from a Card fan . . . funny.
http://www.reviewjournal.com/sports...tball-fan-boasts-giant-38-1-sticker-car-photo
http://www.reviewjournal.com/sports...tball-fan-boasts-giant-38-1-sticker-car-photo
"How Pathetic is This!?"
- Thread starter KYtotheCore
- Start date
It's not something I would be putting on my car, but I can't fault the guy for looking on the brightside.
Kind of ironic that you go 40-0 and you are discussed for decades. You go 38-1 and you might as well be yesterday's news.
Live in California, took my son to a new doctor this morning. I was wearing a final four shirt and the Dr just happened to be a big Wisconsin fan and alum...and wanted to give me his opinion on "one and dones" and why Wisconsin won that game...needless to say we are switching docs. ![[sick]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/sick/sick0006.r191677.gif "Sick [sick]")
Live in California, took my son to a new doctor this morning. I was wearing a final four shirt and the Dr just happened to be a big Wisconsin fan and alum...and wanted to give me his opinion on "one and dones" and why Wisconsin won that game...needless to say we are switching docs.
Before I select a doctor, I always research his/her university degrees and residencies. If I hate the schools attended, I will continue my search. I will not subject myself to hearing comments like Blue Runner experienced. Guess I take my love of the Cats to the level of obsession. I always have a UK item visible, which does invite discussion. But do not want to "discuss" when I am dealing with my health. Not good for blood pressure readings.
Umm, UCLA? I realize you're going to say it wasn't 38 in a row in one season, but that's simply because they didn't play that many games. Does anyone really believe some of those UCLA teams couldn't have won 38 in a row in one season if they had the opportunity?
Unfortunately, that's just sports. Nothing else matters but the championship. I, for myself, like it that way. Don't get me wrong, I love this years team and will always be special to me but the fact is that they did not win the title. For that reason, they will not be looked at as one of the best teams to play at UK. To me, winning regular season games is great but it takes a different breed of team to win a championship. To win when all eyes are on you and with the pressure of an aircraft carrier on your shoulders, is something truly special. That's what makes a team great in my eyes. If you do that, then you are truly great. The rest of the teams simply make the "UK's greatest teams to not win a title" list. Right or wrong, that's just the way it is with sports and particularly with basketball. Even more so with men's college basketball when you're dealing with one of the blue bloods. Those fan bases hold the championship teams above all other teams, no matter what the records read. I may get blasted for saying this but its how I feel. There is a reason that we are who we are and who we will continue to be because of our mentality when it comes to winning, and winning championships. Its the same reason why we dont storm the court, no matter who we beat. Because we expect to win those games, we exprct greatness from our teams and we are not shocked or surprised when we are great. We hang championship banners here because its who we are!
Last edited:
I know Kareem or the Ginger Hippy wouldn't have disappeared off the face of the planet like WCS did in the Final Four.
Not true. 1991 UNLV still gets brought up pretty regularly during college basketball season.
Really disagree. Most mixed fanbase CBB fan discussions have them as a top 3 team of all time.
And if you don't consider '15 one of the best UK teams of all time because of a single elimination tournament, you're insane. There's no argument that can put them out of the top 5 unless you're willing to fully commit to that "championships above all" thing that you seem to be rolling with, in which case, you have to say that UCLA is greater than UK as a program and that '10 Duke was a better team than '91 UNLV.
Funny my oral surgeon told me right before I was put out for surgery that he was a UL alumn. We are in west Tennessee so It was surprising. I just told him I was sorry to hear that. BAHA. we talked UK and UL afterwards and he took 200 bucks off the bill. Cool dude.
I never said that this team was not one of the best teams in UK history because I do think they are for sure, just like 2010. But they didn't achieve special greatness to me. Would they likely beat some if the championship teams? Absolutely! Just like 2010 team could but they came up short on the main prize at the end and that is a pretty huge prize to miss. You mention 1 game elimination tournament like its the freaking NIT or something. No, its the NCAA tournament. I'm sorry if you disagree but it is the tournament that bases how teams are remembered. You think anyone remembers Valvano's squad if he loses that game in the championship? You think people would remember the '98 team as fondly if they had lost to Duke, Stanford, or Utah that year? It is THE tournament and even if you don't like it, your legacy as a team is based off if you win that tournament. That's just the way it is.
Everyone remembers that UNLV team because of the loss in the final. Because it was so shocking! Because they were SO good but failed to reach the ultimate goal. That's why people remember them and they're never talked about on tv without that loss being mentioned.
I never said anything about '10 Duke beating '91 UNLV, nor did I say anything about UCLA being the best program. I'm simply stating how I think of my program's teams and THEIR legacy within the program. When you are talking program greatness, its a little different. I think number of title are a large percentage of what opinions are based off of but I think there should also be all time wins, as well as relevancy of the program during this recent time period. Most people still rate UCLA near the top of the program list simply based off what Wooden was able to accomplish 40+ years ago. If not for those titles, I doubt UCLA would be anywhere near the top considering they have only 1 title since then in 1995.
I just think a title defines how you are remembered and marks your stamp on the program. Its why we hang banners for them and why we don't for regular success. I'm strictly stating how i, and I believe others, look at the teams in our programs history. That's all, within our program. I'm not getting into comparing other teams cause that's just foolish.
If what you are saying is true and its what you believe, then you would have to say that you believe a regular season win is just as big as the NCAA Championship game win, right? That's what you're saying in your post. Right?
Or would that be twisting your words?
Last edited:
I don't have a problem putting them as one of our great final four teams. But calling them more than that is where I'll stop. We still have some younger fans who think they were better than 2012. Lol.
My personal opinion is they were the third best team in the nation last year when all the dust settled. I mean, Duke beat Wisconsin twice and once for a title. They had so much diversity on the floor, they were a total package. I get what JKWO is saying about the numbers, but I don't buy into them the way he does. Our offensive flow was bad for most of the year. We had no consistent outside threats. Our guard play was shaky from time to time. And our bigs couldn't hit a 2 footer for more than half the year. You can make numbers jumpt all sorts of ways. Just look at how coaches manipulate things like the SOS and RPI. What you can't do, is change the results of the season. It's not about a single elimination game. We would have struggled mightily to beat Wisconsin or Duke 4 out of 7 last year. I simply don't think we could have done it to Duke.
Well, you said that they wouldn't be remembered as one of the best teams in UK history. And I disagree with that.
Of course I agree that tourney wins are more important. But I don't think they magically change who is better retrospectively.
I don't believe the best team always wins. In fact, I think the best team wins less than half of the NCAA tourneys.
Even the '96 Bulls lost 3 playoff games. If that was out of some kind of single elimination tourney, then that means failure.
So when I talk about the format, I'm talking about how statistically unmeaningful it is. Again, you could have a team like '91 UNLV that demolishes people and lights up ranked teams by a million points. '15 UK did the same thing to a slightly lesser extent. Then you have teams like '10 Duke or '11 UCONN who got hot at a good time, got some good bounces, saw the best teams in the tourney get knocked out before they had to face them, etc.
So two different questions -
Would I rather have a '91 UNLV/'15 UK season or a '10 Duke/'11 UCONN season.
I'd rather have the latter season, because the championship hangs forever.
But which teams were better?
The former teams were way, way, way better.
That's the distinction I'm drawing.
You can blame WCS for disappearing or Cal for chocking down the stretch but the real reason we lost was the refs plain and simple,
3 horrendous calls cost UK the game:
A. No call on Wisky player not estab himself in bounds before he touched the ball and scored.
B. The horrid phantom foul call on Aaron under basket with Lurch to bail out Whisky with one tic on shot clock.
C. The missed shot clock violation on Whisky.
If anyone doesnt think UK was done in by crooked refs and the mob to keep UK from going 40-0 and the Vegas boys having to PAY UP then your just narrow minded.
3 horrendous calls cost UK the game:
A. No call on Wisky player not estab himself in bounds before he touched the ball and scored.
B. The horrid phantom foul call on Aaron under basket with Lurch to bail out Whisky with one tic on shot clock.
C. The missed shot clock violation on Whisky.
If anyone doesnt think UK was done in by crooked refs and the mob to keep UK from going 40-0 and the Vegas boys having to PAY UP then your just narrow minded.
That's what I'm saying. Championships trump everything. I never said that the 2015 team couldn't beat any of the championships team because I'm sure they could but to claim that this team will be held above the '98 team in the eyes of the typical UK fan is wrong, IMO. I would rank '98 ahead of 2015 based on the fact that they did win the title. Would ''15 beat '98? I'd say yes, pretty easily but that's irrelevant when it comes to legacy.
I'm sorry but the Bulls comparison is kinda ridiculous. That's a series, not a 1 game pressure filled cooker. That's is completely different and of course youre not going to role through undefeated in a series.
So, in response, it is completely irrelevant who would beat who but the fact that you and I both would rather have a 2010 Duke team vs '91 UNLV team makes my point. When it comes to legacy and true greatness, the championship teams will always be held above the teams who do not achieve that goal. The 2015 may have been able to beat any other UK team in history but will never be remembered or look upon as greater than any of the championships. Because it is a 1 game elimination tourney for all the prestigious marbles, it trumps everything else and teams that win that tournament trump every other team, IMO. That's why he hang banners for those teams. It means that much!! That's just my opinion.
On another note,
Hey, good discussion though man!!! You've made some very valid and intelligent points!! I see you points and your post are very well articulated.
If the one loss would have been in the SEC tournament or during the regular season, then I wouldn't otherwise raise an eyebrow. But as has been pointed out, the history books are pretty clear that UCLA set the bar at fifty games higher than 38.
2014-2015 was a really good season. But it wasn't a decal-splattered-across-your-rig season. Those require a banner hanging from the rafters.
2014-2015 was a really good season. But it wasn't a decal-splattered-across-your-rig season. Those require a banner hanging from the rafters.
Live in California, took my son to a new doctor this morning. I was wearing a final four shirt and the Dr just happened to be a big Wisconsin fan and alum...and wanted to give me his opinion on "one and dones" and why Wisconsin won that game...needless to say we are switching docs.
Sounds like he needs to be reminded that Wisconsin turned around and got beat by Duke, who themselves used three 'one and dones'. Hopefully he wasn't trying to say UK lost the game because they had one and dones?
Its his vehicle but I don't need a sticker to keep reminding me about the ( 1 ) .
I find it funny that some are still talking down one and done players when the NCAA champs in both 2012 and now 2015 were composed primarily of these type players.Live in California, took my son to a new doctor this morning. I was wearing a final four shirt and the Dr just happened to be a big Wisconsin fan and alum...and wanted to give me his opinion on "one and dones" and why Wisconsin won that game...needless to say we are switching docs.
Give me the 96, and 2012 team over last season's team any day of the week. Anthony Davis would've ate Willie for lunch.
It really doesn't take a genius to figure this out, but some people find a way to screw it up.
It's not really that. What you said is just the excuse given by people who cannot come to terms with the fact that the team last year was a bit overrated. Our league was down for one. We were nearly beaten in the elite eight by a team who had, what? 1 guy over 6'6? Go into the final four as a supposedly "great all time team" and get beat by a Wisconsin team that, let's face it, wasn't some juggernaut. Duke could have beat us 10+ Especially with those officials. 1996 UK or 2012 UK win that tournament and most level headed fans know it. IMO, 2012 Indiana could have won that tournament.
We had a great UK team, an I don't mind saying that. They were one of the best defensive teams I've ever seen for a 4 month period. But beyond that, there's just not much. Having good figures on paper doesn't always tell the story. It's why the games are played on the court, not with everyone standing around a computer.
Everytime I hear someone mention "it's a one game elimination" I just cringe. There's absolutely nothing anyone can point to and say "we could have beaten them 4 out of 7". Duke? We wouldn't have beat 4 out of 7, I'd almost guarantee. If we were so good, then they only had one game to show it. They failed and better teams advanced. It was right there not the tv for everyone to see it too.
Great team, not the best at all.
And the 2010 team. The 2015 team could not answer Cousins if they played.
