PDA

View Full Version : College Basketball Program Saragin Rankings ALL TIME



soccerstud2210
10-05-2009, 01:10 PM
this was an interesting article.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=4531910

agree or not?

#1- Kentucky
#2- UCLA
#3- Kansas
#4- North Carolina
#5- Indiana
#6- Illinois
#7 Duke
#8- Purdue
#9- Ohio State
#10- Iowa

there are some crazy rankings in there

CDu
10-05-2009, 02:26 PM
It appears to be overvaluing the Big-10, and I'm not entirely sure why. Eight of the first ten Big Ten schools (excluding Penn State) are ranked in the top-15, and Wisconsin is in the top-30. The overvaluing of the Big-Ten has resulted in Northwestern being 77th. I realize that many of the Big-10 schools have old basketball traditions, but that's a little absurd.

The top-3 are the right three, though an argument could be made for nearly any ordering of those three. I think Kansas and Indiana are reasonable #4 and #5. I'd have put Duke #5 or #6. I definitely would not have Illinois ahead of Duke, but again that's a function of some aspect of the model overvaluing the Big Ten.

eightyearoldsdude
10-05-2009, 03:00 PM
It appears to be overvaluing the Big-10, and I'm not entirely sure why. Eight of the first ten Big Ten schools (excluding Penn State) are ranked in the top-15, and Wisconsin is in the top-30. The overvaluing of the Big-Ten has resulted in Northwestern being 77th. I realize that many of the Big-10 schools have old basketball traditions, but that's a little absurd.

The top-3 are the right three, though an argument could be made for nearly any ordering of those three. I think Kansas and Indiana are reasonable #4 and #5. I'd have put Duke #5 or #6. I definitely would not have Illinois ahead of Duke, but again that's a function of some aspect of the model overvaluing the Big Ten.

I agree with this. It seems like UCLA, UK, and UNC are consensus top-3 programs of all-time, but where you rank them depends on how much weight you give cleanliness and sustained excellence (i.e., winning under multiple coaches) relative to number of titles and final fours. UNC seems to fall in at #2 or #3 more often than #1, but there are legitimate reasons to rank us at the top.

It also seems like Duke, KU, and Indiana are consensus 4-6, but I think there is more agreement on Indiana as a #4 program, given their 5 titles. Duke and KU have the same number of titles, but I think Naismith and wining titles with different coaches breaks that tie.

After the top 6, there is a LOT of space. I guess Uconn would be #7? Or maybe Louisville? Are there any other programs that have 3 titles?

DevilCastDownfromDurham
10-05-2009, 03:05 PM
Good recap by Forde. I do think a couple of other points need to be given weight when evaluating programs.

When you crunch the number of wins, titles, and Final Fours six programs clearly stand out to me: Duke, UNC, UK, UCLA, IU, and KU. Throw in any other standards (conference titles, NBA picks, win % from major conferences, NPOY's) and this list is pretty static.

Titles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Men%27s_Division_I_Basketball_Championship_re cords#NCAA_Championships) (FF appearances):
1. UCLA - 11 (17)
2. UK - 7 (13)
3. IU - 5 (8)
4. UNC - 5 (18)
5. Duke - 3 (14)
6. KU - 3 (13)

Wins (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_teams_with_the_most_victories_in_NCAA_Divi sion_I_men%27s_college_basketball):
1. Kentucky - 1988 wins
2. UNC - 1984
3. Kansas -1970
4. Duke -1876
5. Syracuse -1753
6. Temple -1711
8. UCLA 1672
11. IU - 1641

Looking at those six programs, UK and UCLA have major program-shattering scandals that have to be considered when evaluating their "greatness." OTOH, Duke and UNC are the only programs to have built their tradition, won their recruits and earned their conference titles in the shadow of another "great."

As such, I'd argue that there are two "tiers":
1st tier: UNC, UK, UCLA
2nd tier: Duke, KU, IU

To me UNC has to be 1 (2nd most wins, most FF's, 3rd most titles, no major corruption, had to go through Duke) with UK second and UCLA third (300 fewer wins, easy road to titles in the 1970's when seeding was done by geographic region).

Second tier I think all three can make a strong case for #4 depending on what you value most highly. I'd grade IU down for being outside the top 10 in wins and only 8 FF's, but you could spin things any number of ways. I'm also curious about #7. Any arguments?

Duvall
10-05-2009, 03:08 PM
I agree with this. It seems like UCLA, UK, and UNC are consensus top-3 programs of all-time, but where you rank them depends on how much weight you give cleanliness and sustained excellence (i.e., winning under multiple coaches) relative to number of titles and final fours.

I'm not sure how cleanliness can be much of a tiebreaker here; all three of those schools have at least one serious scandal in their past.


Are there any other programs that have 3 titles?

No.

DevilCastDownfromDurham
10-05-2009, 03:20 PM
Just checked and Louisville has a strong case for #7. 2 titles, 8 FF's, but #16 in terms of wins (1587). No real basketball-related scandals and strong competition with UK for recruits, even if they don't have to share a conference.

CameronBornAndBred
10-05-2009, 04:57 PM
I don't have much problem with our ranking, given its timespan, it looks fair. I'm just happy that I have been around to witness for so long the era that is responsible for the higher ranking.

On the flip side, it would be interesting to see where Duke football would rank. They might actually get mentioned mid 20's, but it wouldn't be for any seasons that I got to witness. (Excluding Spurrier's last year)

Welcome2DaSlopes
10-05-2009, 05:08 PM
I think we should be ahead of Illinois and Ucla should be #1 but yes i agree with the rest.

KenTankerous
10-05-2009, 06:02 PM
Has the NCAA ever vacated a Saragin ranking? I'm asking for a friend that just moved here from Memphis a few months ago. Thanks.

eightyearoldsdude
10-05-2009, 06:45 PM
I'm not sure how cleanliness can be much of a tiebreaker here; all three of those schools have at least one serious scandal in their past.



No.

This prompted me to read up on the history of the 1960-61 probation. It turns out that McGuire took recruits to fairly lavish dinners, but they were not against any NCAA rules. We were charged with "excessive recruiting" and were not allowed to participate in the NCAA tournament in 1961. (We voluntarily pulled out of the ACC tournament that year.) Eventually, chancellor Aycock demonstrated that the dinners were not that outlandish, given the number of people in attendance, and no recruits were given cash payments. Because of this, the case was sent back to the infractions committee and ultimately, the majority of charges were dropped.

I don't know a lot of about the history of corruption at UCLA or UK, but I don't think the McGuire blemish compares. In any case, we might not have had Dean for a coach if not for those dinners...

Indoor66
10-05-2009, 07:02 PM
This prompted me to read up on the history of the 1960-61 probation. It turns out that McGuire took recruits to fairly lavish dinners, but they were not against any NCAA rules. We were charged with "excessive recruiting" and were not allowed to participate in the NCAA tournament in 1961. (We voluntarily pulled out of the ACC tournament that year.) Eventually, chancellor Aycock demonstrated that the dinners were not that outlandish, given the number of people in attendance, and no recruits were given cash payments. Because of this, the case was sent back to the infractions committee and ultimately, the majority of charges were dropped.

I don't know a lot of about the history of corruption at UCLA or UK, but I don't think the McGuire blemish compares. In any case, we might not have had Dean for a coach if not for those dinners...

UNC was also limited to one scholaship player per year through 1962.

rushthecourt
10-05-2009, 07:42 PM
Our take is that Duke got hosed here. Illinois is an unconscionable selection ahead of Duke and some other B10 teams.

Illinois over Duke??? (http://rushthecourt.net/2009/10/05/all-time-sagarin-ratings-duke-isnt-going-to-be-happy-about-this/)

throatybeard
10-05-2009, 09:54 PM
My favorite part of this thread is how title looks like Kanye West wrote it.

IIRC, several years ago James Armstrong wrote a fairly persuasive post, disputing the notion that UCLA benefited excessively from coming out of the West. He used all the year-by-year matchups.

allenmurray
10-06-2009, 09:22 AM
IIRC, several years ago James Armstrong wrote a fairly persuasive post, disputing the notion that UCLA benefited excessively from coming out of the West. He used all the year-by-year matchups.

I remember that, and agree. I think the bigger thing in UCLA's favor at that time was the lack of parity in college basketball combined with the small size of the tournament. Those two things having changed over the years is what will prevent anyone from building the kind of dynasty that Wooden had.

hurleyfor3
10-06-2009, 01:49 PM
Has the NCAA ever vacated a Saragin ranking? I'm asking for a friend that just moved here from Memphis a few months ago. Thanks.

Not that I know of, but if you can claim national championships before the NCAA Tournament began, why not dork championships before Sagarin ratings began? I say we were the best team on paper in 1964.

Duvall
10-06-2009, 01:57 PM
I say we were the best team on paper in 1964.

Why? UCLA was undefeated that year and whipped Duke in the final.

sagegrouse
10-06-2009, 02:13 PM
This prompted me to read up on the history of the 1960-61 probation. It turns out that McGuire took recruits to fairly lavish dinners, but they were not against any NCAA rules. We were charged with "excessive recruiting" and were not allowed to participate in the NCAA tournament in 1961. (We voluntarily pulled out of the ACC tournament that year.) Eventually, chancellor Aycock demonstrated that the dinners were not that outlandish, given the number of people in attendance, and no recruits were given cash payments. Because of this, the case was sent back to the infractions committee and ultimately, the majority of charges were dropped.

I don't know a lot of about the history of corruption at UCLA or UK, but I don't think the McGuire blemish compares. In any case, we might not have had Dean for a coach if not for those dinners...

My memory, while fallible, is that the UNC system trustees grabbed the bull by the horns and limited the Tarheels to only a few games outside the conference in 1962 and maybe 1963, which were Dean's first years. This was not requested by the NCAA or the ACC.

Could you shed some light on this topic of ancient history?

sagegrouse

eightyearoldsdude
10-06-2009, 02:36 PM
My memory, while fallible, is that the UNC system trustees grabbed the bull by the horns and limited the Tarheels to only a few games outside the conference in 1962 and maybe 1963, which were Dean's first years. This was not requested by the NCAA or the ACC.

Could you shed some light on this topic of ancient history?

sagegrouse

I'm not totally sure, but I think life was back to normal by 1963. But yes, much of the penalty was self-imposed, IIRC. McGuire was strongly encouraged to take an NBA coaching gig. He wanted to take Dean with him, but Dean felt like he was best-suited for college coaching, thank god.

eightyearoldsdude
10-06-2009, 02:37 PM
Oh--I do recall something about us pulling out of the Dixie classic, due to fears it was corrupted by gambling influences. But I don't know the timing of that.

jimsumner
10-06-2009, 03:09 PM
UNC's probation had nothing to do with schedule and scholarship reductions.

This was the result of the point-shaving scandals, in which both State and Carolina were implicated, State more seriously. State was likewise restricted in scheduling and scholarships.

The point-shaving scandal also led to the termination of the Dixie Classic.

Many thought at the time that replacing an icon like Frank McGuire with a young, unknown assistant coach was a clear statement of deemphasis.

Didn't quite turn out that way.

eightyearoldsdude
10-06-2009, 03:13 PM
UNC's probation had nothing to do with schedule and scholarship reductions.

This was the result of the point-shaving scandals, in which both State and Carolina were implicated, State more seriously. State was likewise restricted in scheduling and scholarships.

The point-shaving scandal also led to the termination of the Dixie Classic.

Many thought at the time that replacing an icon like Frank McGuire with a young, unknown assistant coach was a clear statement of deemphasis.

Didn't quite turn out that way.

Link?

BD80
10-06-2009, 03:20 PM
UNC's probation had nothing to do with schedule and scholarship reductions.

This was the result of the point-shaving scandals, in which both State and Carolina were implicated, State more seriously. State was likewise restricted in scheduling and scholarships.

The point-shaving scandal also led to the termination of the Dixie Classic.

Many thought at the time that replacing an icon like Frank McGuire with a young, unknown assistant coach was a clear statement of deemphasis.

Didn't quite turn out that way.


Link?

A link into the mind and memories of JimSumner?

Could be interesting ...

eightyearoldsdude
10-06-2009, 03:24 PM
A link into the mind and memories of JimSumner?

Could be interesting ...

I'm still new around here :). I guess it seemed like a strong statement to say that our reduced schedule (esp. our self-imposed withdrawal from the ACC tourney) had nothing to do with the NCAA probation. I'm no expert and I'm not saying it's incorrect, I'd just like to see sources.

jimsumner
10-06-2009, 03:37 PM
UNC did withdraw from the 1961 ACC Tournament because of their NCAA Tournament probation.

The schedule reductions I referenced came later and were a result of the point-shaving scandals. UNC and State were limited in the number of non-conference, regular-season games they could play. For example. UNC and State were permitted to play only two non-ACC games in 1962, which accounts for their respective 8-9 and 11-6 overall records that season.

For reference sake I would refer you to Ron Morris' late 1980s history of ACC basketball, Barry Jacobs' 2002 history of the ACC entitled Golden Glory, Bruce Corrie's 25th anniversary history of the ACC, Bill Beezley's history of NC State athletics, or Doug Herakovich's history of NC State basketball.

Morris has the most detailed discussion of the scandal but the book is OOP. Still, a good inter-library loan system should be able to procure a copy.

DevilCastDownfromDurham
10-06-2009, 03:44 PM
Morris' book at UNC (http://search.lib.unc.edu/search?R=UNCb2250115) (Davis Library) can be found at: GV885.49.A84 M66 1988

At Duke (http://find.library.duke.edu/results.php?type=books&recordid=DUKE002117050&format=search) it's in the archives at: 796.32372 M877, A169, 1988 c.1

Since you are new you may not know that Jim (http://jimsumner.net/)is a fairly well-known historian with a focus on North Carolina/Southern athletics.

-jk
10-06-2009, 06:05 PM
UNC's probation had nothing to do with schedule and scholarship reductions.

This was the result of the point-shaving scandals, in which both State and Carolina were implicated, State more seriously. State was likewise restricted in scheduling and scholarships.

The point-shaving scandal also led to the termination of the Dixie Classic.

Many thought at the time that replacing an icon like Frank McGuire with a young, unknown assistant coach was a clear statement of deemphasis.

Didn't quite turn out that way.Link?

Generally speaking, when Jim speaks, people listen. You're safe assuming he's authoritative.

We're blessed with several highly qualified members.

-jk