How does everyone feel about not being the winningest program? 🤔
Kansas
- Thread starter Mperry411
- Start date
We still are the winningest program. Kansas has many extra years of playing over us and only has like a 6 game lead. We have a higher winning percentage and have won more games in less years. That matters more IMO.
Plus, we will get the lead back at some point and probably lose it again. It's just how things go.
Plus, we will get the lead back at some point and probably lose it again. It's just how things go.
I'd feel worse if my coach had been labeled a fraud and cheater by the NCAA, my program was charged with "loss of institutional control" and was facing punishment for five major NCAA violations and Kentucky had recruited several players in recent years accused of battering women, sexual assault and other ugly behavior. I have nothing but contempt for Kansas.
How's it feel to not have a life and be a troll for entertainment?
When you combine:
All time wins-UK 2nd
All time NCAA Championships-UK 2nd
Highest winning %-UK 1st
Kentucky is still the most tradition riched program in college basketball history and its not particularly close with UNC a distant 2nd.
All time wins-UK 2nd
All time NCAA Championships-UK 2nd
Highest winning %-UK 1st
Kentucky is still the most tradition riched program in college basketball history and its not particularly close with UNC a distant 2nd.
I agree, just hope one day those cheating son of a bitches have to face the music
This thread smells like a troll's ass.
I was told Kansas was going on a losing streak and we'd make up ground
That's an embarrassingly weak take.
When we had the greatest number of all-time wins, that was the metric bragged upon. If the all-time winning percentage was brought into a discussion, it was a footnote. We knew what was most important then, it is disingenuous to move the bar now.
The reason the most all-time wins is 'THE STAT', is because it is simple and powerful.... it is one number... stands on its own... it doesn't have to be calculated or derived... and it doesn't carry the same cache. No one is googling "college basketball all-time winning percentage".
The percentage takes out longevity, which introduces several issues.
The first is that sustained excellence is eliminated. E.g. You could have a newly established college join a weak conference and go unbeaten all year and then get annihilated in the NCAA tourney every year... you have a team going 30-1 every year (96.8%). Then you have to employ an additional qualifier, like "with X number of seasons"... it gets convoluted quickly. (of course, you could say that team would eventually have the all-time wins too... but that would take 78 years IF UK and KU stopped playing now)
Secondly, by employing a percentage (while conceding all-time wins), you introduce the fact that Kansas has a lengthier history in college basketball than we do, which negates any (mis)perceived advantage to recognizing a percentage over a single number. Percentage certainly doesn't matter more... and everyone knows that. We should be extremely proud of the number of wins we have, it is impressive... and we should desperately want that statistic back on our side... we should not be diminishing it now.
As for the future, who knows... But when CCC took over the lead was 30... how much longer before KU has the winningest percentage record too? Current trends (vs UK) are (KU +4.8 wins/-2.4 losses over the last 5 years; KU +2.4 wins/-1.5 losses over 10 years; and KU +1.2 wins/-1.2 losses over the tenures of Self and CCC). CCC has won 78.49% of his games here (he has lost 100 games!) and Self has won 81.76% of his games at KU. Last year's tourney run (and our implosion) cost us the record. Self has added 3 more wins to KUs total so far this year.
I think we might disagree on what 'tradition' means. You can't pick three (really only two) metrics (only 1 of which are we first in) and make that case.
Tradition (my definition) is synonymous with sustained excellence.
So, what is excellence?
Certainly being among the top two winningest programs in a sport that has spanned 125+ years... is sustained excellence (as an aside the difference between the number of wins KU has and we have is a mere 0.02%... abysmally small and statistically insignificant).
Championships, meh... absolutely important and impressive, but not necessarily sustained excellence. UCLA has significantly more championships than we do.
Winning percentage... this stat is derived from your first point (all-time wins), for which we have already determined that the difference between first and second place is meaningless (as far as its weight on determining tradition).
Numbers seems just one factor if the issue is tradition. I still don't think of UCLA as having a great basketball tradition even with 11 titles. Tradition is everything everywhen all at once (sounds like a movie title). Wins, conference titles, national titles, great figures in the history of the game, great players in the history of the game, all of it considered together.
That was part of the point of my post. Championships aren't a measure of tradition (as HH used it)...
UCLA is the case in point on why it can't be. UCLA has significantly more championships than we do (even at second), but the 'tradition' factor at UCLA isn't comparable to UK.
It sucks.
But there are lots of ways to attempt to measure "THE #1 College Basketball Program of ALL-TIME".
Championships (8, 2nd most)
Final Fours (17, tied for 3rd most)
Most Wins (2nd)
Highest Winning % (1st)
Those are probably the top ones, but there are other (not as convincing) ways too.
UK = 2nd, 3rd-t, 2nd, 1st
UNC = 3rd, 1st, 3rd, 2nd
Duke = 4th-t, 3rd-t, 4th, 4th
UCLA = 1st, 2nd, 6th, 5th
Kansas = 6th-t, 4th, 1st, 3rd
Above is how I would rank them, although I could switch UCLA and Kansas.
Interesting that UT and Bama are 4th & 6th in most tournaments without a F4.
But there are lots of ways to attempt to measure "THE #1 College Basketball Program of ALL-TIME".
Championships (8, 2nd most)
Final Fours (17, tied for 3rd most)
Most Wins (2nd)
Highest Winning % (1st)
Those are probably the top ones, but there are other (not as convincing) ways too.
UK = 2nd, 3rd-t, 2nd, 1st
UNC = 3rd, 1st, 3rd, 2nd
Duke = 4th-t, 3rd-t, 4th, 4th
UCLA = 1st, 2nd, 6th, 5th
Kansas = 6th-t, 4th, 1st, 3rd
Above is how I would rank them, although I could switch UCLA and Kansas.
Interesting that UT and Bama are 4th & 6th in most tournaments without a F4.
I wouldn't say zero, but they are at best a top 10 school outside that dynasty.
But agree, while they had the most incredible 12 year run (will never be matched), but beyond that dynasty they aren't that special.
Question... because, [and while we have so much to be proud of and I do believe UK to be the Gold Standard of college basketball, that others aspire to be], all this "we are the best" talk, reeks of insecurity. Those comments are cringeworthy. You don't hear Jordan, Brady, Mantle, etc saying "I'm the greatest" despite the many detractors. ... actually, the only sane person at the top to ever say it, was Ali... so maybe it's a Kentucky thing? : )
Can we not recognize that other programs have had successes and made contributions w/o getting defensive, making excuses, or moving the bar?
UCLA had a great run for a while... it is what it is.
Kansas was smart enough to hire the inventor of the game as its first coach... spawned the father of basketball coaching... which led to the most influential and successful coaches at UK and UNC. And in the meantime happened to amass the most wins in college basketball (for now).
There is a 0.02% difference in the number of wins KU has vs what we have. It's part of what makes college basketball so compelling... that there are teams chasing us and yes (in some respects), us chasing them.
Last edited:
I hate to say it but they could go back to back. If they do I’m going to be deathly ill. I don’t think the chance is high but it might happen. If so that cheating hairpiece gets deified like K.
Could it get ANY worse for our program right now?
Cal has to go. No more “wait til next year” every game is another notch UK falls in prominence
Winningest program means zilch....
Your program should be judged on March results, not cupcake results. That conference was a joke through the 60's, 70's, and 80's. And their measly 4 titles is proof of that.
Your program should be judged on March results, not cupcake results. That conference was a joke through the 60's, 70's, and 80's. And their measly 4 titles is proof of that.
compared to the SEC?
this is revisionist thinking. I still have a UK 2K shirt from Cals first season here. I'd be willing to bet some of the "most wins doesn't matter" folks do too
Thank Cal, he has become 20 win 10 loss coach just like Tubby but his defense is not as good as Tubby's.
Florida won back to back titles, Arkansas has won titles.
Miss State, Arkansas, South Carolina, Georgia, Auburn, all have final four appearances. LSU has been to the final four 4 times. Im not looking up Kansas' conference, but i promise you the SEC has been there more. Football just skews the perception.
Why am I a troll? It was a legit question. Personally I hate the Kentucky lost that. TFOH with not having a life. 😡
Been a Kentucky fan for 50 years. Are all y’all too soft to answer a legit question? As I said in another post I hate that Kentucky lost that. You think I’m a troll because I don’t have 100,000 posts? This board has went to shit! Bunch of soft ass people! Did I hurt your feelings? 🤣😂🤣
Yes they claim those as NCAA champions. In all reality they don’t have as many national championships as they do level one violations against them right now !!
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Anyone know where this Joe Adams guy came from?
- Latest: IceManPaulWall
-
-