After the "rebuilding" that went on this season at UK, and the success that North Carolina and Kansas had, I was curious to see how the the "Race to 2,000 Wins" was going. Here is the website, but it only had stats up through last season (2006-2007), so I found the teams' records, and did the math.
http://www.bigbluehistory.net/bb/ncaatrends.html
Kentucky (1,966 - 621 - 1)
North Carolina (1,950 - 699)
Kansas (1,943 - 785)
Duke (1,846 - 808)
After Duke, the total number of wins for #5 Syracuse is significantly lower, so I only focused on the top 4.
Looks like UK still has an 18 game lead over UNC. Unless UK has a period under Gillispie where we ABSOLUTELY SUCK SOMETHING AWFUL, I don't think we will lose our lead. But I guess we'll see.
I think we will get there first.
StrikeoutKing Wrote:After the "rebuilding" that went on this season at UK, and the success that North Carolina and Kansas had, I was curious to see how the the "Race to 2,000 Wins" was going. Here is the website, but it only had stats up through last season (2006-2007), so I found the teams' records, and did the math. http://www.bigbluehistory.net/bb/ncaatrends.html
Kentucky (1,966 - 621 - 1)
North Carolina (1,950 - 699)
Kansas (1,943 - 785)
Duke (1,846 - 808)
After Duke, the total number of wins for #5 Syracuse is significantly lower, so I only focused on the top 4.
Looks like UK still has an 18 game lead over UNC. Unless UK has a period under Gillispie where we ABSOLUTELY SUCK SOMETHING AWFUL, I don't think we will lose our lead. But I guess we'll see.
That's a 16 game lead I think isn't it?
We'll definetly get there first. Hopefully next season. 35-0??!!
OMG! UNC is only 16 wins behind oh no
Hopefully UK will get there first. But you never know. Anything can happen.
UNC doubled ourr win total this season (36-18). I don't think we will have another sub-20 win season under Gillipise. If we can win 20-25 games a year for the next few season, I don't think UNC can catch us.
StrikeoutKing Wrote:After the "rebuilding" that went on this season at UK, and the success that North Carolina and Kansas had, I was curious to see how the the "Race to 2,000 Wins" was going. Here is the website, but it only had stats up through last season (2006-2007), so I found the teams' records, and did the math. http://www.bigbluehistory.net/bb/ncaatrends.html
Kentucky (1,966 - 621 - 1)
North Carolina (1,950 - 699)
Kansas (1,943 - 785)
Duke (1,846 - 808)
After Duke, the total number of wins for #5 Syracuse is significantly lower, so I only focused on the top 4.
Looks like UK still has an 18 game lead over UNC. Unless UK has a period under Gillispie where we ABSOLUTELY SUCK SOMETHING AWFUL, I don't think we will lose our lead. But I guess we'll see.
I would say this is only a 2, maybe 3, team race. Duke has no chance of getting there first.
Interesting Winning percentage though.
UK -- .760
UNC -- .736
Also, UNC has played 61 more games than UK. Cats should get there first. 2009-2010 season (when hopefully I am attending UK and can watch the game in person!!)
Now I hope Lawson and Hansbrough go to the NBA this year.
I think Carolina will pass us and get to the 2,000 win plateau first. They will probably pass us this coming season and then get to the 2,000 win mark sometime in the 2009-2010 season. UK will be lucky to win 34 games in 2 seasons with the way this guy coaches and with the low caliber of talent they have. But I could be wrong and I hope I am because I hate UNC, but things arent looking good. I think Hansbrough will be back next season and they also have some good talent coming in so, thats why I think UNC will do it first.
Braves_Fan_26 Wrote:with the low caliber of talent they have. .
Yea Patterson is Low Caliber.
Let's not forget the fact that UNC started 10 years later than UK didn't they?
So, shouldn't we have more wins?
JBIRD Wrote:Let's not forget the fact that UNC started 10 years later than UK didn't they?
So, shouldn't we have more wins?
That's a technicality. Who cares when we started? Were better. End of discussion. haha
JBIRD Wrote:Let's not forget the fact that UNC started 10 years later than UK didn't they?
So, shouldn't we have more wins?
What are you thinking?
I can't believe UK only has 1 tie and the others don't have any..
I think that UK will get there first, but UNC will pass us by after that. I hope it doesn't happen though haha
North Carolina has to be the easiet place to recruit in the world. I mean, they have a rich tradition and my god their campus is ****ing incredible. UK needs to build a gym on campus that will allow students to surround the court and true fans, Not great-great granny with a Friends of Coal sticker on her chest.
JBIRD Wrote:Let's not forget the fact that UNC started 10 years later than UK didn't they?
So, shouldn't we have more wins?
I disagree with that statement.
Whether UK started 10 years before UNC or not, the bottom line is that North Carolina has played more games than Kentucky. Therefore, more games means that UNC has had more chances to accumulate wins than UK has had. If you think about it in that sense, then it is
UNC, not UK, who should have more wins all-time.