What type of program is Iowa State
- Thread starter Urbandale2013
- Start date
I guess some things are too big for your little brain.
Virginia is not even close to a blue blood. They don't have a single national championship. You should have multiple national championships to even be considered.
I think our program’s (and fan base) goal should be an annual top 4 conference finish, and Sweet 16 appearance. Anything more than that is gravy. Anything that less isn’t going to be considered unsuccessful, just not meeting your goal that year. I think we recruit/have the talent of that level, and have the fan support of similar teams at that level...
Final Four appearances
20 North Carolina
17 Kentucky, UCLA*
16 Duke
15 Kansas
10 Ohio State*
9 Michigan State
8 Indiana, Louisville**
6 Arkansas, Cincinnati,
Michigan**, Oklahoma State, Syracuse
5 Connecticut, Florida, Georgetown, Houston, Illinois, Oklahoma,Villanova*
20 North Carolina
17 Kentucky, UCLA*
16 Duke
15 Kansas
10 Ohio State*
9 Michigan State
8 Indiana, Louisville**
6 Arkansas, Cincinnati,
Michigan**, Oklahoma State, Syracuse
5 Connecticut, Florida, Georgetown, Houston, Illinois, Oklahoma,Villanova*
We're in the 20-30 range as a program. Seeing as blue blood status will probably always be a bridge too far, the long-term aspiration is top 15. But this definition is still too vague, because I think fans disagree on what they define as short-term goals and how much weight they give them. Some fans value the regular season, some value the NCAA tournament, and the value of the Big 12 Tournament is debated every time the Cyclones bow out in March. Fans also disagree on the more subjective, but important, benchmark that is program trajectory.
I'm just glad we don't hire and fire coaches based on fan polls.
Aside: I'd define a blue blood as a program that's too big to fail, or can't be kept down for long in times of transition. I think Indiana and UCLA's current states make them less than blue blood. KU, UK, Duke, and UNC would be mine. Their brands and fanbases are too strong for them to ever spend much time in mediocrity in this internet age of national recruiting.
Another aside, taken from Google: "'Blue blood' is a literal translation of the Spanish 'sangre azul'. This was the designation attributed to some of the oldest and proudest families of Castile, who claimed never to have intermarried with Moors, Jews, or other races."
Who knew?
I'm just glad we don't hire and fire coaches based on fan polls.
Aside: I'd define a blue blood as a program that's too big to fail, or can't be kept down for long in times of transition. I think Indiana and UCLA's current states make them less than blue blood. KU, UK, Duke, and UNC would be mine. Their brands and fanbases are too strong for them to ever spend much time in mediocrity in this internet age of national recruiting.
Another aside, taken from Google: "'Blue blood' is a literal translation of the Spanish 'sangre azul'. This was the designation attributed to some of the oldest and proudest families of Castile, who claimed never to have intermarried with Moors, Jews, or other races."
Who knew?
Does anyone quite realize how flawed a single elimination tournament is in evaluating a season?
I believe too many fans are using 1 game as an indictment on the entire season.
I believe too many fans are using 1 game as an indictment on the entire season.
The Mavericks beat the Warriors by 30 the other night. What if that had been had been the Warriors' whole post-season? The intensity of post-season games means that they rarely get that out of hand, but case-in-point.
Without a doubt there needs to be accountability for poor play (and that wasn't the only thing going against the Clones on Friday), but I agree, there needs to be a holistic approach.
Top half of the conference and a round of 32. There will be peak years, with a contention for a regular season ship, and a sweet 16/beyond run. But I think that's a fair minimum for what has been built that last 10 years. Obviously thata the expectations and sometimes will be over achieved and years like this we'll underachieve.
I think that puts us in the top 15-30 range
I think that puts us in the top 15-30 range
Completely agree, but many of the “Elite Prohm Defenders” have refereed in 2014-15 as a failure when comparing the last 8 years. Can’t have it both ways.
I can pretty easily name 25 programs above Iowa State basketball, anyone who answered 10-25 may need a reality check. We’re certainly getting closer though thanks to the last decade.
L
LincolnWay187
Guest
You become the best and/or one of the best 25 top teams by finishing that way. I want some damn wins, metrics and analyst predictions mean nothing.
It seems a lot of those responses were to the posters that said the 15-16 Sweet 16 team was a failure.
Using 2000 as a starting point, which one of these programs are you putting our resume ahead of?
1. Duke
2. NC
3. Virginia
4. Syracuse
5. Villanova
6. Oklahoma
7. Kansas
8. Gonzaga
9. Michigan
10. Michigan State
11. Oregon
12. Wisconsin
13. Purdue
14. Butler
15. Kentucky
16. Arizona
17. Ohio State
18. Florida
19. Florida St
20. Cincinnati
21. UCLA
22. Louisville
23. Tennessee
24. West Virginia
25. UConn
Seems like a fair list. I'm not sure I agree with Florida State being a head of us.
I would guess we are on a short list of teams who have lost as a 2,3, and 6 seed in the first round in the last 20 years...
