What level of experience will your team bring into next year?

[Scotty00]

Behind probably UNC

The difference between Kentucky and UNC is that you were in a conference that took football serious
So you had automatic entry into the tournament every year. At one time that was Sweet 16.

Final 4 appearances says UNC
NC says UCLA

The rest of the shit isn't important IMO.
Sweet 16 now... Yes but not in the 1960's.

The rest of it’s not important? Then why keep records of it. See this is the problem. People wanna pick and choose what’s important so it goes along with who they want to be the best. That’s exactly why you take everything and lay it out and there’s no question. Going by everything UK sits at the top. Give those other schools credit, their great, but it’s UK!

 

[SheriffBufordTJustice]

I am not going to argue but the point regarding the Sweet 16 is that what we see the Sweet 16 as today wasn't always the case

Kentucky were pretty much given a lot of those spots.

Regarding Sweet 16's since the tournament expanded it has been even between UNC and Kentucky.
21-21

Probably better to look for when teams didn't play Round of 32 games on their home floor.

Kentucky won the SEC was given a home game. Made the Sweet 16 but didn't advance to the Final 4.

 

[Scotty00]

Oh I’m not arguing at all. If roles were reversed and it was IU, Duke or any other team I would give them the nod. I’m not one of those homers who thinks my team does no wrong and we are just better because I cheer for a certain team. Like I said, other teams have been great but when looking at everything it’s UK! It’s not UK’s fault how things used to be. Who did you say your team was?

 

[jhmossy]

….cling to UCLA's title count. It's all ya got. UK is tops in so many categories, I don't need to waste any effort on listing them for you.

All Time:
From Bleacher Report:
After taking home the 2012 NCAA National Championship trophy, the Kentucky Wildcats are yet again the kings of college basketball. It had been 14 seasons since the school won its previous championship, but head coach John Calipari has put the Wildcats back on top of the basketball mountain, and he does not appear to be changing that trend anytime soon.

However, this 2012 championship is not the only reason why Kentucky is college basketball's greatest program. Over the course of the sport's grand history, no other team has achieved more on-court success than the University of Kentucky.

The Wildcats are the leaders or near the lead in nearly every major category of team success, including wins, championships, Final Four appearances, NCAA Tournament success and even fan attendance. The following pages will use statistical and factual reasoning to determine why the University of Kentucky Wildcats are the single greatest program in college basketball history.


Past 10 years:
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nca...onnecticut-syracuse/ud5cdhg65jil188rxwhx8lrle

It ain't easy being right all the time.

• Most wins
• Most Final Fours
• Most Elite 8's
• Most Sweet 16's

….all in the Cal era. Aren't you dookies supposed to be smart? You're clearly not.

 

[ExitFlagger]

He’s the Kentucky version of Gil. But possibly more pitiful.

 

[SheriffBufordTJustice]

Oh I’m not arguing at all. If roles were reversed and it was IU, Duke or any other team I would give them the nod. I’m not one of those homers who thinks my team does no wrong and we are just better because I cheer for a certain team. Like I said, other teams have been great but when looking at everything it’s UK! It’s not UK’s fault how things used to be. Who did you say your team was?

I am a Kentucky fan.
Even I have them behind UCLA, UNC and Louisville.

 

[IUfanBorden]

Ok I’ll give you that but tell me how many years UCLA has been horrible! They damn near fell outta “blue blood” status and prolly should’ve. Let me rephrase what I said. Throughout the history of college basketball UK has been the most consistent team! I will say I’m impressed that an IU fan would know that kinda history about UK. Tip of the hat!

I studied sports history in college. I have a very good account of IU and UK hoops.

 

[IUfanBorden]

I’m talking across the board! Wins, titles, final 4’s and everything. All kinds of great schools and great traditions but going by everything UK is at the top. Not trying to sound like a homer at all but if you look at everything it’s UK!

Everything? Are you sure...

 

[ExitFlagger]

Behind probably UNC

The difference between Kentucky and UNC is that you were in a conference that took football serious
So you had automatic entry into the tournament every year. At one time that was Sweet 16.

Final 4 appearances says UNC
NC says UCLA

The rest of the shit isn't important IMO.
Sweet 16 now... Yes but not in the 1960's.

Yeah...the homers who argue that Kentucky is “clearly” in front are generally taking a very simplistic approach. When you consider all factors, you can make a pretty strong case for North Carolina.

 

[Scotty00]

Yea you got us. We are all homers. It’s not like UK has the stats to be the one!

 

[IUfanBorden]

Yea you got us. We are all homers. It’s not like UK has the stats to be the one!

No one said any different...A case COULD be made for UNC. Sure UCLA had a dominant sstretch. But my God----was that stretch ever dominant. I mean 7 STRAIGHT titles....10 STRAIGHT FF's. That's ridiculous. Does it make them overall, better? Not to me. But I can see why some would say yes. Kentucky's numbers are astounding...They really are. BUT.....I mean, you argue that most of UCLA's titles came at one time...A dominant stretch. That is true. But it's also true that MOST(half to be exact) of UK's titles also came at one time---A dominant stretch; 1948, 1949, 1951 and 58. So there is that. The Final FOur numbers, overall are close...UNC with 20....UCLA and UK with 17. Titles are 11, 8 and 6....So its not like a Secretariat type of Preakness run away...

With that being said....I'd give the nod to Kentucky.

 

[ExitFlagger]

No one said any different...A case COULD be made for UNC. Sure UCLA had a dominant sstretch. But my God----was that stretch ever dominant. I mean 7 STRAIGHT titles....10 STRAIGHT FF's. That's ridiculous. Does it make them overall, better? Not to me. But I can see why some would say yes. Kentucky's numbers are astounding...They really are. BUT.....I mean, you argue that most of UCLA's titles came at one time...A dominant stretch. That is true. But it's also true that MOST(half to be exact) of UK's titles also came at one time---A dominant stretch; 1948, 1949, 1951 and 58. So there is that. The Final FOur numbers, overall are close...UNC with 20....UCLA and UK with 17. Titles are 11, 8 and 6....So its not like a Secretariat type of Preakness run away...

With that being said....I'd give the nod to Kentucky.

Not to mention UCLA also has a modern title, several final fours in the modern era, and they own a ton of records. Dismissing them is funny. They have final fours in 5 different decades and rank highly in every category.

 

[Scotty00]

No one said any different...A case COULD be made for UNC. Sure UCLA had a dominant sstretch. But my God----was that stretch ever dominant. I mean 7 STRAIGHT titles....10 STRAIGHT FF's. That's ridiculous. Does it make them overall, better? Not to me. But I can see why some would say yes. Kentucky's numbers are astounding...They really are. BUT.....I mean, you argue that most of UCLA's titles came at one time...A dominant stretch. That is true. But it's also true that MOST(half to be exact) of UK's titles also came at one time---A dominant stretch; 1948, 1949, 1951 and 58. So there is that. The Final FOur numbers, overall are close...UNC with 20....UCLA and UK with 17. Titles are 11, 8 and 6....So its not like a Secretariat type of Preakness run away...

With that being said....I'd give the nod to Kentucky.

So you’re saying exactly what I’m saying!

 

[IUfanBorden]

So you’re saying exactly what I’m saying!

I wouldn't say, "exactly".

 

[SheriffBufordTJustice]

UNC's run from 1981-2000 was crazy.

I can pretty much tell you who beat UNC in the Round of 32 the 3 times they didn't make the Sweet 16.

I am not even a UNC fan. Anyone who is 50 or older remembers this

94 Boston College
96 Texas Tech
99 Penn State

20 years of consistent basketball that I don't think we will ever see again.

 

[Scotty00]

UNC's run from 1981-2000 was crazy.

I can pretty much tell you who beat UNC in the Round of 32 the 3 times they didn't make the Sweet 16.

I am not even a UNC fan. Anyone who is 50 or older remembers this

94 Boston College
96 Texas Tech
99 Penn State

20 years of consistent basketball that I don't think we will ever see again.

Who exactly is your team again?

 

[SheriffBufordTJustice]

Doesn't matter who I am a fan of...

At least shouldn't.

What should is your age, how much basketball you watch and how well you know the histories of the program.


But fandom shouldn't change anything on how you see it..

Problem with UCLA is you have to be in your late 50's or older to remember their run.

Just like people younger than 40 will think Duke has always been an elite.program.

 

[Scotty00]

It’s just a simple question. I’m just curious who you cheer for. Why hide it?

 

[SheriffBufordTJustice]

You think it has any bearing on how I see it..

Me being 60 years old has more to do with it than being a fan of a certain school..
I am a Texas fan. Pretty neutral in this actually.

 

[Scotty00]

Doesn't matter who I am a fan of...

At least shouldn't.

What should is your age, how much basketball you watch and how well you know the histories of the program.


But fandom shouldn't change anything on how you see it..

Problem with UCLA is you have to be in your late 50's or older to remember their run.

Just like people younger than 40 will think Duke has always been an elite.program.

I’m 42 and I’m a huge college basketball fan. I know all about UCLA’s run (it was incredible), I know about UK’s history and I can tell you a little to a lot about anything you ask me when it comes to college basketball. Again, I’m not one of these homers who thinks their team is the only good team in the history of basketball.

 

[Scotty00]

You think it has any bearing on how I see it..

Me being 60 years old has more to do with it than being a fan of a certain school..
I am a Texas fan. Pretty neutral in this actually.

Not at all, I was simply just curious who your team is.

 

[Scotty00]

I am a Kentucky fan.
Even I have them behind UCLA, UNC and Louisville.

You think it has any bearing on how I see it..

Me being 60 years old has more to do with it than being a fan of a certain school..
I am a Texas fan. Pretty neutral in this actually.

So you’re one of those Texas/Kentucky fans? Hmmm

 

[JC for 3]

Less than 1 per decade, and you probably have no memory of the first.

In a little over a decade, I’ve seen an NCAA title, back to back World Series and a title, a Super Bowl, an MLS title, and an Orange Bowl win.

Again, it’s no wonder that you porch-pissers still talk about 2012 like it was yesterday.

...for you to even mention MLS shows what a tool you are. You really should go chug from the Clorox bottle. What a waste of humanity.

 

[JC for 3]

…...sometimes I got more time to post so many FACTS.

 

[Scotty00]

Has anyone seen @SheriffBufordTJustice? Wanna see if he decided which team he pulls for!

 

[SheriffBufordTJustice]

So you’re one of those Texas/Kentucky fans? Hmmm