Who are your top three?

 

I think 1996 and 2012 for sure. Also good arguments for 1998, 2003 and 2010.

 

I think 1996 and 2012 for sure. Also good arguments for 1998, 2003 and 2010.

 

'98, '03, and 2010 are not even in the conversation imo. 2012 is and of course '96 is. But unless the wheels fall off the wagon, you won't find 4 legit Kentucky teams better than this one. They are on the verge of being one of the best statistical teams in the history of the game.

'98, '03, and 2010 are not even in the conversation imo. 2012 is and of course '96 is. But unless the wheels fall off the wagon, you won't find 4 legit Kentucky teams better than this one. They are on the verge of being one of the best statistical teams in the history of the game.

 

Depends on what the conversation is. If you're asking the best teams in terms of who they played against in their particular season and the results of that season, then that's one thing. If you're asking who would win head to head games, that's another conversation.

Who would win head to head games would be really difficult to determine, since none of the teams mentioned have or will ever play each other. We could come up with all kinds of theories as to who would win and why, but in the end, none of it could be proved. We're getting off topic here, but to keep it simple, statistically speaking, it would be hard to find a better Kentucky team than this one.

Who would win head to head games would be really difficult to determine, since none of the teams mentioned have or will ever play each other. We could come up with all kinds of theories as to who would win and why, but in the end, none of it could be proved. We're getting off topic here, but to keep it simple, statistically speaking, it would be hard to find a better Kentucky team than this one.

 

It's also hard to determine if the level of competition in college basketball is stronger or weaker than those other years.

 

It's also hard to determine if the level of competition in college basketball is stronger or weaker than those other years.

 

I can agree with that. I guess there isnt any "best" teams in history then.

Really should probably wait until after the NCAA but I was thinking " The Undeniables"

 

Isn't that what they called the 2012 team? We need to get away from having to have "Un" in every nickname anyway.

There have been great Kentucky teams that didn't win it all, but were still given a nickname. The question is, what would you nickname this team. Not what would you nickname them if they go undefeated.

 

It doesn't make sense to name them now. What if we go with "The Undefeated" and they lose in the tourney? Have to see how it all plays out.

I think 1996 and 2012 for sure. Also good arguments for 1998, 2003 and 2010.

 

1998 is the least talented UK team to win a title. They aren't even in this discussion IMO. 2003? That was an excellent college team but they aren't as good as this group. 1996 I can see an argument for. Same for 2012. Many who know UK history will argue that 1949 was the best UK team ever.

I think the '98 and '12 teams beat this one. But not by too much. This team could drag both of those squads down to street fight level into a low-scoring grinder.

I think the '98 and '12 teams beat this one. But not by too much. This team could drag both of those squads down to street fight level into a low-scoring grinder.

 

The 98 team? Really?

The History Makers or Record Breakers.

Isn't that what they called the 2012 team? We need to get away from having to have "Un" in every nickname anyway.

 

I don't think that it was, not sure. I will agree on the "un" prefix though. I will start thinking of others ...as we said, really should wait until after the season / NCAA Tourney.

AlmostHadIt's

Depends on what the conversation is. If you're asking the best teams in terms of who they played against in their particular season and the results of that season, then that's one thing. If you're asking who would win head to head games, that's another conversation.

 

I have to disagree Wireman on your picks. 1998 was not that great a team in the pantheon of UK or NCAA. 2010 I can see your argument. 2003, not so much either. They had problems with matchups as well. (See Dwayne Wade)

 

The only teams I would put in the conversation right now are:

 

1996, 1948, 1954, 2010 and 2012. But depth separates this team from the others.

 

1996 had the most depth ever, until this season IMO.

 

1948 was the Fabulous Five, the majority of whom entered the NBA as the Olympians and made the playoffs there. If not for the "Point Shaving Scandal" Beard and Groza would be in the pantheon of Mikan and Pettit.

 

1954 had two absolute studs and Hall of Famers in Hagan and Ramsey. That team would have been 29-0 and ranked where it should be in the conversation with the other unbeaten champions if not for the old rule of "Graduate Students" could not compete even if they had eligibility remaining.

 

The '78 team would be worth a nod as well. They beat the next year's NCAA Champ in the Regional, a phenomenal Arkansas squad and a youthful but talented Duke to win it all.