Kentucky has a total of 18 National Championships in Basketball

[anon_9qtxg60vqzy0y]

•Helms Athletic Foundation - 7 (1933,1948, 1949, 1951, 1954, 1958, 1978)

•Premo Porretta Power Poll -3 (1934, 1947,1948)

•NCAA-8 (1948,1949, 1954, 1958, 1978, 1996, 1998, 2012)


http://www.bigbluehistory.net/bb/statistics/TeamHelmsTitles.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premo-Porretta_Power_Poll

http://www.bigbluehistory.net/bb/statistics/teamncaachampions.html

 

[Supafuzz75]

A: Bread titles don't count in the same year the real title was won..
B: Anyone on here that even acknowledges bread titles should get permy ban..

 

[WildcatfaninOhio]

Next time you're in Rupp, count the championship banners. There are 8.

/discussion

 

[JPScott]

A title is not the same as a championship.

Kentucky has a lot of national titles but not all of them are considered national championships.

For better or worse, the only widely acknowledged and accepted national championships in college basketball are those won via the NCAA tournament. Those who attempt to expand beyond that likely have some sort of agenda.

 

[bucsrule8872]

We aren't UNC or KU.

We don't have to invent titles to make ourselves look better.

 

[the nail at the foul line]

Next time you're in Rupp, count the championship banners. There are 8.

/discussion

A title is not the same as a championship.

Kentucky has a lot of national titles but not all of them are considered national championships.

For better or worse, the only widely acknowledged and accepted national championships in college basketball are those won via the NCAA tournament. Those who attempt to expand beyond that likely have some sort of agenda.

One caveat, 1946 NIT Champs could be considered a champ.

 

[dlh331]

I have no problem with recognizing the 1933 team as a Helms Trophy winner because no national tourneys were held (and I realize it was awarded retroactively)

Also, The 1946 team certainly deserves credit for winning A national tourney. I never have understood why UK chose the NIT over the NCAA in 1946 and 1947. With that group Rupp MAY have won 4 straight titles

 

[Cowtown Cat]

I have no problem with recognizing the 1933 team as a Helms Trophy winner because no national tourneys were held (and I realize it was awarded retroactively)

Also, The 1946 team certainly deserves credit for winning A national tourney. I never have understood why UK chose the NIT over the NCAA in 1946 and 1947. With that group Rupp MAY have won 4 straight titles

What was the reasoning?

 

[JPScott]

One caveat, 1946 NIT Champs could be considered a champ.

The NIT is a national title because it's national in nature, and it's a championship because it's won on the court against direct competition (as opposed to someone simply naming them the best at something).

It most definitely counts as a "NIT Championship". And while I agree in the generic sense it's a national championship due to the reasons spelled out above, it's not what is currently counted by most people as a "National Championship". Again those are generally acknowledged to be NCAA tournament championships only.

FWIW, I know people tend to use the terms "titles" and "championships" interechangeably but they do have distinct differences. Generally a "championship" is something won via direct competition. Whoever wins the championship also receives a title appropriate to the competition in question. But people and teams can also be awarded a title without any direct competition.

 

[StubbornPenny]

The NIT was actually on the same prestige level back then, there wasn’t much of a difference in picking. The NIT has lost a bunch of favor since then, so we don’t bother mentioning it. But those old NITs are NCAA title level.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Invitation_Tournament

Segregation and the difficulty of hosting desegregated teams may have had something to do with us choosing the NIT in the 40s. I don’t know the full story, but that seems like the most likely reason.

 

[Cowtown Cat]

The NIT is a national title because it's national in nature, and it's a championship because it's won on the court against direct competition (as opposed to someone simply naming them the best at something).

It most definitely counts as a "NIT Championship". And while I agree in the generic sense it's a national championship due to the reasons spelled out above, it's not what is currently counted by most people as a "National Championship". Again those are generally acknowledged to be NCAA tournament championships only.

FWIW, I know people tend to use the terms "titles" and "championships" interechangeably but they do have distinct differences. Generally a "championship" is something won via direct competition. Whoever wins the championship also receives a title appropriate to the competition in question. But people and teams can also be awarded a title without any direct competition.

So how many national championships do you count for UK, just the 8? It gets confusing. Also, @JPScott did you ever live in or around the Ashland, Ky area? I used to work with a Jon Scott. That's the reason for the inquiry.

 

[topps coach]

One caveat, 1946 NIT Champs could be considered a champ.

Did not know your history in the NIT but in the thirties and forties I think the NIT was considered tougher so any NIT title should be equal to an NCAA title

 

[CB3UK]

Let's just win 4 more and put the issue to rest entirely.

 

[anon_9qtxg60vqzy0y]

Sidenote; Coach Rupp was a reserve guard on the 1922 & 1923 Kansas Helms Title teams.

 

[dlh331]

I moved to Alabama in 1976. Bear Bryant instructed his Sports Information Director to count ANY year as a national champion if the Tide finished #1 in ANY poll.

I realize the difference in the sports but occasionally I actually see posts where UK fans belittle our title count compared to Alabama’s.

IF....IF we counted titles the same we are right there with them:

1933 Helms
1946 NIT
1948 NCAA
1949 NCAA
1951 NCAA
1952 AP/UPI
1954 AP/Helms
1958 NCAA
1966 AP/UPI
1970 AP/UPI
1978 NCAA
1996 NCAA
1998 NCAA
2003 AP
2012 NCAA
2015 AP

And that is EXACTLY how Alabama touts their 16/17 national titles

 

[oldsports_]

•Helms Athletic Foundation - 7 (1933,1948, 1949, 1951, 1954, 1958, 1978)

•Premo Porretta Power Poll -3 (1934, 1947,1948)

•NCAA-8 (1948,1949, 1954, 1958, 1978, 1996, 1998, 2012)


http://www.bigbluehistory.net/bb/statistics/TeamHelmsTitles.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premo-Porretta_Power_Poll

http://www.bigbluehistory.net/bb/statistics/teamncaachampions.html

 

[Sawnee Cat]

Back in the 40's and early 50's the NCAA was by invitation only also. No automatic bids Teams were invited just like the NIT. UK won in 48 and 49 but were not invited back to defend the title in 1950. In 1950 Rupp had an experienced team that went 25-5, won the SEC title and Sugar Bowl Championship but still did not get an invitation to defend their title. On that team was the best center in college basketball, Bill Spivey and Bobby Watson was an excellent guard. The team was very strong.

They were invited in 1951 and won it again. Rupp is confident they would have won in 1950 had they been invited. So instead of 3 in 4 years we may have had 4 in 4 years.

 

[the nail at the foul line]

Glad I'm not a superhero. It looks like hard work.

 

[gojvc]

Did not know your history in the NIT but in the thirties and forties I think the NIT was considered tougher so any NIT title should be equal to an NCAA title

In 1948 seven of the eight major conference champions of that era were in the NCAA Tournament. Saint Louis was the NIT champion but nobody then or now would have considered them to be even close to as good as UK’s fabulous five. There’s a bit of mythology/history revision surrounding the NCAA/NIT comparison of that era.

 

[JPScott]

I moved to Alabama in 1976. Bear Bryant instructed his Sports Information Director to count ANY year as a national champion if the Tide finished #1 in ANY poll.

I realize the difference in the sports but occasionally I actually see posts where UK fans belittle our title count compared to Alabama’s.

I'm not trying to belittle UK's titles. In fact I'm fully in favor of recognizing all titles UK is awarded (including Helms), but to keep them in perspective for what they are.

As far as the Alabama example, as you noted that's a difference between basketball and football. Until recently football had no generally acknowledged method of determining who was the undisputed National Champion. Basketball has had that since the NCAA tournament was created.

 

[JPScott]

Did not know your history in the NIT but in the thirties and forties I think the NIT was considered tougher so any NIT title should be equal to an NCAA title

The NIT was considered more 'prestigious' at the time because it generally was more lucrative and because it guaranteed a spot in Madison Square Garden. But as far as it being 'tougher', that's debateable.

I do think that in the past 25 years there's been a lot of revisionist history trying to make the NIT more than it actually was. It was a very prestigious and well respected tournament with a lot of great teams, don't get me wrong, but as far as I can tell from looking at the information at the time it was never (until recently) confused with the National Championship.

 

[JPScott]

So how many national championships do you count for UK, just the 8? It gets confusing. Also, @JPScott did you ever live in or around the Ashland, Ky area? I used to work with a Jon Scott. That's the reason for the inquiry.

I'm pretty clear on my site. I count the NCAA championships as National Champions.

Note on my main Stats page I list:

NCAA National Champions

NIT Champions

Helms Foundation Trophy Winners​

To be more exact I should change the word "Winners" to "Recipients"

And no, I've never lived in the Ashland area (or the state of Kentucky for that matter).

 

[Rush2112 UK]

I wrote this many years ago:


Many historians love to claim that the premier tourney in the early
days of college basketball was New York's NIT. But the fact is that the
NCAA tourney has been INDISPUTABLY pre-eminent since AT LEAST 1955, when the NCAA mandated that conference champions must play in it and shun the NIT. However, the case may also be made that it had easily been the best post-season venue since 1953 (when many schools around the country began to avoid the NIT after the gambling scandals of the early '50s) and probably even since 1951 (when the NCAA field expanded to 16 teams and conference champs were extended automatic invitations for the first time).

Now here's a twist: many would even take this line of reasoning back to the mid-40s, since most of the best teams around the nation were participating in the NCAA by then. Is there any doubt that Hank Iba's Oklahoma A&M champs of 1945 and 1946, led by the 7' Bob "Foothills" Kurland, were the best in the country? They didn't play in the NIT. What about 1947 champ Holy Cross, with the great Bob Cousy? They didn't play in the NIT, either. And, certainly, Kentucky's legendary Fabulous Five of 1948 and 1949 were easily the best teams in those years.

(In 1949, the first year of the AP poll, #1 UK beat #14 Villanova,
#4 Illinois and #2 Oklahoma St. to win the title. In 1951, #1 UK beat
unranked UofL, #9 St.John's, #5 Illinois and #4 Kansas State to take it
all. Clearly, Kentucky's path to the title in those two years was at
least as difficult as any modern champ has faced.)

Want more evidence? Well...

*The NIT began in 1938, or only 1 year before the NCAA started its tourney.
Therefore, the NIT had no real edge on the NCAA in terms of seniority.

*Since the AP poll was started in 1949, the NCAA champion was ranked higher in the final poll every year, and from 1951 on, most of the top 10 teams
were participating in the NCAA... not the NIT.

*It's true that in 1944 and 1949, NCAA champs Utah and Kentucky,
respectively, lost in the NIT. The two teams were among the six that played
in both tourneys from 1939-50. BUT... 1940 NIT champ Colorado also played
in the NCAA... and was bounced in the quarter-finals by USC. The NIT
runner-up from that season, Duquesne, was also beaten in the NCAA, by
eventual champion Indiana. The other two squads to play in both events-
CCNY and Bradley- were the champs and runners-up, respectively, of BOTH
tourneys in 1950!

*The NIT sometimes invited such small colleges as Roanoke (1939),
Westminster (1941), Washington and Jefferson (1943), Muhlenberg (1944-46) and Rensselaer Polytechnic (1945) in its early days, which probably diluted the field somewhat. In the combined 7 appearances these schools made, they compiled a record of 3-8, with the 8 losses coming by an average of 11.5 ppg... quite a hefty margin back then.

*FINALLY, there's this: For three season during WWII, the NCAA and
NIT champions met in a benefit game in Madison Square Garden to raise
money for the Red Cross. The *NCAA Champs* won all three games in this
series:

1943 Wyoming (NCAA) beat St.John's (NIT) 52-47.
1944 Utah (NCAA) beat St.John's (NIT) 43-36.
1945 Oklahoma A&M (NCAA) beat DePaul (NIT) 52-44.

It's indisputable that the NCAA tournament has been the premiere option since at least 1951... and quite arguably for many years before that.

 

[JoeBeeHall]

Next time you're in Rupp, count the championship banners. There are 8.

/discussion

Nice avatar

 

[dlh331]

To me JPScott is THE expert on UK and I like the way he lists the tier of Titles/trophy winners

When I was a kid delivering papers in Hazard, one of my customers was the brother of Bill Davis, an AA guard on Rupp’s 1933 team. Bill told me several times he played on Rupp’s FIRST national champs team (the 1933 Helms Trophy holder)

Maybe one day when the NCAA goes under, we can revisit this

 

[WildcatfaninOhio]

Nice avatar

Nicky Whalen. Australian actress and model, and hotter'n an outback wildfire in the middle of summer.

 

[Cowtown Cat]

I'm pretty clear on my site. I count the NCAA championships as National Champions.

Note on my main Stats page I list:

NCAA National Champions

NIT Champions

Helms Foundation Trophy Winners​

To be more exact I should change the word "Winners" to "Recipients"

And no, I've never lived in the Ashland area (or the state of Kentucky for that matter).

I just meant confusing in general. Your stats are clear and straightforward.

 

[JPScott]

Segregation and the difficulty of hosting desegregated teams may have had something to do with us choosing the NIT in the 40s. I don’t know the full story, but that seems like the most likely reason.

I'm not sure what the basis of this is. There weren't a lot of integrated teams in college basketball in the 1940's period.

The NCAA, having a lot of state schools didn't have many integrated teams in 1940s. I know I've looked in the past and asked a lot of basketball researchers and it's still not definitive to me who the 1st black player to play in the NCAA tournament was.

The NIT, with Long Island (Dolly King) and a few other schools likely had more black players during the 1940s than the NCAA had, but even that wasn't many. For example when UK faced LIU in 1947 I don't know that any of those players on the LIU team were black.

The first black player that UK faced in a regulation game that I'm aware of was Ben Bluitt in 1949 vs. Loyola Chicago in the NIT. (Bluitt is shown behind Alex Groza (#15) reaching for a rebound).

Link to UK-Loyola Boxscore

I'm not aware of any cases where UK refused to play a game because the other team had black players.

FWIW, the closest thing I know of was in December 1933 Cincinnati played Kentucky in Lexington. There was a black player on the Cincinnati team by the name of Chester Smith who did not make the trip to Lexington. I never saw an explanation for why but assume it was to avoid any racial issues.

 

[lakercat]

I thought that the point of this thread was to mock other schools who count these titles, amirite?

 

[StubbornPenny]

I'm not sure what the basis of this is. There weren't a lot of integrated teams in college basketball in the 1940's period.

The NCAA, having a lot of state schools didn't have many integrated teams in 1940s. I know I've looked in the past and asked a lot of basketball researchers and it's still not definitive to me who the 1st black player to play in the NCAA tournament was.

The NIT, with Long Island (Dolly King) and a few other schools likely had more black players during the 1940s than the NCAA had, but even that wasn't many. For example when UK faced LIU in 1947 I don't know that any of those players on the LIU team were black.

The first black player that UK faced in a regulation game that I'm aware of was Ben Bluitt in 1949 vs. Loyola Chicago in the NIT. (Bluitt is shown behind Alex Groza (#15) reaching for a rebound).

Link to UK-Loyola Boxscore

I'm not aware of any cases where UK refused to play a game because the other team had black players.

FWIW, the closest thing I know of was in December 1933 Cincinnati played Kentucky in Lexington. There was a black player on the Cincinnati team by the name of Chester Smith who did not make the trip to Lexington. I never saw an explanation for why but assume it was to avoid any racial issues.

Good research. My assumption was just based on a short line in the Wikipedia article, I have no evidence. UK could have just picked the NIT for any random nonsensical reason. Either way, the NIT was just as legit as the NCAA back then, but no one ever mentions them because of the NITs context now.

 

[LordEgg]

1943 Wyoming (NCAA) beat St.John's (NIT) 52-47.
1944 Utah (NCAA) beat St.John's (NIT) 43-36.
1945 Oklahoma A&M (NCAA) beat DePaul (NIT) 52-44.

Who knew tubby had a time machine and coached two teams at a time?

 

[JPScott]

In 1948 seven of the eight major conference champions of that era were in the NCAA Tournament. Saint Louis was the NIT champion but nobody then or now would have considered them to be even close to as good as UK’s fabulous five. There’s a bit of mythology/history revision surrounding the NCAA/NIT comparison of that era.

I agree that there's a bit of mythology/history built up around the NCAA/NIT during the time, but St. Louis in 1948 is not a good example. They were a very good team and were highly regarded, with All-Americans Ed Macauley and Jim McIntryre. The following year they beat UK 42-40 in New Orleans during the Sugar Bowl Festivities.

As NIT Champion, the 1948 St. Louis team was eligible to enter the Olympic Trials tournament where they likely would have faced Kentucky. However the Billikins chose not to participate, with their athletic board citing that they had already missed too much class.

 

[JPScott]

Also, The 1946 team certainly deserves credit for winning A national tourney. I never have understood why UK chose the NIT over the NCAA in 1946 and 1947. With that group Rupp MAY have won 4 straight titles

I looked into the 1946 decision a little more and it's still not clear why they decided to attend the NIT rather than the NCAA. UK did participate in the 1945 NCAA tournament where they lost to Ohio State in the first round so maybe Rupp was looking for something different?

Looking through old newspaper articles, as early as 10-FEB NIT organizer Ned Irish was expressing interest in inviting UK to participate in the NIT, which he said he would formally do after the SEC tournament was completed.

As it played out, as of 27-FEB (prior to the SEC tournament beginning) it was reported that UK had recently accepted an NIT bid, which effectively forfeited their standing to receive an invitation to the NCAA tournament. A few days earlier UK (20-2 at the time) was still listed as one of the possibilties to be named as the NCAA District 3 representative [other schools being considered at the time were LSU (15-2), Navy (12-2), North Carolina (27-3), Duke (17-6) and Marshall (23-9).]

So maybe another reason was Rupp wasn't sure his team would receive the NCAA bid.

As it turned out North Carolina ended up accepting the District 3 nomination, but that didn't happen until March 5.

When I get a chance to look at the Lexington papers I'll see if there's more explanation for the decision. It should have happened sometime between 25-FEB and 27-FEB.

 

[LordEgg]

This does not make it necessarily so but my dad was convinced that the NIT had more panache at one point and was the more celebrated tournament though it obviously changed pretty quickly. He would be 86 if her were alive today so these were real time events to him.

 

[carbonlib23]

•Helms Athletic Foundation - 7 (1933,1948, 1949, 1951, 1954, 1958, 1978)

•Premo Porretta Power Poll -3 (1934, 1947,1948)

•NCAA-8 (1948,1949, 1954, 1958, 1978, 1996, 1998, 2012)


l

wow......bread titles..... smh

 

[JPScott]

Good research. My assumption was just based on a short line in the Wikipedia article, I have no evidence. UK could have just picked the NIT for any random nonsensical reason. Either way, the NIT was just as legit as the NCAA back then, but no one ever mentions them because of the NITs context now.

Just for context, the Wikipedia line in question states:

Some conferences, such as the Southeastern Conference, were racially segregated, making hosting non-segregated early round games on their campuses problematic.

My response to this is that whoever wrote this doesn't really know what they're talking about. Some of the early tournaments the games were indeed held on campuses (including in 1942 UK played in New Orleans in Tulane's Fogelman Gym which directly contradicts the claim above.) But by 1943 the sites of the East and West regionals moved to Madison Square Garden in New York and Municipal Arena in Kansas City, MO respectively, so if hosting integrated teams on campus was an issue, it was moot because the games were not being held on campus after 1942.

These sites remained in place throughout the remainder of the 1940's and early 1950's until 1952 when the locations expanded (from 2 to 4) and changed to include a mix of municipal and college arenas. (for example the regional sites in 1952 included Raleigh, Chicago, Kansas City and Corvallis Oregon with the Final 4 in Seattle). Soon after the gambling scandal made it so that the NCAA would not hold their Finals in the New York metro area again (until 1996 when UK beat Syracuse in the NJ Meadowlands.)

But as I mentioned, the main reason why this is inaccurate is because there simply weren't many (if any) integrated teams participating in the NCAA tournament in the early to mid-1940's.

Below is the list of teams participating in the NCAA tournament. I know that by at least 1950 there was at least one integrated teams in the NCAA (CCNY) but I don't know if any others were prior to that.

1939 - NCAA Field

Oregon *
Ohio State
Villanova
Texas
Oklahoma
Utah State
Brown
Wake Forest

1940 - NCAA Field

Indiana *
Southern Cal
Colorado
Duquesne
Rice
Kansas
Western Kentucky
Springfield

1941 - NCAA Field

Wisconsin *
Washington State
Arkansas
Dartmouth
Pittsburgh
North Carolina
Wyoming
Creighton

1942 - NCAA Field

Stanford *
Rice
Colorado
Dartmouth
Penn State
Kentucky
Kansas
Illinois

1943 - NCAA Field

Wyoming *
Georgetown
DePaul
Dartmouth
New York Univ
Texas
Washington

1944 - NCAA Field
Utah *
Dartmouth
Ohio State
Iowa State
Temple
Pepperdine
Missouri
Catholic

1945 - NCAA Field

Oklahoma A&M *
Ohio State
Kentucky
New York U
Arkansas
Oregon
Tufts
Utah

1946 - NCAA Field

Oklahoma A&M *
North Carolina
Ohio State
New York U
Baylor
California
Harvard
Colorado

1947 - NCAA Field

Holy Cross *
Texas
Oklahoma
Navy
Oregon State
CCNY
Wyoming
Wisconsin

1948 - NCAA Field

Kentucky *
Holy Cross
Michigan
Baylor
Columbia
Kansas State
Wyoming
Washington

1949 - NCAA Field

Kentucky *
Oklahoma A&M
Illinois
Yale
Villanova
Wyoming
Oregon State
Arkansas

1950 - NCAA Field

Bradley
Ohio State
Holy Cross
North Carolina State
UCLA
CCNY *
Baylor
Brigham Young

By 1950, for sure CCNY was integrated with Ed Warner, Leroy Watkins and Floyd Layne. Before that, I'm not sure. If anyone can verify that any of those earlier teams were integrated and that those black players played in NCAA games, I'd appreciate knowing it.

One thing to note is that 1948 was an important year in terms of integration because any barriers (formal or informal) which might have been in place to prevent black players from participating in post-season tournaments was banned. This came via the US Olympic Committee which decreed that any organization that participated in banning black players would not be invited to participate in the Olympic trials. (And indeed this helped pave the way for Don Barksdale of the AAU Oakland Bittners to be named to the US Olympic team.)

The small school NAIB, which did ban Indiana State (coached by John Wooden at the time) in 1947 from bringing a black player (Clarence Walker) to their tournament had to relent and allow Walker to participate in the 1948 NAIB tournament. I know that a lot of UCLA fans like to give credit to Wooden for the change (and I have no doubt that Wooden was an advocate for allowing his player to participate) but it was really the US Olympic Committee decision which forced the NAIB (and in effect the NCAA as well) to open their doors to black players participating in these tournaments.

 

[kyjeff1]

wow......bread titles..... smh

I think he was just mocking Kansas.

 

[carbonlib23]

I think he was just mocking Kansas.

oh....ok....carry on, then...

 

[anon_9qtxg60vqzy0y]

oh....ok....carry on, then...

I think he was just mocking Kansas.

Glad someone got the pun. Somebody needs to clue @Supafuzz75 , it went way over his head.

 

[CondorCat]

I always heard the NIT was the more prestigious event in the 1940s. All the games were in NYC with big time media exposure. It was a great place to showcase your talent and a fertile area for recruiting. That ended with the point shaving scandal after which the NIT left New York and was played on campuses.

It was possible in some years to get bids and play in both the NCAA and NIT tournaments. UK did that in 1949 winning the NCAA but losing in the NIT (marred by the scandal). CCNY is the only team to win both the NCAA and NIT in the same year. A rule change in 1950 prevented teams from playing in both.

People forget how small the NCAA tournament was back in the 1940s. Our NCAA titles in '48 and '49 were won when the entire tournament consisted of 8 teams. Win one game and you are in the Final Four baby! (Of course, there was no "Final Four" event at one location until the tournament expanded in the 1950s.) We have a banner hanging for a Final Four in 1942, and we were 1-1 in that tourney. Teams making the Sweet 16 today have a better record.

That's why it doesn't bother me much if other teams decide to count "titles" and NIT championships from the early years. It was a different era then and doesn't really compare to the difficulty of winning an NCAA title today by getting through a fully-seeded 68 team tournament.