Ap top 100 programs

[thecoach]

http://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men ... based-poll

Interesting retrospective.

[tacitus]

I don't like their formula.

First, I don't like the binary of 2 points for each week as #1 and 1 point for all other appearances. There is not a huge difference between a 24 and a 25, or a 2 and a 3, but there is a heck of a lot of difference between a 2 and a 25. A 2 is competing for a national championship, where as a 25 is a competitive team that could beat a 2 or a 3 on any given night, but is very unlikely to go all the way. That said, getting that #1 ranking is an accomplishment in its own right.

Points should be something like: #1=6, #2-5=5, #6-10=4, #11-15=3, #16-20=2, and #21-25=1.

Second, I do not mind having the all time rankings, but I am more interested in the breakdown by decades. This would give us a better idea of the dominant teams during various periods, and also how teams are on a rise or decline in recent years.

Obviously, we would be in the top 25 for 2000's and potentially in the the top 15 or so for the 2010's. So perhaps I obviously have an implicit bias here.

[bluegrass]

Someone was bored and needed something to do I'm sure UC fans will be touting this. It's based on a 68 year time span so for half of the that time X was probably never ranked.If it was based on the last 25 years,I'm sure we'd be much higher

[mumuskie87]

Vanderbilt at 46?
No NC, No F4, only 1E8, 6 S16's and 15 NCAA Tournament appearances.
Xavier at 53 -
3 E8's, 8 S16's and 28 NCAA Tournament appearances.

San Francisco must have gotten a lot of credit for winning 2 NC's 60 years ago to be ranked 48.
Only 1 NCAA appearance in the last 35 years.

UCLA ranked 4th with 11 NC's - more than Duke and UNC combined.

Jim O'Connell of the AP must have been eating retard sandwiches when he wrote that.