Is Villanova a blueblood?

[mileskishnish72]

What'd they do in '71 to have everything vacated?

I think that was Howard Porter.

[Miep Gies]

Villanova is definitely a trueblood but the question should be is UMBC a newblood or a blueblood?

[brewcity77]

UCLA has won just one national championship in 40+ years.  Indiana hasn't won one in 30+ years.

They've got great history, but how is that even relevant now?

I'm not sure it is. Personally, I don't care. But as avid CBB fans, we are aware of the top teams and programs on a year to year basis.

I think of blue bloods as the programs the general public views as perennially elite (whether accurate or not). It took Duke decades, Christian Laettner, and sustaining success after before they had that universal perception. And as hard as that perception is to gain, so is it to lose because the general public only pays attention for 4 weeks in Spring.

[Dr. Blackheart]

When you're literally the birthplace of basketball you will get the benefit of the doubt more often than not.  I think they should have had more tourney success in the last decade or so given the talent level, but 12 straight B12 championships is extremely impressive regardless.

I guess. Or a reflection of a historically mediocre basketball conference dominated by football-centric teams. One could argue that the BE round robin better prepares its top teams for the tourney (even before the NBE).

The B12/8 has won only one championship since 1990 with conference members at the time.  Same as the B10/14. P12/14 has won two (95/97).

SEC and BE =6 (not counting UCONN's AAC win or UL's vacated BE win). ACC= 10. Nova has continued the BE and their tradition.

UCLA, Kansas and IU are old money, living off inflated, inherited seeds.  You have to give UNC, Kentucky and Duke the blue blood title. Nova is more deserving than these others.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

without a doubt.

[NotAnAlum]

I think to answer this question you have to speculate on where the program will be 10 year from now.  A true Blueblood will be a competing for national championships 10 years from now.  I'm pretty certain that will be the case with Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, UNC.  Will Nova.  Hard to say for sure.  What will happen when Jay Wright leaves.  Will they be able to get any coach they want like UNC and Kansas did.  Do today's first graders dream of playing for Nova?  Because you'll want to be able to have your pick of the litter 10 years from now.
Its very hard to become a true Blueblood.  Nova is certainly on their way.  But they are pretty much in the same place UConn was 10 years ago and I don't think anyone would consider them Blueblood now.

[Its DJOver]

I guess. Or a reflection of a historically mediocre basketball conference dominated by football-centric teams. One could argue that the BE round robin better prepares its top teams for the tourney (even before the NBE).

The B12/8 has won only one championship since 1990 with conference members at the time.  Same as the B10/14. P12/14 has won two (95/97).

SEC and BE =6 (not counting UCONN's AAC win or UL's vacated BE win). ACC= 10. Nova has continued the BE and their tradition.

UCLA, Kansas and IU are old money, living off inflated, inherited seeds.  You have to give UNC, Kentucky and Duke the blue blood title. Nova is more deserving than these others.

I guess you're just stricter with the title of blue blood than I am, because other than IU, I'd give all those schools the title of blue blood.  I don't care how little tourney success you have, if you win a P6 league every year for a decade+ you've earned the title IMO. 

Also as Brew pointed out, it is very difficult to lose the title.  UCLA hasn't done much relative to the other teams that are seem to be consensus blue bloods, but I would still consider them a BB.  It's just too hard for me to ignore all the banners that they have, no matter how old they are.  Maybe if they are irrelevant for years to come, but it'd take a lot to lose it IMO.

[Galway Eagle]

What'd they do in '71 to have everything vacated?

What would've happened to us if Jim Chones had signed and still finished out the season.

[Babybluejeans]

When you're literally the birthplace of basketball you will get the benefit of the doubt more often than not.  I think they should have had more tourney success in the last decade or so given the talent level, but 12 straight B12 championships is extremely impressive regardless.

The birthplace of basketball is widely known as Springfield, Mass. Hence the bball hall of fame. Kansas does not warrant inclusion as a blueblood in any event.

[SaveOD238]

Rollie had a helluva run as well.. then they disappeared for a while, now they're great again.  It would be like if we won a couple of natties and made the final 4 in 5 of the next 10 years, then based on our history plus the recent few years we'd be a blue blood as well... right?

Yes.  The way that Villanova is perceived today is exactly what Marquette could be in 5 years if things break right.

[Its DJOver]

The birthplace of basketball is widely known as Springfield, Mass. Hence the bball hall of fame. Kansas does not warrant inclusion as a blueblood in any event.

My mistake, when the inventor of the game also founded your universities basketball program, you will get the benefit of the doubt more often than not.

Do you not consider regular season success when evaluating status? Because they don't have as many championships as other BB, but 12 straight B12 rings is hard to look past.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Do you not consider regular season success when evaluating status? Because they don't have as many championships as other BB, but 12 straight B12 rings is hard to look past.

Besides the historical point (which is strong), would you consider Gonzaga a Blue Blood under the conference criteria? 

[brewcity77]

Besides the historical point (which is strong), would you consider Gonzaga a Blue Blood under the conference criteria?

I wouldn't because of a lack of Final Fours and National Championships. Gonzaga is probably 2 national titles away from it. I'll give them this, they do have a place in the national zeitgeist because they are ALWAYS there come March and the general public now knows their name, but to be a blue blood I think you have to be able to shed that plucky underdog label that they have associated with them. It's almost impossible to reach that status if you aren't in a high-major.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

Maybe need a category of "Light Blueblood"?

[Galway Eagle]

The birthplace of basketball is widely known as Springfield, Mass. Hence the bball hall of fame. Kansas does not warrant inclusion as a blueblood in any event.

2nd in all time wins is kind of a big deal

[Its DJOver]

Besides the historical point (which is strong), would you consider Gonzaga a Blue Blood under the conference criteria?

If Gonzaga would have had the same success in a power conference then I absolutely would consider them a BB.  They play in a mid major conference so it is tougher to gauge there success relative to the top tier teams in a format other than the tourney.  Based on what they have done and who they have done it against, I would put them in the tier right below BB, alongside programs such as Louisville, and Michigan State.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Maybe need a category of "Light Blueblood"?

"The Bluebloods of Orange County"?

[Silkk the Shaka]

Villanova is definitely a trueblood but the question should be is UMBC a newblood or a blueblood?

If we go on a similar run would that make us a brewblood?

[GGGG]

My mistake, when the inventor of the game also founded your universities basketball program, you will get the benefit of the doubt more often than not.

Yeah but he's the only one of their eight (!!!) coaches to have a losing record.

Marquette has had more coaches my my lifetime (9 over 50 years) than Kansas has had in its entire 120 years of playing basketball.

[MomofMUltiples]

The answer is, who cares? (i know, I know, it's the off season.)

There are simply programs around the country that, for one reason or other, are perceived to be consistently better than others.  For many years, there was a great deal of consistency among those programs -- UCLA, Kentucky, I4, Kansas, Duke, NC, whatever.  Even now, when Chris Mack was offered the Louisville job, most perceived that as a "better" position than Xavier hc - whether that was because of money, or "challenge" or tradition is irrelevant.  There are teams that always get the benefit of the doubt in national rankings, just because of the name on the front of the jersey.  Of course, the preseason polls routinely start with Duke, NC, Kentucky, etc - but every now and then you see a new school up there.  The past couple seasons that has been Villanova.

Just like in today's society, I think that college basketball currently has some "old money" programs, but many of them are starting to lose out to those gauche "new money" programs.  Indiana and UCLA seem to have lost the family fortune a few years ago.  Then you have, horror of all horrors, the "old money" programs where someone in the family tree went out and made vulgar "new money," e.g. the one-and done factories that are Kentucky, Duke and increasingly, Kansas.  Over the long term, as in many years, there really are no bluebloods.  There are programs that dominate for a time but get ignored after they fall on hard times for a couple (or 40) years.  If you asked younger fans today which are the top programs in the country, I doubt any one of them would name UCLA or Indiana.  Sort of like how "top movies of all time" lists suffer from recency bias, in today's world, what have they done lately reigns over what have they done over time.

Villanove is today's "it" program.  I hope they can maintain consistency for many years.  But there is no reason that Marquette can't become the next "it" program.  Success begets continued success.  Get the right recruits,  make a couple deep runs in the tourney and have a coach that sees an opportunity to build on that at Marquette and not use it as a stepping stone to the perceived "better" gig. 

[Its DJOver]

Yeah but he's the only one of their eight (!!!) coaches to have a losing record.

Marquette has had more coaches my my lifetime (9 over 50 years) than Kansas has had in its entire 120 years of playing basketball.

It's not just his record, but the prestige of his name.  If MU produced basketball icons like James Naismith, Dean Smith, Adolph Rupp, and Phog Allen all of us here would be flaunting that every chance we got.  Whether or not you think they have had the on court success to be considered a BB, the Kansas program has produced more than enough iconic college basketball personas to have the prestige of a BB IMO.

[Dr. Blackheart]

If we go on a similar run would that make us a brewblood?

Judging by BAC, we are already in. I think KO and Deano put us over the top.

[GooooMarquette]

2nd in all time wins is kind of a big deal

Where are they in all time games played? I'd bet they're right up there....

[Galway Eagle]

Where are they in all time games played? I'd bet they're right up there....

3rd all time win % does that make you happier?

[Coleman]

I think to answer this question you have to speculate on where the program will be 10 year from now.  A true Blueblood will be a competing for national championships 10 years from now.  I'm pretty certain that will be the case with Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, UNC.  Will Nova.  Hard to say for sure.  What will happen when Jay Wright leaves.  Will they be able to get any coach they want like UNC and Kansas did.  Do today's first graders dream of playing for Nova?  Because you'll want to be able to have your pick of the litter 10 years from now.
Its very hard to become a true Blueblood.  Nova is certainly on their way.  But they are pretty much in the same place UConn was 10 years ago and I don't think anyone would consider them Blueblood now.

I don't disagree with you. The true test may be when the coach leaves. But what does that mean about Duke then? All of their success has been under Coach K. Nova has national titles under two coaches.