JarHeadJim
I have never won sheet!
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2011
- Messages
- 127,628
- Like
- 392,674
I would have to go with 2012 Kentucky http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball
I can't believe 2013 Louisville is getting so many votes.
Kentucky. Not even close. They wouldnt have been down 12 with 12 minutes to go against Wichita State
Stupid talk. They always try to make the latest champions one of the all time great team no matter how silly it really is. The Louisville team is probably not amoung the top 5 or ten and maybe not even the best Louisville NC!I would have to go with 2012 Kentucky http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball
Stupid talk. They always try to make the latest champions one of the all time great team no matter how silly it really is. The Louisville team is probably not amoung the top 5 or ten and maybe not even the best Louisville NC!
As far as the UK team last year, being an old timer, I would pit some of Wooden's UCLA team against them. 1968-69 team with Alcindor, Rowe, Wicks, Shackeford, etc would be more than a match for UK last year. Then the 72-72 team with Walton, Wilkes, Lee Farmer is up there too.
The 2012 UK team would get beat by most of the national title teams pretty easily. The level of play in college basketball has been tremendously downgraded.
People thought Anthony Davis was a franchise-changing player even though he is rail thin and has limited offensive game. Think about that for a moment. That is what passes for franchise-changing expectations these days. BTW, Anthony Davis can't stay healthy now.
Any team, and I mean ANY team, with Lew Alcindor would crush 2012 UK.
I agree with the main point, but I think Davis is gonna be a really good player and definitely a possible franchise changer. He was the best player in college since Durant. And his numbers this year are pretty damn impressive. 17/10/2 blocks per 36 minutes, with a 56% true shooting, and he played most of the season as a 19 year old. (it's not like there are no franchise changing players coming up through college anymore; all of the american players go to college they are all in college, it's just that if they only stay for a year it's harder to identify them.)
The injuries are a bit of a worry though. I think he's hurt both the ankle and the knee so far.
He isn't big enough to handle 82 games. And I would argue that D Rose and Blake Griffin were better. If Blake or D Rose had the supporting cast Ant Davis had, I think they win titles.
Um you guys are insane, Derrick Rose never played a minute of college ball. He never existed in college. You guys are delusional.He isn't big enough to handle 82 games. And I would argue that D Rose and Blake Griffin were better. If Blake or D Rose had the supporting cast Ant Davis had, I think they win titles.
You might be right, but he's also 19 years old. I think he puts some more weight on, I'm not willing to say after one year he can't make it through a season.
Blake was awesome in college, but Davis had the #5 offensive rating in the country in his one year in college, on a lower usage, of course. And he was also a transcendent defensive force. I'd take Davis, i get there is an argument for Blake.
As for Rose, hell, he didn't even need a better supporting cast, just needed to make another foul shot. It's harder to compare big guys and guards, but Rose had "only" a 56% true shooting in college. I'm taking Davis over him.
Agree.The 2012 UK team would get beat by most of the national title teams pretty easily. The level of play in college basketball has been tremendously downgraded.
People thought Anthony Davis was a franchise-changing player even though he is rail thin and has limited offensive game. Think about that for a moment. That is what passes for franchise-changing expectations these days. BTW, Anthony Davis can't stay healthy now.
Any team, and I mean ANY team, with Lew Alcindor would crush 2012 UK.