Kentucky, Kansas or Duke?
- Thread starter bkingUK
- Start date
I was usually Rex Chapman, sinking the winning turn around fade away as time expired. SmokinSmileHey....As a kid, I played many of games in my backyard, as a Hoosier.
unlike you i think a true dynasty is built over several decades
Isaiah Thomas here. And if I missed, and after a pause, I would do my Don Fischer--" he was fouled"!!!. Off to the free throw line. Every.Single.Time.
Ahhhh, I see. So UCLA's 7 titles in 10 years to you isn't a dynasty? Why am I not surprised a UK fan would feel this way. To me, tradition is built over several decades. A dynasty is a period of time ; Short or extended.Where a team is quite dominant. You know like going to 7 F's in 9 years; 5 straight at one time. Winning two titles, with three runner up's.
JMO.
1993 injury to Alan Henderson. That team with a healthy, 100% Henderson would've been very difficult to beat. That was a very good year with KU, UNC, UK, UM being really good. But I still think we win it if Henderson's healthy.
1982-83. Really good team. Then lose Wittman. Finished 25-6. Lose in SW 16 as the 2 seed.
Landon Turner as well.
I don't feel the 82-83 team was like the 93 team though. That injury still irks me.
Last edited:
I was usually Byron Houston or Randy Rutherford. I made several game winning shots in my front yard after school.
Are KU and Kentucky fans creating new accounts just to vote?
Sounds like a very Kentucky thing to do actually...Laughing
Sounds like a very Kentucky thing to do actually...Laughing
Those were the days, huh? I remember when Reed from Arkansas hit a 50' to beat UL. I bet I was out on the court, replaying that shot for hours. Ahhhh, the days of glory. When kids were , well, kids.
Unless you are Coach Cal; then everybody says you suck.
a true dynasty is a marathon not a sprint (you should be smart enough to know that)
teams like UK, UNC, KU, DUKE have done it over a long period of time under different coaches
the dynasty at UCLA has crumble just like the Ming dynasty did
UCLA made 3 straight Final 4s under Ben Howland from 2006-2008 and won a National Championship less than 25 years ago in 1995.
Remember, UK didn't accomplish anything from 2000-2009 and the program was basically a dumpster fire.
Every major program goes through downswings especially during coaching transitions.
Championships are all that matter at the end of the day and UCLA has the most of them.
For the lazy.
KU 38%
UK 18%
Duke 15%
Gonzaga 11%
Tennessee 9%
Virginia 5%
Nevada/Villinova 2%
I still consider UCLA the only real dynasty in CBB. Granted, it was easier to pull off something like that than it would be now. I think Duke needed another title or two in that span.
UCLA, Yankees from the 30s-50s, Alabama since 09. True dynasties.
UCLA, Yankees from the 30s-50s, Alabama since 09. True dynasties.
That's a hard one. They won 3 in 4 (a mini dynasty by my arbitrary definition), but then went almost a decade before getting another one.
Definitely an AFC dynasty.
I don't know if my team has a real chance. Duke's 2 headed monster scored like crazy. We only had 7 guys average double figures. And we're so dang young.
Kansas has a team going undefeated. Our BPI isn't even respectable.
All these UNC fans seem confident in their team.... CAL can't coach and we have a Senior Transfer that wasn't pro worthy, so we might as well set our expectations low..... we might not win 10 games this year...
Kansas has a team going undefeated. Our BPI isn't even respectable.
All these UNC fans seem confident in their team.... CAL can't coach and we have a Senior Transfer that wasn't pro worthy, so we might as well set our expectations low..... we might not win 10 games this year...
I heard you guys destroyed a bunch of people nobody has ever heard of that live on an island in the Caribbean so that meant you guys are gonna be almost unstoppable in CBB this season.
Finally a Kentucky fan who can acknowledge the truth. Calipari has had FOUR #1 overall picks (Rose, Wall, Davis, and Towns) and only has one title to his name. That's embarrassing but I'm really proud of you for admitting it.
Imagine not having any #1 picks and not one title to his name. Now that guy can coach.
Where did I say that? I just pointed out that Calipari has been a massive failure for the amount of talent that he's had.
I'll bite. If you only measure by championships. Sure. Measuring by overall success; 1 title, 2 runner up, 5 final fours in 11 years.
How do you know what blue bloods measure by? Winking Most I know measure by overall success in every manner possible. From recruiting, to games, to being Elite in March, and post college success. Whether NBA, Coaching, etc. Bring in great young men and make them in to men. (wait that sounded wrong).
And Bennett should work on that. UVA isn't that far from other schools recruiting at an elite level.
I keep hearing phrases like "sick backcourt" and "no weaknesses." Yet, once again, you're heavily reliant on freshmen, especially in the backcourt.
So why are you guys so convinced that this year's freshmen will be more mature and effective than last year's? No one has answered this question.
We've seen them play and it's fair to be impressed afterwards. It's up to you to take offense to our excitement and try and downplay it.
KU has a great team this year.
Wait, now. For one, I thought Duke was ONLY good since Coach K? Also, make up your mind. You said dynasty's are over several decades. But the refer to UCLA"s run as just that- a dynasty. Man do you even believe what you type?
Last edited:
I think itbwould have been. A FF in 93. Then three straight titles. That would've been quite impressive.
Similar threads
