Top 25 CBB programs of all time by (Lost Letterman)

[CatsTopPac]

By the way, I completely get the argument. I'm not easily dismissing it. I don't think anyone who wants to say UK is best, is crazy.

I just think that UCLA is the better team in history.

 

[CatsTopPac]

I'll say this though, if UK has another 5 years like they just had, I'd switch them.

To me, NCs and FFs are my marker when you get to that level, and I'd be willing to change an NC or two for UK taking over going to more FFs, and having a decade run like that.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

UCLA leads in titles, FF, winning %, etc.

Nope.

6th in Winning Percentage.
2nd (tied with UK) in FF appearances.

They lead in titles and streak-related records. Pretty much every other record is held by UK or UNC.

I think your perception of UCLA is somewhat skewed.

 

[CatsTopPac]

Nope.

6th in Winning Percentage.
2nd (tied with UK) in FF appearances.

They lead in titles and streak-related records. Pretty much every other record is held by UK or UNC.

I think your perception of UCLA is somewhat skewed.

Sounds great. If UK has another 5 years like their last 5 w/o UCLA doing anything, and I'll switch them.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

Sounds great. If UK has another 5 years like their last 5 w/o UCLA doing anything, and I'll switch them.

I don't really care where you rank them. But you keep making patently false claims about UCLA and as long as you do I will continue to correct you. What you're claiming isn't a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact and you're facts have been categorically wrong more often than not thus far.

FWIW until the past few years, I always had UNC as #1, but I think this season put UK ahead of them.

 

[CatsTopPac]

Great work. Thanks for correcting me. I now know exactly where UCLA lines up in those categories. If I was you, I'd be all over it too.

Knowing what I know about the information, I still have UCLA unless UK gets a few more FFs or another NC.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

Great work. Thanks for correcting me. I now know exactly where UCLA lines up in those categories. If I was you, I'd be all over it too.

Knowing what I know about the information, I still have UCLA unless UK gets a few more FFs or another NC.

That's great that you have them #1 now that you aren't just making up bullshit about them and claiming it as fact. (but that's absolutely what you've been doing) You're in good company as most people have them #1.

My issue was never were you had UCLA ranked (so I'm not quite sure why you insist on repeating it over and over and over and over and over again, ad nauseam) my issues were the flippant way in which you dismissed dissenting opinions based on incorrect information.

they are definitely #1

They're arguably #1. Don't claim victory when you haven't fought the battle. That's an arrogant UK fan move.

 

[CatsTopPac]

That's great that you have them #1 now that you aren't just making up bullshit about them and claiming it as fact. (but that's absolutely what you've been doing) You're in good company as most people have them #1.

My issue was never were you had UCLA ranked (so I'm not quite sure why you insist on repeating it over and over and over and over and over again, ad nauseam) my issues were the flippant way in which you dismissed dissenting opinions based on incorrect information.



They're arguably #1. Don't claim victory when you haven't fought the battle. That's an arrogant UK fan move.

I stated it over and over because it's an opinion question. Yes, some of the facts that supported my opinions were incorrect, but insinuating that I was just making up bullshit, is hyperbole. I was off by one with FF, and off by 5 with winning %. If I said that UCONN was my favorite and tried to say that they had the highest winning % and FF, then I would give you "making up bullshit". You like to say dramatic things like "you have been categorically wrong more than you have been right", by my count, I have been wrong on this thread 4 times and correct 13-15 times. But you're not here to acknowledge facts, are you?

My issue is not that you correct people when they are wrong. Everyone is wrong, and should be corrected. My issue is that you go about it as if you are never wrong, and that the other person is a fucking idiot for being wrong. Then, you like to rub it in like it's a fucking "battle", and keep driving the point home.

If someone is specifically being an asshole to you or everyone in their opinions/facts, then have at them, but when you bring it just in correcting people, then it gets a bit egotistical.

It'd be great if you could do what you do and be like a stat guy who seeks to make the discussion better by correcting people when they are wrong so that they can make a better argument. But you reserve the right to call people out like you are personally offended when people are wrong and that it is your job to correct their ignorantly offensive ways.

Maybe my facts are usually correct compared to others on here, or in general. Maybe I've had a long day and am enjoying a bowl and didn't bother to look it up. Maybe because of that I shouldn't have commented on here because you'd jump my shit. Or, maybe it's an internet CBB board about UK and UCLA, and having absolutely every fact lined up to support my opinion isn't really that big of a deal. If it was the political forum and the misinformation is actually impacting arguments that are very important, then I get it.

We all know that you are the most factual commenter on the SportsHoopla CBB board. I'm sure we all know that you are near, waiting in the wing to jump on some dumbfuck for not closing every door in an opinion. I'm so very sorry that I posited that UCLA was definitely #1, and that I claimed victory without fighting the battle.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

Fuck you and your fucking opinion? Does that make you feel better? You clearly wanted a fucking dust up, so let's fucking do it. I was nicer and more polite to you though out this exchange than 95% of the posters I encounter on here, and you still have to act like a fucking tool.

Oh. its just my opinion man. I can say whatever I want 'cause it's an opinion man. don't harsh my buzz while I smoke a bowl, man. Go shove your bong up your ass and smoke that, you fucking addict. Nobody was criticizing your opinion, but congrats on having missed the fucking point despite me clearly stating that in no uncertain terms half a dozen times so far.

Stats are fucking guesses you toolbag. They're hard concrete numbers. It doesn't matter if UCLA is 6th, or 60th, you claimed they had the best winning percentage and you were wrong. Not only were you wrong, but you had no basis with which to be right. It's not like you were right recently and the stats changed since you last saw. UCLA hasn't been near the #1 spot for decades, if ever. That's why your spouting off bullshit. It's clear you're just making shit up to support your argument.

After I politely corrected you, you could have just admitted your mistake, and moved on, but fuck that, let's double down on the stupid bullshit and make up MORE stupid bullshit! So I politely correct that, and you still just keep bitching about your opinion. Then when I have the audacity to just call you on your bullshit, you go and cry like a fucking girl.

I hope your wife punches you right in the fucking ovaries, you stupid bitch.

So you got your fight. Happy now?

 

[Codaxx]

I find it odd that an Arizona fan would take up the cause. Arizona is the premiere program in the Pac 10 and it has not been that way for awhile. Sadly, UCLA is not considered a top 5 job anymore. That really speaks volumes about where the program is today. UK has 5 different coaches win titles.. That speaks a lot about the program, it is not 1 great coach. There have been 7 Head Coaches at Kentucky since 1930, 5 of 7 won NC. UCLA has had 9 coaches since Wooden (1975). 1 of 9 won titles. You can not compare the consistency of UK or UNC with UCLA. UCLA had an unreal run, but that is not a reflection on the total history of the program. We are judging 85 years of performance, not 15.

 

[UKnation87]

They're arguably #1. Don't claim victory when you haven't fought the battle. That's an arrogant UK fan move.

Easy....

 

[gpm1976]

I find it odd that an Arizona fan would take up the cause. Arizona is the premiere program in the Pac 10 and it has not been that way for awhile. Sadly, UCLA is not considered a top 5 job anymore. That really speaks volumes about where the program is today. UK has 5 different coaches win titles.. That speaks a lot about the program, it is not 1 great coach. There have been 7 Head Coaches at Kentucky since 1930, 5 of 7 won NC. UCLA has had 9 coaches since Wooden (1975). 1 of 9 won titles. You can not compare the consistency of UK or UNC with UCLA. UCLA had an unreal run, but that is not a reflection on the total history of the program. We are judging 85 years of performance, not 15.

Even so, it's hard to deny just how impressive those consecutive titles look in the 70s. I can't imagine that any other team will dominate like that ever again. Besides, every argument I see on here is just splitting hairs. UNC and UK(in particular) are at the top RIGHT NOW. What else matters?

 

[Codaxx]

Even so, it's hard to deny just how impressive those consecutive titles look in the 70s. I can't imagine that any other team will dominate like that ever again. Besides, every argument I see on here is just splitting hairs. UNC and UK(in particular) are at the top RIGHT NOW. What else matters?

It is just a pt of view. I look at as what has the program done, not simply what a coach did. You judge a program by what the next coach or prior coaches have done, that is my 1st criteria. Many schools have gotten a singular great coach. Very few have gotten multiple coaches that will make the Hall of Fame, that is where the true elite are. The next criteria is projecting the future. You can never know, but you take the evidence at hand. I would bet UK is the class of the SEC in 10-20 years. I would bet Kansas is the class of the Big 12 in 10-20 years. I would take UNC over Duke projecting out 10-20 years. Would you bet on UCLA to be the class of the Pac? I probably take Zona. That is my issue with having UCLA at #1.

 

[gpm1976]

It is just a pt of view. I look at as what has the program done, not simply what a coach did. You judge a program by what the next coach or prior coaches have done, that is my 1st criteria. Many schools have gotten a singular great coach. Very few have gotten multiple coaches that will make the Hall of Fame, that is where the true elite are. The next criteria is projecting the future. You can never know, but you take the evidence at hand. I would bet UK is the class of the SEC in 10-20 years. I would bet Kansas is the class of the Big 12 in 10-20 years. I would take UNC over Duke projecting out 10-20 years. Would you bet on UCLA to be the class of the Pac? I probably take Zona. That is my issue with having UCLA at #1.

I agree, it's all point of view.. and at this moment right now, UK is definitely the better of the two programs. All I was saying in my earlier post is that UCLA's run of titles stand out like no other. Look at the talent calipari pulls in and he couldn't even get back to the title game. 10 titles in 12 years will never be done again. but again, we're splitting hairs. The top 3 programs are UCLA, UK and UNC... and you can make one argument after the other why each deserve the top spot.

 

[CatsTopPac]

It is just a pt of view. I look at as what has the program done, not simply what a coach did. You judge a program by what the next coach or prior coaches have done, that is my 1st criteria. Many schools have gotten a singular great coach. Very few have gotten multiple coaches that will make the Hall of Fame, that is where the true elite are. The next criteria is projecting the future. You can never know, but you take the evidence at hand. I would bet UK is the class of the SEC in 10-20 years. I would bet Kansas is the class of the Big 12 in 10-20 years. I would take UNC over Duke projecting out 10-20 years. Would you bet on UCLA to be the class of the Pac? I probably take Zona. That is my issue with having UCLA at #1.

I agree, when it comes down to it, it's a point of view.

One either thinks that a teams like UK or UNC are better because they might have more success in some areas and less in others, but they are the more consistent program. Others might like UCLA because they are consistent, although not as consistent as UNC or UK, but they also had a decade plus of success that is far beyond what anyone will ever accomplish in the sport again. Dominance or consistency. Take your pick.

I'm not taking up the cause for any other reason but because I think that UCLA is the better program in history. I choose dominance. 11 titles with all the FFs is my benchmark. Everyone has their own benchmarks that they hold up. It's all your point of view.

And I think that you can't separate what a coach did from the program, again, if he was that dominant. Duke, Syracuse, Arizona, and UConn are all near the top because of one coach that made the program.

NOw all that said, I do think that UCLA is on its way down from the top spot. I think UK is only a few years of sustained success for doing that, for me. A few years away, in the history of CBB shows how close I think they are. But I think they are still the best program. With the great argument of what 7 coaches have done at UK, Wooden did more than all of them combined (in terms of NCs). It's just another way of thinking about it.

I'd take AZ over UCLA moving ahead as well, but not prior. Again, I don't see anyone as upset that IU is at #6 when they have had a very very significant drought over the last 3 decades that doesn't seem to be subsiding anytime soon. But over the history of CBB, they are #6 to me.

 

[SpartyNash13]

Syracuse higher than Michigan State is absolutely laughable. I don't think there is a more overrated program of all time.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

Again, I don't see anyone as upset that IU is at #6 when they have had a very very significant drought over the last 3 decades that doesn't seem to be subsiding anytime soon. But over the history of CBB, they are #6 to me.

Again, why would anybody be upset that a team everyone seems to agree is a top 6 all-time program is ranked 6th in the all-time rankings? What exactly are they supposed to be upset about?

 

[CatsTopPac]

Fuck you and your fucking opinion? Does that make you feel better? You clearly wanted a fucking dust up, so let's fucking do it. I was nicer and more polite to you though out this exchange than 95% of the posters I encounter on here, and you still have to act like a fucking tool.

Oh. its just my opinion man. I can say whatever I want 'cause it's an opinion man. don't harsh my buzz while I smoke a bowl, man. Go shove your bong up your ass and smoke that, you fucking addict. Nobody was criticizing your opinion, but congrats on having missed the fucking point despite me clearly stating that in no uncertain terms half a dozen times so far.

Stats are fucking guesses you toolbag. They're hard concrete numbers. It doesn't matter if UCLA is 6th, or 60th, you claimed they had the best winning percentage and you were wrong. Not only were you wrong, but you had no basis with which to be right. It's not like you were right recently and the stats changed since you last saw. UCLA hasn't been near the #1 spot for decades, if ever. That's why your spouting off bullshit. It's clear you're just making shit up to support your argument.

After I politely corrected you, you could have just admitted your mistake, and moved on, but fuck that, let's double down on the stupid bullshit and make up MORE stupid bullshit! So I politely correct that, and you still just keep bitching about your opinion. Then when I have the audacity to just call you on your bullshit, you go and cry like a fucking girl.

I hope your wife punches you right in the fucking ovaries, you stupid bitch.

So you got your fight. Happy now?

So just because you aren't as big of an asshole to me as you are to 95% of people on here that I should be thankful or something? You're still an asshole. I can see it without you being such an overt one to me. Calling you out doesn't make me a fucking girl. You calling me one for doing so just makes you more of an asshole.

What you don't understand is that facts stand on themselves. They don't require you to be an asshole for them to hold more weight. You are pretty blind to the correct statements people make and automatically view everything as bullshit if someone states facts that are wrong. You think that you politely correct people but you are always pretty condescending. Polite isn't telling people that most of what they say is wrong, when only a minority of the content is actually wrong. And again, as we can agree, you were not as big of an asshole as you are to 95% of people you attack.

You get so worked up because you want to be right and push your facts in everyone's face all the time. You blow things out of proportion to in order to prove how wrong people are. You personally attack people for being wrong. I'm an addict because I smoke a bowl after a long day? You hyperbolize and you don't need to. Just let the facts do the talking for you.

I admitted I wad wrong like three times, and you couldn't leave it alone. You had to keep pushing that you were right, and that I was almost completely wrong with everything I said. You are still pushing it. It's not your responsibility to do so. Especially when someone admits that they were wrong. Stop throwing tantrums that get in the way of your facts. It just makes you an asshole.

 

[CatsTopPac]

Again, why would anybody be upset that a team everyone seems to agree is a top 6 all-time program is ranked 6th in the all-time rankings? What exactly are they supposed to be upset about?

I don't know, maybe the #7 team doesn't agree. Maybe the #8 team doesn't agree. Maybe someone who is more concerned with consistency would add them to their argument to show how dominance is placed over consistency in more than one occasion in the top 10.

 

[CatsTopPac]

I agree, it's all point of view.. and at this moment right now, UK is definitely the better of the two programs. All I was saying in my earlier post is that UCLA's run of titles stand out like no other. Look at the talent calipari pulls in and he couldn't even get back to the title game. 10 titles in 12 years will never be done again. but again, we're splitting hairs. The top 3 programs are UCLA, UK and UNC... and you can make one argument after the other why each deserve the top spot.

Watch out, it was me saying that UCLA is definitely better that struck a nerve in Trolly to call me out and have me list facts. We have to keep our opinions at arguably, or we're claiming victories without fighting the battle.