Kentucky, Kansas or Duke?
- Thread starter bkingUK
- Start date
did that build a dynasty for Donovan?
only time will tell, but my money is on him not winning another one anytime soon
No one is ever looking up to Kansas in April. Beginning of March? Sure.
History would suggest that means nothing (other than UCLA, but clearly they're not reeling in that level of talent).
Oklahoma St won back to back. So did San Francisco, Cincinnati and Florida. None of them ever got another.
It might be time to retire this narrative. If KU has sucked in March in the modern era, Kentucky isn't very good either. Kentucky has one more title, the same number of title game appearances, fewer final fours, and 100+ more losses overall.
Maybe you need to dig up Rupp.
Never said it would. But after those titles, Donovan had some really good teams; 2014 team was really good. Thought they were the best team. Went to a few Elite 8's. Just came up short. It's tough to win the title.
I don't think or feel Wright is about to go on some type of Wooden run. But to dismiss what he's done is asinine. To insinuate he's "gotten lucky" is even more asinine; though lick does play it's role. But he's won 2 of the past three tourneys. So rather he's getting better, or he's as lucky as Cal is unlucky. Winking
Interesting that you say/feel he won't another title again anytime soon. Why? He'll have another good team this year. I know---stronger field. But it's not like he'll have to beat KU, Duke AND UK. Probably only one of them. If that. I wouldn't bet against him not winning another title soon. But then again, probably wouldn't bet he will. After all, the NCAAT is probably the hardest title to win. Best team or not.
No one asides UCLA has ever won more than two consecutive titles. So does that mean ONLY UCLA has ever produced a dynasty? Is winning multiple titles consecutively the only criteria for you in defining a dymasty? Do you not consider what 'K' did in the late 80's, early 90's a dynasty? What about UK's run imthe late 40', through the mid 50's? In other words, exactly what is a dynasty to you?
Donovan had some very good teams before those titles
i don't think those titles did anymore for him and UF then he had accomplished before the titles
Wright had underachieved as much as any top coach until he finally broke through and won a couple of titles
time will tell if Wright hit lightning in a bottle or if he can actually sustain it
does he go another 15 years before he wins a title?
A ton of coaches have had the same , or similar paths/results. Anton of those guys we now call HOF'ers. Wrights won over 400 games. Been to what, four Final Fours? Won two titles. And he's only 56. Look, Ollie at UCONN is an example of catching lightning in bottle. Not a guy who's won 70% of his games, with over 400 wins, two titles, etc, etc.. Why people want to dwell on his early failures is beyond me . Thank goodness for Dukie fans that Duke didn't do that [with K].
Edit: I'd be willing to bet it's not 15 more years before Jay wins another. But again, it is tough.
But the thing is we have at least one more title than Kansas in every era. Which ends up tallying 8-3
Yes, I consider UCLA the only true dynasty. You could call Rupp winning 3 in 4 a mini dynasty. Duke in the early 90s was a great run but not a dynasty. A dynasty has to be extended dominance over several years.
If Wright wins another within 2 years, I think it could be called a dynasty.
Yep, those Rupp titles are sure relevant to this year's prospects.
A more relevant statement: "No one looks up to Calipari in April."
I’m not declaring them champs. They could lose early in the tournament. The tournament is too random to declare any team a for sure bet. They will be better than last year. I saw exhibition games last year UK played in November and I can compare that to what I saw with the Bahamas tour in August. We look a lot better this year. November 6th will tell us more.
Fair enough. I just look at a dynasty a bit different. I consider Dukes run from 86-94 as a dynasty. Won two titles. Runner-up three times. 7 Final Fours. To me, that's a dynasty. JMO.
Last edited:
Not getting ahead. Just saying I like they way they look now in comparison to preseason/exhibition games from previous teams. I think we have a chance to do something special. We have pieces we haven’t had since 15. I think 15 had a better inside game, especially defensively. I think this team has a good balance.
In a random tournament you never know. Still as good of shot as any other top team.
I’ll take history’s side in regards to Kansas winking a title against teams other than big 12
Nope, that would just be Cal's 2nd title and it was a 7 year gap between his 1st and 2nd. Not close to what K accomplished from 86-94 as Borden pointed out.so you are saying that if UK wins it this year Cal would have a dynasty
2 National Titles, 3 Finals appearances and 7 Final 4s in 9 years...a true dynasty.
Also, no dynasty can ever include an NIT appearance. RollLaugh
Cal is unlikely to win a title anytime soon too. It's hard to win it all period.
This is a very stupid comment since KU just made the Final 4 and UK hasn't made a Final 4 since 2015. Eyeroll
Yes, Duke's still been amongst one of the best programs in the NCAA since 1994 but KU, UK and UNC have been on the same level as us for sure.
The 1986-1994 is truly remarkable.
Rupp had one of those runs
had Pitino stayed he was on pace for one of those runs
both Wooden and Calhoun had those type of runs
i give props to Rupp, K, Calhoun, Wooden
they all accomplished something that is very tough to do
History also tells us that Calipari has very low odds of winning it.
We can do this all day.Laughing
Imagine If he had been at a blue blood as long as bill self and only had one title. He probably wouldn’t be our coach anymore
Well, in 5-6 years, and 30 lottery picks and 0 titles later, we'll have our answer.
Ummm, no. Duke didn't have any NIT's during that span.Laughing Plus, well K's run was quite a bit more impressive.so you are saying that if UK wins it this year Cal would have a dynasty
'86- Runner up
'87- SW 16
'88- Final Four
89- Final Four
90- Runner -up
91- Champions
92-Champions
93- 2nd round
94- Runner-up
Cal' s been good. But not that good. Not even close, really.
2010- Elite 8
2011- FF
2012- Champions
2013- NIT
2014- Runner up
2015- FF
2016- 2nd round
2017- Elite 8
2018- SW 16
NOPE.
UK has pieces...For sure. But ummm, brother you dont have "2015 types of pieces". No sir. Still shocked that team didn't win it all. Right there with 1990 UNLV.
I was only 3 when IU lost in '75. But my grandfather, dad , uncles tell me---"best team IU's ever had. And still painful".
Biggest ouch for me was 1993. Henderson injury to this day kills me.
Much different. Neither UNLV or UK lost a 1st team All-American, prior to the NCAAT. If May doesn't break his arm, IU wins back to back titles. No question.
We'll never know. Just as we'll never know how UK would have done with Poythress.
Sucks.
Nope. Just saying I don't think you can put that IU team in with the likes of 2015 UK, or 91 UNLV. Poythress was an important part. Scott May was THE part. All-American.We'll never know. Just as we'll never know how UK would have done with Poythress.
Sucks.
I'll say this---of course without absolute, but it's hard to fathom that team, with May, losing.
You said "we". I didn't think you were one of "those guys". LaughingNever said we did.
Not to double quote, but yes....it sucks. Injuries have possibly cost IU 2- 3 Titles. Same with UK. I don't mind losing. Don t mind getting beat. But God damn it stings when you lose , and not at full strength.We'll never know. Just as we'll never know how UK would have done with Poythress.
Sucks.
Similar threads
