News Post

Sports Daily: Is It Right To Hate On Kentucky Basketball?

05:10 PM - April 11, 2014 by RaychelSnr

What excites you more -- jaw-dropping performances by elite athletes or a group of average players that display the very essence of a great team?

More specifically, do you enjoy the model set forth by the Kentucky men's basketball program? By all appearances, it wouldn't be a stretch to label the Wildcats as a stepping stone, not a destination.

The sports purist and team-builder inside of me loathes this model set forth by Kentucky. But at the same time, if it works (and it has -- two title appearances in three years including a championship) and we still complain, maybe that just makes the rest of us 'haters.'

Sound Off: Do you enjoy teams like Kentucky that load up on and lose elite stars yearly, or side with teams built over a longer period of time?

Sports Headlines for April 11, 2014

Hmmm...ninety-three points on 15 shots is pretty decent -- wait, what!? [Image]
Minnesota beats North Dakota at the Frozen Four on a goal with 0.6 seconds left. [Animated Gif]
A young Marcus Smart? That flop was a 'flop.' [YouTube]
The 2014 Masters tournament -- in one epic photograph. [Image]
DYK? Greenland can't join FIFA due to their inability to grow regulation-length grass.

Game: NCAA BasketballReader Score: 8/10 - Vote Now
Platform: SportsVotes for game: 1 - View All

Member Comments

# 21 PhantomPain @ 04/16/14 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProfessaPackMan


	I could care less about UK but it's just hilarious to me how sensitive most of their fans are and I've noticed that since I've been on OS. You say one bad thing about the team or it's players and even UK players that are in the NBA, you get a full blown essay from them. Relax and stop being so damn touchy everytime someone doesn't praise the holy ground that UK or Cal walks on.

I have a short response for you. UK fans are crazy! Or another term to use, is EXTREMELY passionate. It's all we got to root for man, cut us some slack and either read the good points some make or laugh at the stupidity that others ake. Either way, you win!

# 22 PhantomPain @ 04/16/14 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ehh


	While all of your points are valid I think it goes a little deeper than that. Calipari has obviously been a successful college coach so saying "he's won" is a tough point to argue against. Recruiting and motivating are the two most important qualities of a college basketball coach and Calipari has them both in spades which is why he's been successful. Plenty of coaches have won titles without being great in-game coaches. However, the eye test in-game still leaves quite a bit to be desired, anyone that understands the depths of basketball knows that Calipari isn't a great X's and O's coach just like Roy Williams, Rick Barnes, etc. He has a very basic system and does not adjust well (not that this is that much of an aberration in the coaching world). Basic systems tend to struggle against elite defenses. Also, just a personal opinion of mine, but there is absolutely no reason or excuse to use such a simple system. The more movement and more you have going on in your offense the more the defense has to work and the more opportunities there will be for defenses to make a mistake that you can capitalize on. Basically he's going with a simple system because A) he can get away with it in college with supreme freshman talent each year B) it isn't that far from what these poor kids are used to in AAU. Some people think that's genius, I get why he does it but I think it's a foolish move. For anyone who disagrees with me, I completely get the opposite side of the argument (why install a complicated offense for a core of players that'll be on campus for seven months?), just my opinion on the matter. In addition to simplicity, for young college kids, I think he gives them too much freedom. Young players need more guidance and structure. They're still learning the game. Having your "secret tweak" being that you told your starting PG who shoots 36% from the field to shoot less and pass more is not genius, that's common freaking sense. He pretty much threw last year's team under the bus for their underachieving ways (at least he took a brunt of the blame this year). When UK made the boneheaded foul with under a minute left in the title game that ultimately put things on ice for UConn, Calipari's press conference response was to shrug it off to the fact that they're freshman. When asked about Randle struggles? He's a freshman, and he was a little nervous and a little tired. Why in the world you would ever put James Young on Napier to start the title game or switch every ball screen literally had me laughing at my TV. Did Calipari watch a second of the MSU or Florida film? This stuff isn't rocket science. Teams that don't execute well out of timeouts (or coaches that don't have uniquely drawn plays in the huddle) drive me crazy. So basically he's a genius when they win and when he loses it's the player's fault because "they're freshman". Kudos to him for trying to relieve the pressure from his kids but it's complete BS. To say overall that he's a bad coach is obviously foolish, I understand why UK fans get tired of the blanket statement from probably clueless opposing fans that say it only because they hear so many other fans say it. He does two-thirds of the coaching trinity extremely well and that's enough to win a lot of games but he's an average-at-best in-game coach. It is also funny that Calipari is one of the few guys that gets knocked for being out-coached. Ollie out-coached Izzo and Donovan quite a bit and you barely heard a peep from the media about it. He made several mid-game adjustments that pretty much led to UConn winning. Moral of the story... Spoiler Ollie is a ****ing stud.

Well said, ehh. Cal is not a great in-game coach. I consider him average. Sometimes he makes great adjustments and makes him look awesome at X's & O's and many times you are left scratching your head. As for the system, you already understand it. It's simple because he usually has a bunch of freshmen that have no idea how to go through drills and he has to teach them when there aren't many upperclassmen to help. By the time March rolls around he can actually starting coaching more because the players are usually by then playing with emotion, hustle and for each other. Last year I think Cal was as frustrated as he has ever been with that team and he put a lot of responsibility on the players. Usually he tries and take the blame and to take the spotlight off the kids. I guess last year he couldn't help himself?

He is one of the best, if not the best, at recruiting and motivating so that goes a long way. But he could certainly get better at in-game coaching.

And Ollie does seem to be a stud. Look forward to seeing how he does over the years. I like him.

Finally, ehh, you are quickly becoming one of my favorite posters on this forum. Thank you for the intelligent insight and conversation you provide.

# 23 wildcatchild @ 04/16/14 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProfessaPackMan


	I could care less about UK but it's just hilarious to me how sensitive most of their fans are and I've noticed that since I've been on OS. You say one bad thing about the team or it's players and even UK players that are in the NBA, you get a full blown essay from them. Relax and stop being so damn touchy everytime someone doesn't praise the holy ground that UK or Cal walks on.

Imagine if you had to hear some version of the following statement from envious Vikings, Bears and Lions fans 365 days a year:

Mike McCarthy is a terrible coach. He has Aaron Rodgers, Clay Matthews, Jordy Nelson, Randall Cobb, etc. and he's only won a single Super Bowl? Pathetic, all he does is walk up and down the sideline and tell Aaron to sling it downfield every play.

I have a hard time believing you would turn the other cheek if this is all you ever heard from your NFC North rivals. But if pointing out stupidity in essay format is sensitive --- as opposed to calling people names and getting banned --- then I guess I'm guilty as charged.

# 24 wildcatchild @ 04/16/14 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ehh


	While all of your points are valid I think it goes a little deeper than that. Calipari has obviously been a successful college coach so saying "he's won" is a tough point to argue against. Recruiting and motivating are the two most important qualities of a college basketball coach and Calipari has them both in spades which is why he's been successful. Plenty of coaches have won titles without being great in-game coaches. However, the eye test in-game still leaves quite a bit to be desired, anyone that understands the depths of basketball knows that Calipari isn't a great X's and O's coach just like Roy Williams, Rick Barnes, etc. He has a very basic system and does not adjust well (not that this is that much of an aberration in the coaching world). Basic systems tend to struggle against elite defenses. Also, just a personal opinion of mine, but there is absolutely no reason or excuse to use such a simple system. The more movement and more you have going on in your offense the more the defense has to work and the more opportunities there will be for defenses to make a mistake that you can capitalize on. Basically he's going with a simple system because A) he can get away with it in college with supreme freshman talent each year B) it isn't that far from what these poor kids are used to in AAU. Some people think that's genius, I get why he does it but I think it's a foolish move. For anyone who disagrees with me, I completely get the opposite side of the argument (why install a complicated offense for a core of players that'll be on campus for seven months?), just my opinion on the matter. In addition to simplicity, for young college kids, I think he gives them too much freedom. Young players need more guidance and structure. They're still learning the game. Having your "secret tweak" being that you told your starting PG who shoots 36% from the field to shoot less and pass more is not genius, that's common freaking sense. He pretty much threw last year's team under the bus for their underachieving ways (at least he took a brunt of the blame this year). When UK made the boneheaded foul with under a minute left in the title game that ultimately put things on ice for UConn, Calipari's press conference response was to shrug it off to the fact that they're freshman. When asked about Randle struggles? He's a freshman, and he was a little nervous and a little tired. Why in the world you would ever put James Young on Napier to start the title game or switch every ball screen literally had me laughing at my TV. Did Calipari watch a second of the MSU or Florida film? This stuff isn't rocket science. Teams that don't execute well out of timeouts (or coaches that don't have uniquely drawn plays in the huddle) drive me crazy. So basically he's a genius when they win and when he loses it's the player's fault because "they're freshman". Kudos to him for trying to relieve the pressure from his kids but it's complete BS. To say overall that he's a bad coach is obviously foolish, I understand why UK fans get tired of the blanket statement from probably clueless opposing fans that say it only because they hear so many other fans say it. He does two-thirds of the coaching trinity extremely well and that's enough to win a lot of games but he's an average-at-best in-game coach. It is also funny that Calipari is one of the few guys that gets knocked for being out-coached. Ollie out-coached Izzo and Donovan quite a bit and you barely heard a peep from the media about it. He made several mid-game adjustments that pretty much led to UConn winning. Moral of the story... Spoiler Ollie is a ****ing stud.

Post of the Year!

(And yes, Kevin Ollie is a stud)

# 25 ProfessaPackMan @ 04/17/14 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wildcatchild


	Imagine if you had to hear some version of the following statement from envious Vikings, Bears and Lions fans 365 days a year: Mike McCarthy is a terrible coach. He has Aaron Rodgers, Clay Matthews, Jordy Nelson, Randall Cobb, etc. and he's only won a single Super Bowl? Pathetic, all he does is walk up and down the sideline and tell Aaron to sling it downfield every play. I have a hard time believing you would turn the other cheek if this is all you ever heard from your NFC North rivals. But if pointing out stupidity in essay format is sensitive --- as opposed to calling people names and getting banned --- then I guess I'm guilty as charged.

Actually I would because my response to that hypothetical situation would "Yeah but he's still been more successful than all, if not most of you combined" or I could be an ***hole and just say "My team has still has more Super Bowls than all 3 of you combined".

Come on man, you can do better than using the Packers as an example. You'd have a point if I was a Lions/Vikings fan since they've had very little success compared to the Packers.

And who said anything about calling someone names or getting banned? The hell are you talking about? Lol you're proving my point. Like I said, I don't have a problem with y'all fanbase. Could care less about them but since I've been here, everything I said is accurate.

# 26 wildcatchild @ 04/17/14 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProfessaPackMan


	Actually I would because my response to that hypothetical situation would "Yeah but he's still been more successful than all, if not most of you combined" or I could be an ***hole and just say "My team has still has more Super Bowls than all 3 of you combined". Come on man, you can do better than using the Packers as an example. You'd have a point if I was a Lions/Vikings fan since they've had very little success compared to the Packers. And who said anything about calling someone names or getting banned? The hell are you talking about? Lol you're proving my point. Like I said, I don't have a problem with y'all fanbase. Could care less about them but since I've been here, everything I said is accurate.

I'm not really disagreeing with you. Yes, UK fans can be sensitive, especially when you have to deal with delusional rival fan bases and the national media (Jeff Goodman, Pat Forde, Doug Gottlieb etc.) who regularly criticize our program. I guess it's the price you pay with an outspoken/successful coach like Cal, although I think it's reached the point of absolute absurdity, hence, this thread.

Actually, I think you could make the argument that the Packers are the UK Basketball of the NFL for three reasons: historical greatness, championships and fan passion.

Anyway, I brought up the part about calling names/getting banned. I personally use this forum to "debate the hate" rather than calling names or, as you suggested, counting championships. That method doesn't always work with some our rivals who aren't good at math and history.

# 27 jake44np @ 04/22/14 09:13 PM

I am a die hard IU basketball homer.
My dad hated UK and his dad hated UK. With that being said I don't and never had.
Matter of fact I even catch myself rooting for them sometimes. (Please don't tell my relatives!)
For me the it has to do with my love for Notre Dame football I think. I know what ur thinking dude is a IU bball fan and ND football fan. Pick a damn school already.
Well here is how I got to where I am at. I grew up in Bloomington with my dads side of the family and everyone were Bob Knight lovers. I grew up going to 5 or so games a year and have passion for IU bball.
With that being said my grandpa on my moms side graduated from ND and started taking me to ND football games when I was 2. I have been to over 75 ND games and love the place.
Anywho ND football and UK bball have a lot in common. U either love them or hate them, plain and simple. Unless ur me, again I don't love UK but certainly don't hate them.
Like I said I sometimes catch myself rooting for them simply because most people hate them that I know. Just like a ton of people hate ND for no reason. Have I made mt point? I hope so. Lol

# 28 wildcatchild @ 04/25/14 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jake44np


	I am a die hard IU basketball homer. My dad hated UK and his dad hated UK. With that being said I don't and never had. Matter of fact I even catch myself rooting for them sometimes. (Please don't tell my relatives!) For me the it has to do with my love for Notre Dame football I think. I know what ur thinking dude is a IU bball fan and ND football fan. Pick a damn school already. Well here is how I got to where I am at. I grew up in Bloomington with my dads side of the family and everyone were Bob Knight lovers. I grew up going to 5 or so games a year and have passion for IU bball. With that being said my grandpa on my moms side graduated from ND and started taking me to ND football games when I was 2. I have been to over 75 ND games and love the place. Anywho ND football and UK bball have a lot in common. U either love them or hate them, plain and simple. Unless ur me, again I don't love UK but certainly don't hate them. Like I said I sometimes catch myself rooting for them simply because most people hate them that I know. Just like a ton of people hate ND for no reason. Have I made mt point? I hope so. Lol

Well said Jake!

Look, I get the reason people don't like and/or pull for UK. It's the same reason I don't cheer for the Yankees, Steelers or St. Louis Cardinals. They win, they win big, and it's usually at my favorite team's expense (Cubs, Bengals, Reds, etc.). However, the level of hate that spews from a few media members is unprecedented and downright disturbing at times. I'm talking about guys like Wilbon, Forde, Goodman, Thamel, etc. These guys are supposed to be professional journalists but they do absolutely nothing to hide their disdain for all things Calipari/UK.

Maybe I don't follow other sports closely enough but I can't think of anything that compares to the hate I'm seeing, at least in terms of sports journalism. It reminds me a lot of political analysts on TV, how their non-preferred party can do nothing right whereas their preferred party can do nothing wrong. Even if a reporter is proven wrong, he or she will never admit it and will stop at nothing to keep spinning facts to support their agenda. We're already seeing some of the media spin after most of UK's players said they were returning. The narrative has suddenly switched from "Calipari is ruining to college basketball with his one-and-done approach" to "Calipari is going to have his hands full managing this front court log jam" and "some of the UK players aren't going to be happy with their playing time."

# 29 jake44np @ 04/26/14 08:19 PM

There was a lot of hate from a lot of these guys b4 Cal ever came to UK.

# 30 wildcatchild @ 04/27/14 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jake44np


	There was a lot of hate from a lot of these guys b4 Cal ever came to UK.

I know, it stems from the days when we were on probation, first during the Rupp era and then the Eddie Sutton fiasco. I knew hiring Calipari would create a powder keg situation, just never imagined how over-the-top it's gotten in recent years.

# 31 jake44np @ 04/27/14 05:08 PM

Find me someone who hates Northwestern basketball.
Points is no one does because they usually are not very good and they have never made the NCAA tourney. No one hates bad teams.
There is a fine line between hate and jealousy.

« Previous 12Next »

More Links

Sports Daily: Is It Right To Hate On Kentucky Basketball?