Probably, not sure what i would call 72-40 though.
Kansas currently with 30 game home winning streak...do we have a shot?
- Thread starter KMKAT
- Start date
I would call that yesterday's news. But I have had conversations with many UK fans who love to chat about those past victories. They even love to chat about those games from the 50's and 60's. Are you one of those types of fan? I can google past-history of KU/UK.
No, I'm not that old. I was alive a year ago though. But what's not to love about a 32 point beatdown? Speaking of 1 point victories, that would actually be kind of sad for a junior and senior laden team at home against a much less experienced team still finding itself.
Hope to see you guys in March or April!
It's not a meaningless game. You never know when seeding might come in to play. UK wins and they have wins over Duke, UL, and KU. Be hard pressed for any team to claim 3 better wins.
It definitely sounds good on paper, but UL and Duke aren't nearly as good as their squads the previous few seasons.
No doubt, they’re quality wins, but Duke's ranking has been padded by reputation and last season's results. Both teams are probably in the top 11-20 tier. Now with injuries, it's very likely Duke is going to drop a few previously unanticipated. They're going to drop out of the top 25 at some point, but
they'll jump back into the top 15 by March by my estimation. Regardless, they'll end up being no lower than a 3 seed.
And you guys lost to a 1 man show Michigan St team. Dare I say Duke beats Michigan St in the tourney if they meet?
Since Kansas doesn't have a great history winning national championships I can understand why that wouldn't be your favorite subject.
I have to agree with Kilmo.
They are Kansas.
Their Super Bowl is the 2nd round of the NCAA tourney...
Good a history major...I love hearing about those championships when there was 8 teams in the NCAA Tournament.
Except that we had to win ours on the court, in a tournament, EVERY TIME.
Universally recognized... not just by some marketing guy at a bread company.
Kansas has enough trouble making the Elite 8 now so your past reflects your current trend.
Can we agree that any tourney is better than just some VP of Marketing at a bread company picking champions from decades prior based on his opinion?
I am not sure a 8-Team Tournament is good. But if you want to call it better than hindsight, I might agree. But both are like both are trying to name the fastest guy at a Weight Watcher Meeting.
Qualifying for the tournament was handled by conference championships. There weren't as many teams. 68 teams is fun and CBS and the NCAA make a bundle of money. Today's title is no more valid than a title from the 40s. The modern era is an arbitrary construct mainly pushed by ESPN.
Kentucky has a shot to win in Kansas but the odds are pretty slim UK will win but until the game is played who knows. This will give UK's young team some more experience and help get the team ready for the tournament.
Really? One team has to earn it. Another team is just crowned by a nonathletic institution, a freaking bread company....
You guys couldnt win your conference so you didnt get to play in the tourney, you didnt earn your way.
Just like Robinson didnt earn POY and 1st round pick or Selby and Cliff to the NBA. You have to earn it.
Like Wichita State did last year. They earned it.
Perhaps a marketing Exec from Wonder Bread will name you guys Champs over Duke last year in the year 2075 just because. Then you guys will have 6 banners to hang....
I like your team. I think they are getting better at each game. And, I don't think that all five starters have had a solid game together. Each had a game or two where they were playing strong but I haven't seen a game where they all were playing strong together. My hope is that they don't pick the Jan-30th game to do that.
I am confused. I thought louisville wasn't any good. Pretty sure that is the common theme here.
I get it. You don't like Helms. I think the 8-Team Tournaments were weak. We don't see eye-to-eye.
So we have better basketball players, but not overall athletes. Got it. Pretty sure we are just playing basketball with this group.
You are a logical poster.
How can you equate a crowned title from a bread company marketing exec decades later on par with winning a tournament of conference champions that is universally recognized by the Association, media, etc?
We dont like UL, just like you guys dont like Wichita State.
Except we are not scared to play them.
We'd have to play virtually a perfect game, and hope the whistles go our way. The Phog is a tough place to win if your name isn't Kansas.
FWIW Cats have 22-6 Win/Loss record overall with KU. In Lawrence Cats are 7-4 Win/Loss record I think my count is correct. Hell yes Cats have a decent chance to win! It's blue blood competition. Actually the way our teams coming together I am looking forward to it.
Our blue is bluer!
Our blue is bluer!
I don't. The Helms and any mythical National Championship (Coach's Poll, AP, UPI) are never better than a tournament. A 68-team tournament is better than a 8-team tournament. My point is that how much better is an 8-Team Tournament than a mythical championship? A step or two maybe but not heads and tails. The modern tournament started in 1984 when it expanded to 64+ teams.
But I could make a case that the best team in 1953-54 wasn't LaSalle, the NCAA Tournament winner but it was Kentucky, the 1953-54 Helms Champions who didn't go to the Tournament. And, I know that you know that those decisions were not made by 'marketing guy' but a committee of sports executives and sports media.
Sometimes hindsight has a better view.
Similar threads
