What team would you most like to see us destroy?

[Shadow1671]

Obviously, there are a lot of great answers so far and they are all correct. But the first name that popped into my head when I saw the thread title was Gonzaga. They seem to be the cool new thing and it would be a shit-ton of fun to just spank that ass once to show them what's what.

 

[FurdTerguson]

I don't want to destroy a program that's never done any harm to us. I'm looking at someone like UConn. Of course they're like the burned up legless Anakin Skywalker now.

 

[Bluesbrother]

Consider that we have already beaten the hell out of UNC, U of L, Kansas, UCLA, Tennessee, LSU, Notre Dame, and Auburn at least once in the last 25 years.

Duke?
UConn?
Or would you like to blow out one of the others again?

I agree with some earlier posts and would be thrilled to believe, with confidence, we could beat teams like St Peters and Evansville. If we could beat these types of teams regularly and convincingly, I'm thinking couches would burn over on State Street. An exciting thought because the only way that happens is because Cal is gone.

 

[Pnasty94]

Duke. Gotta beat em by 30. They own our ass right now, and they are not using astroglide.

 

[crawfords corner]

St. Peter's


Too soon? Or would that actually be "too late"?

 

[Dontworryboutit23]

Tennessee is number one over Louisville now

 

[JC CATS]

The NCAA runner up.

Beat me to it

 

[Swimcat20]

Louisville as always, especially after the bastards lied their way out a major beatdown last year. I want to wipe up the floor with their sorry ass.

 

[rick64]

Duke every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

 

[CatsIndy2010]

West Virginia is always a good game.

Wisconsin, only if we meet again in the tourney.

I just wish for a 20+ win season next year.

 

[Nicholascat]

North Carolina for the way our game was officiated in 17 and being gifted a title that year. If that game was called even remotely close to fair I think we would've won it all that year.

 

[Nooneputsbabyinacorner]

Always KU. Eff KU. Eff Self.

Duke without K is not near as fun anymore. The demon is dead and all the bad juju went with him. I still don’t like them but I don’t wish to destroy the fabric of their existence anymore.

UofSmell of course. L’s down forever and ever. Amen.

And EweTee. Always EweTee. And Barnes can kiss it too. I don’t care for him and have NO clue how he and Cal are buddies. They seem like completely different people.

UNC is still on the list but with Davis there it’s kinda like Duke. Roy took all the old ba juju with him. I still want to beat them by a thousand, but Davis is likable and his guys play hard and seemingly clean. We will see.

Auburn. I don’t like Pearl and his cocky ass attitude. All that arrogant crowing this year and they ended up about like us. With a big fat pile of NOTHING.

Not sure you all will have the horses to do that this year. But who knows?

 

[bbncal02]

Not sure you all will have the horses to do that this year. But who knows?

I didn't think we did this past year and we put you guy where you belong.

Enjoy your title. Call us when you get four more.

 

[Nooneputsbabyinacorner]

I didn't think we did this past year and we put you guy where you belong.

Enjoy your title. Call us when you get four more.

Credit where credit is due for sure. But, since the tournament expanded to 64 Kentucky and Kansas have the same number of titles - 3. UNC has 4? and Duke 5?

Winning a title when the field was 8 or 16, etc. when only one team per conference were allowed (so the level of competition and depth of the tournament was nonexistent), there were no seeding rules so you played uneven match ups based on geography versus trying to match up teams evenly across brackets, a period of time where the best teams would get a first round bye, is almost like bragging about Helms titles.

 

[kennyskywalker34]

Credit where credit is due for sure. But, since the tournament expanded to 64 Kentucky and Kansas have the same number of titles - 3. UNC has 4? and Duke 5?

Winning a title when the field was 8 or 16, etc. when only one team per conference were allowed (so the level of competition and depth of the tournament was nonexistent), there were no seeding rules so you played uneven match ups based on geography versus trying to match up teams evenly across brackets, a period of time where the best teams would get a first round bye, is almost like bragging about Helms titles.

I got a question. Why are you here? I have never once gone to a Kansas or any other teams board.

But you're just here to stir up things. If the Cats were winning games at a clip they did a few years back. You would likely be no where to be found.

I do respect the fact that you admit to being a Kansas fan.

Most just come here that are fans of other schools and pretend to be a UK fan.

 

[Nooneputsbabyinacorner]

I got a question. Why are you here? I have never once gone to a Kansas or any other teams board.

But you're just here to stir up things. If the Cats were winning games at a clip they did a few years back. You would likely be no where to be found.

I do respect the fact that you admit to being a Kansas fan.

Most just come here that are fans of other schools and pretend to be a UK fan.

I don't post here often. I read the recruiting information some posters provide here, as we typically go after the same recruits, but of late not so much. Generally only post in threads referencing KU.

 

[RunninRichie]

Credit where credit is due for sure. But, since the tournament expanded to 64 Kentucky and Kansas have the same number of titles - 3. UNC has 4? and Duke 5?

Winning a title when the field was 8 or 16, etc. when only one team per conference were allowed (so the level of competition and depth of the tournament was nonexistent), there were no seeding rules so you played uneven match ups based on geography versus trying to match up teams evenly across brackets, a period of time where the best teams would get a first round bye, is almost like bragging about Helms titles.

Since titles were so easy to win back then why didn’t kansas rack up a few?

 

[Myth Buster51]

1. Indiana. But the fat jagoff is afraid to put them back on the schedule.
2. Louisville. #2 only because UK already destroys Louisville on a regular basis.

 

[Nooneputsbabyinacorner]

Since titles were so easy to win back then why didn’t kansas rack up a few?

One team per conference. So, your argument is winning an eight team tournament which is seeded by geography and not in a manner that balances talent is as prestigious as winning a 64 team tournament which is? Okay.

 

[Ron Mehico]

One team per conference. So, your argument is winning an eight team tournament which is seeded by geography and not in a manner that balances talent is as prestigious as winning a 64 team tournament which is? Okay.

You guys invented bball, Rupp came from Kansas, and you had Wilt Chamberlain. Don’t act like you don’t value those things about your program, and don’t act like history is not important. I mean if there’s one team that shouldn’t downplay history - good lord. You guys blew your opportunity to win championships early, and that’s nobodies fault but your own. Don’t try to downplay them or act like they don’t matter like a giant hypocrite. Don’t act like a Baylor fan. Get outta here with that garbage, what an embarrassment.

 

[RunninRichie]

One team per conference. So, your argument is winning an eight team tournament which is seeded by geography and not in a manner that balances talent is as prestigious as winning a 64 team tournament which is? Okay.

Those were the best 8 teams in the country. 2012 UK wouldn't have even made the tourney because they lost to vandy in the sec title game under those rules. You guys kill me. You try to take away titles won in a legit tournament against guys like Elgin Baylor and Bob Cousy but beat your chests about retroactive ''national championships'' from the 1920s. One where you guys didn't even win the conference (Missouri did.) Foh dude.

 

[ColonelCat]

Since titles were so easy to win back then why didn’t kansas rack up a few?

Maybe Helms Bakery wasn't the main awarder at that time.

 

[kywildcat41086]

The NCAA runner up.

End of thread....awesome

2nd place answer isthe frauds in durham....period

Bingo! No other answers needed!

 

[CATONTINROOF]

1. Indiana. But the fat jagoff is afraid to put them back on the schedule.
2. Louisville. #2 only because UK already destroys Louisville on a regular basis.

Hate uavel early avoid the long lines

 

[DreadLox]

The Russian army.

 

[83Cat]

IU and I mean a 46 point blowout at their house. Shut them up for decades.

 

[bbncal02]

Credit where credit is due for sure. But, since the tournament expanded to 64 Kentucky and Kansas have the same number of titles - 3. UNC has 4? and Duke 5?

Winning a title when the field was 8 or 16, etc. when only one team per conference were allowed (so the level of competition and depth of the tournament was nonexistent), there were no seeding rules so you played uneven match ups based on geography versus trying to match up teams evenly across brackets, a period of time where the best teams would get a first round bye, is almost like bragging about Helms titles.

Oh for the love of….

We’re bragging about NCAA recognized titles. We have 8. You have four.

Regardless of when they were won.

What next. You going to tell the Celtics some of their titles don’t matter because their weren’t as many teams in thr NBA at the time? Go try that. Let me know how that works out for you.

 

[EliteBlue]

We need to set the tone with the Payne era Louisville.

We also owe Duke a beating

 

[THE_HOOK]

St. Peters.

 

[WCSPlayedWRInHS]