Difficulty of each championships run ranked since 1985

[Afghusky15]

Always am surprised to see many here describe UConn's 2014 championship run as "flukey" or the one that got away from UK.

This analysis ranking every championship run since 1985 objectively shows 2014 as by far and away the most difficult championship run.

Subjectively, the 2014 run was as impressive of a championship run as there could be. We beat a 2 seed nova in the 2nd round , who many analyst who thought should have been a 1 seed that year. We beat a really good Iowa st team that many chose as a dark horse pick for FF. We beat Michigan st who was the most picked team to win the whole thing, and then we beat the number 1 team in the tourney that year Florida to get to the national championship game. To top it off we beat the number preseason team, you guys.

 

[mj2k10]

It was not a fluke that UConn beat UK in that title game. It was a fluke that UConn went on that type of 6 game run in the tournament. It was the classic example of a team playing way, way, way over their heads for a duration of time. Hell, UConn had to go to OT in the 1st round against a 10 seed.

And I'll be the first one to admit that a UK title that year would also have been flukey. Although I will say, still more explicable than what UConn did, because you have the obvious difference between what a totally inexperienced roster is like earlier in the year vs what it's like in March/April. That 2014 UConn team definitely belongs in the same class as 85 Villanova, 88 Kansas, and 03 Syracuse, much more than the 2011 UConn team. There was no rational explanation for why any of those teams were able to play the way they did in the tournament.

 

[CatChow]

If we won in 2014 our run would've been considered far more difficult than that of UCONN. We had to play 3 of the previous years Final Four teams (including one that was 34-0), and a Wisconsin team that was absolutely stacked with talent and would go to consecutive Final Fours

 

[KYExtemper]

Surprised that 1997 Arizona isn't higher since they had to beat three #1 seeds and I'm not sure a team has ever replicated that feat.

 

[lakercat]

Flawed system, but we get your point. Arizona had to beat three number one seeds in the tournament. Kentucky had a a similar, if not more difficult run. Kentucky was in the bracket of death against multiple under-seeded teams. I picked UConn over Villanova (wasn't UConn favored, or a very small underdog?), and Michigan State was a four-seed. Yes, UConn beat the number one overall seed. South Carolina has yet to play a one-seed. Florida in 06' played a 14, 11, 7, 1, 11, 2; that's three double-digit seeds, but they are in the top ten in terms of difficulty. I think Florida's 07 run was more difficult. Kentucky, in 2014 had to play four top-four teams (Florida, in their last five tournament runs played a TOTAL of FIVE top-four seeds, and ZERO top two seeds). Basically, every low seed gets the "most difficult run".

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

delete.

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

Isn't this ranking bound to have the lower ranked teams that managed to win it all at the top? Obviously a 1 seed is not going to have the toughest road.