.46 rating FOX 2:00 pm #6-Villanova at Xavier
0.86 rating ESPN 12:00 pm Michigan at #14-Maryland
0.74 rating ESPN 2:00 pm #10-Northern Iowa at #11-Wichita State
1.01 rating ESPN 5:00 pm Texas at #8-Kansas
1.40 rating ESPN 7:00 pm Syracuse at #4-Duke
0.84 rating ESPN 9:00 pm #7-Arizona at #13-Utah

Sunday
0.86 rating CBS 2:00 pm #21-SMU at Connecticut
1.24 rating CBS 4:00 pm Michigan State at #5-Wisconsin

[naginiF]

I'm taking the school's entire history into account. Not just the last decade. Using that standard, Marquette is absolutely a top 20 program in college basketball history

This was done in 2012, and i'm sure was discussed ad nauseam at the time, but i don't think there would be much change for us adding and E8 and 2 yrs of suckitude.  I don't have time to adjust the scoring to reflect the past 2 years but I'm sure Princeton, Penn and Temple wouldn't hold their spots and UW is undervalued but it's still a pretty good measuring stick.  I personally would like to see recent (last 15 years) weighted heavier than 40 years ago but not so much that I'm going to spend the time developing that view.

I think you'd have a tough time arguing a higher ranking than #17 and an equally tough time arguing a lower rank if you look at the total body of work of a program.  Elite?  Not sure but that's a darn good number and there are plenty of "good" programs that don't come close to it.
http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/tag/_/name/50-in-50-series

[brewcity77]

Here's my take:

Blue Bloods

These programs are great year-in and year-out with a chance to go to the Final Four every year. They are long-lasting programs that can survive coaching changes, player turnover, and still land McDonald's All-Americans regularly. These are also the "sex-appeal" type programs that kids dream about from the time they are young and are still good when they are making their college decisions. They also must be basketball schools ahead of being football schools -- to be a blue blood, fans MUST think of you as a basketball school when your name is mentioned.

Kentucky
Duke
North Carolina
Kansas

Near-Elite

Programs that are either at the top now or close to it, but have either fallen off for periods or just not sustained success long enough to be in that next tier.

Louisville
UCLA
Florida
Michigan State
Arizona
UConn
Georgetown
Syracuse

Quality Programs

Top-25 programs, but something missing from being a truly top program. Some are fatally flawed and can never reach that top tier, some may be closer to blue blood than than the teams in the near-elite tier.

Marquette
Ohio State
Villanova
Maryland
Virginia
Michigan
Wisconsin
UNLV
Cincinnati
Texas
Memphis
Indiana

Best of the Rest

These teams are regularly flirting with being top-25 programs, but for whatever reason cannot maintain. Pretty much the "also considered" list.

Oklahoma State
Oklahoma
West Virginia
Temple
Purdue
Illinois
Georgia Tech
NC State
St. John's
Xavier
LSU
Kansas State

Some of the schools simply can't reach that top tier. Schools like Michigan State and Florida are always going to be viewed as football-first. UCLA and Louisville are close to the top tier, but I feel Louisville needs to sustain this success beyond Pitino while UCLA has to get back to where they were 5 years ago. In the third tier, I think it's more likely that schools like Marquette, Villanova, Maryland, or Memphis could become blue-bloods than some of the schools ahead of them (like MSU & Florida). Those are basketball-first schools, but the first two would to have sustained success (regular conference titles, trips to the second and third weekend) while also recruiting an average of 1+ McDAA per year, while the latter two would have to have the kind of on-court success to match recruiting success.

As far as the "where's Wisconsin" question, they likely will never be a blue blood without some radical shifts. It's not possible under Bo. He just doesn't play an appealing enough style that make them must-watch and attracts elite recruits. Also, they would need their basketball program be more emblematic of the school in fans eyes than their football program. I don't see this state ever allowing that to happen.

Honestly, it's more likely DePaul would become a blue-blood than Wisconsin simply because they can at least put basketball first. And no, that's not to say DPU will ever be a blue blood, but consider Florida. No matter how much wild success Billy Donovan has, they aren't usually considered a blue blood. Two titles, five Final Fours since 1994, and they regularly get top recruits. But they're a football school, even when the basketball program is better. That's a defining line that will forever keep Wisconsin from that level of recognition.

[brewcity77]

Wisconsin is like Gonzaga. They may win a ton year-in and year-out, they may go dancing every year, but that's not enough to be be elite. If the Zags started attracting elite recruits, though, they'd have a better shot at becoming a blue blood than Bucky, and I didn't even put the Zags on the list (WCC just sucks too much).

[muwarrior69]

I thought this guy did a great job breaking it down.

http://fansided.com/2014/10/21/75-greatest-college-basketball-programs-time-statistically-ranked/

Agree. Elite, Blue Bloods are just terms that come and go over time. We are in pretty good company.