Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They remind me of UK under Tubby a bit. Great regular season success poo poo in tourneythey've won the league 12 years in a row
the tournament is a bit of a crapshoot, and northern iowa/stanford are a far cry from lehigh or mercer or norfolk state
self has a hell of a program
than KU?
Alright man, let's be realistic here.The Chickenhawks are the most over-rated program with the most over-rated coaches that recruit the most over-rated players. A want a b blue blood program with the most annoying, egotistical, & ignorant fans. Luck & big 12 referees r the only reason they have been considered a top 10 team in the last 5 years. All hype & no substance is the KU calling card.
I'm no Kansas activist by any means, but don't they only have 3 less Final Four appearances than us? I believe it's 17-14.you are looking at success being determined by national titles and final fours.
you are leaving out regular season kenpom rankings.
Ridiculous and uninformed.The Chickenhawks are the most over-rated program with the most over-rated coaches that recruit the most over-rated players. A want a b blue blood program with the most annoying, egotistical, & ignorant fans. Luck & big 12 referees r the only reason they have been considered a top 10 team in the last 5 years. All hype & no substance is the KU calling card.
Carolina 5 titles**
Kansas 3 titles
unc's tradition doesn't touch ku's. those mothers cheated three titles for a fact and every win in between. ku's been on probation for a title. but in my mind it's ku 2 unc 1. even though we know damn well unc cheated in '57 too.
then it's 0-0. wow it's not worth even talking about anymore. i guess ku wins having naismith. unc has strictly contributed cheating.They have been on probation for more then a title. Try all of them. All 3.
then it's 0-0. wow it's not worth even talking about anymore. i guess ku wins having naismith. unc has strictly contributed cheating.
Only as window dressing by todays standards.Do Helms titles count?
John Calipari U? The talent he's had and 1 title?
"What cheating?"--Roy Williams, UNC fans and ESPN.unc holds that record. Can imagine how bad it must suck to be cheating on the level they are and have no more than they do to show for it?
John Calipari U? The talent he's had and 1 title?
Brothal U always said you can't win with freshmen until we did. Now they have to say he needs to win more with all that talent. Then they completely ignore that he has done exactly that. How would ul fans know what talent looks like? If his post isn't ban worthy then I have no idea what is. For the shear ignorance alone.John Calipari U? The talent he's had and 1 title?
Brothal U always said you can't win with freshmen until we did. Now they have to say he needs to win more with all that talent. Then they completely ignore that he has done exactly that. How would ul fans know what talent looks like? If his post isn't ban worthy then I have no idea what is. For the shear ignorance alone.
It's really hard to deny that we had the best team in the country in 2010, and 2015 and didn't even make the title game in either of those years. Definitely should have won it in at least one of those years! We definitely over achieved in 2011, and 2014 with our final 4, and title game runs though!!
I posted JCU because I wanted to include his other teams. He should have won one at Memphis as well. He could be sitting on 4 and set up great for #5 next season.
Stingray is a jealous idiot. I can't wait until cal hangs his next banner so idiots like him have to endure it.
So much terrible with your posts. Let's take a look, shall we?
2008 was the only year where all #1 seeds made the Final Four (also top 4 in KenPom by a bit). Memphis was probably the least talented overall - Rose was the best individual talent (but not college player, more on that in a bit), and then Dorsey and CDR? And never forget Willie Kemp (of W/Y/K fame). Compare that to, say, UCLA with Love, Westbrook, Collison, Mbah a Moute, and even Josh Shipp got a cup of coffee in the NBA. And, besides Love, they had at least 2 years in college. North Carolina was loaded (Ellington, Danny Green, Hansbrough, Lawson, and even all their 4/5 star PFs in Deon Thompson and Alex Stepheson). Same with Kansas (Aldrich, Arthur, Chalmers, Collins, Rush). Probably the most stacked Final Four in the last 20 years - again, top 4 seeds advanced, and they were true #1 seeds by any measure (advanced stats, eye test, etc...). And Memphis 1) beat that stacked UCLA team, 2) had Kansas on the ropes, 3) FTs and Chalmers 3, and 4) lost in OT. Oh noes! Such a bad job coaching, Cal! GTFO if you think he "should have won" that year - you don't know what "should have" means if you really believe that. His other Memphis teams were not legit title contenders. Solid, Elite 8 maybe.
2010 - was not as good as the record. KenPom had UK third, yes, but huge, huge gap between Kansas and Duke and UK. Lol, another Kansas choke job here. Yeah, UK, probably should have beaten #2 seed WVU, but 1) it was a 2 seed, and 2) horrible shooting night. Should have won? No.
2011 - #4 seed to the Final Four. Should that team have won? Entering the tournament, they should have won?
2012 - title favorites (especially with UNC injuries) and won it despite relying so heavily on freshmen.
2013 - lol no.
2014 - can argue they under performed all year, but is getting to the title game with that bunch considered a failure? By whom? With the benefit of hindsight, the Harrison twins were, like, mid tier 4 stars maybe?
2015 - 6 really good teams, of which 4 passed the eye test - UK, Arizona, Duke, and Wisconsin. Wisconsin had the best offense in KenPom history. UK lost a close game. Oh noes! I will admit that the super conservative offense reared its ugly head late in that game, though. But all the top 4 last year were better than any teams in 2014, 2016, and 2011. Easy. Happens that some years are tougher than others. Titles count the same when you're just flashing fingers at the camera, but here on the internet we can argue context and the like. Like adults that understand basketball and probabilities and such.
Really, though, what posters like you cannot seem to understand is that "talent" is a nebulous word, and it is not necessarily directly correlated with ability to help a team win basketball games today. Age, experience, and skill matter. In a team environment, continuity and cohesiveness matter as well. But people like you think that athletic potential, or NBA draft potential (largely similar), directly equates to ability to win college games. In other words, the NBA ceiling for a player = current usefulness in the college game. That's dumb. That's short-sighted. That ignores everything we know, such as the aging curve where, damn near without exception, players peak in their late 20s as athletic ability meets skill meets experience in a glorious blaze of production. It ignores that, almost universally, freshmen struggle and get a lot better every year. It ignores that even the best college players are terrible in their first year in the NBA. Would you rather have senior Buddy Hield or freshman Andrew Wiggins? For college, Hield easy. For the NBA (lol "talent") Wiggins in a walk. Invoking "talent" when talking about winning college basketball games is generally a badge of ignorance.
But, sure, throw out the word "talent" and get a spray tan and you might win a Skip Bayless impression. But you're not going to fool anyone who knows anything about basketball, son.