Winning championships is not necessarily the most important aspect of being the UK coach.

[Gromcat]

This isn’t really about championships to the extent some believe. You can wait to hang banners.

Bill Self is a good example of what I’m about to talk about. I know he’s been ruined and has lackluster hair but still. It’s the methods I’m talking about.

Kentucky fans do not require a title every season, or every 10 years really. Sure we want it, but we know, or most know, that’s not how this works.

Blue bloods are blue bloods because of

1. Program sustainability at the highest level.

This means you have to at minimum be a good team yearly, not miss tournaments, control your conference, control your head to head records, beat your rivals, and remain at the top of the list ,statistically speaking, in the major ncaa categories (there’s around 30 something categories that matter).

2. You’ve got to remain a top 5 program, and be the best program, at the end of each decade.

We have the most number 1 and top 3 finishes in each decade since 1940. Espn rated UK the top overall program using this as a huge part of the measuring stick.

This is what makes UK, UK, and blue bloods, blue bloods. Kansas had 3 titles for 100 years and was considered a blue blood because of this criteria.

Calipari does not sustain success. Even if he wins a championship he doesn’t sustain well enough to coach at a place like this. His claims that SEC titles don’t matter, his claims that the tournament is all that matters, should disqualify him here to begin with.

I see so many misinterpret what we have to do at this program. In my opinion, we need to get back on track with “the list”. We will win titles but we have to sustain. We can’t win a title and be in the NIT, or go 10 years without final fours and lose so many games. We need a coach to sustain while in pursuit of the title.

 

[BlueSince92]

This isn’t really about championships to the extent some believe. You can wait to hang banners.

Bill Self is a good example of what I’m about to talk about. I know he’s been ruined and has lackluster hair but still. It’s the methods I’m talking about.

Kentucky fans do not require a title every season, or every 10 years really. Sure we want it, but we know, or most know, that’s not how this works.

Blue bloods are blue bloods because of

1. Program sustainability at the highest level.

This means you have to at minimum be a good team yearly, not miss tournaments, control your conference, control your head to head records, beat your rivals, and remain at the top of the list ,statistically speaking, in the major ncaa categories (there’s around 30 something categories that matter).

2. You’ve got to remain a top 5 program, and be the best program, at the end of each decade.

We have the most number 1 and top 3 finishes in each decade since 1940. Espn rated UK the top overall program using this as a huge part of the measuring stick.

This is what makes UK, UK, and blue bloods, blue bloods. Kansas had 3 titles for 100 years and was considered a blue blood because of this criteria.

Calipari does not sustain success. Even if he wins a championship he doesn’t sustain well enough to coach at a place like this. His claims that SEC titles don’t matter, his claims that the tournament is all that matters, should disqualify him here to begin with.

I see so many misinterpret what we have to do at this program. In my opinion, we need to get back on track with “the list”. We will win titles but we have to sustain. We can’t win a title and be in the NIT, or go 10 years without final fours and lose so many games. We need a coach to sustain while in pursuit of the title.

Morg, I’d drink your bathwater if you looked like April Gloria. And. You know. Were her.

 

[Gromcat]

Morg, I’d drink your bathwater if you looked like April Gloria. And. You know. Were her.

I am whatever you want me to be. Just win.

 

[BlueSince92]

😂

 

[HagginHall1999]

It's about titles and always had been. Prove me wrong.

 

[KyCatFan]

To me it's always being in contention in the SEC. It's caring about all tournaments (preseason, SEC, and NCAA). It's always making the NCAA Tournament. It's a Sweet Sixteen in a down year. It's a Final 4 every three or 4 years. It's a championship every 7 to 10 years. I don't think that's to much to ask for a blueblood. Of course there will be some stretches where that doesn't happen, but for the most part it's about what we average historically since our first title.

 

[BBUK]

Ole Grom....

Got to give him props though, once I gave him a pair (Of props), I'd like to kick one, out from under him just to watch him fall...

 

[VAWildcat15]

Your take is the only correct one. If an NCAAT championship was all that mattered, we would consider UCLA a better program than ours and it wouldn’t be especially close. The NCAAT is fickle and to be honest not the best way to actually determine the best team (it’s the most exciting tournament in sports though).

What do you accomplish in the statistically likely event that {name a year} just isn’t your year to win it all? That has always been what sets us apart. If this wasn’t true we wouldn’t make such a big deal about things like all time wins. And of course, the more years you spend knocking on the door, the likelier it is that that door eventually opens for you.

Non-UK fans pretend that we’re unreasonable freaks who expect a title every year. They’re wrong. We just expect to believe we could win a title. That’s not an unreasonable standard here.

 

[Gromcat]

It's about titles and always had been. Prove me wrong.

I’d say being the champion is necessary, but it’s never been the only measuring stick.

I can prove you’re wrong if you believe it is.

Explain how Kansas was a blue blood with 1 more title than Florida until last year.

Explain why Indiana was not considered a blue blood with 5.

 

[HagginHall1999]

I’d say being the champion is necessary, but it’s never been the only measuring stick.

I can prove you’re wrong if you believe it is.

Explain how Kansas was a blue blood with 1 more title than Florida until last year.

Explain why Indiana was not considered a blue blood with 5.

Fair, but the reason IU and Florida aren't considered BB is really a out all time wins.

I was being a bit facetious. I get that we "care" about some of the other things but the reality is this is all about championships.

 

[Double Oaked Juice]

I am whatever you want me to be. Just win.

Take me as I am, swear I'll do the best I can!!

 

[wccat2969]

My contention has always been as Cal says about shooting 'you don't have to make them all but you can't miss them either'. As that goes Cal, we know we can't win the title every year (we can always expect as we should) but we can lose them all either. At this point as the OP stated in his point #1 Program sustainability at the highest level, these last several years have not been what Kentucky or any blue blood would define as 'highest level'. So Cal, your words have once again come back to bite you...'stop losing them all, make some!'

 

[Sawnee Cat]

One thing has been obvious for a few years. Calipari is no longer the coach to keep Kentucky at a Blue Blood Level. We have become an also ran for the SEC Championship and an also ran in the NCAA tournament.

Kentucky can do better. Much better. Please Texas, take him away from us.

 

[Gromcat]

Fair, but the reason IU and Florida aren't considered BB is really a out all time wins.

I was being a bit facetious. I get that we "care" about some of the other things but the reality is this is all about championships.

It actually isn’t lol. It’s the point of the entire thread. If that were true Indiana would be a BB, they’re not. Kansas wouldn’t have been for a long time, they’ve always been.

 

[SemperFiCat]

I agree with Morg. Knowledgeable college basketball fans know that the best team actually cuts the nets a relatively low percentage the time. A Blue Blood doesn't necessarily need the titles (that normally requires at least some good fortune) as validation. All the things that Morg pointed out are the real BB resume builders. For me as a UK fan, I expect a S16 in a down year, and a FF every three or four years. You do that consistently, and the titles will come.

What Cal has failed to realize is that winning conference titles, tournaments, and big meaningful games not only helps the UK brand, but more importantly UK's seeding and chances in the tournament. Cal's neglect of UK's traditions and standing as a BB have literally shot himself in the foot in terms of legacy.

 

[TheDude73]

What being a blue blood requires is simple - CONSISTENCY in SUCCESS!

Win games consistently, regardless of roster turnover.
Compete in tournaments to the end or nearly the end more frequently than not.
Coaches don't ever open their mouths and say that certain games/tournaments don't matter. Being a blue blood - every single game and tournament SHOULD matter.
Coaches never open their mouths with excuses. Take accountability, and show that you've learned from each hard lesson in the next game out.

We are no longer consistent. Cal's first 5 years were awesome, for the most part, and a guy like him should have had no issues adjusting to the landscape and continuing that consistency.

 

[Elliott Tim]

Ole Grom....

Got to give him props though, once I gave him a pair, I'd like to kick one, out from under him just to watch him fall...

Happy and blessed New Year to you.

 

[BluPappi81]

Final Fours and championships are the standard. Why accept less?

 

[southvillecat]

Couldn’t agree more. You have to have sustained excellence year in and year out to be a blue blood.

 

[Rockfly78]

win titles. all that other stuff will take care of itself. is this not common sense?

 

[Tida Nysage]

Be “in the running” yr in & out. For UK, this has slipped the past few yrs & this is why we are so up in arms so to speak. We should NEVER look at a UK game & think we don’t deserve to be on the same floor with an opponent. Jmo

 

[Gromcat]

win titles. all that other stuff will take care of itself. is this not common sense?

Read the thread. It’s your sense, not common sense.

Calipari won a title and went straight to an NIT. we can’t have that crap, sustainability is what makes a blue blood. UCLA has the most titles and no one considers them a blue blood that understands the sport.

 

[bluegoad72]

Your take is the only correct one. If an NCAAT championship was all that mattered, we would consider UCLA a better program than ours and it wouldn’t be especially close. The NCAAT is fickle and to be honest not the best way to actually determine the best team (it’s the most exciting tournament in sports though).

What do you accomplish in the statistically likely event that {name a year} just isn’t your year to win it all? That has always been what sets us apart. If this wasn’t true we wouldn’t make such a big deal about things like all time wins. And of course, the more years you spend knocking on the door, the likelier it is that that door eventually opens for you.

Non-UK fans pretend that we’re unreasonable freaks who expect a title every year. They’re wrong. We just expect to believe we could win a title. That’s not an unreasonable standard here.

It's this for me and what Morg said. It's the expectation that we "could" win the title. I think most reasonable fans don't expect a title every year, but we want to be in the hunt. It's the excitement come tournament time that we can compete for that title and have as good or better a chance than anyone. I think that's all I want.

 

[jjsomer]

Read the thread. It’s your sense, not common sense.

Calipari won a title and went straight to an NIT. we can’t have that crap, sustainability is what makes a blue blood. UCLA has the most titles and no one considers them a blue blood that understands the sport.

If IU and UCLA are not blue bloods, who is? Is UK?

Every fan has a different set of criteria for what success even is. If we all agreed on the criteria for what defines a successful season, statistically pct of successful seasons to remain a blue blood would differ from one fan to the next.

 

[Ron Mehico]

Win consistently, make a final four once every 5 years, run an entertaining system that’s fun to watch. That’s my standard.

 

[TOMCATS1990]

Only getting one every 10 years or so but you need to be in the conversation to get one almost every season. 2010-2015 CCC, not 2016 2022 CCC. KY should never miss the NCAA tourney

 

[LineSkiCat14]

I'd like to see us strive Final4's and then 30+ win seasons at a respectable clip. Hard to expect much more. And these won't always coincide.

 

[SemperFiCat]

If IU and UCLA are not blue bloods, who is? Is UK?

Every fan has a different set of criteria for what success even is. If we all agreed on the criteria for what defines a successful season, statistically pct of successful seasons to remain a blue blood would differ from one fan to the next.

IU and UCLA are second tier BBs.

Take away the best coach in each program's history and look at what's left. Some programs have had a great coach, and really not much else. Kentucky's greatness has spanned many decades and five different coaches have won title for UK. That's what makes Kentucky a legit blue blood, and special.

 

[VAWildcat15]

IU and UCLA are second tier BBs.

Take away the best coach in each program's history and look at what's left. Some programs have had a great coach, and really not much else. Kentucky's greatness has spanned many decades and five different coaches have won title for UK. That's what makes Kentucky a legit blue blood, and special.

To follow up on this for anyone who is still confused - Kentucky has 5 NCAAT champion coaches. Only five schools have five championships in all of history. Only three schools, including Kentucky, have more than five championships. To a large extent, we make the coach, it’s not the other way around like most places.

 

[BBUK]

Happy and blessed New Year to you.

Thanks much ET... I DO hope all is well for you and yours...

 

[Rockfly78]

Read the thread. It’s your sense, not common sense.

Calipari won a title and went straight to an NIT. we can’t have that crap, sustainability is what makes a blue blood. UCLA has the most titles and no one considers them a blue blood that understands the sport.

Don’t expect too much out of us now. We are all just McDonald’s workers right? Thank you for reminding me how to think sir.

 

[Rockfly78]

Kentucky is the number 1 program of all time and the reason why is because if one single stat. We have won titles with 5 different coaches. That’s incredible. It’s what separates Kentucky from UCLA and it’s also the reason Duke will never assume the mantle. No coach has made the program. You can even argue that Kentucky can make a coach.

 

[Rockfly78]

To follow up on this for anyone who is still confused - Kentucky has 5 NCAAT champion coaches. Only five schools have five championships in all of history. Only three schools, including Kentucky, have more than five championships. To a large extent, we make the coach, it’s not the other way around like most places.

Damn I literally just posted this without seeing your post. My bad. But great minds think alike

 

[BigRedMachineBigBlueNation]

If IU and UCLA are not blue bloods, who is? Is UK?

Every fan has a different set of criteria for what success even is. If we all agreed on the criteria for what defines a successful season, statistically pct of successful seasons to remain a blue blood would differ from one fan to the next.

Kentucky, North Carolina, and Kansas are the Big 3. Everyone else have been recently successful (Duke, UConn, Villanova) or were great but are no longer (Indiana, UCLA.)

 

[jjsomer]

To follow up on this for anyone who is still confused - Kentucky has 5 NCAAT champion coaches. Only five schools have five championships in all of history. Only three schools, including Kentucky, have more than five championships. To a large extent, we make the coach, it’s not the other way around like most places.

There are a few that hint around that UK is no longer a blue blood. For the record, I am not one in that camp. There are no universally agreed upon criteria for success. Clearly, missing the tourney and losing to a 15 seed in the first round are not successful seasons for a blue blood.

 

[kntckfan]

I have been thinking a lot about the concept brought up here. I really believe that the major issue most of us have right now, is that the coaching staff and athletic dept. seem to be using a different measuring stick than the fans, when it comes to success. I would love to see us fans unite on criteria for what “success” is at UK, and press the athletic dept to hold the coaching staff accountable for this.

 

[UKWildcats1987]

It's about titles and always had been. Prove me wrong.

It's always about trying to win titles. If calipari won a 2nd title this year or next year most UK fans would be back on board as all the main crap talkers on here are all about winning another natty title even though fans don't seem to get rings for them lol.

 

[kntckfan]

It's always about trying to win titles. If calipari won a 2nd title this year or next year most UK fans would be back on board as all the main crap talkers on here are all about winning another natty title even though fans don't seem to get rings for them lol.

I don’t think the criteria can be “solely win a title” if that were the case, then over 90% of our seasons have been “unsuccessful” I would take a team like the Unforgettables as a great example. They did not win a title, but were fans unhappy and just considered the team/year a failure?

 

[32Cut-Nets]

This isn’t really about championships to the extent some believe. You can wait to hang banners.

Bill Self is a good example of what I’m about to talk about. I know he’s been ruined and has lackluster hair but still. It’s the methods I’m talking about.

Kentucky fans do not require a title every season, or every 10 years really. Sure we want it, but we know, or most know, that’s not how this works.

Blue bloods are blue bloods because of

1. Program sustainability at the highest level.

This means you have to at minimum be a good team yearly, not miss tournaments, control your conference, control your head to head records, beat your rivals, and remain at the top of the list ,statistically speaking, in the major ncaa categories (there’s around 30 something categories that matter).

2. You’ve got to remain a top 5 program, and be the best program, at the end of each decade.

We have the most number 1 and top 3 finishes in each decade since 1940. Espn rated UK the top overall program using this as a huge part of the measuring stick.

This is what makes UK, UK, and blue bloods, blue bloods. Kansas had 3 titles for 100 years and was considered a blue blood because of this criteria.

Calipari does not sustain success. Even if he wins a championship he doesn’t sustain well enough to coach at a place like this. His claims that SEC titles don’t matter, his claims that the tournament is all that matters, should disqualify him here to begin with.

I see so many misinterpret what we have to do at this program. In my opinion, we need to get back on track with “the list”. We will win titles but we have to sustain. We can’t win a title and be in the NIT, or go 10 years without final fours and lose so many games. We need a coach to sustain while in pursuit of the title.

Seeing all the tweets and rumors of Texas’ interest in Calipari has filled me with an excitement I can’t describe. I’ve always trusted my gut feelings when it comes to UK basketball because my love for the program is so deeply ingrained. So if my gut is feeling excitement at the prospect of finding a new Coach, then it must be right. I can feel it. It’s the perfect time for Cal to leave on his own accord, and bring someone in to unite this fanbase.

 

[TOMCATS1990]

CCC any way you spin it should have at least another title with the massive amount of talent that’s walked through the door since 2010. I fill out a bracket every March Madness ( my super bowl) for fun and for money. I never pick against the CATS on my bracket and should never have too……… KY Basketball is to BBN what Green Bay is to the Cheese Heads a way of life. CAL understood the fan base and thrived it until he didn‘t. Al Davis said it best just win baby win.