Jump to content

2023 Final Four general thread


shadow_operative

Recommended Posts

Texas was one of the 3 o r 4 best teams in the  tournament. Nothing wrong with that, at all. Helluva year. 

UConn was the best team in the tournament on both ends. Above and beyond everyone else. It peaked at the right time. Offensive continuity was there for most of the season and the defense is what separated it at the end.  

Good for the Hurley family. That's one helluva an accomplishment for UConn - 5 trips to the final, 5 wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It got me thinking about the teams Uconn beat in the championship game. After the upset ( i think it was at least) of Duke in 1999, they faced Georgia Tech, Butler, San Diego State and an 8 seed Kentucky. Although they were also a 7 or 8 seed that year. Some pretty random teams they faced off at the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, PittsburghTiger said:

I know it’s been discussed before but, I think a win tonight solidly puts UConn into Blue Blood status. That would be five titles in less than 25 years, would tie them with Duke and Indiana, put them one in front of Kansas and one behind UNC. UCLA has won one title since 1975’s title. Indiana hasn’t won since 1987. And Kentucky has won one since it’s title in 1998. 

IMHO, that's like saying Miami was a football blue blood in 2001. Being a blue blood requires more history and prestige than just winning titles over an approximate 20 year period. Blue bloods are old money, wealth builders. UConn is a great program with a hell of a run of titles over a couple decades, but they're still nouveau riche. When UConn isn't any good, no one cares. When a blue blood sucks, they're still a blue blood and in the conversation and national conscience. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, gernblansten said:

IMHO, that's like saying Miami was a football blue blood in 2001. Being a blue blood requires more history and prestige than just winning titles over an approximate 20 year period. Blue bloods are old money, wealth builders. UConn is a great program with a hell of a run of titles over a couple decades, but they're still nouveau riche. When UConn isn't any good, no one cares. When a blue blood sucks, they're still a blue blood and in the conversation and national conscience. 

Does anyone care about Indiana because the Hoosiers won five titles? The last one being 1987. That was 36 years ago.

What about UCLA? They have won one title, in 48 years, since the end of the run in 1975.

Are those two programs still Blue Bloods?

Blue Blood family fortunes can be lost and bankrupted. And new money takes over.

Is a quarter century of championships enough time to be considered no longer Nouveau Riche? Is the cutoff 30 years? 40 years? 50 years?

Because if it is 50 years then UCLA has been living off its trust fund for too long.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Vic Mackey said:

It got me thinking about the teams Uconn beat in the championship game. After the upset ( i think it was at least) of Duke in 1999, they faced Georgia Tech, Butler, San Diego State and an 8 seed Kentucky. Although they were also a 7 or 8 seed that year. Some pretty random teams they faced off at the end.

Does anyone really remember who UCLA beat in their titles? I don't.

Unless they are amazing games, 1983, 1985, Duke v UNLV, etc, and the losing team is remembered as well people don't really care whom it is that you beat.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PittsburghTiger said:

Does anyone really remember who UCLA beat in their titles? I don't.

Unless they are amazing games, 1983, 1985, Duke v UNLV, etc, and the losing team is remembered as well people don't really care whom it is that you beat.

I am not demeaning their championships at all. Was just a random thought for the teams they faced in the championship game were pretty random. Seeing as how if UT won it all this year, they would have beat a random San Diego St team. And right, no one would care at all. If you win 5 games to get to the championship game, then you earned it. 

Edited by Vic Mackey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, gernblansten said:

IMHO, that's like saying Miami was a football blue blood in 2001. Being a blue blood requires more history and prestige than just winning titles over an approximate 20 year period. Blue bloods are old money, wealth builders. UConn is a great program with a hell of a run of titles over a couple decades, but they're still nouveau riche. When UConn isn't any good, no one cares. When a blue blood sucks, they're still a blue blood and in the conversation and national conscience. 

is UCLA one, with only 1 title since Wooden? What about Michigan football?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Vic Mackey said:

I am not demeaning their championships at all. Was just a random thought for the teams they faced in the championship game were pretty random. Seeing as how if UT won it all this year, they would have beat a random San Diego St team. And right, no one would care at all. If you win 5 games to get to the championship game, then you earned it. 

I didn't think you were. I was just adding to what you said. I think the nature of the tournament leads to some randomness.

I'd throw in UNC over Georgetown as memorable because everyone remembers the kid from Georgetown throwing the pass at the end, just like Weber and his timeout. I think there needs to be a lot of pain involved for teams to be remembered for losing, kind of like Kentucky losing to Duke in that overtime game before the championship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...