So, will Kentucky dominate college ball for the foreseeable future?

I don't really follow college basketball (or college sports at all, really) but with several high picks in recent years, are "1 and done" college players going to go to Kentucky knowing they're likely to be able to get drafted high? Or will players make decisions based on other factors?

Well, Cal's been here 3 years. I'd bet he stays for around 10 years total, and leaves with 3 titles (including this year).

You won't see a truly dominant team like 2011-12 every year, more like every other year.

[QUOTE=BlackWhiteGreen]I don't really follow college basketball (or college sports at all, really) but with several high picks in recent years, are "1 and done" college players going to go to Kentucky knowing they're likely to be able to get drafted high? Or will players make decisions based on other factors?[/QUOTE]

No, Kentucky won't dominate college basketball every year.

What they had this season was a great team that probably won't ever be stacked like that until their 2013-2014 team. Last year they had 3 of the Top 10 freshman, including 2 of the Top 5 in Davis & Gilchrist along with players such as Lamb & Jones who could've been 1st Round picks the previous year.

But Calipari has definetly set up a stream of top recruits who are going to head to Kentucky for 1-2 years, play in front of a crowd larger than NBA arenas, on TV every game, & getting NBA exposure.

Of course not.

They will consistently be around a Sweet 16-contender level depending on what they can haul in recruiting. But let's not act like UK gets every top recruit, nor that every top recruit they get will end up being John Wall or Anthony Davis every year. And that Sweet 16-contender level every year isn't only held by UK. You could argue UNC and Kansas are right there every year as well. Maybe even Duke if they weren't incredibly overrated every year.

Also, lest we forget that the college game has something called the NCAA Tournament. The best team doesn't win it all the time. Not that UK will be the best team every year... In fact, last year was the only year where you could say UK had the best team throughout the season. Maybe, you could argue the Wall-Cousins team, but I remember most people favoring Kansas on top going into the tournament. And neither of those teams even made the Final Four.

Last year they actually had one of their potential one and done's stay for his soph year (Jones) which greatly helped. Is that the first time that has happened since Cal has been there? If he leaves, UK isn't cutting down the nets, imo. What happens? Millers moves to the starting lineup and they are forced to actually use their depth? That team went 6 deep.

[QUOTE=IGotACoolStory]Of course not.

They will consistently be around a Sweet 16-contender level depending on what they can haul in recruiting. But let's not act like UK gets every top recruit, nor that every top recruit they get will end up being John Wall or Anthony Davis every year. And that Sweet 16-contender level every year isn't only held by UK. You could argue UNC and Kansas are right there every year as well. Maybe even Duke if they weren't incredibly overrated every year.

Also, lest we forget that the college game has something called the NCAA Tournament. The best team doesn't win it all the time. Not that UK will be the best team every year... In fact, last year was the only year where you could say UK had the best team throughout the season. Maybe, you could argue the Wall-Cousins team, but I remember most people favoring Kansas on top going into the tournament. And neither of those teams even made the Final Four.

Last year they actually had one of their potential one and done's stay for his soph year (Jones) which greatly helped. Is that the first time that has happened since Cal has been there? If he leaves, UK isn't cutting down the nets, imo. What happens? Millers moves to the starting lineup and they are forced to actually use their depth? That team went 6 deep.[/QUOTE]

that guy in your avatar will be cutting down some nets in UK blue

Nope. They won't always have the mix of upperclassman experience and lower classman talent they had last year. Plus, there's no AD clogging up the lane. b I'm betting UK's '12 squad will be the best Cal will ever field. Next years team doesn't look all that scary.

[QUOTE=IGotACoolStory]Of course not.

They will consistently be around a Sweet 16-contender level depending on what they can haul in recruiting. But let's not act like UK gets every top recruit, nor that every top recruit they get will end up being John Wall or Anthony Davis every year. And that Sweet 16-contender level every year isn't only held by UK. You could argue UNC and Kansas are right there every year as well. Maybe even Duke if they weren't incredibly overrated every year.

Also, lest we forget that the college game has something called the NCAA Tournament. The best team doesn't win it all the time. Not that UK will be the best team every year... In fact, last year was the only year where you could say UK had the best team throughout the season. Maybe, you could argue the Wall-Cousins team, but I remember most people favoring Kansas on top going into the tournament. And neither of those teams even made the Final Four.

Last year they actually had one of their potential one and done's stay for his soph year (Jones) which greatly helped. Is that the first time that has happened since Cal has been there? If he leaves, UK isn't cutting down the nets, imo. What happens? Millers moves to the starting lineup and they are forced to actually use their depth? That team went 6 deep.[/QUOTE]

I agree with this, for the most part. I think you're selling Kentucky (and UNC and Kansas) a little short saying they're a Sweet 16 contender every year. Teams like Ohio State, Syracuse, and Michigan State are Sweet 16 contenders most years. UNC, Knetucky, and Kansas are Elite 8/Final 4 threats almost every season.

As for the OP, I don't know if they'll dominate, but they'll come close as long as the one-and-done rule is in place and Calipari is their head coach. UNC is the only other team that consistently comes close to recruiting on their level, and even then Roy Williams doesn't recruit sure fire one-and-dones to the extent Calipari does. Williams seems to have a recruiting pattern where every other 2-3 years he attempts to load up with five stars, and fills the other recruiting classes in with foundation and 2+ year four stars.

Good is a better word than dominant

[QUOTE=ukfan22]that guy in your avatar will be cutting down some nets in UK blue[/QUOTE]

Why so passive aggressive?

I wouldn't doubt it since, from everything I have heard, it's down between Florida State and Kentucky. Florida State just seems out of place, even if his parents went there and he and his family are real right with Coach Hamilton.


[QUOTE=KG215]I agree with this, for the most part. I think you're selling Kentucky (and UNC and Kansas) a little short saying they're a Sweet 16 contender every year. Teams like Ohio State, Syracuse, and Michigan State are Sweet 16 contenders most years. UNC, Kentucky, and Kansas are Elite 8/Final 4 threats almost every season. [/QUOTE]

Almost every season, sure. Every season which is what I was getting after.

A F4 contender every year is, imo, a legitimate National Championship contender every year.

UNC (with Roy): 2005, 2008, 2009, and 2012 were his possible championship years. That's 4 of his 9 seasons as the Tar Heels head coach.

KU (with Self): 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012 were his possible championship years. That's also 4 of the 9 years. And frankly, I didn't think last year was a possible year until they found themselves in the National Championship game.

UK (with Cal): 2010, 2011, and 2012 were his possible championship years. That's all 3 of his years so he could technically be in that F4 threat every year conversation. Although you have to take it with a grain of salt when you are comparing 3 years to 9 years for the other two coaches, considering how quickly the landscape in college basketball can, and often does, change.

And let's do Duke in the last 9 years just because they are often thrown in the top tier group.

DU (with K - last 9 seasons): 2004, 2006, 2010 were his possible championship years. You could argue 2011 if Irving didn't get injured. But you could also do something similar for other teams, so we won't.


So most of the team didn't even reach half, unless you disagree with me on the potential championship years. IMO, that's not a high enough percentage to put them in a consistent Final Four team year in and year out.

Also, Syracuse does not belong in the Izzo and Matta group...

No, they haven't even been dominating it lately. one championship is not "dominating".

Didn't Calipari say a year or two ago that he didn't plan on coaching for more than 10 more years? I remember reading it in an ESPN article.

And anyways, he thinks his shit doesn't stink but something will catch up to him eventually during his time at UK. We've seen it happen at UMASS and Memphis. But thats the nature of the beast. Dealing with all of these 5 star guys, especially at the volume he does, will eventually get you in trouble with the NCAA.

[QUOTE=UConnCeltics]Didn't Calipari say a year or two ago that he didn't plan on coaching for more than 10 more years? I remember reading it in an ESPN article.

And anyways, he thinks his shit doesn't stink but something will catch up to him eventually during his time at UK. We've seen it happen at UMASS and Memphis. But thats the nature of the beast. Dealing with all of these 5 star guys, especially at the volume he does, will eventually get you in trouble with the NCAA.[/QUOTE]

lol, a UConn fan talking shit about NCAA problems

[QUOTE=ukfan22]lol, a UConn fan talking shit about NCAA problems[/QUOTE]

dont be so obnoxious

everyone has a right to their opinion, regardless of what the program they follows, does

[QUOTE=ukfan22]lol, a UConn fan talking shit about NCAA problems[/QUOTE]
Yup, buying a plane ticket illegally, texting a few too many times, and being retroactively punished for poor academic performance sure is the sign of a dirty program. You can find dirt on any program that competes at a high level in the NCAA, from UConn to UNC to UK to Indiana. Wherever whenever.

My favorite part of this post was when you defended Calipari.

Even UK homers like you know the NCAA will have your ass in a few years.

[QUOTE=UConnCeltics]Yup, buying a plane ticket illegally, texting a few too many times,[B] and being retroactively punished for poor academic performance [/B]sure is the sign of a dirty program. You can find dirt on any program that competes at a high level in the NCAA, from UConn to UNC to UK to Indiana. Wherever whenever.

My favorite part of this post was when you defended Calipari.

Even UK homers like you know the NCAA will have your ass in a few years.[/QUOTE]

i remember rolling my eyes at this when i heard it. so the uconn team has bad enough grades to be punished but not UK? yeah, not believing it. But i get it, uconn is a legitimate university while UK is not. UK will give the basketball team the grades they need to play.

[QUOTE=UConnCeltics]Yup, buying a plane ticket illegally, texting a few too many times, and being retroactively punished for poor academic performance sure is the sign of a dirty program. You can find dirt on any program that competes at a high level in the NCAA, from UConn to UNC to UK to Indiana. Wherever whenever.
[/QUOTE]

:no:

UNC has never had major violations in basketball during the shot clock era.

Don't lump us with the UK's and UConns that have had multiple major NCAA violations, or Calipari who's waiting for his next violation to be handed down.

:oldlol:

[QUOTE=CLTHornets4eva]:no:

UNC has never had major violations in basketball during the shot clock era.

Don't lump us with the UK's and UConns that have had multiple major NCAA violations, or Calipari who's waiting for his next violation to be handed down.[/QUOTE]

It's s good thing everyone seems to be ignoring the academic fraud that involved half your 2005 team championship team.

Swept under the rug already.

Eh, until Calipari leaves for an NBA team or something. Can't see him staying at UK for more than 3-4 more years. He almost has nothing left to prove. That is, assuming they don't find some foul play like in his past.

Hope so. Really do. Purdue can rack up some really good classes like they have been the next couple years, let em grow, build continuity, blah blah blah, but they're not winning a title.

And that's honestly fine with me. Looking at it completely selfishly, like every fan that doesn't root for maybe 4/5 schools should, GOOD. Most of the regular posters here are fans/alumni of big conference schools. Don't knock Calipari and UK for just taking advantage of the system. It's an "amateur" basketball problem, not NCAA.

You're 18, you're a legal adult. There's absolutely no reason for players not to be eligible once they hit 18 other than NBA GMs being punk asses that don't trust their staff's evaluations.

The AAU culutre of prep hoops is an entirely different animal and I'm not about to pretend I know how to legitimately "fix" it. But divorcing big money athletics from college athletics is a good start. 15 year old actors can drop out of school and get tutored on set in a trailer and no one cares. Why can't there be a structured, fully sanctioned Euro style minor league? Morally gross? You bet. But anymore than it already is?

It all boils down to, for me, let these kids make money for themselves. Everyone else is. There's an entire industry built on watching high school sophomores. Grown men make a living telling us how good they think 15 year olds are. That disgusts you less than the actual 15 year old making a couple grand a month to pay his mom's light bill? Take the kid gloves off. The industry of basketball doesn't treat these kids as children until it comes time to compensate them.

PAY EM.

I'm ok with paying players as long as they're not using tax payer or tuition fees. I can't justify paying players salaries when academics are being sacrificed just to do that. It doesn't serve the greater good.

And the NBA needs to get the age minimum back to 18. It's egregious how they're using college as a weed out system.

[quote=wang4three]I'm ok with paying players as long as they're not using tax payer or tuition fees. I can't justify paying players salaries when academics are being sacrificed just to do that. It doesn't serve the greater good.

And the NBA needs to get the age minimum back to 18. It's egregious how they're using college as a weed out system.[/quote]Completely agreed.

Which is why NCAA basketball needs to stop being the de facto minor league for the NBA and the NFL. ESPECIALLY the NFL, but that's a different thread. There needs to be legitimate minor leagues for both. Starting whenever the kid's parents want to sign the contract. The only way you can be against is either you're so disillusioned to think AAU tourneys will basically become minor leagues, which they won't, there'd be maybe 15 kids a year. And their entire future is predicated on basketball anyway, stop kidding yourselves thinking the majority of scholarship athlets are in it for the education.I'm talking about NBA sanctioned academies, just like the Euroleague.

"Amateur basketball" is clearly a huge business. It's far past time to make it an above board one. A kid doesn't succeed at it? Tough. Same way he doesn't succeed spending 65% of his time out of a classroom getting that "Organizational Leadership degree." A lot of people are honestly just kidding themselves.

[QUOTE=InspiredLebowski]Hope so. Really do. Purdue can rack up some really good classes like they have been the next couple years, let em grow, build continuity, blah blah blah, but they're not winning a title.

And that's honestly fine with me. Looking at it completely selfishly, like every fan that doesn't root for maybe 4/5 schools should, GOOD. Most of the regular posters here are fans/alumni of big conference schools. Don't knock Calipari and UK for just taking advantage of the system. It's an "amateur" basketball problem, not NCAA.

You're 18, you're a legal adult. There's absolutely no reason for players not to be eligible once they hit 18 other than NBA GMs being punk asses that don't trust their staff's evaluations.

The AAU culutre of prep hoops is an entirely different animal and I'm not about to pretend I know how to legitimately "fix" it. But divorcing big money athletics from college athletics is a good start. 15 year old actors can drop out of school and get tutored on set in a trailer and no one cares. Why can't there be a structured, fully sanctioned Euro style minor league? Morally gross? You bet. But anymore than it already is?

It all boils down to, for me, let these kids make money for themselves. Everyone else is. There's an entire industry built on watching high school sophomores. Grown men make a living telling us how good they think 15 year olds are. That disgusts you less than the actual 15 year old making a couple grand a month to pay his mom's light bill? Take the kid gloves off. The industry of basketball doesn't treat these kids as children until it comes time to compensate them.

PAY EM.[/QUOTE]

in addition to this a lot of student athletes (at least at the top tier schools) are not allowed to miss class, while their colleagues are afforded the discretion by their professors to go to class when they see fit.

I'm not advocating them skipping class at all, rather, it's just more evidence of the mixed message that the NCAA sends its student-athletes

if these athletes want to make a smoother transition to the NBA, get rid of all these rules and if they make poor decisions then so be it, let them learn the hard way like anyone else

as for paying them, i definitely would endorse an idea like that, these schools make ridiculous sums of money from their athletic programs and it could even be an incentive for players to stay. Why tell a guy he's not old enough to go to the NBA, but he can join the army and kill people, i dont get it

If they keep getting quality players that are coachable and clean cut, Kentucky will be a top program for awhile.

[quote=Burgz V2]in addition to this a lot of student athletes (at least at the top tier schools) are not allowed to miss class, while their colleagues are afforded the discretion by their professors to go to class when they see fit.

I'm not advocating them skipping class at all, rather, it's just more evidence of the mixed message that the NCAA sends its student-athletes

if these athletes want to make a smoother transition to the NBA, get rid of all these rules and if they make poor decisions then so be it, let them learn the hard way like anyone else

as for paying them, i definitely would endorse an idea like that, these schools make ridiculous sums of money from their athletic programs and it could even be an incentive for players to stay. Why tell a guy he's not old enough to go to the NBA, but he can join the army and kill people, i dont get it[/quote]To be clear, I don't want the NCAA, a conference, or a specific school to compensate them. I want to entirely divorce amateur basketball from college athletics. Go the baseball route, kid wants to enter the draft straight outta HS? Cool, here's your contract offer. He wants to go to college. You're there at least 3 years.

The bastardization of post secondary education in lieu of athletics should seriously gross people out. Kids are enrolled in a lot of the schools we attended strictly because they're good ball players. Cite all the bullshit GPA stats you want, these kids are not at college to learn. THAT IS WHY COLLEGE EXISTS, NOT TO HAVE A GOOD BASKETBALL TEAM. They're already majoring in basketball. Make it real, make it a real job. I want these kids to make money off their talent but more than anything I want them to stop making a joke out of college.

[QUOTE=InspiredLebowski]To be clear, I don't want the NCAA, a conference, or a specific school to compensate them. [B] I want to entirely divorce amateur basketball from college athletics.[/B] Go the baseball route, kid wants to enter the draft straight outta HS? Cool, here's your contract offer. He wants to go to college. You're there at least 3 years.

The bastardization of post secondary education in lieu of athletics should seriously gross people out. Kids are enrolled in a lot of the schools we attended strictly because they're good ball players. Cite all the bullshit GPA stats you want, these kids are not at college to learn. THAT IS WHY COLLEGE EXISTS, NOT TO HAVE A GOOD BASKETBALL TEAM. They're already majoring in basketball. Make it real, make it a real job. I want these kids to make money off their talent but more than anything I want them to stop making a joke out of college.[/QUOTE]

very admirable, but man, do realize how impossible that seems? these amateur teams are hardly amateur anyways, everywhere you look there is a team sponsored by nike, a tournament by adidas etc. etc. These sponsorships have taken over the AAU circuit and the AAU circuit has taken the place of old fashioned college recruiting.

in terms of just basketball, the AAU game has begun to create a generation of players that only knows how to play when the ball is in their hands and i'm not particularly fond of that either

i've always been lukewarm to the baseball system, however, i agree it works in allowing players to see what they can make now and make an educated decision as to whether to sign or go to college. However, i think the existence of a proper farm system in baseball helps this though; a place where they can play and still get paid and realistically still have a shot of being a good player in the majors. Until that happens I think we are stuck with the same old system, possibly intensified.

the reasoning behind paying them make sense, sure, but i think it's a slippery slope. how would you differ how much players at Michigan St. make and say a school like Western Kentucky? I'm at a loss for ideas on that one.

btw, Purdue looking like contenders as early as 2013. If Hammons comes in in-shape they could possibly make some noise in the conference this year, last year was unfortunate with all the distractions

[QUOTE=InspiredLebowski]To be clear, I don't want the NCAA, a conference, or a specific school to compensate them. I want to entirely divorce amateur basketball from college athletics. Go the baseball route, kid wants to enter the draft straight outta HS? Cool, here's your contract offer. He wants to go to college. You're there at least 3 years.

The bastardization of post secondary education in lieu of athletics should seriously gross people out. Kids are enrolled in a lot of the schools we attended strictly because they're good ball players. Cite all the bullshit GPA stats you want, these kids are not at college to learn. THAT IS WHY COLLEGE EXISTS, NOT TO HAVE A GOOD BASKETBALL TEAM. They're already majoring in basketball. Make it real, make it a real job. I want these kids to make money off their talent but more than anything I want them to stop making a joke out of college.[/QUOTE]

QFT

[FONT="Verdana"]I predict no Kentucky in next year's final four.[/FONT]

[QUOTE=SourPatchKids][FONT="Verdana"]I predict no Kentucky in next year's final four.[/FONT][/QUOTE]

who knows

next year is a down year for college basketball, and we'll have a lot of talent. Not much depth, but 3-4 top 20 picks. I think Cal has proven what he can do by now. I'd take our team over anyone but maybe Indiana.

and I'm not even entirely sold on Indiana, because they looked amazing when they play us and kind of mediocre against pretty much everyone else. Watford especially would be the number one pick just based off his performances against UK, dude is unstoppable.

[QUOTE=ukfan22]and I'm not even entirely sold on Indiana, because they looked amazing when they play us and kind of mediocre against pretty much everyone else. Watford especially would be the number one pick just based off his performances against UK, dude is unstoppable.[/QUOTE]

Indiana has a great homecourt advantage and players who play great under pressure. They've been non-factors on the national stage for so long now that i think they still play down to some teams' level, but when it's time to play a national contender, they all of sudden step it up.

coming into this year they are going to be dangerous thats for sure, they have a good incoming class and retained their entire core from last season Plus Cody Zeller gonna be a Wooden/Naismith candidate right from the jump

[IMG]http://kysportsbuzz.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Alex-Poythress.jpg[/IMG]
[FONT="Fixedsys"][COLOR="DarkSlateGray"]Alex Poythress, aka MKG 2.0.[/COLOR][/FONT]

They aren't going to dominate this season. This will be perhaps Calipari's weakest squad since he's been at UK.

Now, even if they don't "dominate", they obviously still have the talent to go to the Sweet 16.

[QUOTE=fatboy11]They aren't going to dominate this season. [B]This will be perhaps Calipari's weakest squad since he's been at UK.[/B]

Now, even if they don't "dominate", they obviously still have the talent to go to the Sweet 16.[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lu98w5fF2e1qccuauo1_500.jpg[/IMG]
As much as I hate, to admit it Kentucky has a legitimate shot to repeat as national champs.

[QUOTE=SourPatchKids]
As much as I hate, to admit it Kentucky has a legitimate shot to repeat as national champs.[/QUOTE]

They might not even be the best team in the SEC this year. Their freshmen class is not on par with 2011 or Cal's first year. Last year was a special group.

I could see Missouri and Florida being better than Kentucky this year. Though, admittedly, I could see Kentucky again being the best in the SEC. I don't see them repeating as national champs, though. That's hard enough to do with a full returning squad, let alone a group of lesser talented freshmen.

[QUOTE=SourPatchKids][IMG]http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lu98w5fF2e1qccuauo1_500.jpg[/IMG]
As much as I hate, to admit it Kentucky has a legitimate shot to repeat as national champs.[/QUOTE]

there are a lot of other teams that have been loading up on talent and kentucky is running with froshes once again.

With the field being much deeper Kentucky may not even get to the SEC finals this year tbh

[QUOTE=Burgz V2]there are a lot of other teams that have been loading up on talent and kentucky is running with froshes once again.

With the field being much deeper Kentucky may not even get to the SEC finals this year tbh[/QUOTE]

Vandy and Mizzou lost basically everyone, and Florida lost their best player and another starter in Irving. There are a few other solid teams, but no one near UK's talent level.

Not saying they will definitely win the league, but I think they should be considered the favorite. Especially if we get this Clanton transfer from UCF.

They basically brought in the perfect replacements for MKG and Davis(minus the uni). They also have plenty of upperclassmen to lead the team.

[QUOTE=ukfan22]Vandy and Mizzou lost basically everyone, and Florida lost their best player and another starter in Irving. There are a few other solid teams, but no one near UK's talent level.

Not saying they will definitely win the league, but I think they should be considered the favorite. Especially if we get this Clanton transfer from UCF.[/QUOTE]

i think the key, as is with a lot of UK teams, will be the PG play. I'm not entirely sold on Ryan Harrow and I seen anything from Goodwin to suggest he can be the same type of outside threat as lamb. Poythress is potentially an elite defender and so is Noel.

Mizzou lost some key players but the Oriakhi transfer makes their frontcourt pretty solid as they are getting Bowers back this season after missing all of last season.

Are they the favorite in the SEC?Sure, I would agree that statement. But like i was saying to the poster above, it's not as clear cut that they are the NATIONAL favourites, there's a lot of great talent out there.

[QUOTE=ukfan22]Vandy and Mizzou lost basically everyone, and Florida lost their best player and another starter in Irving. There are a few other solid teams, but no one near UK's talent level. [/quote]

Erving Walker wasn't Florida's best player. I expect them to be better without him. Yes, I actually mean that and should be held to that.

Missouri lost a lot, but they also have a lot of good transfers coming in. They still have Pressey and Dixon in the backcourt to go with Oriahki up front.

Missouri and Florida are easily as good as UK. Definitely Florida. And don't forget Tennesse. They return their whole team and they actually finished tied for 2nd in the SEC last season. Don't sleep on them.

[QUOTE=ukfan22]Not saying they will definitely win the league, but I think they should be considered the favorite. Especially if we get this Clanton transfer from UCF.[/QUOTE]

How can you say in one sentence that no one in the SEC has talent near UK's, but then turn around and give yourself an out by saying you aren't saying they'll definitely win. If it's truly not close, they should definitely win, right?