ADVERTISEMENT

This is the halfway point of Cal at UK, how many

Yes, I'd probably say that UNC was the best team this season. Again, I agree that in general, teams that win it all have "good talent"...................just not necessarily the best. The best team doesn't always win the championship. They just don't. I don't think UConn was the best team a few years back. Just like I don't think Duke was in 2010, nor 2015. UK in 1998? Doubtful.

Saying a team with great talent usually wins is different than saying the most talented or even the best team wins.

This year? Probably.
Agree to disagree man, in 2001 who was the best team? Duke, did they win it? Yes. 2002 who was the best team? Maryland? Check. 2003 you could argue we were the best team but an injury hurt us, so it turned into a crapshoot, and the best player in the tourney took over and won it. 04 best team was uconn, they won it; 05 UNC was the best, they won, I could keep going. Normally, the best team wins it in my opinion.
 
I'll say he wins 1 more. 2 titles, and probably 7-8 Final Fours if he stays 15 years. He is already the 2nd best coach in UK basketball history with 1 title and 4 Final Fours.
You are dreaming if you think Cal wins 2 more titles here, if he gets 1 more It will shock me. To much roster turnover, you cant lose every players of worth and even some not of that much worth every year and expect to win one, much less two..lol..now call me a troll and move on.
 
Again, please look at the history of the tournament, and educate me on a time when a team without great talent won it all. If you dont think not even reaching the title game in 2015 with the all stars that was on that team, you must be a real loser.
Teams without great talent. Starting 30 years ago:
1987-IU
88-KU
89 Mich.
91- UNLV did not win as defending champs and everybody back
95-UCLA
97-Arizona
99-UCONN beat Duke
00-MSU
02-Maryland
03-Syracuse Melo was great,team wasn't
04 UCONN a 2 seed led by Okafor not great
08-KU
10-Duke
11-UCONN
13-UL
14-UConn
16-Villanova
Anymore questions smart ass? You're the loser in this argument. Now go home and get your shinebox.
 
Balls bounce wierd ways, whistles are blown incorrectly, fouls go uncalled.

There's always some luck of the draw with those things.

im referring to some on this board using that as an excuse. "Crap shoot" past the final four. No it's not. And I see it all the time to justify our misses.

3 Straight shot clock violations in the final four or stalling the ball / not using timeouts wisely etc override luck. Boxing out and not turning the all over in the last 4 minutes overrides luck.

Not saying anyone here believes it does. Just an observation from certain pumpers over the last 3 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thebluestripes
You are dreaming if you think Cal wins 2 more titles here, if he gets 1 more It will shock me. To much roster turnover, you cant lose every players of worth and even some not of that much worth every year and expect to win one, much less two..lol..now call me a troll and move on.
Read his post again. He said 1 more title for 2 total.
 
It is not necessarily the best teams that wins it all, but it is far from crap shoot. Most of the time the national champion could be narrowed down to five teams. There are some exceptions such as UCONN in 2014 but those are rare.
 
  • Like
Reactions: morgousky
It's a sliding scale.

Flipping a coin or playing roulette = 100% luck no talent.

Playing chess = 100% skill or close to it.

Sports obviously falls way to the skill side.

But luck always plays a role. It's the reason that we will never have a perfect prediction system. There's a certain breaking point due to the luck portion
 
titles will he win in the next 8 years?

With the mass exodus of players and a great recruiting class coming in this feels like a halfway mark in Cal's UK tenure.

Assuming he does stay 8 more years will he win one or two more titles in your opinion?

What a hell of a first half of a tenure btw!

How do you know this is the halfway point Cal ?
 
i think 1-2 titles. Do the exact same way, and the ball should bounce our way once or twice.
 
That is bologna, 9 times out of 10 the team with the most overwhelming talent wins it all. Now, if it is a year where there is no dominant team, it is a crap-shoot. With that being said however, 2015 we should have been champs...as times goes on and we see about 4 future nba all stars emerge from that team, along several other really good pros, it will be an embarrassment that we did not even reach the title game that year.

When you make ridiculous exaggerations, you look stupid. 9/10 years there is no team "with the most overwhelming talent," let alone one that wins it all. There was not one this year. Or 2016. Maybe 2015 (although Wisconsin had the #1 offense in all of KenPom's history, and Duke was stacked). 2014? Nope. 2013? Nope. 2012 there were two - UNC was very talented until Marshall went down. 2011? Maybe Ohio State, but they didn't win at all so it doesn't help your argument. 2010? If you argue UK, you're ignoring every metric (for example, UK was far behind Kansas and Duke that year in advanced metrics.. the Wall team had a lot of close wins), and basically equating NBA potential with current college production (which is what the stupid and/or ignorant constantly do). 2009? UNC was stacked, and they won. 2008? Which of the four stacked #1 seeds was "the team with the most overwhelming talent?"

TL:DR - your take sucks, and you should feel bad for making such an easily discredited argument.
 
Agree to disagree man, in 2001 who was the best team? Duke, did they win it? Yes. 2002 who was the best team? Maryland? Check. 2003 you could argue we were the best team but an injury hurt us, so it turned into a crapshoot, and the best player in the tourney took over and won it. 04 best team was uconn, they won it; 05 UNC was the best, they won, I could keep going. Normally, the best team wins it in my opinion.

You're just making crap up to fit your false narrative. 2002 Maryland was a deserving #1 seed, but 2002 Duke was overwhelmingly better by every measure. And Cincinnati was better by almost every advanced metric until Martin went down. If you really want to try to prove this point, go back and find pre-tournament advanced metrics (to avoid simpleton arguments like "Doug Gottleib picked team XXX") that support your claim. Then show us your piles of cash for getting 8:1 odds on a 90% surefire bet. Just a picture with you and your piles of cash. Thanks.
 
It is not necessarily the best teams that wins it all, but it is far from crap shoot. Most of the time the national champion could be narrowed down to five teams. There are some exceptions such as UCONN in 2014 but those are rare.

SI.com has the Magic 8 ball which identifies the 8 teams from which the title winner will come (they can't all be obvious, either, according to the rules they set). Grant Wahl came up with it and had a great track record (only missed, 2003 Syracuse, IIRC). Luke Winn took it over and did okay. Seth Davis took it over and I assume it's now a flaming pile of garbage like everything he touches.
 
It would be just short of a miracle if Cal wins another title. Just so hard to win with freshmen.
 
I'd say one more title for Cal followed by 2 or 3 more Final Fours. And even if we do win that one, he's going to need a few returnees and some luck going our way. Don't think winning a championship is at the top of his priority (second priority followed by putting guys in the pros). JMO
 
When you make ridiculous exaggerations, you look stupid. 9/10 years there is no team "with the most overwhelming talent," let alone one that wins it all. There was not one this year. Or 2016. Maybe 2015 (although Wisconsin had the #1 offense in all of KenPom's history, and Duke was stacked). 2014? Nope. 2013? Nope. 2012 there were two - UNC was very talented until Marshall went down. 2011? Maybe Ohio State, but they didn't win at all so it doesn't help your argument. 2010? If you argue UK, you're ignoring every metric (for example, UK was far behind Kansas and Duke that year in advanced metrics.. the Wall team had a lot of close wins), and basically equating NBA potential with current college production (which is what the stupid and/or ignorant constantly do). 2009? UNC was stacked, and they won. 2008? Which of the four stacked #1 seeds was "the team with the most overwhelming talent?"

TL:DR - your take sucks, and you should feel bad for making such an easily discredited argument.
You do not know college hoops very well obviously.
 
You do not know college hoops very well obviously.


Oh, but you are the expert?

9 out of 10 win?

2003 you gave the excuse of injury but 2014 doesnt get the same without WCS and an injured Randle?

You whine about 2015? They won every game and 90% of the final four game... they lost ONE game in the last 4 minutes...
 
Oh, but you are the expert?

9 out of 10 win?

2003 you gave the excuse of injury but 2014 doesnt get the same without WCS and an injured Randle?

You whine about 2015? They won every game and 90% of the final four game... they lost ONE game in the last 4 minutes...
Got it Brian, you love not winning championships. Now we can move on. Randle was injured in 2014? Hmm..I thought he played, school me Brian.
 
at the beginning of cal's tenure here I wouldve said 3 or 4, but with his current recruiting philosophy, I'd say he'd be very lucky to get 1 more.
 
Last edited:
9 of 10???????

lol no.

First off, the majority of the years there is no clear cut favorite team that is head and shoulders above the rest.

Even when there is, you have this one and done tournament where you have to win 6 games in a row. Heck even in 2015, I think most had UK's odds at 30-35% max.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mapcatfan
titles will he win in the next 8 years?

With the mass exodus of players and a great recruiting class coming in this feels like a halfway mark in Cal's UK tenure.

Assuming he does stay 8 more years will he win one or two more titles in your opinion?

What a hell of a first half of a tenure btw!

1 more. Note lol I didn't realize this was an old thread I'd already posted in.
 
Got it Brian, you love not winning championships. Now we can move on. Randle was injured in 2014? Hmm..I thought he played, school me Brian.


Dont start punching above your weight class...

The stupid ass remark that a fan doesnt love championships pretty much sums up your intelligence level.

You will continued to be schooled by more than me on here with your attitude and rudeness.


But here you go:

"Randle struggled with leg cramps"

"Kentucky’s Julius Randle went to the bench three times in the first half, missing 5:01 of game time. The reason for the frequent substitutions was leg cramps, according to an in-game report by the CBS TV broadcast crew."

"Cramps plagued Randle earlier in the season. Over a three-game stretch, starting on Dec. 28 in a win over Louisville, Randle was limited to an average of 22 minutes because of cramps. Randle averaged nearly 32 minutes in the Wildcats’ previous five NCAA Tournament games."


"The performance wasn't great, but it might have been due to an injury he suffered in the Final Four game against Wisconsin. As Pat Forde from Yahoo! Sports pointed out before the game, it appeared that Randle was struggling through warm-ups."


"Eric Crawford of WDRB in Louisville reiterated what CBS officially reported about Randle’s cramping issues"

"Connecticut dominated the early going and built a 15-point lead at one point, largely because Randle was ineffective. The Huskies used their athleticism and speed to beat the hobbled Randle down the floor in transition a number of times, which eliminated his shot-blocking presence."

"Jason McIntyre of the Big Lead and Jeff Borzello of CBS Sports both recognized that Randle looked far from 100 percent in the first half"



Did you even watch the game?
 
Dont start punching above your weight class...

The stupid ass remark that a fan doesnt love championships pretty much sums up your intelligence level.

You will continued to be schooled by more than me on here with your attitude and rudeness.


But here you go:

"Randle struggled with leg cramps"

"Kentucky’s Julius Randle went to the bench three times in the first half, missing 5:01 of game time. The reason for the frequent substitutions was leg cramps, according to an in-game report by the CBS TV broadcast crew."

"Cramps plagued Randle earlier in the season. Over a three-game stretch, starting on Dec. 28 in a win over Louisville, Randle was limited to an average of 22 minutes because of cramps. Randle averaged nearly 32 minutes in the Wildcats’ previous five NCAA Tournament games."


"The performance wasn't great, but it might have been due to an injury he suffered in the Final Four game against Wisconsin. As Pat Forde from Yahoo! Sports pointed out before the game, it appeared that Randle was struggling through warm-ups."


"Eric Crawford of WDRB in Louisville reiterated what CBS officially reported about Randle’s cramping issues"

"Connecticut dominated the early going and built a 15-point lead at one point, largely because Randle was ineffective. The Huskies used their athleticism and speed to beat the hobbled Randle down the floor in transition a number of times, which eliminated his shot-blocking presence."

"Jason McIntyre of the Big Lead and Jeff Borzello of CBS Sports both recognized that Randle looked far from 100 percent in the first half"



Did you even watch the game?
I consider myself schooled by the poe. Look guy, Randle played and played fine against Uconn,..please dont try and blame the loss on that. We were twice as talented as that team, if you cant see that then you need to take up tennis. Typical sunshine pumper though, u guys should start a club.
 
Am I the only one that finds the term sunshine pumper completely idiotic?
No.

It's pretty much a 1 to 1 ratio between posters who use that term and posters who make you embarrassed to root for UK. I spent a solid 5 years + on message boards on the other side of this equation with Tubby, and not once did I even consider using that idiotic phrase. Reason being, I never wanted to fall into the trap of basically rooting against my own team (or sounding like it) just to gain some leverage in an argument.

Which is something I wish a lot of people on here would think about before going on some immature rant. When you say "I love Cal, BUT" a hundred different times, people cease to believe the first part of the statement. Do it enough times, and it begins to sound like you're actively rooting against UK.
 
And as to this general thread, it is an interesting question how much longer Cal will stay. I think UK could get very lucky with this. We know there's about a 0 % chance of Cal leaving before 2020, 3 seasons from now. At that point, Cal will be 61. I'm guessing (and it is just a guess) that the NBA is having less and less appeal to him. He knows that he's never going to be as big a deal in the NBA as he can be in college, and at 61, already in the HOF, I'm not sure he'd want that kind of lifestyle change. I just don't see the NBA as a major threat in terms of ending Cal's time at UK.

The question is how much longer he wants to keep going. I'm sure if you talked to him right now, and he gave you an honest answer, he'd say "Not long". However, there's a long history of elite coaches going way past 61 years old. I'm sure if you had asked Pitino in 2003 whether he'd still be going in 2017, he would have said "No way". Ditto Krzyzewski if you had talked to him in 2001. Boeheim is hanging on like a tick. Lute Olson had to be pushed out at 73. The stories about how bitter Adolph Rupp was about being pushed into retirement are legendary. Bob Knight hung around in reduced circumstances until he was 68. And so on, and so on. When people are great at something and enjoy doing it, they rarely give it up early or easily.

A lot of this is going to come down to how much Cal and his wife like their life in Lexington, whether they're happy to stay or would prefer to live elsewhere. And there's a very real threat that if Cal wins another title, he'll call it a day. But maybe, just maybe, he'll be at UK for at least another decade.
 
I consider myself schooled by the poe. Look guy, Randle played and played fine against Uconn,..please dont try and blame the loss on that. We were twice as talented as that team, if you cant see that then you need to take up tennis. Typical sunshine pumper though, u guys should start a club.




One jerk after another... (most likely previously banned)

If you couldn't tell Randle was ailing and playing fewer minutes, then you are dumb. I just cited the media reports after the game you obviously never watched.

If you think WCS being out wasn't a factor then you are incredibly dumb.


Several factors led to that loss, one of which was our defense of their guards.

But to say WCS being out and the best player hobbled had no factor is idiotic.
 
Last edited:
titles will he win in the next 8 years?

With the mass exodus of players and a great recruiting class coming in this feels like a halfway mark in Cal's UK tenure.

Assuming he does stay 8 more years will he win one or two more titles in your opinion?

What a hell of a first half of a tenure btw!
It seems as if we're almost always one player short.
If we miss out on Bamba, Johnson, and Diallo leaves, we may end up a player short next season as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crpoore
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT