Anyone else lost some enthusiasm for the once great game of college basketball? [Archive] - Wildcat Nation Forums

Sir Richard F. Burton

07-09-2006, 08:37 AM

I am in support of a guy like Rondo making as much money as he can heck, if I was offered the chance to go from earning zero dollars at a college versus a few million I'd leave just like Rondo.

That being said College Basketball is a shell of it's former self. When Pat Ewing played 4 years at Georgetown and UK played his team with Sam Bowie Mel Turpin and Kenny Walker (my least favorite UK loss of all time) the game of College Basketball was a sight to see sadly it is not nearly the same these days.

In those days you got to watch a guy develop Kenny Walker was All SEC (3rd team) as a Freshman. Backin those days you got to watch a player like "Sky"develop into an All American as a senior. Today he would likely have left UK after his freshman year.

I just am not as excited by the college game I still love it more than any other but, we are forced to cheer for a much diminshed "product"
The UK 1996 Champs were an exception.

CatFanInTheBathtub

07-09-2006, 08:55 AM

Sir Richard F. Burton wrote: I am in support of a guy like Rondo making as much money as he can heck, if I was offered the chance to go from earning zero dollars at a college versus a few million I'd leave just like Rondo.

That being said College Basketball is a shell of it's former self. When Pat Ewing played 4 years at Georgetown and UK played his team with Sam Bowie Mel Turpin and Kenny Walker (my least favorite UK loss of all time) the game of College Basketball was a sight to see sadly it is not nearly the same these days.

In those days you got to watch a guy develop Kenny Walker was All SEC (3rd team) as a Freshman. Backin those days you got to watch a player like "Sky"develop into an All American as a senior. Today he would likely have left UK after his freshman year.

I just am not as excited by the college game I still love it more than any other but, we are forced to cheer for a much diminshed "product"
The UK 1996 Champs were an exception.

That seems a bit harsh. To me, I get no less excited sitting down on a Saturday afternoon to see a Cats game thanI ever have been, and I can't wait for the next season to start.

It is true that the quality of play has been reduced slightly by the more frequent early departures there are these days, but I don't think that's reduced the competitiveness or intensity of the gameat all. This past tournament was a great example.

College basketball is alive and well. There is no sport onTV with the same passion and atmosphere. OK college football is close but I'm a UK fan so...you know.

Sir Richard F. Burton

07-09-2006, 09:05 AM

Don't get me wrong I still get very,very excited:D

JPS

07-09-2006, 09:15 AM

I certainl enjoy college basketball, but I have to admit that IMO, the last truly great college basketball season (in terms of deep, talented teams with top-notch players) was 1984. (That was the year you had truly great, deep teams in North Carolina, Georgetown, Kentucky, Houston etc. etc.)

Jon

freethrow

07-09-2006, 09:45 AM

I still get excited too, but in the Pre-Internet days the hunger was a bit greater and less tarnished in some way. As fan's we were certain that barring injury we would have players back that didn't graduate. We also had minimum info about any new recruits coming in and always expected the best. For the most part we were ill informed about most other teams and other recruits and always felt that Kentucky would be the dominating team in the land and it usually was.

Back in the day if UK wanted a particular recruit they would usually land him. In todays world it can be a much more frustrating process and that makes us as fans a little less confident and excited I think. If there were problems in the recruiting process back then we were much less aware. These things are not enough to keep us from being fans though. :) Part of me longs for those days again, but another part is happy that there is an Internet and I can be, in a fans way, a part of the process that goes on between seasons. The Internet Feeds A Need. :)

Sadly, the NBA troubles are here to stay. Kids out of high school and with little college experience have proven themselves in the NBA to the world and to the other kids out there. The early NBA jump will not end. Seeing players like James and Bryant become SuperStars with millions of bucks is too big a carrot to resist. :(

JohnJ

07-09-2006, 04:03 PM

FCFS82 wrote: As long as we cheer for the name on the front, the players wont matter in a sense. If your a fan of players, stars, etc., then you have a whole league to your fancy - the NBA.

Chicago Cubs baseballfans cheer for the name on the front and nothing else. Simply brainless IMO. Most other sports fans however like to have some more substance like a quality team with quality players to cheer for.

UK fans have traditionally been known as very knowledgeable and demanding fans who appreciate great basketball and want more to cheer for than merely a name on the jersey.

JohnJ

07-09-2006, 04:04 PM

JPS wrote: I certainl enjoy college basketball, but I have to admit that IMO, the last truly great college basketball season (in terms of deep, talented teams with top-notch players) was 1984. (That was the year you had truly great, deep teams in North Carolina, Georgetown, Kentucky, Houston etc. etc.)

Jon
But after 1996, the dam broke with so many players leaving for the pros that we have not really seen the likes of any teams that good since.

BOURBON TOWN CAT FAN

07-09-2006, 04:07 PM

I'd like to see UK produce a top tier SEC football team every year, thaneven watching the basketball team right now.

Terry L. Wildcat

07-09-2006, 04:12 PM

:cool:Understanding your point Sir and liking the game better when I was at UK (60's)...but my passion and rooting interest for our Wildcats only increses with age.

SamKat

07-09-2006, 04:42 PM

Sir has a point I hadn't considered in the lack of All Americans at UK for a while. Nonetheless, I am more like Terry L. Wildcat in becoming more passionate about Kentucky Wildcat Basketball day by day.

I follow the scoring and rebounding, etc. of the ex-Wildcat pros, but that is mostly it until deep intoNBA play-offs. The NBA is about individual players. Their shot clock is too short in my opinion, so that any little opening causes a shot to go up and rebounders had better already have their block-out spots. Run and shoot, run and shoot, run and shoot! That is what the young recruits look forward to and normally they are looking beyond college basketball.

I like the coaching strategies and the conditioning of the college game. Super, super players go on; however college remains the more interesting basketball.

Sir Richard F. Burton

07-09-2006, 07:38 PM

Will Lavender

07-09-2006, 08:18 PM

College sports aren't pro sports. People speak about them in the same terms, and they are similarly analyzed, but really they're worlds apart. In pro sports, it's the athletes who are followed. Of course people are fans of certain teams; however, if you ask a regular Joe on the street what he likes about the NBA, more often than not he'll tell you a name. The name of a superstar.

College sports are about teams. They're about cities, usually small cities, and they're about tradition. Players are important, as always, but it's the team that matters -- as someone else said, the name on the front of the jersey -- and so it really doesn't matter that the talent is down and that the best players are jumping into the professional ranks. It doesn't matter. The constant is that name, Kentucky, and it represents so much more, to me anyway, than who the superstars are.

CatFanInTheBathtub

07-09-2006, 10:00 PM

All I know is that the national title means the same now as it did in, say, '84. in fact, it probably means more since it is damn sure harder to win it now.

DCWildcat

07-09-2006, 10:19 PM

College basketball will never be what it was.

Don't be surprised if a farm system replaces college in 50 years, and the game looks more like college baseball. From an economic standpoint, there's too much money out there and not enough incentive for players to continually choose college rather than Europe for their one year of eligibility. 1995-2010 will be the all-time peak for college ball talent imo.

CaliUKFan

07-10-2006, 03:17 AM

I had to recently buy a tape on the 96 team (the best college team of all time in my opinion) to remind me of our greatness...

I still love UK basketball though thru good times & bad

wildcatdon

07-10-2006, 08:02 AM

i agree with original poster...but,i would rather watch college football any day than college basketball....you cant change the rules in football to affect the game like they have in basketball...you still have to use the talent and execute...to me college basketball is not what it used to be...

Will Lavender

07-10-2006, 10:14 AM

wildcatdon wrote: i agree with original poster...but,i would rather watch college football any day than college basketball....you cant change the rules in football to affect the game like they have in basketball...you still have to use the talent and execute...to me college basketball is not what it used to be...
I don't particularly like football because of that word you use: "talent." Other than maybe on the lines, I don't think football is a game of talent. It's a game of blunt athleticism. It's a genetics game. You put the fastest guys out on a football field and they're going to win 9 times out of 10. I don't care who's coaching them, how well they can catch, how well they know the schemes. If they can run, they'll win 95% of the time.

I prefer the skill of being able to put a basketball through a hoop or being able to hit a 95 mile an hour rock as it's being hurled toward you.

This, of course, is another argument entirely than the original poster started--but it's an interesting one.

UKBlue2321

07-10-2006, 10:22 AM

Back to the originial post, I will always love watching Kentucky Basketball, because it is Kentucky Basketball. But, the NBA has produced a different college game. You can't deny it. Players leaving early to make bucks (rondo), Players thinking they can make it, then ending up not, (Morris, Buikie, Estill). But it is UK basketball, and that is all that matters to me.

bret1555

07-10-2006, 10:50 AM

Will Lavender wrote: wildcatdon wrote: i agree with original poster...but,i would rather watch college football any day than college basketball....you cant change the rules in football to affect the game like they have in basketball...you still have to use the talent and execute...to me college basketball is not what it used to be...
I don't particularly like football because of that word you use: "talent." Other than maybe on the lines, I don't think football is a game of talent. It's a game of blunt athleticism. It's a genetics game. You put the fastest guys out on a football field and they're going to win 9 times out of 10. I don't care who's coaching them, how well they can catch, how well they know the schemes. If they can run, they'll win 95% of the time.

I prefer the skill of being able to put a basketball through a hoop or being able to hit a 95 mile an hour rock as it's being hurled toward you.

This, of course, is another argument entirely than the original poster started--but it's an interesting one.

Sorry, Will. . . I can't roll with you on this one.

While raw athleticism is a huge factor in any sport, football does not merely reward the genetic gifts a player has. The skill that is most rewarded in football is that of teamwork; For, it is the only sport in which a single player cannot dominate. In baseball, one batter can change the game completely. In basketball, on player can take over for stretches of a game. In hockey & soccer, it is the same story. Not so in football. After middle school, it really doesn't matter how gifted a kid is, he cannot dominate a game alone. It may look like that (i. e. Herschel Walker), but it isnt. One or two blown assignments in any play, and that play is dead in the water -- offensively or defensively.

I realize that the other sports I have mentioned are also teamwork intensive, but football, by the nature of the game, is less rewarding of individual athleticism.

Sorry to get off the topic!!! In case you couldn't tell, I coach football. haha

Doug Hardin

07-10-2006, 11:30 AM

I've slowly evolved into more of an NBA fan than a college fan. I used to only watch NBA games non-stop after the college season ended. Then around 2000 I started following the NBA more closely--not so coincedentally, my favorite team was winning its first title in 12 years and starting a mini-dynasty.

I really made the jump sometime in 2004. That was the year UK lost to UAB in the second round of the NCAAs, and I guessI started to think that the NCAA Tournament was a less legitimate way of picking a champion than the NBA Playoffs. I also got the NBA League Pass package on DirecTV that fall and started watching every Lakers game and several others--even horrible Blazers-Warriors matchups are entertaining to me. I grew to appreciate things about the NBA game more--just the little things like players routinely finishing a 3-on-2 fastbreak,the existence of a mid-range jumpshot, and the possibility that someone will throw a punch at any moment.

I also would share the sentiments of whoever said the Internet has affected his enthusiasm. This is the only sports message board I ever read or post on, mainly because I can get information on my other teams just by watching SportsCenter. For example, the Lakers signed Vladimir Radmanovic with their mid-level exception, and thatwas running across the Bottom Line and reported on Sportscenter and ESPN.com, but this site and the local papers are the only place I can get any info about Tyrone Nash. It's harder for me to just have fun and enjoy the games whenI'mpart of an onlinecommunity like this because not only doI hate the feeling of the team losing,Ialso don't like having to deal withall of the people on the boards who take pleasure in being negative and come out of hiding after a loss to demand a coach be fired or a player be benched and call everyone an idiot who disagrees. Since I don't post on an Orioles, Titans, or Lakers boards, I find watching their games more enjoyable, and I'm seriously considering an "Only post during the offseason" rule for myself. The reason for this long-winded blabbering, though,is that I'm work and killing time until lunch ;)

BigblueDrew

07-10-2006, 01:02 PM

I like the game as much now as I did in the 60's when I started being a fan. I am in a small minority that don't think the NBA has really hurt college basketball. There is alot more turnover and fewer long term "stars"( something the media hates) butthe teams are where the real loyalty lie in College Basketball. UK, Duke, UNC, Ariz, people are passionate about them regardless of who is playing. The worst thing about modern college basketball IMO, as compared to the old days is the way it is officiated. Way, way to much contact allowed it has changed the game for the worse, that and the three point shot, which although exciting has been terrible for the game.

Houstoncat

07-10-2006, 04:16 PM

SamKat wrote: Sir has a point I hadn't considered in the lack of All Americans at UK for a while. Nonetheless, I am more like Terry L. Wildcat in becoming more passionate about Kentucky Wildcat Basketball day by day.

I follow the scoring and rebounding, etc. of the ex-Wildcat pros, but that is mostly it until deep intoNBA play-offs. The NBA is about individual players. Their shot clock is too short in my opinion, so that any little opening causes a shot to go up and rebounders had better already have their block-out spots. Run and shoot, run and shoot, run and shoot! That is what the young recruits look forward to and normally they are looking beyond college basketball.

I like the coaching strategies and the conditioning of the college game. Super, super players go on; however college remains the more interesting basketball.

The pro game is more complex with better athletes. Their conditioning is usually superb. Heck I'm for going to a 24 second clock in the NCAA as well as the pro depth three. You'll see better inside games develop, fewer darn teams that will hold the ball the full 35. The best teams will win. As for strategy I think the college game is better from the point that the coaches have less talent. A pro head coach is more a manager of people and a very skilled user of tools to achieve a goal.

Speed the colleage game up, put the jump ball back in, put a charging line under the goal. DON'T have a star system. Don't dilute the tournament by allowing more teams in. One and done is why the tournment is the best spectecle in sports.

Littlemeyer

07-10-2006, 04:53 PM

JohnJ wrotChicago Cubs baseballfans cheer for the name on the front and nothing else. Simply brainless IMO.

:thumbdown Well, I certainly can't speak intelligently about your experiences with Chicago Cubs fans, but that is a mighty broad brush you're attempting to paint with there!

I am truly bewildered at your comment. It is better not to cheer for the name on front of the jersey?

During seasons where the quality just isn't there (most seasons, for us Cubs fans) we should just stop being a fan and cheer for a different team?

Or, when our favorite players retire or get traded, follow them out the door instead of sticking with the team?

You call it brainless, I call it loyalty. I could NEVER transfer my fandom to any team other than Kentucky. The same holds for the Cubs. I just couldn't do it. I don't understand how anybody could do that. For me, saying "OK, I don't like the Cubs or the Wildcats anymore" would be like waking up tomorrow and saying "OK, I don't like girls anymore".

When UK struggles, it is brainless to stick with the team? I have a friend, a very close friend, who thinks this way. To me, suffering, with the team, through the downtimes makes the great times so much better. Often, when Kentucky is losing basketball games, I'll make the comment to my wife that I wish I didn't care so much, because I HATE the feeling I have when we lose. Of course, I wouldn't have it any other way, and she quickly points that out to me. When the good times come back, the lows I experienced emotionally make the highs that much higher.

I felt that in 2003 when the Cubs were 5 outs away from going to the World Series. Well, we all know what happened next. But it doesn't matter. I'm not going to stop cheering for them because they blew it. I'm going to remember that night the next time the Cubs are in that situation, and as good as I'm feeling then, I'll feel that much better when I remember Bartman and the Gonzalez error and the D. Lee double and the eventual 8-run 8th inning that led us to an anti-climatic game 7 emotionally spent and destined to be the goats once again.

Ugh. I don't want to get this thread off-topic.

I hope I always have this enthusiasm level for college basketball. Sure, the game is changing and is not what it was in 1984, or 1996 for that matter. But it is still a VERY quality product, even w/o the 4-year superstars. Of course, my enthusiasm is based on the name on front of the jersey, so, who knows.

Will Lavender

07-10-2006, 06:31 PM

SunBaller

07-10-2006, 09:59 PM

FCFS82 wrote: College basketball is just fine. Talent can't be stockpiled? Ask UNC of 2005, seems to me I recall four of their guys going in the first round. What about Connecticut of this past season? They were loaded.

Where I think college basketball is better is that there are not just six or seven teams that can win a title every year. For some fans of a big dog program like Kentucky, I can see where this is a bad thing.

"College basketball is just fine. Talent can't be stockpiled? Ask UNC of 2005, .. " True, butUNC beat us in the 2005/2006 season and they had lost their top seven scorers and rebounders and we had three (3) McD's AA's.

"What about Connecticut of this past season? They were loaded." True, but UConn beat us in the 2005/2006 NCAA Tournament and we had three (3) McD's AA's.

I have no desire to "keep up with the Joneses". UK should be setting the standards, not grasping for excuses and making comparisons with inconsistent programs.

SunBaller

07-10-2006, 10:08 PM

Will Lavender wrote: College sports aren't pro sports. People speak about them in the same terms, and they are similarly analyzed, but really they're worlds apart. In pro sports, it's the athletes who are followed. Of course people are fans of certain teams; however, if you ask a regular Joe on the street what he likes about the NBA, more often than not he'll tell you a name. The name of a superstar.

College sports are about teams. They're about cities, usually small cities, and they're about tradition. Players are important, as always, but it's the team that matters -- as someone else said, the name on the front of the jersey -- and so it really doesn't matter that the talent is down and that the best players are jumping into the professional ranks. It doesn't matter. The constant is that name, Kentucky, and it represents so much more, to me anyway, than who the superstars are.

There's some truth to that, but the majority of players in all pro sports trade somewhatfrequently. Fans who live within the cities/states of those pro sports don't leave their teams and follow their "previous" favorite player just because they changed teams. They stay devoted to their home town/stateteams. It's only the pro fans who don't have a home/state pro team that follow their favorite player and not their "favorite" team. It's the same with colleges.

CatFanInTheBathtub

07-11-2006, 12:04 AM

SunBaller wrote: FCFS82 wrote: College basketball is just fine. Talent can't be stockpiled? Ask UNC of 2005, seems to me I recall four of their guys going in the first round. What about Connecticut of this past season? They were loaded.

Where I think college basketball is better is that there are not just six or seven teams that can win a title every year. For some fans of a big dog program like Kentucky, I can see where this is a bad thing.

"College basketball is just fine. Talent can't be stockpiled? Ask UNC of 2005, .. " True, butUNC beat us in the 2005/2006 season and they had lost their top seven scorers and rebounders and we had three (3) McD's AA's.

"What about Connecticut of this past season? They were loaded." True, but UConn beat us in the 2005/2006 NCAA Tournament and we had three (3) McD's AA's.

I have no desire to "keep up with the Joneses". UK should be setting the standards, not grasping for excuses and making comparisons with inconsistent programs.

I am trying to figure out a relationship between your statement of the obvious and the post which you quoted, or even the original post, but I just cannot.Since I don't want this thread to get off topic anymore than the next guy, could you please explain ?

catswinitall

07-11-2006, 01:33 AM

Hey... I figured I would add my $0.02. While I am particularly captivated with the University of Kentucky Wildcat basketball team, I still find college basketball, as a whole, absolutely energizing.

As I am only 37, I did not personally experience the championship that was delivered by the hands of the Fab Five in '48... and I was only able to watch clips from the 25-0 run through the regular season in '55. I wasn't alive to see the Fiddlin' Five give Rupp his last title and I was not even a twinkle in my father's eye when the Runts were defeated by Don Haskins and his UTEP team in '66.

That does mean that I have not witnessed great moments at UK... I have. While I barely remember the '78 loss to UCLA, I do remember watching Melvin Turpin, Kenny "Sky" Walker, Sam Bowie, and Dicky Beal shooting 3 for 33 in the second half against the Hoyas in '84. All that is to say that, not only have I personally witnessed greatness at UK, I have heard the tales of greatness that inevitably follow.

It wasn't until about 1992 that I really began to appreciate college hoops for what is was --an opportunity for greatness to shine, regardless of it's origin. I saw the Christian Laettner shot on tv, and was mortified - but still held respect for his ability, albeit luck, to make that shot...

College basketball, for me, holds an element of magnificence untouched by any other team sport. For me, there is not other sport that is so compellingly electric that it actually causes the hair on your neck to stand. The fanaticism of the fans... the hunger of the players... the unpredictiveness of the game holds so much fascination that I can't help but to be enthralled.

While it is true that we, UK, have had some heartbreaking years recently, the sport itself is as dynamic as ever... not necessarily for the same reasons -- because the game has changed, but the energy is still there...

I feel like I've typing forever, so I will close with this... I am more amazed with the endurance of the sport than I am with the basic principal of the game... Some would say Baseball is the great American pasttime... I say, College Basketballl, is on it's heels to claim that title...

JD.

bret1555

07-11-2006, 10:42 AM

I love college basketball. . . But if you're talking about sports which engender pure fanaticism, I don't think you can beat college football. Especially here in the south (though, Kentucky is a bit of an exception). Then again, if Bear had stayed at UK, won a case full of SEC Championships, and a few NCs, things might also be different in that regard.

SunBaller

07-11-2006, 11:20 AM

catswinitall wrote: . . . I still find college basketball, as a whole, absolutely energizing.

College basketball, for me, holds an element of magnificence untouched by any other team sport. For me, there is not other sport that is so compellingly electric that it actually causes the hair on your neck to stand. The fanaticism of the fans... the hunger of the players... the unpredictiveness of the game holds so much fascination that I can't help but to be enthralled.

While it is true that we, UK, have had some heartbreaking years recently, the sport itself is as dynamic as ever... not necessarily for the same reasons -- because the game has changed, but the energy is still there...

:thumbup:thumbupExactly. The game of College Basketball is greater and better than ever. There will never be another UCLA type dynasty with a long string of National Championships, but who wants that anyway? There was certainly no enthusiasm for college basketball during those years when it was predominantly UCLA, was there? I have lost some enthusiasm for UK Basketball mostly because of the style of play, but Ihaven't lost my enthusiasm for the game. Remember George Mason!!!orwas it George Washington???Well, Remember George!!!!!!

Saying the game is less great is nothing more than "loser speak". I think we've lost enough and it's time for a change (It's OK, one of you Apologists can quote the winning percentages in the last 8 seasons, but I already know it). I also know how many Final Fours we've appeared in. Oh, I forget thatEliteEights and Sweet Sixteens are almost the same as FinalFours now.

I very much doubt if the fans atUNC, Duke, UConn, UCLA, Louisville, Florida, Tennessee, LSU, George Mason,Pittsburg, etc., etc., etc.,have lost any enthusiasm. Just the opposite.

RCS

07-11-2006, 12:03 PM

Regular season TV numbers and attendence are down nationwide. The Tourney, however, just keeps getting bigger and bigger. I would say true college basketball fans are few now, but there are more casual fans who turn it on to see how their bracket is doing or if there are any upsets.

Where the Tubby bashing fits in to all of this I have no idea. No one was talking about that at all.

The point the poster was making was that while the over all depth of talent is not as high as it once was in college basketball, there are still some great teams, talent wise. How you took that and made it into a bash on UK is a site to behold.

CatFanInTheBathtub

07-11-2006, 05:53 PM

SunBaller wrote: catswinitall wrote: . . . I still find college basketball, as a whole, absolutely energizing.

College basketball, for me, holds an element of magnificence untouched by any other team sport. For me, there is not other sport that is so compellingly electric that it actually causes the hair on your neck to stand. The fanaticism of the fans... the hunger of the players... the unpredictiveness of the game holds so much fascination that I can't help but to be enthralled.

While it is true that we, UK, have had some heartbreaking years recently, the sport itself is as dynamic as ever... not necessarily for the same reasons -- because the game has changed, but the energy is still there...

:thumbup:thumbupExactly. The game of College Basketball is greater and better than ever. There will never be another UCLA type dynasty with a long string of National Championships, but who wants that anyway? There was certainly no enthusiasm for college basketball during those years when it was predominantly UCLA, was there? I have lost some enthusiasm for UK Basketball mostly because of the style of play, but Ihaven't lost my enthusiasm for the game. Remember George Mason!!!orwas it George Washington???Well, Remember George!!!!!!

Saying the game is less great is nothing more than "loser speak". I think we've lost enough and it's time for a change (It's OK, one of you Apologists can quote the winning percentages in the last 8 seasons, but I already know it). I also know how many Final Fours we've appeared in. Oh, I forget thatEliteEights and Sweet Sixteens are almost the same as FinalFours now.

I very much doubt if the fans atUNC, Duke, UConn, UCLA, Louisville, Florida, Tennessee, LSU, George Mason,Pittsburg, etc., etc., etc.,have lost any enthusiasm. Just the opposite.

My God Dude !!!!

Can you make one freaking post without wildly straying off-topic ?