Can Villanova repeat as NCAA tournament champion? Absolutely

Since the NCAA tournament began in 1939, just six schools, non-UCLA division, have won consecutive national titles. They are:

Oklahoma A&M (1945-46), Kentucky ('48-49), San Francisco ('55-56), Cincinnati ('61-62), Duke ('91-92), and Florida (2006-07). So, it has happened just twice since UCLA won its seven straight and 10 of 12 from 1964 to 1975. That's twice in 42 years, seemingly daunting numbers for your defending national champion Villanova Wildcats.

Wooden famously walked out on his crutches in the final seconds of the 1991 national semifinal when it was clear unbeaten and defending champion UNLV was going to lose to Duke, the UCLA/UNLV comparisons over. There would be no coronation, no consecutive champs for the first time since UCLA won every year from 1967 to 1973. It would have to wait until the next year, when the Blue Devils of Christian Laettner, Bobby Hurley, and Grant Hill went back-to-back.

This college game has little in common with the game played from the 1940s through the 1970s. No shot clock then, no three-point shot. The best teams were junior- and senior-dominated. The best players did not leave early for the NBA draft. Nobody did.

When Duke won that second title, Laettner was a senior, Hurley a junior, Hill a sophomore. If this were today, it's likely none of them would have been around for that second try. All were lottery picks after their senior years.

Florida was the exception to all the modern rules. The 2006 champs had three surefire NBA players. They all came back to try for a second title. The Gators had the same starting five the second season they had the first - juniors Al Horford, Joakim Noah, Corey Brewer, and Taurean Green and senior Lee Humphrey. They went 68-11 those two seasons.

After they beat Ohio State in 2007 for the second title, the juniors left - Horford, Brewer, and Noah going third, seventh, and ninth, respectively, in that NBA draft.

So Duke and Florida not only brought back the critical players, all of those players became lottery picks. That's what it has taken to go back-to-back since UCLA was winning all those titles with Hall of Fame big men (Lew Alcindor, Bill Walton) anchoring half of them.

So does that mean consecutive titles are impossible for Villanova, which lost two incredibly important seniors - point guard Ryan Arcidiacono and center Daniel Ochefu - from the 2016 champs and does not have two players who would have played key roles on this team - Phil Booth and Omari Spellman? It does not.

This is a different era, even from the one Florida dominated for those two seasons. The most talented college players stay for one season, so it is just about impossible to construct a super team with NCAA tournament experience. And the best talent is always very young, with the very best at two schools, Duke and Kentucky.

Villanova still has five players who had key roles last March and April - Josh Hart, Kris Jenkins, Darryl Reynolds, Jalen Brunson, and Mikal Bridges. Villanova was a really good team for three straight seasons, but absolutely brilliant during that six-game run to the title. These players, three seniors and two sophomores, were right in the middle of all that basketball played as well as the game can be played.

They did it once; they can do it again. Like last season, there is no overwhelming team out there, no Kentucky (2012) with Anthony Davis, no Florida from a decade ago, no Duke from the early 1990s, no UCLA dynasty or anything even close to it.

Villanova had a great draw last year, and after watching how the Cats rolled into the Final Four, you could see they had a real chance to win it.

This team is about as good on offense, not as good on defense without Arch's ball pressure and Ochefu's rim protection, and with a notable lack of depth, which makes it harder to sustain the pressure coach Jay Wright prefers. They are more likely to lose with a bad shooting night, whereas last year's team could and regularly did win games almost solely because of its defense (see Kansas in the Elite Eight).

UCLA beat 10 schools for the championship (Duke, Michigan, Dayton, North Carolina, Purdue, Jacksonville, Villanova, Florida State, Memphis State, and Kentucky). UCLA was always there; no other school was even consistent enough to be in the last game twice.

During its four-year run, Villanova has been a No. 1 seed twice and No. 2 seed twice. That's serious consistency in a sport where the really good teams almost never stay together for long. Villanova is the exception to the modern rule because so far none of its really good players have been so good that they were wanted by the NBA before their senior years.

Some other historical numbers reveal Villanova's task may not be as difficult as that short list of consecutive champs would seem to suggest. Many other teams have come very close to repeating or been in the last game twice in a row.

Tive schools won the title and lost in the championship game the next year - La Salle (1954-55), California ('59-60), Ohio State ('60-61), Georgetown ('84-85), and Arkansas ('94-95).

Four schools lost in the championship game two straight years - Ohio State ('61-62), Houston ('83-84), Michigan ('92-93), and Butler (2010-11).

Cincinnati nearly won three straight, losing in overtime to Loyola of Chicago in the 1963 title game. Kentucky, which won it in 1996 and 1998, lost in OT to Arizona in the 1997 title game.

So, is it very difficult to repeat? Obviously. Is it so difficult that Villanova can't do it? Absolutely not.