Benjamin Evergreen What Does Go Blue Refer Too in College Football

Now that the Syracuse Orange's NCAA Tournament run is over, we can stop and look around a bit; take stock of the carnage around us from what's been a pretty haphazard couple weekends.

We were paying attention to the #NARRATIVE around Syracuse, but there was a pretty strong conversation dragging Virginia's playing style after they lost, too. That coincided with everyone hyping 16-seed UMBC. Also, you may have heard that another 11-seed (and TNIAAP favorite), the Loyola-Chicago Ramblers made it all the way to the Final Four.

THAT's the story of this March. Unless, of course, you're a certain worldwide leader in sports...

Yes, Loyola-Chicago's improbable run is noted there, and "miracle" could also refer to Michigan advancing at the buzzer against Houston in the second round to set up the Wolverines' own Final Four trip.

But the curious claim of "three bluebloods" is the confusing thing here, since most honest college basketball observers would not believe that statement whatsoever.

You heard it during the Villanova Wildcats' broadcasts repeatedly that they're a "blueblood" now, as if it's a completely accepted fact. The thing is, two championships in five tries doesn't make you one of the long-standing, traditional titans of the sport. And if 'Nova grabs another championship next Monday night, that won't either.

Tradition, consistency and resources are what dictate blueblood status. That's not just college basketball, and not just sports.

Syracuse fans agree with this, and there are few within the fan base that would call the Orange a blueblood at all. This statement's more to clear things up for any visiting fans, who at this point, believe this is idea on 'Nova is coming from a point of bias.

Being real, college basketball's blueblood list is pretty short. I'd agree with Matt Norlander that it's limited to these six schools (and I'd probably trim Indiana off at this point):

Historically speaking, there are only six bluebloods: Kentucky, UNC, Indiana, Duke, UCLA and Kansas. Other programs are on the fringe, but those are six big houses. In terms of contemporary performance (last decade), Nova a top-five program, no doubt.

— Matt Norlander (@MattNorlander) March 18, 2018

North Carolina, Kansas, Duke, Kentucky and UCLA. That's it. The Bruins are given the benefit of the doubt despite recent struggles because we're still just a decade removed from them making three straight Final Fours, and their valleys are nowhere near what the Hoosiers have experienced.

But beyond those schools is a very large contingent of second-tier powers who can occasionally rise up and not just compete for titles, but win them. There's consistency here too, but without the same access to resources and with interruptions in tradition here and there. If I have to make that list, it looks like this (in alphabetical order):

• Connecticut Huskies
• Georgetown Hoyas
• Indiana Hoosiers
• Louisville Cardinals
• Michigan State Spartans
• Syracuse Orange
• Villanova Wildcats

That's it, and yes I'm leaving off Arizona because their resume and extended period of success doesn't necessarily look as impressive stacked up against these schools. Feel free to quibble about Georgetown, but that now-garbage program has a permanent place among some of the sport's best storylines ever — their rivalry with Syracuse chief among them. If they found a way to become great again, the larger narrative would welcome them back like they never left (and same goes for any of the other six programs here). Michigan being football-first is my biggest hesitation on the Wolverines.

Assuming we're all accepting that cut-off from tier 1 bluebloods to the tier 2 contenders, and the line at the bottom of tier-2, what would it take for a school to rise from that second tier to the first, as these "blueblood" claims about Villanova (and implied by ESPN's headline, Michigan, somehow) seem to believe has happened already?

It's not just titles, because if so, UConn would already have moved up. While the Huskies have hung more banners than Syracuse (take your victory lap, @NoEscalators), that success is still a fairly recent development. That's why Florida isn't in tier 2, and why Butler's not even considered tier 3 (a conversation we don't necessarily have to dig into at all).

Nicole Sweet-USA TODAY Sports

Resources, as mentioned are key. And long-standing success is created by those resources (and success can also create more resources over time). Losing seasons are possible for even the best of these programs. It's more about the depth of the valleys (see my point on Indiana), and how to withstand the change around them numerous times. Combine all of that with some dominant seasons and Final Four appearances, and now we're getting somewhere.

With more titles, Michigan State and Syracuse would be prime candidates to jump. MSU's success is weighted on Tom Izzo's tenure but there's success to pre-date it. SU's made a Final Four in five straight decades, but only collected one title. UConn's ability to jump could be stunted by their conference situation until they rejoin the Big East (probably).

Villanova's not a blueblood and it's probably going to take another decade-plus or three or four more titles to change that. It's nothing against them. They can look at the gap between their 1980s highs and the recent return to the highest levels of prominence. That doesn't mean they're a bad program. The list above includes them among the 12 best in the country. And eventually, sure, maybe we'll see them jump. But with a Final Four possessing a fantastic narrative in Loyola already, there's no need to manufacture these other ones without much basis.

kunzeounins.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.nunesmagician.com/2018/3/26/17163034/whats-a-college-basketball-blueblood-anyway-syracuse-orange-tradition-success-ncaa-tournament

Share this post