Louisville claiming they won 1948 Championship

**SvFan4life** · Aug 29, 12, 07:46 PM

Seen it on KSR.

Not really sure why they would have approved this shirt, of they didn't and Addidas ran with it then just pitiful.

**PurplePride92** · Aug 29, 12, 09:15 PM

Is this one of those NCAA/NIT significance moments?

**BigGreenHorse** · Aug 29, 12, 09:23 PM

Didn't they?

**Randy Parker** · Aug 29, 12, 09:25 PM

I don't know the back story here, but I'm pretty sure the 1948 UK team is one of the school's most accomplished squads. They later helped win a gold medal, I believe.

**PurplePride92** · Aug 29, 12, 09:34 PM

Gotcha....makes sense why this is being mentioned. They took UK's title. Interesting.

**SvFan4life** · Aug 29, 12, 10:32 PM

Originally Posted by PurplePride92

Gotcha....makes sense why this is being mentioned. They took UK's title. Interesting.

U shoulda known it had to do something with UK. Haha

**Getslow** · Aug 30, 12, 12:06 AM

Calm down, big blue nation. No one is trying to cheat you and not everything is about you.

Louisville won and has always claimed the 1948 NAIB title. That organization has since expanded beyond basketball and is now called the NAIA. Louisville joined the NCAA the following season.

**ThrillVille Cardinal51** · Aug 30, 12, 02:49 AM

We did. I was there.

**mobaar** · Aug 30, 12, 06:39 AM

That's downright pitiful. Come on Cards. Have a little more respect for yourself than that.

On the bright side, UK now has 12 titles!!!

1933, 1946, 1948, 1949, 1951, 1954, 1958, 1976, 1978, 1996, 1998, 2012

**PurplePride92** · Aug 30, 12, 07:00 AM

Originally Posted by SvFan4life

U shoulda known it had to do something with UK. Haha

I assumed but wasn't sure.

**PurplePride92** · Aug 30, 12, 07:00 AM

Originally Posted by Getslow

Calm down, big blue nation. No one is trying to cheat you and not everything is about you.

Louisville won and has always claimed the 1948 NAIB title. That organization has since expanded beyond basketball and is now called the NAIA. Louisville joined the NCAA the following season.

I understand that.

**Hatz** · Aug 30, 12, 07:44 AM

It's really no different than UNC of all people.

When Duke had won three National Titles (at the time the same as UNC had), the Tar Heel sports department began marketing their 1924 Helms Foundation championship as part of their total of National Titles.

I called more than a few UNC fans on that one and told them if we are going to count Helms then UK has 9, not 7 National Titles. (at the time that was the count)

**Getslow** · Aug 30, 12, 07:57 AM

Originally Posted by PurplePride92

Is this one of those NCAA/NIT significance moments?

That's what's going on with 1956. I'd be lying if I said I understood that distinction and when that switch really started to happen.

I do know that Louisville beat Dayton in that NIT final... that would have been rough on me...

**Getslow** · Aug 30, 12, 08:12 AM

In truth, I'd be a little more sympathetic to this if UK's official athletic site didn't claim a football championship in 1950 that they didn't win.

**DragonFire** · Aug 30, 12, 08:13 AM

It's not something to get fired up about, but I do think there should be a distinction made about what championships they are counting. If those banners on the back said NAIA and NIT for 1948 & 1956 respectively, it'd be different. If the Helms Athletic Foundation had recognized them as champs, even that would be different.

The NIT was still a big deal in 1956, but the NCAA champ that year was undefeated San Francisco with Bill Russell.

**DragonFire** · Aug 30, 12, 08:19 AM

Originally Posted by Getslow

In truth, I'd be a little more sympathetic to this if UK's official athletic site didn't claim a football championship in 1950 that they didn't win.

They did retroactively win the Sagarin version. Football is a whole different (and stupid) animal. So many teams could claim a championship because there are so many organizations that hand them out. And in 1950 the AP and UPI handed out theirs before the bowls, which is why Oklahoma won it at all. Tennessee probably would have won it had they taken into account postseason games.

**HammerTime** · Aug 30, 12, 08:34 AM

Originally Posted by Getslow

In truth, I'd be a little more sympathetic to this if UK's official athletic site didn't claim a football championship in 1950 that they didn't win.

UK has football?

**Hatz** · Aug 30, 12, 09:11 AM

The NIT was a big deal for many decades. But as the NCAA tourney took in more teams, the number of quality squads going to the NIT faded. This is what makes the difference IMO.

Winning the NIT in the 50's, 60's or 70's was still a big feat. But it lost it's luster with each decade and the expansion of the NCAA to 24 teams, 32 and 48 by '79 put an end to how good that tourney could be. By the 50's I don't think anyone confused the NIT champ with the National Title winners of the day.

**Hatz** · Aug 30, 12, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by Getslow

In truth, I'd be a little more sympathetic to this if UK's official athletic site didn't claim a football championship in 1950 that they didn't win.

I think people start "fishing" for things to be proud of when you don't have a long history in your program to point out to others.

**mobaar** · Aug 30, 12, 09:42 AM

Originally Posted by Hatz

It's really no different than UNC of all people.

When Duke had won three National Titles (at the time the same as UNC had), the Tar Heel sports department began marketing their 1924 Helms Foundation championship as part of their total of National Titles.

I called more than a few UNC fans on that one and told them if we are going to count Helms then UK has 9, not 7 National Titles. (at the time that was the count)

Counting Helms' titles is a lot more justified IMO (but you can believe I don't let UNC fans I know get away with it). There wasn't an NCAA title at that point.

Again, UK has 12 using this method, and is tied with UCLA (who has 11 NCAA and 1 NIT).