[sherman14]

According to the ESPN College Basketball Encyclopedia.

[sherman14]

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/rank?ver...#topOfList

[vundy33]

Of course...this is old news. We have all already known this for years.

[UKsportsfan]

never been prouder to be a cats fan. Freakin Pat Forde tried to go and ruin it though talkin about how UCLA and UNC should be #1 and #2 and UK should be #3 because they are "cleaner" programs. Nice guys finish last Pat. And from now on its gonna be like the old days, maybe better.

:worthy: COACH CAL

[vundy33]

I'd like to punch that ****** Pat Forde in the face

[thetribe]

UCLA has more #1 votes than UK does but we outweigh them in overall points. Both of these programs are heads and shoulders above everyone else in terms of all-time programs but CLEARLY the University of Kentucky is THE greatest college basketball school of all time!

[PC_You_Know]

It's also notable to say that the gap between #1 UK and #2 UCLA is greater than any consecutive teams on the list.

[Stardust]

How can UCLA be #2?


NCAA Records:

11 NCAA titles
7 consecutive NCAA titles (1967-1973)
13 NCAA title game appearances
18 Final Four appearances*
10 consecutive Final Four appearances (1967-1976)
26 Final Four wins*
38 game NCAA Tournament winning streak (1964-1974)
134 weeks ranked #1 in AP Top 25 Poll
221 consecutive weeks ranked in AP Top 25 Poll (1966-1980)
54 consecutive winning seasons (1949-2002)
88 game regular season winning streak (1971-1974)

C'mon, we are all UK diehards, but be real. We are not #1!

[dangerousdaneerfan]

How can UCLA be #2?


NCAA Records:

11 NCAA titles
7 consecutive NCAA titles (1967-1973)
13 NCAA title game appearances
18 Final Four appearances*
10 consecutive Final Four appearances (1967-1976)
26 Final Four wins*
38 game NCAA Tournament winning streak (1964-1974)
134 weeks ranked #1 in AP Top 25 Poll
221 consecutive weeks ranked in AP Top 25 Poll (1966-1980)
54 consecutive winning seasons (1949-2002)
88 game regular season winning streak (1971-1974)

C'mon, we are all UK diehards, but be real. We are not #1!

:Clap: A UK fan with some common sense.

[cj2561]

never been prouder to be a cats fan. Freakin Pat Forde tried to go and ruin it though talkin about how UCLA and UNC should be #1 and #2 and UK should be #3 because they are "cleaner" programs. Nice guys finish last Pat. And from now on its gonna be like the old days, maybe better.

:worthy: COACH CAL

UCLA is #1 with 12. They are 12-1 in the title game.
UK #2 with 7
UNC and IN is #3 with 5

BY all time wins.
UK #1
UNC #2

[Benchwarmer]

How can UCLA be #2?


NCAA Records:

11 NCAA titles
7 consecutive NCAA titles (1967-1973)
13 NCAA title game appearances
18 Final Four appearances*
10 consecutive Final Four appearances (1967-1976)
26 Final Four wins*
38 game NCAA Tournament winning streak (1964-1974)
134 weeks ranked #1 in AP Top 25 Poll
221 consecutive weeks ranked in AP Top 25 Poll (1966-1980)
54 consecutive winning seasons (1949-2002)
88 game regular season winning streak (1971-1974)

C'mon, we are all UK diehards, but be real. We are not #1!

It said of all time not a ten year period. Most of UCLA accomplishments happened between 1967 and 1976.

[Amun-Ra]

I think it is really close with UK and UCLA. I would have to give the edge (albiet slight) to UK cause we have been a contender almost every year since the 40's while UCLA didnt come on till the lat 60's.



Oh by the way I wish Pat Forde would DIAF!

[theVILLE]

me personally i think that UCLA is #1....sure UK is right behind them....i dont see how UNC is 3 neither.....as SD said they have 11 national titles and 7 in a row...thats tought to beat...i mean they won as many in a row as UK has won...
I vote UCLA, UK, Indiana, Mich. St. and then UNC

[sherman14]

UK has 7 NCCA Titles
The winningest team of all time in number and winning percentage
13 Final Fours
43 Sec Regular Season Titles
27 Sec Championships
Had 3 Titles in four years(1948,1949,1951)
Has had some of the greatest coaches of all time(Adolph Rupp, Ricky P)
Kentucky is the most successful contender for a National Title for nearly 60years
No other program can match it

[Stardust]

It said of all time not a ten year period. Most of UCLA accomplishments happened between 1967 and 1976.

What? Better look at the recent accomplishments of UCLA, they are BETTER than our Cats accomplishments! Better understand the full picture first!

[Stardust]

UK has 7 NCCA Titles
The winningest team of all time in number and winning percentage
13 Final Fours
43 Sec Regular Season Titles
27 Sec Championships
Had 3 Titles in four years(1948,1949,1951)
Has had some of the greatest coaches of all time(Adolph Rupp, Ricky P)
Kentucky is the most successful contender for a National Title for nearly 60years
No other program can match it

You mean except for UCLA who has better accomplishments of all time. As for Coaches, it's not called the Adolph Rupp Award, it's the John Wooden Award.

UK Basketball started in 1903, UCLA 1920. Both teams have averaged exactly 18.7 victories per season, so you can't use the "Most Overall Victories" in the argument.

I a true blue Cats fan, but I am also a realist!

[Stardust]

I think it is really close with UK and UCLA. I would have to give the edge (albiet slight) to UK cause we have been a contender almost every year since the 40's while UCLA didnt come on till the lat 60's.



Oh by the way I wish Pat Forde would DIAF!

UK had a 20 year head start on their Basketball Program. Took them that long to get Rupp, who in turn made UK Basketball what they are today. Same can be said with UCLA. Took them just about as long to get Wooden, who turned UCLA into the program that they are.

Great debate, but hard to shun UCLA for what they have done in less time

[sherman14]

You mean except for UCLA who has better accomplishments of all time. As for Coaches, it's not called the Adolph Rupp Award, it's the John Wooden Award.

UK Basketball started in 1903, UCLA 1920. Both teams have averaged exactly 18.7 victories per season, so you can't use the "Most Overall Victories" in the argument.

I a true blue Cats fan, but I am also a realist!

You have to exclude a couple of seasons of inellegability.
NO one matches UK OVERALL. UCLA has there spurts. But UK has always been a contender for the title.

[Wildcatk23]

You mean except for UCLA who has better accomplishments of all time. As for Coaches, it's not called the Adolph Rupp Award, it's the John Wooden Award.

UK Basketball started in 1903, UCLA 1920. Both teams have averaged exactly 18.7 victories per season, so you can't use the "Most Overall Victories" in the argument.

I a true blue Cats fan, but I am also a realist!

I think the wooden award has something to do with the ESPN era!

but anyways

here shouldn’t be much debate about No. 1. The Wildcats have a lengthy tradition to match North Carolina, Kansas and Indiana. Like Duke, they’re among the perennial title contenders. And if any school comes close to dominating the hoops landscape like UCLA did, it’s Kentucky, which won four NCAA titles and an NIT trophy between 1946 and 1958.

No matter how one measures success, Kentucky’s résumé has it.

Kentucky is No. 1 in wins , win percentage (75 percent), NCAA tournament appearances (50).
The Wildcats are 2nd in NCAA championships (7) and regular-season conference titles (49).

Kentucky is tied for 4th most Final Four appearances (13) and is sixth in NCAA tourney win percentage (.6897), though they do have the most victories in the Big Dance (100).

The ‘Cats haven’t missed an NCAA tournament since 1991, UNtil Billy G.
.
They’ve also won the NIT twice. They were 3rd, 1st and 2nd in a 4-year span in the 40s when the NIT was perhaps the nation’s premier tournament. This was the big dance Then,

Kentucky’s been dominant the last 15 years, including 9 seasons with at least 25 wins. Just Duke and Kansas have more.

Perhaps the biggest testament to Kentucky’s overall dominance? They’re always a contender. Always.

No team won more games in the 1940s and ‘50s. The ‘Cats won the 2nd most in the ‘30s and ‘90s, were fifth winningest team in the ‘60s and ‘70s and finished among the top 10 in the ‘80s and ‘2000s. That’s eight decades either leading or being among the best programs. No other school is close.

consistency consistency consistency consistency

[vundy33]

You have to exclude a couple of seasons of inellegability.
NO one matches UK OVERALL. UCLA has there spurts. But UK has always been a contender for the title.

That's to long ago to factor in.

Overall, UK has done better than any other team. We have dominated in every decade since we have existed. UCLA has not...

lol I just seen Jay Bilas rank us 3rd behing UCLA and UNC...hahahaha. Idiot...

[Benchwarmer]

What? Better look at the recent accomplishments of UCLA, they are BETTER than our Cats accomplishments! Better understand the full picture first!

What? The full picture?
UCLA Since 1975-1 Championship
Before 1964-NONE

UCLA Final Fours since 1975-6
Before 1964-1

Kentucky Since 1975-3-Championship
Before 1964-4 Championships


Kentucky Final Four since 1975-7
Before 1964-5

Like I said not the all decade team, UCLA. It's the all time #1, Kentucky

[cj2561]

UK has 7 NCCA Titles
The winningest team of all time in number and winning percentage
13 Final Fours
43 Sec Regular Season Titles
27 Sec Championships
Had 3 Titles in four years(1948,1949,1951)
Has had some of the greatest coaches of all time(Adolph Rupp, Ricky P)
Kentucky is the most successful contender for a National Title for nearly 60years
No other program can match it

The SEC only have one team in it. It not until late the other teams is getting to UK level. Them all time wins, UK have a basketball team for over all years now. Some of the other teams havn;t been playing that long. Don;t mean nothing, if you don't have the title to go with them

[mrsportsfan]

But we can all agree we hate Pat Forde:devilflam

[vundy33]

UK had a 20 year head start on their Basketball Program. Took them that long to get Rupp, who in turn made UK Basketball what they are today. Same can be said with UCLA. Took them just about as long to get Wooden, who turned UCLA into the program that they are.

Great debate, but hard to shun UCLA for what they have done in less time

I can see where your coming from though...

[Wildcatk23]

UK had a 20 year head start on their Basketball Program. Took them that long to get Rupp, who in turn made UK Basketball what they are today. Same can be said with UCLA. Took them just about as long to get Wooden, who turned UCLA into the program that they are.

Great debate, but hard to shun UCLA for what they have done in less time

You mean who they was, after there 600000 championships in a row, they have hardly been a factor in college basketball with kentucky always being an elite contender for the title

[Stardust]

Hmm, Took both teams to win their first National Championships. So, from that point, UCLA won 11 from the 60's to the present. UK 7 from the 40's to the present. I guess with the logic of Math, had UCLA started their program 20 years earlier like UK, then UCLA would be the better team over the entire breadth of their existence????

[Wildcatk23]

NCAA Tournament champions
1948, 1949, 1951, 1958, 1978, 1996, 1998
NCAA Tournament runner up
1966, 1975, 1997
NCAA Tournament Final Four
1942, 1948, 1949, 1951, 1958, 1966, 1975, 1978, 1984, 1993, 1996, 1997, 1998
NCAA Tournament Elite Eight
1942, 1945, 1948, 1949, 1951, 1952, 1956, 1957, 1958, 1961, 1962, 1966, 1968, 1970, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1986, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2003, 2005
NCAA Tournament Sweet Sixteen
1951, 1952, 1955, 1956, 1957, 1958, 1959, 1961, 1962, 1964, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1978, 1980, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005
Conference tournament champions
1921, 1933, 1937, 1939, 1940, 1942, 1944, 1945, 1946, 1947, 1948, 1949, 1950, 1952, 1984, 1986, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2004
Conference regular season champions
1933, 1934, 1935, 1937, 1939, 1940, 1942, 1944, 1945, 1946, 1947, 1948, 1949, 1950, 1951, 1952, 1954, 1955, 1957, 1958, 1962, 1964, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1978, 1980, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1986, 1995, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2005

[Benchwarmer]

Hmm, Took both teams to win their first National Championships. So, from that point, UCLA won 11 from the 60's to the present. UK 7 from the 40's to the present. I guess with the logic of Math, had UCLA started their program 20 years earlier like UK, then UCLA would be the better team over the entire breadth of their existence????

UCLA started basketball in 1919 First Championship 1964
Kentucky started basketball in 1903 First championship 1948

That is 16 years Kentucky had on UCLA. During those 16 years Kentucky had a record of 90 w and 81 L.

Kentucky didn't have a winning record until 1912 and they only played 9 games.
UCLA first season 1919 they went 12 and 2.

12/26/1951
UCLA-53
Kentucky-84 win

12/4/1959
UCLA-66
Kentucky-68 win

2/17/1961
UCLA-76
Kentucky-77 win

3/31/1975
UCLA-92 win
Kentucky-85

12/3/1994
UCLA-82 win
Kentucky-81

3/20/1998
UCLA-68
Kentucky-94 win

11/28/1998
UCLA-62
Kentucky-66 win

11/10/2000
UCLA-97 win
Kentucky-92 OT

12/6/2003
UCLA-50
Kentucky-52 win

11/21/2006
UCLA-73 win
Kentucky-68

Kentucky 6 wins and UCLA 4 wins

[Beetle01]

Forde mentions being a dirty program, but Uk has paid for their crimes. What about UCLA, their the 65-76 seasons will eventually be vacated once Wooden dies. I mean they paid every player tons of money, bought them everything, while they were there. BIll Walton and almost everyone who played there during this time admits to this openly. Walton even wrote a book about it.

NCAA is useless.

[Wildcatk23]

Forde mentions being a dirty program, but Uk has paid for their crimes. What about UCLA, their the 65-76 seasons will eventually be vacated once Wooden dies. I mean they paid every player tons of money, bought them everything, while they were there. BIll Walton and almost everyone who played there during this time admits to this openly. Walton even wrote a book about it.

NCAA is useless.

Exactly, they have admitted to it, but its ucla and nothing is going to happen