Addressing the "8 titles in 100 years fallacy" some of you keep using.

[STL_Cat]

Considering 2 of Cals 4 final 4's at UK were not as #1 seeds....not really. No matter what seed this team is they're capable of making a final 4 & capable of winning a championship. Being a 1 or 2 seed is not going to make a difference.

Some of you are just miserable people & need something to gripe about.

SelectioN Sunday & we have a capable team. Seems like UK fans would have more productive things to post about.

Well, you’re wrong. I’m one of the happiest and upbeat people you’ll ever meet. You might have a hard time believing that but it’s the truth.

I understand this team is capable of making a final four, hell yeah they are. You won’t find anyone rooting harder for that than me. I’m just citing some facts that I think are significant. Not being a 1 seed in the NCAA tournament this many consecutive years is bothersome. It shouldn’t happen at Kentucky. Just is what it is, man.

 

[azurricat2010]

A non-invite should be counted as a -17 when coupled with the actual years a team makes the tournament.

A 1 seed + a non-invite essentially carries the same weight as a 16 seed average.

I don't think that's how it would work because if a P5 school made the tourney they'd never be a 16.

The most rational way would be to do a summation of seeds over appearances because it would give a seed average for when the team made the tourney.

A team with 6 appearances and a seed average of 3 would be ranked higher than one with the same seed average but fewer appearances.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

Considering 2 of Cals 4 final 4's at UK were not as #1 seeds....not really. No matter what seed this team is they're capable of making a final 4 & capable of winning a championship. Being a 1 or 2 seed is not going to make a difference.

Some of you are just miserable people & need something to gripe about.

SelectioN Sunday & we have a capable team. Seems like UK fans would have more productive things to post about.

So you've now called us "miserable", "impossible", and suggested that we're silent throughout the season when things are going well (which is bunk, by the way).

That's not very graceful for a guy who's screenname suggests that he is willing to give "grace to you."

 

[gracetoyou]

They’re not UK fans. Anyone diminishing our accomplishments to prop up John Calipari ( fans of 1996 would puke at that notion) in ANY way need to follow John Calipari when he leaves. Wherever that is. I’ll never forget who they are. They are NOT UK fans anymore.

You're not a UK fan when your unrealistic. You're a miserable sports fan that will NEVER be able to enjoy any sport. You become a cancer to the sport.

I'm sorry butvwhen it comes to EXPECTATIONS & you're talking about championships & 4 of them were in a period most of us where not living & did not experience....YES IT MATTERS!

1959-2022....4 championships in many of our lifetimes. 1 every 15 years.

 

[Cowtown Cat]

It's been 9 years since our last title, you can't count 2022 yet when Kentucky is still playing.

But it's really only been 8. No one got to compete in the NCAA Tournament in 2020. Can't hold that against Calipari, not his fault COVID happened.

Well, then if @Son_Of_Saul takes that year out, the gap ratio between titles becomes just that much smaller. You realize that, correct?

 

[Cayutsssssssss]

And the NCAA tournament is the hardest title in all of sports to win..

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

You're not a UK fan when your unrealistic. You're a miserable sports fan that will NEVER be able to enjoy any sport. You become a cancer to the sport.

I'm sorry butvwhen it comes to EXPECTATIONS & you're talking about championships & 4 of them were in a period most of us where not living & did not experience....YES IT MATTERS!

1959-2022....4 championships in many of our lifetimes. 1 every 15 years.

Again, do you count Cal's Final Four average of 1 every 3 years or do you negate it because all of those happened before 2015?

Isn't an average actually still an average, even if it's not a recent indication of a trend?

Do you negate Cal's Final Four average like you do Kentucky's Final Four and title average?

 

[Cowtown Cat]

You're not a UK fan when your unrealistic. You're a miserable sports fan that will NEVER be able to enjoy any sport. You become a cancer to the sport.

I'm sorry butvwhen it comes to EXPECTATIONS & you're talking about championships & 4 of them were in a period most of us where not living & did not experience....YES IT MATTERS!

1959-2022....4 championships in many of our lifetimes. 1 every 15 years.

Those four titles by Rupp are in the record book, right? Then they count and they matter. We aren’t gonna “cancel culture” half of our national titles. Good Lord.

 

[gracetoyou]

So you've now called us "miserable", "impossible", and suggested that we're silent throughout the season when things are going well (which is bunk, by the way).

That's not very graceful for a guy who's screenname suggests that he is willing to give "grace to you."

Dude, don't go there. I'm having a sports discussion & not being unrealistic. As a UK fan I get tired of reading posts bashing our players & coaches. That might be acceptable to you but seems strange for a real fan to do to their own team their supposedly a fan of.

If I didn't know better I'd think I was on a Louisville or Duke forum. Yes...you're being unrealistic. That's not being ungraceful.

 

[gracetoyou]

Those four titles by Rupp are in the record book, right? Then they count and they matter. We aren’t gonna “cancel culture” half of our national titles. Good Lord.

I'm not. We're talking EXPECTATIONS. When half (4) of the championships for everyone age 61 were before our lifetime it makes no sense to say you expect one every 9 years.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

I'm not. We're talking EXPECTATIONS. When half (4) of the championships for everyone age 61 were before our lifetime it makes no sense to say you expect one every 9 years.

All of Cal's UK Final Fours were before 2016.

Do they count toward his overall average even if they aren't recent?

You've avoided this question every time it's been asked.

 

[crawfords corner]

Coach Rupp would probably have another 2-3 titles if not for Sam Gilbert. UK would be the one with 11 titles. UCLA would be Kansas.

 

[Cowtown Cat]

Okay, so take Rupp’s four titles out of the equation, just for fun. Then you start at 1978-2012, we’ve won four titles. Not taking any years out for probation, Covid, etc. that’s a title every 8.5 years on the dot.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

Coach Rupp would probably have another 2-3 titles if not for Sam Gilbert. UK would be the one with 11 titles. UCLA would be Kansas.

And if we go back 100 years, we'd have to count Helm's, which would give us another 2 titles and actually help augment the overall average.

 

[crawfords corner]

Okay, so take Rupp’s four titles out of the equation, just for fun. Then you start at 1978-2012, we’ve won four titles. Not taking any years out for probation, Covid, etc. that’s a title every 8.5 years on the dot.

I would start in 85.

 

[Ky_Bred_Cat]

The only time most of you impossible people are halfway satisfied is in periods like 1993-1998, 2011-15. Unfortunately the only other period similar to those was 1948-1951. I mean...it is what it is.

You cannot go bonkers every time we're not in a period like that. Good grief!

You can when your coach is the highest paid coach in all of college basketball. And Calipari is the one that set this expectation with his early success and with his mouth. It is what it is.

 

[gracetoyou]

All of Cal's UK Final Fours were before 2016.

Do they count toward his overall average even if they aren't recent?

You've avoided this question every time it's been asked.

I typed out a response & posted...not sure why it's not showing up.

I said I'm fine with saying it's been since 2015. Only 5 tourneys since last final 4 & 2 of those 5 we were 1 shot shy.
2015-16
2016-17 - 1 shot shy
2017-18
2018-19 - 1 shot shy
2019-20 - Covid...no tourney
2020-21

 

[crawfords corner]

And if we go back 100 years, we'd have to count Helm's, which would give us another 2 titles and actually help augment the overall average.

As Browns fan I wish we could do that with our titles. Eff the Patriots and Brady. Otto Graham and it ain't even close.

 

[Cowtown Cat]

I would start in 85.

So that would be 3 titles in 27 years, or every 9 seasons.

 

[ukcatz12]

It's almost not even worth comparing anything to pre-1985 and absolutely not worth comparing the 4 titles in 10 years Rupp won to the modern era. The game is just not even close to the same game. The way champions are determined is different, there's no competing tournament, at large bids for a 68 team field, mid majors regularly making runs to the Final Four, etc.

And titles come in bunches. Florida repeated, UConn had two fluke titles in a very short span, we made three straight title games, etc. To average out years between titles, especially when considering titles that happened so long ago the game wasn't even integrated yet, and hold any program to hitting that average is ridiculous and disregards any sort of context or the nuances of the modern game.

 

[azurricat2010]

There would have to be a pretty severe penalty for missing the tournament altogether in this equation. Just lessening the denominator almost rewards you for being really shitty vs being just kind of shitty.

That's what I thought at first saying it almost penalizes those that made the tourney but in reality you'd rank the team with more appearances and the same seed average higher than a team with the same average but fewer appearances .

Example

UK's average post 2015 is 3. 2009 to 2015 the seed average is also 3.

Gonzaga would have a seed average of 3 but would rank higher than UK because they have 6 appearances and UK has 5.

Really all you can do is sum the seeds over the number of appearances.

 

[Cowtown Cat]

It's almost not even worth comparing anything to pre-1985 and absolutely not worth comparing the 4 titles in 10 years Rupp won to the modern era. The game is just not even close to the same game. The way champions are determined is different, there's no competing tournament, at large bids for a 68 team field, mid majors regularly making runs to the Final Four, etc.

And titles come in bunches. Florida repeated, UConn had two fluke titles in a very short span, we made three straight title games, etc. To average out years between titles, especially when considering titles that happened so long ago the game wasn't even integrated yet, and hold any program to hitting that average is ridiculous and disregards any sort of context or the nuances of the modern game.

Again, it would be a title every 9 seasons.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

It's almost not even worth comparing anything to pre-1985 and absolutely not worth comparing the 4 titles in 10 years Rupp won to the modern era. The game is just not even close to the same game. The way champions are determined is different, there's no competing tournament, at large bids for a 68 team field, mid majors regularly making runs to the Final Four, etc.

And titles come in bunches. Florida repeated, UConn had two fluke titles in a very short span, we made three straight title games, etc. To average out years between titles, especially when considering titles that happened so long ago the game wasn't even integrated yet, and hold any program to hitting that average is ridiculous and disregards any sort of context or the nuances of the modern game.

But why can't we compare it when it comes to actually recognizing the competitive value of that era?

Did Duke, UNC, Florida, Tennessee, Indiana, Kansas, and the hundreds of other programs not have an athletic department back then with real competitive basketball teams?

I'm not buying that argument at all.

They all had access to the same competitive realities that Kentucky did. They just couldn't get it done whereas UK actually did.

 

[LowCountryCat]

I said on this board right after the Wisky loss that Cal would never win another title here.

But hey, at least he’s bringing in guys like Sharpe.

 

[azurricat2010]

All of Cal's UK Final Fours were before 2016.

Do they count toward his overall average even if they aren't recent?

You've avoided this question every time it's been asked.

You technically could count one and not the other just because they are two different eras of basketball.

 

[ukcatz12]

But why can't we compare it?

Did Duke, UNC, Florida, Tennessee, Indiana, Kansas, and the hundreds of other programs not have an athletic department back then with real competitive basketball teams?

Is this a serious question? The world was completely different back then. There's more talent today than there's ever been and that talent is more spread out across the country. If you really can't understand the competitive differences between 2022 and 1951 I don't know what to tell you.

 

[azurricat2010]

I said on this board right after the Wisky loss that Cal would never win another title here.

But hey, at least he’s bringing in guys like Sharpe.

We all thought that after losing in 2015. If we couldn't win with that team how can we win one at all? The thing is each year has a winner and hopefully number 9 is around the corner.

 

[azurricat2010]

Is this a serious question? The world was completely different back then. There's more talent today than there's ever been and that talent is more spread out across the country. If you really can't understand the competitive differences between 2022 and 1951 I don't know what to tell you.

Even 2022 with the 1990s.

 

[kybassfan]

It's not a crap take if you read the post all the way to the end.

I addressed the gaps.

Did you even make it that far, or did you stop reading after you read the first point you disagreed with?

Joe B. - pressured out
Sutton - fired
Smith - pressured out
BCG - fired

If you think Joe B's and Tubby's tenures didn't end prematurely due to the pressures of maintaining the program, I question your ability to understand inference, and I write that with as much respect as I can.

Now there are complete fabrications. Neither Joe B nor Tubby were pressured out. Joe B retired under his own power. Tubby went in search of something he could not get at KY. In fact, Uk was completely unprepared for his departure resulting in the BCG knee jerk. Sutton and for the most part BCG were fired due to contract (I use that term loosely in BCG's case) violations resulting from infractions or on the job behavior. I question your ability to tell the truth. Literally everything you have written is not factual or some cherrypicked misrepresentation.

And you did not address the gaps. You waved your hands and inferred utter BS about the coaches. So, yeah, you are spewing crap. Don't worry. We expect it from you.

 

[Vol1977]

8 titles in 100 years is pretty damn good. I would take one.

 

[Gromcat]

You're not a UK fan when your unrealistic. You're a miserable sports fan that will NEVER be able to enjoy any sport. You become a cancer to the sport.

I'm sorry butvwhen it comes to EXPECTATIONS & you're talking about championships & 4 of them were in a period most of us where not living & did not experience....YES IT MATTERS!

1959-2022....4 championships in many of our lifetimes. 1 every 15 years.

Look the Kentucky hating Calipari fan doesn’t like it. Tough.

When he leaves you go with him.

 

[Blue63Madison]

They say it every year after we flame out of the NCAA Tournament.

"We only have won 8 titles in 100 years."

This is fallacy, and it's an audacious fallacy at that because it is not correct historically.

The NCAA tournament began in 1939. Between 1939 and 1998, UK won 7 national titles. That's 7 titles in 59 years, or one every 8.4 years. Between 1948 and 1998, UK's title to year ration was one title for every 7.1 years. If you remove the probation/forfeit years, it's actually one title every 6.7 years.

Between 1939 and 2012, UK won 8 titles, or one title every 9.1 years (8.6 years if you remove probation years or the 1954 season).

So even at our worst, we're winning a national title every 9.1 years before 2013 ( or 8.8 years if you remove the probation/forfeited seasons).

We're coming up on that actual historical average right now, in fact. One title for every 9.1 years, and it's been ten years since our last title. Based on historical precedent, it's time for a title.

Factor in the reality that UK was on probation for two years during the Pitino Era, and refused to participate in the 1954 NCAA Tournament - a season where they were undefeated. Remove those three years from factoring into the title ratio, and between 1939 and 2012, UK averaged a title once every 8.8 years.

Historically, UK is averaging:

1. An Elite Eight every 2.1 years (or an Elite Eight every other year). Historically, finishing with an Elite Eight is expected every other year.
2. A Final Four every 4.7 years.
3. A National Title Game appearance every 6.6 years.
4. A National Title every 9.9 years (1939-2021 *counting the Covid year, the two probation years, and the forfeited tournament year).

***Also, some of our fans are quick to point out the "gaps" between titles, but they rarely point out what resulted from those gaps, which was this: multiple head coaching changes happened *because* of the gaps.

The gap between 1978 and 1996 saw *three* different head coaches (one was fired and one was pressured out).

The gap between 1998 and 2012 also saw *three* different head coaches (one was fired and one was pressured out).

These coaching changes came because the gaps were not acceptable by Kentucky's historical standards and norms.

All this is to say, we need to get our actual history correct when we're making arguments. The "8 titles in 100 years" is a weak fallacy.

Our historical standard of excellence is better than that.

I honestly don’t think I’ve ever seen a UK fan say we’ve only had 8 titles in 100 years. Ever. Not once.

 

[Wildcat-in-STL]

Winning titles is hard but for a blue blood that claims to still be in its prime, not having a 1 seed in 5 years is awful…. It’s now been 7 but Duke, UNC and KU haven’t been over 4 years without a 1 seed since the 80’s if not earlier because the 80’s is the furthest back I checked.

if you let Oscar winning the POY to manipulate you into thinking this year was elite then smack yourself. Winning no sec, sect title or ncaa final four/ title and 8 losses is average for UK at best. Doesn’t come anywhere close to forgiving last year or giving hope of cal figuring out how to navigate and win big in the NCAA of now. I mean he mocked us fans over a month ago and said he didn’t change offense and didn’t need to. We’ll look where we are cal. He deserves to be mocked right back

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

Is this a serious question? The world was completely different back then. There's more talent today than there's ever been and that talent is more spread out across the country. If you really can't understand the competitive differences between 2022 and 1951 I don't know what to tell you.

You misinterpreted what I wrote.

I am saying that access to competition was the same back then as it is now - not that the level of competition was equal or better, but that all of those programs had the same accessibility to win as they do now.

All of those teams could have won titles, but they didn't. That's why the competitive access argument I'm using stands, and stands soundly.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

I honestly don’t think I’ve ever seen a UK fan say we’ve only had one title in 100 years. Ever. Not once.

Did you mean "8 titles in 100 years?"

 

[Blue63Madison]

Did you mean "8 titles in 100 years?"

LOL … yes!!

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

we have had what 8 in 100 t years. Give Tubby credit for the title he won is all I am saying

Do you mention titles in every single thread?

Why do you root for a team that has sucked over 100 years and only met your requirement 8 times?

I mean we have 8 of em in 100 years so we’ve grown accustomed to winning titles year in and year out.

We have 8 titles in like 100 years. You realize that correct ?

Why wouldn’t you always want the highest rated recruits? And don’t bring up nonsense of 8 titles in 100 years. If you’re going to be that asinine, then take the time to see how many top rated incoming classes in 100 didn’t win the championship. Because currently we’ve had the top rated class almost every year since Cal’s arrival, and it’s not working. Why? Because that top rated class is here one year. I bleed blue more than you know, but I’m not brainwashed.

What is “nonsense” about bringing up winning 8 titles in 100 years? It’s a fact.

We have 8 titles in over 100 years. I

That's why we've only won 8 titles in over 100 years.

UK has played since 1903. We have 8 titles in over 100 years.

Answer me this then. We have 8 titles in over a 100 years.

We have 8, count em 8, titles in over 100 years. You must be miserable a lot of the time.

Yes cuz winning 8 titles in over 100 years should definitely make it title are bust LMAO.

In a heartbeat.

We average 8 titles per ~100 years currently. That is well short of 1 per decade.

LOL … yes!!

I found all of these in less than 5 minutes, and none of them were written in this thread except yours, @Blue63Madison .

Is this satisfactory evidence needed to substantiate my point?

 

[JPScott]

Pre integration statistics are meaningless. How many teams were actually competitive back then?

Totally different environment now.

FWIW, one could just as easily argue the opposite, that UK had it harder during the years when they weren't integrated but some of their opponents in the NCAA tournament were.

 

[ukdesi]

If you go back to 85 when the tournament of 64 started, then 3 titles in 37 years, so about 1 in 12 years.

If you go back to 75 when the tournament became 32 teams, then 4 titles in 47 years, so still about 1 in 12.

Expectation of 1 in 12 years seems reasonable looking at the history in the "modern" era. Standard deviation of years between titles post 1975 is 8 years, so a range of 4 to 20 years between titles with good confidence.

 

[ruppcat]

Pre integration statistics are meaningless. How many teams were actually competitive back then?

Totally different environment now.

Nonsense post and ignorant of the facts.

Elgin Baylor played on the 1958 Seattle team.

Plus, it was a much tougher path to the title game back in the day.