Big10 Teams NCAA Tourney Records Comparison
by Boiler00 on Jan 15, 2012 3:44 PM EST
Email
Print
As much talk there has been lately about us needing/wanting to get our first NCAA championship I just wanted to compare our history to the rest of the league. As you can see there plenty of teams in our boat. Even teams like Illinois and Wisconsin that are consistently ranked during recent years don't have one. We are tied for 4th in most appearances. We have the 6th best winning percentage. What's really shitty is OMHR has one more final four appearance. We should be more concerned about that than our lack of 5 banners. We really do need to get a championship and I at least like our chances of a final four with the '12 and '13 classes.
| Tournament Appearances | Record | Final Fours | Championships | ||
| Indiana | 35 | 60-30 | 0.667 | 8 | 1940, 1953, 1976, 1981, 1987 |
| Michigan St | 25 | 52-23 | 0.693 | 8 | 1979, 2000 |
| Ohio St | 27 | 45-25 | 0.643 | 10 | 1960 |
| Michigan | 22 | 42-20 | 0.677 | 6 | 1989 |
| Illinois | 29 | 38-29 | 0.567 | 5 | None |
| Purdue | 25 | 33-24 | 0.579 | 2 | None |
| Iowa | 22 | 27-24 | 0.529 | 3 | None |
| Wisconsin | 17 | 21-15 | 0.583 | 2 | None |
| Minnesota | 11 | 12-11 | 0.522 | 1 | None |
| Penn St | 8 | 9-10 | 0.474 | 1 | None |
| Nebraska | 6 | 0-6 | - | 0 | None |
| Northwestern | 0 | - | - | 0 | None |
Stuff in the FanPosts is entirely at the discretion of those that post them. They do not represent the views of Hammer & Rails, SBNation, or Purdue University in any way.
20 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Might want to check some of these
I know for sure Wisconsin has a NCAA tournament title.
good catch
I missed that one. It was in 1941. I also realized I didn’t update the records for last March’s games but the number of appearances are correct. Hopefully that’s the only mistakes.
well shit...
I got my data from ESPN and they list OSU as having 10 final fours but I’m watching the game right now and the sideline sign said 9 final fours. I even counted on ESPN and I only see 9. I guess some of the data might be off. Should have went to the NCAA website and researched I guess.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/tournament/history?team1Id=7012
Thanks for the research
I love facts and cold, hard numbers so this is good stuff. Keep it up.
Looking at it, I am just very surprised about us being only 6th in terms of number of appearances. I’d think as the team to win the most B1G champ we gotta be the most (or at the very minimum, top 3) in making the tournament, even if we are not known for making it to the Final Four.
Sorry, I mean 4th
Not knowing the data, I would have guessed we would be at the very least Top 3.
I'm a bit surprised too...
Since at-large bids started in ‘75 (after some REALLY good teams were left out,) we’ve usually been in the mix. The last few Keady years hurt a bit. And I think IU has almost always had NCAA teams in that era.
So that pushes them ahead of us. MSU has similarly been consistent in getting to the Big Dance—maybe lost a couple years during the Heathcote/Izzo transition but that’s about it. IIRC Ohio State and Illinois were pretty good in the 50s/60s, and Lou Henson almost always had NCAA teams, too. That’s why they’d be ahead of us.
The biggest skew here is that so many of our conference championships were won before the NCAAs, period—or when the NIT was higher priority—or when the team declined to participate. Here’s a list.
With all the at-large bids available now, it’s more about a program not slipping than being consistently elite. I can’t really see any of the top 5 missing the NCAAs for a while—assuming Indiana’s resurgence isn’t temporary.
by Beavis Beefcake on Jan 20, 2012 1:30 PM EST up reply actions
I think that OSU had to vacate the 1999 FF
That would explain the sideline sign in their arena.
I like our chances in the next few years.
With the next 2 incoming recruiting classes, we have the opportunity to have a balanced team if our recruits continue to devleop and buy into Painters system. It looks like we might have a lineup where positions will be filled with the traditional type of talent. No longer will our center average less then 4 rebounds a game. No longer will we have to rely on the 3-pt to win games. No longer will we have to run with a 6’4" power forward for long stretches. Our guards and wings won’t be undersized. All the players on the court will have more then 1 skill set.
this is very true
and I agree. We can feel good about having the right sized players at all positions. As complimentary as they were to each other even with the Baby Boilers we didn’t have a true center to go out there. We’ll have slashers (TJ, Davis, Smotherman, AJ) and athleticism down low with Lawson, Simpson and Hammons that we’ve been lacking. Maybe our downfall will be lack of 3 point shooters. RJ seems to be pretty good in HS. Stephens should be our best 3 point threat I would assume. Hopefully AJ finds his touch. I don’t know how good Davis and Scott are at the 3 ball.
I believe Kendall is a pretty good shooter.
Davis is capable of taking shots too, but his slashing game is where he gets most of his points.
Agreed, but I am only cautiously optimistic
It looks good right now, but given all the heartbreak as a Purdue fan, just too many things can happen to derail us. An injury here and there (as in Robbie). A suspension (as in GDB last March) or some kind of academic ineligibility. A transfer here and there (as in the Traitor). We all take for granted that players will come in and keep growing every year like JJ, but the fact is, not many players are self-motivated like him. I’d even argue that JJ is the exception, not the norm.
But yes, the next two classes seem to be exciting. Just don’t put too much expectation though and throw the players under the bus at the first sign of struggle.
I use the rule of three in basketball
You need at least 3 stars on your team to likely win a championship. Will we have 3?
UConn didn't have 3 stars.
They had a once-a-decade pg, tho. Lamb was a rising star, but was only a freshman. They had some very good young players, but none I would consider stars, at least not last year.
True, Butler didn't have 3 stars to make it to the championship game twice
Although maybe Butler is so unconventional that we shouldn’t use them as an example since they are more the exception rather than the norm
Hayward, Mack, and Howard the first year.
Mack and Howard returned the second time.
star players help but
it depends on the program. Painters system doesn’t need 3 star players to compete for a National Championship. His defensive strategy and motion offense requires 5 players to have multiple skill sets and no position significantly weaker than the competition. Using our team today as an example, our post position is so much weaker then all of our competition it becomes a liability even with other good players in other positions. If we had an average post player this year, we might only have 1 or 2 losses.
That's true
but that Butler team that went to the title game the first time was very good. They had an NBA lottery pick and an NBA point guard, and Howard was a great big man when he stayed out of foul trouble. They went 33-5. Even playing in the Horizion League, that’s still good.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
