Started By
Message
Where Would Kentucky be Without the SEC?
Posted on 3/27/17 at 2:21 pm
Posted on 3/27/17 at 2:21 pm
Heard a stat that Kentucky has 30 SEC CHAMPIONSHIPS, more than all other SEC teams COMBINED. That's an amazing stat but also speaks to how little resistance they've gotten from the competition
To frame this discussion let's start at Post integration. From that point forward would Kentucky have been as dominant in the ACC or old Big East? Would they have maintained their blue blood status in a conference with more competition and depth?
Also, You can't discount the financial benefits of SEC football even at a basketball school.
To frame this discussion let's start at Post integration. From that point forward would Kentucky have been as dominant in the ACC or old Big East? Would they have maintained their blue blood status in a conference with more competition and depth?
Also, You can't discount the financial benefits of SEC football even at a basketball school.
10
Posted on 3/27/17 at 2:30 pm to undecided
Kentucky is a charter member of the SEC.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 2:33 pm to undecided
Even post 1969, Kentucky has faced challengers every decade. Vandy,Alabama and Tennessee in the '70's, LSU,Ala and Tenn in the 1980's ,Florida in the 1990's and 2000's. They've been pushed.
Just because Auburn has always been content with fielding rot gut teams doesn't mean the other schools have.
Just because Auburn has always been content with fielding rot gut teams doesn't mean the other schools have.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 3:05 pm to undecided
Then explain how they were able to beat enough teams OOC despite a "weak" conference schedule to win 8 National Championships?
They'd be just fine.
They'd be just fine.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 3:35 pm to undecided
You heard wrong because they have almost 50 SEC titles.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 4:04 pm to undecided
quote:
From that point forward would Kentucky have been as dominant in the ACC or old Big East
No
quote:
Would they have maintained their blue blood status in a conference with more competition and depth?
Yes
Posted on 3/27/17 at 6:42 pm to undecided
So much fail in this thread, where to begin?
What you missed is they could have close to double that if the SEC had not dropped the SEC tournament for a quarter of a century or so
In the days of the early NIT the Cats owned the Big East turf the same way they own Catlanta. If not for the mob influence, UK would have just been the early alpha of the east instead of the SEC.
In terms of the ACC based on time frame Kentucky would have owned what became the ACC as they were a basketball power first. Case did not leave Indiana for NC State till after UK basketball had a firm grip and UNC was well behind NC State early on. Dook was always behind NC State, UNC, and probably Maryland until the late 70's and early 80's. Long before Tobacco Road was in diapers the basketball game every year was Indiana vs Kentucky, If you do not remember this you are too young.
Not only a charter member but the first SEC head was the UK president. SEC formed in the early 30's and the ACC did not form until a generation later in the early 50's so UK had a 20+ year head start on any current ACC school not named Georgia Tech.
You are young and wrong. While the ACC and Big East benefitted greatly from the rise of ESPN, before the ESPN era they were the bottom of the barrel when you just had the Big 3 (ABC / CBS / NBC) broadcasting college sports. In fact I would go so far to say if the book that took down the Wolfpack the Dook rivalry would be a distant 3rd or 4th for the Tar Heels.
I knew Rupp when he was alive and I know his child, pretty damn sure he did not care as long as the kid could play and get wins for Rupp's teams. He played African Americans on his teams before he came to UK and had no problem doing so. While no angel he was aware of the difficulty of taking African Americans to play venues in the deep south at the time and chose not to push the envelope at the time. Most of the "myth" of his racist past is rooted in journalist writing articles in the 80's and 90's who were not even alive to know him.
Correct answer as Rupp in men = Pat in women in that they would play anybody, anytime, anywhere and always played to win while playing a fast game. Lots of the ACC for decades would play "stall ball" which was boring as crap (and why they instituted the shot clock) to prevent folks like Dean Smith from playing "4 corners" and putting the fans to sleep.
Because of several reasons
#1 KY is a small population state so must import more than they produce internally which is almost impossible to do in the SEC with Ohio State + Notre Dame just north and Tennessee + Alabama just south who are producing more in state talent at the junior high and high school level.
#2 KY is a tobacco state so kids that are harvesting, stripping, and hanging are working during football season but are free to play sports in the basketball season as it does not interfere with farm work.
#3 KY is a poor state so a winning sport is a source of state pride and with less wealth and less talent it is easier to compete in basketball (with just 5 players and little equipment cost) than football (with 11 players and much higher equipment costs)
#4 KY historically wins with 1 star and the "locals" in true team play. UK would have 1 or two legitimate stars and the rest were kids who just dreamed about "Kentucky" on their chest and played well above their ability. Classic example was the 92 team where Pitino was forced to revert to the old Rupp model and "the unforgettables" is what he got as the result. If UK were to extrapolate that to the much higher numbers required for football it would just never get to critical mass.
: kige :
Wooden was a .600 to .700 coach without Sam Gilbert but went to .900 when Gilbert started "helping" UCLA. Watch the movie "Blue Chips" sometime as the real story of UCLA back in the day. If Auburn had Sam Gilbert they may have a decade of Nattys in football and a much better W/L balance with Bama.
Clair Bee may be the greatest college basketball coach of all time but has been all but forgotten by a modern generation and removed from the old NIT generation.
quote:
Heard a stat that Kentucky has 30 SEC CHAMPIONSHIPS, more than all other SEC teams COMBINED.
What you missed is they could have close to double that if the SEC had not dropped the SEC tournament for a quarter of a century or so
quote:
To frame this discussion let's start at Post integration. From that point forward would Kentucky have been as dominant in the ACC or old Big East?
In the days of the early NIT the Cats owned the Big East turf the same way they own Catlanta. If not for the mob influence, UK would have just been the early alpha of the east instead of the SEC.
In terms of the ACC based on time frame Kentucky would have owned what became the ACC as they were a basketball power first. Case did not leave Indiana for NC State till after UK basketball had a firm grip and UNC was well behind NC State early on. Dook was always behind NC State, UNC, and probably Maryland until the late 70's and early 80's. Long before Tobacco Road was in diapers the basketball game every year was Indiana vs Kentucky, If you do not remember this you are too young.
quote:
Kentucky is a charter member of the SEC.
Not only a charter member but the first SEC head was the UK president. SEC formed in the early 30's and the ACC did not form until a generation later in the early 50's so UK had a 20+ year head start on any current ACC school not named Georgia Tech.
quote:
I wouldn't put any of those schools on the same level as being in a conference with UNC and Duke or the 80's Big East
You are young and wrong. While the ACC and Big East benefitted greatly from the rise of ESPN, before the ESPN era they were the bottom of the barrel when you just had the Big 3 (ABC / CBS / NBC) broadcasting college sports. In fact I would go so far to say if the book that took down the Wolfpack the Dook rivalry would be a distant 3rd or 4th for the Tar Heels.
quote:
Rupp did not want to play African-Americans.
I knew Rupp when he was alive and I know his child, pretty damn sure he did not care as long as the kid could play and get wins for Rupp's teams. He played African Americans on his teams before he came to UK and had no problem doing so. While no angel he was aware of the difficulty of taking African Americans to play venues in the deep south at the time and chose not to push the envelope at the time. Most of the "myth" of his racist past is rooted in journalist writing articles in the 80's and 90's who were not even alive to know him.
quote:
They'd be just fine.
Correct answer as Rupp in men = Pat in women in that they would play anybody, anytime, anywhere and always played to win while playing a fast game. Lots of the ACC for decades would play "stall ball" which was boring as crap (and why they instituted the shot clock) to prevent folks like Dean Smith from playing "4 corners" and putting the fans to sleep.
quote:
Kentucky borders Ohio, West Virginia, Tennessee, and Indiana. Not too far from Michigan, Missouri or Illinois.
Why has the football not been better?
Because of several reasons
#1 KY is a small population state so must import more than they produce internally which is almost impossible to do in the SEC with Ohio State + Notre Dame just north and Tennessee + Alabama just south who are producing more in state talent at the junior high and high school level.
#2 KY is a tobacco state so kids that are harvesting, stripping, and hanging are working during football season but are free to play sports in the basketball season as it does not interfere with farm work.
#3 KY is a poor state so a winning sport is a source of state pride and with less wealth and less talent it is easier to compete in basketball (with just 5 players and little equipment cost) than football (with 11 players and much higher equipment costs)
#4 KY historically wins with 1 star and the "locals" in true team play. UK would have 1 or two legitimate stars and the rest were kids who just dreamed about "Kentucky" on their chest and played well above their ability. Classic example was the 92 team where Pitino was forced to revert to the old Rupp model and "the unforgettables" is what he got as the result. If UK were to extrapolate that to the much higher numbers required for football it would just never get to critical mass.
quote:
It really difficult to be both a football and basketball school.
: kige :
quote:
Wooden, you idiot, the greatest college basketball coach of all time.
Wooden was a .600 to .700 coach without Sam Gilbert but went to .900 when Gilbert started "helping" UCLA. Watch the movie "Blue Chips" sometime as the real story of UCLA back in the day. If Auburn had Sam Gilbert they may have a decade of Nattys in football and a much better W/L balance with Bama.
Clair Bee may be the greatest college basketball coach of all time but has been all but forgotten by a modern generation and removed from the old NIT generation.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 7:29 pm to undecided
The question is Where would the SEC be without UK?
The SEC is a close third to the ACC for most NC's by conference with 11. UK has 8, Gaytors have 2, and Hawgs have one.
PAC-12 has 15 and of course UCLA has 11 of those
FTR, ACC is at 13 with UNC and Duke at 5 each, NCSt with 2
The SEC is a close third to the ACC for most NC's by conference with 11. UK has 8, Gaytors have 2, and Hawgs have one.
PAC-12 has 15 and of course UCLA has 11 of those
FTR, ACC is at 13 with UNC and Duke at 5 each, NCSt with 2
Posted on 3/27/17 at 8:26 pm to undecided
A better question would be: Where would the SEC be without Alabama football and Kentucky basketball?
Just another run of the mill middling conference.
Just another run of the mill middling conference.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:18 pm to undecided
Kentucky is a charter member of the SEC.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 4:14 am to undecided
quote:
where would Kentucky be without the sec
Still north of Tennessee and south of Indiana and Ohio.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News