UK Basketball 8th Edition

[WVRed]

Thank God we dont have to rely on Kentucky kids. Hmmmmmm......but neither does UK anymore. Very factual stuff there NY Red. Home state AAU pipeline? Watford, Oladipo, Sheehey.............geez I fail to make the connection.

BTW, neither Pittino or Calipari gutted their program. Crean took over a program that would have been pretty dang good. He kicked off three returning starters.

I think the point NYRed was trying to make is that IU has benefitted mainly from keeping kids in-state. When Indiana has been at their best has been when they have kept the top recruits in Bloomington.

Comparing Kentucky to Indiana in terms of basketball talent is apples and asparagus. Kentucky occasionally produces four star recruits, but not at the level that has came through Indiana. The Zellers, Josh McRoberts, Greg Oden, Mike Conley, Marquis Teague, etc.

For the record, Kentucky made an instant impact hire with John Calipari. People were scared because of the baggage, but Calipari is in the same tier as Roy Williams and Coach K in being able to start over at a program and build a winner overnight. Not a lot of coaches can have that impact, and it's not to take anything away from Tom Crean, because he was the perfect fit for Indiana at that time.

[Assembly Hall]

WVRed, I dont think that was his point at all. I took it as IU will not succeed because they dont recruit nationally, which aint the case at all with Crean. 3 starters on this current team are from out of state. Not only that, they dont even come from border states.

That being said, there is a lot of talent that Indiana produces. Talent good enough to be on the best teams out there. Zellar at UNC, the Plumlee brothers at Duke, Thomas at Ohio St, and even Teague at UK. IU doesnt need to recruit out of state but they will.

I dont think Crean gets credit for what he did at Marquette. Look at where they are now thanks to him. He took over an IU program that had a dark cloud hanging over it. He came in and gutted it and started from scratch. I dont think Cal's, Roy's, or K's situations even compare to what TC took on. I would compare it more to Pittino's situation when he took on the Kentucky job.

As I have stated in several posts. I hate UK, but I respect them.

[New York Red]

I wasn't suggesting IU has no out-of-state kids. I just don't think Crean will be able to recruit enough top recruits nationally, so he better get most of the top recruits in-state. As for what he did at Marquette, other than the Final Four year when Dwayne Wade put them on his back, they won a total of one NCAA tourney game in 9 years with Crean as coach. He'll need to do a lot better than that at IU. By comparison, Marquette has won 5 NCAA tourney games in four years with Buzz Williams as coach.

[Assembly Hall]

Understood NYRed. But how many of those Marquette players were Crean's guys? A final four at Marquette is pretty dang impressive to me. As was Cal's at UMass and Memphis. We shall see how Buzz does in the next few years.

[New York Red]

Understood NYRed. But how many of those Marquette players were Crean's guys? A final four at Marquette is pretty dang impressive to me. As was Cal's at UMass and Memphis. We shall see how Buzz does in the next few years.

Oh it was an impressive run, no doubt about that. They got that Final Four at UK's expense, by destroying us in the Elite Eight. That was a bigtime Marquette team. But that "Crean's guys" argument works both ways. The Seniors on that FF team weren't recruited by Crean, just as Buzz Williams has won with a lot of Crean's recruits. I don't buy into that argument though. It's like when people discredit Tubby Smith's championship at UK because he "won with Pitino's players". I don't care whose recruits they were, it was a great coaching job, as Crean's was when he took Marquette to the Final Four.

[Assembly Hall]

Oh it was an impressive run, no doubt about that. They got that Final Four at UK's expense, by destroying us in the Elite Eight. That was a bigtime Marquette team. But that "Crean's guys" argument works both ways. The Seniors on that FF team weren't recruited by Crean, just as Buzz Williams has won with a lot of Crean's recruits. I don't buy into that argument though. It's like when people discredit Tubby Smith's championship at UK because he "won with Pitino's players". I don't care whose recruits they were, it was a great coaching job, as Crean's was when he took Marquette to the Final Four.

No, that FF team was Crean's 4th year there. I will agree to a point on the coaching aspect. But it is a heckuva lot easier for a new coach to win when the talent is already there or ya got something to work with. Crean took an IU job that should have been easier had he not decided to clean house. He kicked off Armon Bassett, Jordan Crawford, and JeMarcus Ellis(all three starters). Several others tranferred including Eli Holman(who followed Ray McCallum to Detroit). His leading returning scorer was a walk-on that averaged around 2 points a game. The cupboard was completely bare. I do think that Maurice Creek's injuries up until last year hampered the team from improving in his 2nd and 3rd years.

[New York Red]

My bad, I thought it was his third year. I guess my eyes aren't what they used to be. I stand by the other part though -- only one NCAA win in his other eight years combined. I think the jury is still out on what kind of coach Crean is. I know IU fans won't agree with that opinion, but I wouldn't expect them to either.

[LexRedsFan]

Thats to bad. If you were a little older you might have a different perspective and a little more appreciation for what is going on at UK right now. Seems like the 80's and early 90's are a distant memory now.

I wish the 90's were every decade. 93 final four, 96 title, 97 runner up, 98 championship as well as an E8 in 92, 95 (?), and 99.

And I most definitely have an appreciation....my "growing up" as a uk fan started during Tubby time. Aka the longest final four drought in uk history. I have the vaguest of memories of the 96 team, and that's probably just from watching game tape.

Btw, Kentucky has 5 coaches with titles. That's more coaches with titles than any program except UCLA, (UK obviously), UNC, IU. I'd say if any program has withstood the test of time, it's Kentucky. I'm not worried about us not being a part of the landscape of college basketball.

[Assembly Hall]

My bad, I thought it was his third year. I guess my eyes aren't what they used to be. I stand by the other part though -- only one NCAA win in his other eight years combined. I think the jury is still out on what kind of coach Crean is. I know IU fans won't agree with that opinion, but I wouldn't expect them to either.

I cant argue with the other 8, other than to say that I dont think they made the NCAA in 4 of them. In Cal's first 5 years at Memphis he had 1 tournament win. As an IU fan, I agree the jury is still out on him at IU. Nothing short of a championship will solidify that, a couple would make him a legend! But as of right now he has the program back on track.

[Assembly Hall]

I wish the 90's were every decade. 93 final four, 96 title, 97 runner up, 98 championship as well as an E8 in 92, 95 (?), and 99.

And I most definitely have an appreciation....my "growing up" as a uk fan started during Tubby time. Aka the longest final four drought in uk history. I have the vaguest of memories of the 96 team, and that's probably just from watching game tape.

Btw, Kentucky has 5 coaches with titles. That's more coaches with titles than any program except UCLA, (UK obviously), UNC, IU. I'd say if any program has withstood the test of time, it's Kentucky. I'm not worried about us not being a part of the landscape of college basketball.

Tubby time. AKA the long final four drought in UK history? I dont think so.

Yes, UK has 5 different coaches with titles. 3 of those coaches have won in the last 20 years. UCLA has more titles but only 2 coaches are responsible for them. Kentucky has withstood the test of time. But I would also say that Kansas, North Carolina, UCLA, and IU have as well.

[LexRedsFan]

Tubby time. AKA the long final four drought in UK history? I dont think so.

Really? So, you don't think fact is true?

1942, 1948, 1949, 1951, 1958, 1966, 1975, 1978, 1984, 1993, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2011, 2012

Yes, UK has 5 different coaches with titles. 3 of those coaches have won in the last 20 years. UCLA has more titles but only 2 coaches are responsible for them. Kentucky has withstood the test of time. But I would also say that Kansas, North Carolina, UCLA, and IU have as well.

UK and UNC are the big TWO, IMO. IU had been the "time tested" until recently -- assuming they get back soon, I would say they still have. But if IU goes another 5, 10 years without a title? 1987-2017 would be a long gap for a national power... KU is bizarre -- all that tradition, Final Fours...and only 3 titles to show for it. And UCLA's "time tested" is nowhere near the other 4, IMO.

Not to mention I like to make fun of Indiana because you're in the UK thread, and that's what I'm going to give you here.

[Assembly Hall]

"Tubby Time" was not the longest Final Four drought in UK history.

UK had droughts of not winning championships. All the programs do. But it is not the measuring stick for a time tested program. UK, KU, UNC, UCLA, and IU's dominance go back to the start of the NCAA tournament. Those 5 schools have always been there in the NCAA landscape, for nearly 75 years. UK, to me, is the most storied program out there. Followed by KU, UNC, and IU. UCLA didnt really become a force until the 60's, but they were there in the 40's and 50's. Several programs have developed since the early to mid 70's and several others have fallen off the map. Duke, Louisville, and Uconn have been built into powerhouses but only Louisville had multiple coaches.

To me, having multiple coaches at a school and still win means a heckuva lot. Not only winning championships but being in contention throughout the decades.

[LexRedsFan]

"Tubby Time" was not the longest Final Four drought in UK history.

Yes, it was. 1998-2011 was the longest drought in history. I just posted the years for you.

UK, to me, is the most storied program out there. Followed by KU, UNC, and IU. UCLA didnt really become a force until the 60's, but they were there in the 40's and 50's. Several programs have developed since the early to mid 70's and several others have fallen off the map.

I go:

1. Kentucky
2. North Carolina
3. Kansas
4. UCLA
5. Indiana
6. Duke


There's a substantial drop-off after those, but I'd go with some combo of Louisville, Syarcuse, Michigan State, Arizona, UConn (Reluctantly) there.

[Assembly Hall]

I see what you are saying now Lex, although Tubby wasnt there for all of those years.

Cant argue with your rankings other than UCLA, but they deserve to be up there.

Duke didnt win the title until K got there, although they had some pretty good teams before he got there.

I would put Ohio St up there.

[New York Red]

I'd have to do some number crunching, but I don't think I can put Ohio State in my all-time top ten. Their entire history is basically the Jerry Lucas/John Havlicek era (three seasons) and the Thad Matta era (8 seasons) . Between those two eras they went something like 40-45 years with just a single Final Four appearance and they lost that game. With only one national championship, and that coming 52 years ago, they have to be somewhere outside the top ten.