Why the University of Kentucky wins at Basketball and loses at Football.

[drothgery]

University of Kentucky Basketball is the unofficial state religion (right behind Southern Baptist), and the sheer fact that we haven't won a NCAA Basketball championship in 7 years is making people very irate.

obOrangeFan -- And it would've been longer if not for tick-tacky foul calls on Wallace (the only player on the 1996 Orange that would go on to the NBA; when he fouled out with the Orange down by 5, the game was over). Between that and Keith *@!#ing Smart, it's a wonder that Boeheim managed to avoid losing it at some point along the 2003 run, though having Melo, Hak, and GMac helped.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I'm a lifelong Kentuckian, born in Louisville and raised in Lexington

Same here, except for the "lifelong" part. I bailed from that Godforsaken state as soon as I thought I could get a job in San Francisco.

Lexington is the farthest north Southern city, and Louisville is the farthest south Northern City. Kentucky is part of the south, it's a unique part of the south that's slightly intermixed with a few elements of the midwest and north, but Kentuckians still consider themselves Southerners.

I disagree. I never knew any Kentuckians who considered themselves Southerners. The closest they ever came was "Not Hoosiers, That's For Damned Sure."

University of Kentucky Basketball is the unofficial state religion

This I agree with, except to take issue with the "unofficial." I miss literally three things about Kentucky: the basketball, thoroughbred racing, and thunderstorms. Ironically, Californians think they have all three. It's kinda cute, in a sad way.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

obOrangeFan -- And it would've been longer if not for tick-tacky foul calls on Wallace (the only player on the 1996 Orange that would go on to the NBA; when he fouled out with the Orange down by 5, the game was over).

Just because your w00fing is retroactive doesn't mean the Basketball Gods aren't listening ...

If I recall correctly, Wallace fouled out with only a minute or two remaining, after having a helluva game. At that point, Syracuse was fouling deliberately, hoping for UK to miss free throws. I won't even mention the fact that UK was called for more fouls than Syracuse. So, as excuses go, that one's pretty lame.

And, seriously, you don't even need an excuse; the real championship game that year was the semifinal between UK and UMass. Every other team in the field that year went into it an Also-Ran. The fact that Syracuse was even anywhere close in the finals was due to the fact that the UK players were already carrying trophies in their shorts. (IYKWIM,AITYD.) UK practically had a pro roster that year ... Syracuse never had a chance in hell.

Oh, and BTW, it wouldn't have been "longer," even if the Orangemen had pulled a Helen Kelleresque miracle in '96. The most recent championship UK has is from '98. Seven years ago, as the poster said.

 

[xmanii]

Doncha just love Rick Pitino?

oOo, low blow

 

[drothgery]

If I recall correctly, Wallace fouled out with only a minute or two remaining, after having a helluva game. At that point, Syracuse was fouling deliberately, hoping for UK to miss free throws.

I thought it was three or four minutes, but SU certianly wasn't intentionally fouling at that point; they were only down by five. With their best player by far out of the game, it didn't stay close much longer, and then the intentional fouling started.

I won't even mention the fact that UK was called for more fouls than Syracuse.

SU had one player they couldn't afford to lose; UK did not.

And, seriously, you don't even need an excuse; the real championship game that year was the semifinal between UK and UMass. Every other team in the field that year went into it an Also-Ran. The fact that Syracuse was even anywhere close in the finals was due to the fact that the UK players were already carrying trophies in their shorts. (IYKWIM,AITYD.) UK practically had a pro roster that year ... Syracuse never had a chance in hell.

In a best of 7 series, I'd agree with you. The '96 Orange had far less talent than that Kentucky team. But the NCAA plays a single elimination tournament; after the second round, anybody can beat anyone. The favorites usually win, but it's nothing you can count on. It's very, very rare that two #1 seeds play for the title, after all.

Heck, the '03 Orange were certainly underdogs against Kansas (admittedly this was mostly because of inexperience), and the only Syracuse team that went into the title game as a clear favorite (the 1987 team) lost.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I thought it was three or four minutes, but SU certianly wasn't intentionally fouling at that point;

Well, it's been a while, so I'm not positive, but I'd be willing to bet Wallace played 38 or 39 minutes of the game.

SU had one player they couldn't afford to lose; UK did not.

Granted, but "lack of depth" is a different excuse for the loss than "ticky-tack fouls being called." (I'll even grant "lack of depth" as one of the reasons for the loss; as I said before, there's no shame in losing to that '96 UK team.)

And, honestly, if Syracuse was truly that dependent upon one player for offense -- and he did have a spectacular night -- he should have been instructed to lay off on defense, given that he was playing with four fouls. (Maybe they forgot he only had one left ... that wasn't one of the years the B-East was experimenting with a Six-Foul Rule, was it?

In a best of 7 series, I'd agree with you. The '96 Orange had far less talent than that Kentucky team. But the NCAA plays a single elimination tournament; after the second round, anybody can beat anyone.

In the vast majority of NCAA tournament years, I'd agree with you. But '96 was different. UK had five players that went on to at least moderately successful pro careers ... a couple of them have been stars or franchise players. UMass had a solid squad led by the best player, by far, in the entire nation: Marcus Camby. I don't know if you really remember that year, but there was a huge uproar because UK and UMass had been scheduled -- yes, "scheduled" -- to meet in the semifinals instead of the finals. It was considered bad placement by the Selection Committee.

'96 was different. UK and UMass were utterly dominant that year; I didn't see a single national sportscaster (i.e., non-homer) pick a team other than those two to win it all. That doesn't happen anymore, and with the exodus of the highest quality players early to the pros, it's unlikely to ever happen again. A lot of people said the pressure of the '96 season is what drove Pitino away from UK ... not only were UK fans expecting a championship -- and certain UK fans demand an annual championship -- but so was everyone else in the country.

BTW, I'm not really sure what the other poster's comment on Pitino is supposed to mean, but I personally think Tubby Smith is a better college coach. Pitino is a great motivator, and a great recruiter, but he is extraordinarily weak in "last two minutes" situations. For an exercise, compare Pitino's record in games decided in the last two minutes with Tubby's. It's not even close. Tubby finds a way to win or to avoid losing ... Pitino instead counted on the buffer of an early blowout score, pretty much disdaining endgame strategy. With the teams he was able to assemble, it often worked, of course.