Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Wins or Championships?
#61
PC_You_Know Wrote:Don't know and don't care....I started understanding basketball about 94 when i was 5...and I've liked Duke ever since. My team has been on top the past 20 years...and everyone else hates Duke for it.


By your own words, you've only followed Duke basketball since 1994. Well, it just so happens that since 1994, Duke and UK have won the exact same number of titles, 2. For that matter, up till about four months ago, you had even seen UK cut down the nets more than Duke. At least now they're even.

Just havin' fun with ya...
SHELBY VALLEY WILDCATS - 2010 KHSAA STATE CHAMPIONS

[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
#62
Scotty doesn't know Wrote:Good gosh this thread burns me up!!!! How the heck did Duke get brought into this discussion? Im pretty sure that Zaga fan's main objective on here was to get the consensus opinion on which means most WINS or CHAMPIONSHIPS? How is this an arguement over Duke.

On with the topic, in which Duke would not have any baring on..... The thought with my placement of UCLA can sway from day to day in the since that it is UNC and UCLA are equal but in almost polar opposite ways, UNC has had that long lasting tradion of excellence dating back to as long as when the NIT and Helms were the titles to claim. They have the wins and the championships to back up their winning tradion and it is a combination of the two that makes it so hard to NOT put them number 2. HOWEVER, UCLA with the one decade (lil over) winning the 10 titles ESTABLISHED their program in the ranks of college basketball excellence. If you were to even look back in the records for UCLA you will find that they made their first NCAA tourney in 1950 (9 years after UNC's first and 8 years after UK's first) and the program was established begining in 1920.... and it shows in their all time wins number 1642. I consider that heavily when looking at the whole picture..... UK and UNC have the excellent combination of titles over the years and the wins to solidify their years of progress in comparison to UCLA. But in UCLA defense you HAVE TO LOOK SERIOUSLY at the 10 titles under Wooden and the resurrection of the program in the 1995 title. But that only proves a lil lack of longevity in their tradition.

So to finish, I wrestle with this in my head and have to come to a conclusion at some point and the previous statements support my claim as to what is a lil more important. UCLA IS AND WILL ALWAYS BE one of the most storied and decorated programs in all of college sports but at the end of the day the 12 year span to define their tradition and power makes me have to give the long lasting title of nations 2nd best to UNC who has the 2004 wins and 5 titles through their long history.

Thanks Scotty...
It's been a while since we had a relevant post on here
#63
Zaga, sorry about saying you had a "tiny brain" I got an infraction for it. Sad
#64
More Cowbell Wrote:First off, since you say UK just "came out of a hiatus", I assume you aren't counting this past season as part of it, so it would actually only be 11 seasons. But even so, have you been even watching basketball during those 11 years? Just because UK hasn't been to the Final Four in that span hardly means they were in a hiatus. For example:

1998/99 = SEC tourney champs, Elite Eight, top 10 final ranking
1999/00 = SEC season champs, top 20 final ranking
2000/01 = SEC season and tourney champs, Sweet Sixteen, top 10 final ranking
2001/02 = SEC division champs, Sweet Sixteen, top 20 final ranking
2002/03 = SEC season and tourney champs, Elite Eight, #1 final ranking, 32-4 record
2003/04 = SEC tourney champs, #2 final ranking, 27-5 record
2004/05 = SEC season champs, Elite Eight, top 10 final ranking, 28-6 record

So much for a 12-year hiatus. In that span, UK won 4 SEC season titles, 4 SEC tourneys, and went to 3 Elite Eights. In both 2003 and 2004, they entered the NCAA tournament as the #1 overall seed. So don't say UK has been out of the picture the whole time since the last NCAA title.

Now if you want to say that UK had not been relevant for the last 4 years prior to this one, I agree. The last two Tubby years and the two Gillespie years will go down as a dark period in UK's storied history. A 4 year hiatus, indeed. Just not 11 or 12 years. :biggrin:

Calipari said something along the lines of "They hang nothing but Championship banners here"...so the way I look at it, if UK isn't winning a title, because that's all they care about..it's a hiatus.

You showing how far UK has gone isn't making their resume sound better...you can show that Kobe has been to the title game more than Micheal...but MJ went 6/6...Kobe is 4/7. Showing that UK has been to this many Final Fours and Elite Eights more than other teams is only showing that they choked.
#65
More Cowbell Wrote:By your own words, you've only followed Duke basketball since 1994. Well, it just so happens that since 1994, Duke and UK have won the exact same number of titles, 2. For that matter, up till about four months ago, you had even seen UK cut down the nets more than Duke. At least now they're even.

Just havin' fun with ya...

You're right, I didn't really understand basketball when Duke won their first or second title, but atleast I was alive and it wasn't in 1940. That's one of the problems I have with UK fans. You all hate how UCLA dominated the NCAA for 10 years and you all think it's not right because people say Wooden cheated...but you all claiming titles from the 40's and 50's when some of your grandparents didn't even understand the game yet is ridiculous.
#66
^ Don't lump all UK fans into the same category
#67
Stardust Wrote:^ Don't lump all UK fans into the same category

You're one of the rare ones who doesn't rub the 7 titles in everyone's face.
#68
PC_You_Know Wrote:You're one of the rare ones who doesn't rub the 7 titles in everyone's face.

Usually look at things in 10 year increments and definitely don't go beyond the years of my age. Realistically, won't go beyond the age that I truly could say I was interested in such things which puts us all around 12-15.
#69
Stardust Wrote:Why is UK favored most over UNC? It's their championships. Over the last 15 years, these teams have been close in the wins depratment, but UK has always been thought of as the better program.

Let's look at it another way. Outside of the state of Kentucky, most everyone considers UCLA as the greatest bastketball program of all-time. Why, championships. UK, UNC and Kansas all have a comfortable lead in wins, but UCLA's championships puts them at the top in most peoples minds.

New England Patriots over the past 10 years is considered the best team in football. The Colts have considerably more wins than the Pats, but the Pats have the Rings versus the Colts plural "ring".

:Thumbs:
#70
PC_You_Know Wrote:The way I look it at is this:

Uk fans are claiming they're the best program because they have the most wins. You know what I think of when I hear that?

"We got to the big game(s) more times than your team, and lost."

UK has lost in the championship, what? Twice?? How many times has Duke lost in the championship game? Take your however many wins and 4 titles and go back to Durham. We won't miss you. :biggrin:
#71
Im pretty sure that I saw a stat that said that Duke and UK have been to the same amount of championship games I do believe. Yep I looked it up, so within the 10 trips to the championship game I believe that leaving 6 up in the air considers Duke as not taking advantage of their "big games" and big opportunities. UK have won it 7 out of the 10 trips to the championship game where as Duke has won it 4 out of their 10 trips to the championship........ Bit of a difference.

Anyways, Duke is a solid team for that 4th or5th spot duking (no pun) it out with Kansas and Indiana..
[SIZE="4"]
[COLOR="Blue"]Shelby Valley High School:
2009 and 2010 All "A" State Champions and 2010 Kentucky Sweet 16 State Champions
MaxPreps National Champions!![/SIZE][/COLOR][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
#72
PC_You_Know Wrote:You're right, I didn't really understand basketball when Duke won their first or second title, but atleast I was alive and it wasn't in 1940. That's one of the problems I have with UK fans. You all hate how UCLA dominated the NCAA for 10 years and you all think it's not right because people say Wooden cheated...but you all claiming titles from the 40's and 50's when some of your grandparents didn't even understand the game yet is ridiculous.

What does it matter when the Championships were won? Your on here discussing Duke and their Championships from 18 and 19 years ago. Is that rediculous? If Duke had won lets say championships in the 40's, 50's, 60's 70's, and 80's you would be dicussing them and you know it. The only reason you keep throwing up before the 90's is because Duke has none to discuss.
#73
I think in most cases championships are more important than wins.
#74
Scotty doesn't know Wrote:Im pretty sure that I saw a stat that said that Duke and UK have been to the same amount of championship games I do believe. Yep I looked it up, so within the 10 trips to the championship game I believe that leaving 6 up in the air considers Duke as not taking advantage of their "big games" and big opportunities. UK have won it 7 out of the 10 trips to the championship game where as Duke has won it 4 out of their 10 trips to the championship........ Bit of a difference.

Anyways, Duke is a solid team for that 4th or5th spot duking (no pun) it out with Kansas and Indiana..

See now you're twisting the facts. I never said anything about how many times Duke had been there, I was simply telling UK fans not to use the #'s game saying you'd been there so many times. I know Duke has lost in the title game, but when UK fans say "Oh we've been to the title game blah blah times"...well you didn't win them all, so it's not that impressive.
#75
Benchwarmer Wrote:What does it matter when the Championships were won? Your on here discussing Duke and their Championships from 18 and 19 years ago. Is that rediculous? If Duke had won lets say championships in the 40's, 50's, 60's 70's, and 80's you would be dicussing them and you know it. The only reason you keep throwing up before the 90's is because Duke has none to discuss.

But I was alive for all of them, that's the point. I'm a Yankees fan, but I don't rub it in my friends' faces that we have 27 titles, because I wasn't alive for the major portion of them.
#76
Stardust Wrote:^ Don't lump all UK fans into the same category

And, this is coming from someone that is celebrating the way past glory of wrestlers.
#77
PC_You_Know Wrote:But I was alive for all of them, that's the point. I'm a Yankees fan, but I don't rub it in my friends' faces that we have 27 titles, because I wasn't alive for the major portion of them.

Everything we do today is relevant toward the future. May it be 5 years or 50 years in the future. Everything we do today shapes who we are down the road, may it be an individual person or a group. Everything was relevant to my papaw until he past away two years ago, except this years Duke National Championship. He is not here to hate on Duke for it and if he was here he would not be happy. Even until he past away he was a big blue fan and talked about the past uk teams. Don't say that teams in the past don't matter, they do. You keep saying that you don't care about what happened before you were born. Well life was moving along before you got her and some of us understand that. Tradition is not developed in 20 years. It takes a lot longer than that. Yes UK has 7 National Championships under their belt and some from along time ago, they are there. We Uk fans celebrate them for that reason. We are not a flash in the pan team. We were here in the past, in the present, and the future.
#78
Benchwarmer Wrote:Everything we do today is relevant toward the future. May it be 5 years or 50 years in the future. Everything we do today shapes who we are down the road, may it be an individual person or a group. Everything was relevant to my papaw until he past away two years ago, except this years Duke National Championship. He is not here to hate on Duke for it and if he was here he would not be happy. Even until he past away he was a big blue fan and talked about the past uk teams. Don't say that teams in the past don't matter, they do. You keep saying that you don't care about what happened before you were born. Well life was moving along before you got her and some of us understand that. Tradition is not developed in 20 years. It takes a lot longer than that. Yes UK has 7 National Championships under their belt and some from along time ago, they are there. We Uk fans celebrate them for that reason. We are not a flash in the pan team. We were here in the past, in the present, and the future.

You can have all the tradition and past memories that you want...but don't rub a championship in someone else's face that's from 1940 acting like you were there to witness the game.
#79
PC_You_Know Wrote:You can have all the tradition and past memories that you want...but don't rub a championship in someone else's face that's from 1940 acting like you were there to witness the game.

PC, how many Duke games have you actually been too..
#80
PC_You_Know Wrote:See now you're twisting the facts. I never said anything about how many times Duke had been there, I was simply telling UK fans not to use the #'s game saying you'd been there so many times. I know Duke has lost in the title game, but when UK fans say "Oh we've been to the title game blah blah times"...well you didn't win them all, so it's not that impressive.

Are you serious dude??? 70% is not that impressive when making it to the championship game? When Duke is 40%(10 appearences), UNC is 55.56% (9 appearences) and Kansas is 37.5% (8 appearences)? The only big time schools with a better win percentage in the big game would be Indiana with 83.3% (6 appearences), and UCLA with 84.6% (13 appearences). I would consider that as pretty impressive. I know you just get sick of all of the stuff UK fans say but most have the knowledge of the game unlike any other fanbase and can give reasons as to why. Just relax, I was not taking any shots at Duke or you I meerly wanted to say some information once the amount of "big game" appearences was brought into it. :Thumbs:
[SIZE="4"]
[COLOR="Blue"]Shelby Valley High School:
2009 and 2010 All "A" State Champions and 2010 Kentucky Sweet 16 State Champions
MaxPreps National Champions!![/SIZE][/COLOR][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
#81
Ballers Wrote:PC, how many Duke games have you actually been too..

Sounds like all of them from the womb to the present time.
#82
PC_You_Know Wrote:Don't know and don't care....I started understanding basketball about 94 when i was 5...and I've liked Duke ever since. My team has been on top the past 20 years...and everyone else hates Duke for it.

Duke has been on top only twice since you were 5. 20 years, try the last 15 years.
#83
Ballers Wrote:PC, how many Duke games have you actually been too..

i reallu want to know how many of these champioships he was at also?
#84
Benchwarmer Wrote:Everything we do today is relevant toward the future. May it be 5 years or 50 years in the future. Everything we do today shapes who we are down the road, may it be an individual person or a group. Everything was relevant to my papaw until he past away two years ago, except this years Duke National Championship. He is not here to hate on Duke for it and if he was here he would not be happy. Even until he past away he was a big blue fan and talked about the past uk teams. Don't say that teams in the past don't matter, they do. You keep saying that you don't care about what happened before you were born. Well life was moving along before you got her and some of us understand that. Tradition is not developed in 20 years. It takes a lot longer than that. Yes UK has 7 National Championships under their belt and some from along time ago, they are there. We Uk fans celebrate them for that reason. We are not a flash in the pan team. We were here in the past, in the present, and the future.

Amen and thank you. Good post.
[SIZE="4"]
[COLOR="Blue"]Shelby Valley High School:
2009 and 2010 All "A" State Champions and 2010 Kentucky Sweet 16 State Champions
MaxPreps National Champions!![/SIZE][/COLOR][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
#85
PC_You_Know Wrote:UK...you're saying UK has the most wins, but they don't have the most titles. That's saying that they've had more chances at the big time games, and lost.

UK has the 2nd most titles with 7 and the most wins of all-time.

What is your point?

Duke has the 5th most titles and are 4th on the all-time win list.

Duke has 2 more final runner-ups(6) than they do titles(4).

Kentucky 7 Titles, with 3 runner-ups.

They've had the same # of appearances in the BIG GAME. Looks like Duke has lost more than they have won.
#86
Looks like PC has been punked out.... He's nowhere to be seen? Hmmm... :biggrin:
#87
So anyways, who agrees that the order should be:
1) Kentucky
2) North Carolina
3) UCLA
4) Kansas
5) Duke (toss up between Kansas and Duke)
[SIZE="4"]
[COLOR="Blue"]Shelby Valley High School:
2009 and 2010 All "A" State Champions and 2010 Kentucky Sweet 16 State Champions
MaxPreps National Champions!![/SIZE][/COLOR][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
#88
Scotty doesn't know Wrote:So anyways, who agrees that the order should be:
1) Kentucky
2) North Carolina
3) UCLA
4) Kansas
5) Duke (toss up between Kansas and Duke)

I would flip flop UCLA and Kansas. Otherwise, good list, I agree.
#89
Jarons Wrote:I would flip flop UCLA and Kansas. Otherwise, good list, I agree.

Wow!! I think that you are the first one to say this one! Most people are upset that UCLA isnt 2!!
[SIZE="4"]
[COLOR="Blue"]Shelby Valley High School:
2009 and 2010 All "A" State Champions and 2010 Kentucky Sweet 16 State Champions
MaxPreps National Champions!![/SIZE][/COLOR][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
#90
Scotty doesn't know Wrote:Wow!! I think that you are the first one to say this one! Most people are upset that UCLA isnt 2!!

UCLA just not has been as consistent as UK, UNC, and Kansas over the years.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)