Jamie Shaw's top 10 basketball programs since 2000
- Thread starter Smashcat
- Start date
I hâte unc. But there’s no way we’re ahead of them since 2000. They have like 7 final fours to our 4 and 3 titles to our 1 during that time.
Unless we’re taking AFAM gate into consideration. But if that’s the case UNC isn’t even top 10.
Also Uconn is easily top 3 since 2000. And gonzaga is wayyyyy too high.
Unless we’re taking AFAM gate into consideration. But if that’s the case UNC isn’t even top 10.
Also Uconn is easily top 3 since 2000. And gonzaga is wayyyyy too high.
Programs aren’t just about titles. We do play the seasons too.
We play the conference tournament.
Which is better, a team that wins a couple titles and sucks the rest of the time or a team that’s in the hunt almost every year no matter who’s coaching?
I’ll take the latter.
We play the conference tournament.
Which is better, a team that wins a couple titles and sucks the rest of the time or a team that’s in the hunt almost every year no matter who’s coaching?
I’ll take the latter.
UK basketball hasn't been n the hunt almost every year the past 23 years.
2000, 2001, 2002, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2013, 2021, 2022, 2023. Don't think any of those were n the hunt.
And yes, I'd rather have the 4 titles UCONN has or the 3 titles UNC has the past 23 seasons.
It should be:
#1 UNC (3 titles, 7 Final Fours)
#2 Duke (3 titles, 5 Final Fours)
#3 Kansas (2 titles, 6 Final Fours)
#4 UConn (4 titles, 5 Final Fours)
How is Gonzaga even in the discussion?
#1 UNC (3 titles, 7 Final Fours)
#2 Duke (3 titles, 5 Final Fours)
#3 Kansas (2 titles, 6 Final Fours)
#4 UConn (4 titles, 5 Final Fours)
How is Gonzaga even in the discussion?
Last edited:
I disagree about UCONN. Yes they have titles and final fours - and like 10 god awful years. Very bipolar
2001 we were in the mix following a shaky start.
2003 we were very firmly in the hunt. Bogans ankle sunk us.
2022 we were a 2 seed who blasted UNC, Kansas, and UT in season. We were definitely in the hunt though out the year, although we faded violently.
I wonder what AD came in and has been here since 2003......hmmmmmmmm
If you're the University of Notorious Cheaters (UNC) & your players are enrolled in classes that a 5 year old kid could pass. They've got a lot more time to devote to basketball, so they should be better than everyone else that's playing by the rules.
No way Michigan St and Zags should be ahead of us. UNC should be ahead of us. The rest is arguable.
Uconn has 5 titles, but often sucks badly when they don't win it. Duke also went through a rough spell for a few years before K co-opted Cals shtick.
Cal sh*tting the bed so much in the last few years dropped us from 1 or 2 to 5 imo. Uconn could be 2-5, depending on what you place more value on.
Duke
Kansas
UCONN
UNC
UK
Uconn has 5 titles, but often sucks badly when they don't win it. Duke also went through a rough spell for a few years before K co-opted Cals shtick.
Cal sh*tting the bed so much in the last few years dropped us from 1 or 2 to 5 imo. Uconn could be 2-5, depending on what you place more value on.
Duke
Kansas
UCONN
UNC
UK
If you were really a UK fan, that wouldn’t even be a question.
2001 lost 10 games and lost to a 6 seed n sweet 16. They were up and down and finished down.
2002 was a 10 loss team and to be fair lost to eventually champ Maryland n sweet 16 but was team turmoil. I didn't mention 2003.
2022 lost to a 15 seed and won nothing that mattered as far as sec regular season or tourney. They had bragging rights over the teams you beat but then watched unc and ku in title game. If you want to add 2022 fine, but then I can remove 2018 or 2016 that I didn't mention.
At least those teams won sec tourney though and went further n ncaa.
If only UK finished the job in 2015. Historic 40-0 season, additional title, and keeps one away from Duke. Cal probably doesn’t lose his mojo either.
Not sure why I thought you said 2003.
I’ll stand by 2001 whether you agree or not. They went in hot as a 2 seed. Everyone expected us to play Duke in the Elite Eight. Got blitzed in the first half by USC and almost came all the way back.
That team was in the mix or a contender or whatever you want to call them. As much as we were in 1999, or 2005, or 2019, or a few other similar years.
2022 was in the mix. 2018 and 2016 really weren’t. 2018 had a shot because the field opened up but couldn’t close the deal. 2016 was paper soft inside. Backcourt was next level of course.
2022 blew it when they decided not to play Sharpe. They needed another body down the stretch, preferably a wing. And they had one.
I'm not elitist enough to assume UK should have 4 or 5 titles since 2000 but man, we should have more than one in 22 years. Goodness.
2015 we had a very mediocre first-shot half court offense all year and masked it with smothering defense, transition scoring, high free throw rate, and spectacular offensive rebounding. We saw the problem all year when teams kept us out of transition and defended without fouling. Negligent of Cal to let it fester.
2010 I can't believe Cal couldn't do SOMETHING to change our plan of attack against the 1-3-1, he just had a bunch of kids out there trying to wing it and missing jumper after jumper.
At least one of those teams should have been a champion.
I disagree with everyone who doesn’t think UCONN is wayyyyyyyyyyyy out in front with 4 titles in this time period. We’re not in this to look good getting consolation prizes. It’s not just better to win more titles even if you look worse in between; it’s infinitely better.
Everyone seems to have a different standard for this sort of thing.
I did not believe 2001 was on the level of the other actual contenders that season like Arizona, Duke, Michigan State, Stanford etc. We had 9 losses going in. And Saul was still the point guard and he was just not a high level D1 point guard. Though he did play well in the USC loss.
But for me, the teams i actually believed had a chance to win it come tournament time were:
2003, 2004, 2005, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2015, 2017. That’s been it. Most of the other teams either had problems stringing together high level performances, or had one or 2 huge question marks in the starting lineup, mainly point guard, (Saul Smith, Ashton Hagans, Savhir Wheeler) or they flat out were never that good(2002, 2006/7/8/18,23)
Idk UConn 4/5 titles looks pretty good. They were on one hell of a heater in the early 2010s seemed like everytime we turned a corner we ran into that bunch.
Cost us atleast one title.
It’s odd because Cal is also the only reason we’re as high as we are as he’s accounted for all 4 finals fours and the lone title during that time period.
It’s been a combination of Tubby, Gillispie and Cal. Tubby just could never quite get over the hump again after his first season. And Cal just hasn’t been able to adapt to the sport changing after he went on his initial run.
We’ve hung onto Tubby and Cal too long. Tubby should have left after 05. And Cal probably should have been gone after ‘21. That’s on Barnhardt though. Mitch Barnhardt is ultra conservative. He wants to hand out these huge contracts so he doesn’t have to make hard decisions on hiring and firing guys. He’s greatly overrated as an AD.
I could not have put it any better. They are the gold standard without the Cal drama and BS.
Trying to take into consideration the winning %, final fours, and national championships, if you award a team 10 points for finishing first in that category, 9 for finishing second, and so on, you will come out with this, unless I put in some incorrect numbers
Kansas
Duke
unc
Mich St
UK
UConn
Nova
Florida
Zags
UCLA
Kansas
Duke
unc
Mich St
UK
UConn
Nova
Florida
Zags
UCLA
Thing is....Step back just one season---1999----And that is 5 titles.
Five titles in 24 years, is 5 titles, no matter how ya slice it.
I'd take five titles in 24 years, even if meant missing the NCAAT the other 19.
Meh, not really. Uconn had a bad stretch from 2017-2020---Missing the NCAAT 4 straight years.
BUt............
1999--National Champs
2000- Second round
2001---Missed NCAAT
2002- Elite 8
2003- SW 16
2004--National Champs
2005- Second Round
2006--Elite 8
2007--Missed NCAAT
2008-First round
2009--Final Four
2010- Missed NCAAT
2011--National Champs
2012- First ROund
2013-Missed NCAAT
2014--NAtional Champs
2015-Missed NCAAT
2016---First Round
2017-2020 Missed NCAAT
2021-First Round
2022- First round
2023--National Champs
Basically, these dudes were winning a natty every 5 years....
13 of the years you listed they lost in the first round or missed the NCAA. I would consider those awful, and all you did was say “not really” and then just repeat my exact same point.
5 national titles....6 final Fours....8 Elite 8;s in that span...
Never missed the NCAAT in back to back seasons until the scandal under Ollie; 2017-2020
In a 12 year span, they won 3 titles...went to 4 Final Fours... Missed the tourney three times, only lost once in the 1st round...
They have been hit and miss....There is a diffeence between having bad years, opposed to god awful.
Would you not take their resume since 1999?
5 titles?-----UK has 1.
The 4 titles are great, but that 67% winning percentage?
Duke won 3 titles, 5 final fours and an 81% winning percentage
Kansas won 2 titles, 6 final fours and 82% winning percentsage
Unc won 3 titles, 7 final fours and a 71% winning percentage
I would take any of those over 4 titles and missing the NCAAT or losing in the first round almost half the time. Completely missing the tourney 6 times in that span? Yuck.
Duke won 3 titles, 5 final fours and an 81% winning percentage
Kansas won 2 titles, 6 final fours and 82% winning percentsage
Unc won 3 titles, 7 final fours and a 71% winning percentage
I would take any of those over 4 titles and missing the NCAAT or losing in the first round almost half the time. Completely missing the tourney 6 times in that span? Yuck.
I said that I disagreed with that poster that UCONN was the number 4 team of the last 25 years because they are very bipolar due to having 10 (or 13 as you pointed out) awful years. I’m not sure what exactly you’re arguing with me, but it’s not what I’m stating.
Nobody but the fans of the school remember much about a team unless they win a title, but I get what you’re saying.
1. Who do you put ahead of them? Since 2000, they have 4 titles. No one has more. Go back a mere one season, and they have 5.
2. Losing in the 1st round, even the second, can be considered bad---But awful?
3. The probation years makes thing look worse, than they really are/were, for Uconn.
Again since 2000, They have won 4 national titles. I mean you'd choose to be good every year, lose in the 1st/2nd round, handful of FF's, few Elite 8's, over 4 titles?
There have been 24 NCAAT's from 2000 to now. Uconn has won 4 of them. Missed 8, playing in 16.
If I told you UK would win 4 of the nest 24 Tournaments, but would also miss 8 of them, you'd pass?
I don't think ya would.
My point is simple, Ron---Yeah they have had some lean, bad years....But they have alos won 4 titles, with 5 Final Fours. Sure you can aruge Kansas, UNC and Duke have been better....But after that, who?
If UConn not at #4----who?
We were top 4 to that point when Tubby left. Winningest program from 2002-2004. Just couldn't get into the Final 4 in the tournament although we were real close.
I'm not sure what to think. On one hand, I want to be a team that competes and has a chance ever year. On the other hand, getting a NC is the goal so if you have a few but other years really suck, how is that worse than being in the hunt but not winning them? It's great to be in the hunt every year, but if the goal is to win a title as often as you can, it seems winning a few in a couple decades and sucking the rest of the time would make sense compared to being in the hunt and not winning many or any.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
Similar threads
