I would imagine that Calipari wasn't exactly expecting Orton and maybe even Bledsoe to be one and done players for him when the season started.

The potential for an NBA lockout in 2010-11 is going to make the recruiting battles very interesting as time goes on...

Exactly. Plus, the game has changed so much that if you want to be a legit title contender, you need NBA stars that are both talented and athletic.

 

That said, depending on how the other teams look in 2011, Kentucky could be the most dominant team that year - 40-0 possibilities.

 

That is why I no longer have the feel for college basketball I once had. I rather watch a mid major or naia team now. I'm not a big fan of the nba any more.

 

Had we seen one since anyways?

My point is I would rather watch a group of players grow together over 4 years rather than see a college or university turn into a farm club for the nba.

My point is I would rather watch a group of players grow together over 4 years rather than see a college or university turn into a farm club for the nba.

 

Right... And that's fine.

 

And my point is that you're talking about a group of guys from 20 years ago. So recent history shows that you probably weren't going to get that again anyways with Pitino, Smith, Gillispie (well, maybe by accident), Calipari, or whoever the coach is.

 

There is too much money involved for big time schools to be able to take a chane on this type of squad unless it's out of necessity.

 

It was a great team, but like Wall/Patterson/Cousins/Bledsoe/Orton, it's not something that comes around too often so just enjoy it while it's there -- You're probably not going to see it again.

Tradition and watching young men grow over their four year career means nothing anymore. :cry:

At this point, I think Cal needs to get another 3 or 4 year guy in this next class. A good, local player IMO that he needs to extend an offer to is Chane Behanan. I know he is a 2011 recruit and thus wouldn't be considered part of this next recruiting class, but he is a 4-star that seems like he would stick around for awhile and thus compensate for the constant one-and-doners that Cal will bring in. He would fit in nicely with other long-term players like Stacey Poole, Darius Miller, Jon Hood, etc.

I would imagine that Calipari wasn't exactly expecting Orton and maybe even Bledsoe to be one and done players for him when the season started.

 

Exactly...

Orton really shouldn't go, even though he probably will...

 

It seems like he's good for one missed jam and a goal tend per game... Hasn't shown any sort of shooting touch at all. He could be a very good player, but I'd like to see more from him before I'd draft him in the 1st round.

So will we no longer see groups like the ones with Feldhaus, Farmer, Wood, and Phelfry?

 

Sorry nWo. As revered and cherished as this group is in UK basketball lore ( and rightly so), the fact remains that their glory season resulted in an elite 8 loss. They were immense overachievers who brought the program from the despair and agony. If you want final 4s and national championships then as a talent core these are not the players you would recruit. I love this group as much as anyone ( have the "Unforgettables" print haning in my family room). So I have to say, we probably will not see a group like the Unforgettables again at UK.

Please don't underestimate how good John Wall, Cousins and Patterson are. Bledsoe, Orton, Miller, Dodson, Liggins, Kanter, Knight, Leslie would be a good team but I wouldn't expect them to have a record like this or be a favorite to win the championship.

 

I do agree that this team, particularly Wall and Cousins, are really special. PG's like Wall and bigs like Cousins don't come along every year and we were lucky enough to land both at the same time.

 

That said, nobody expected this group to have a season like they have. And, they haven't been viewed as the favorite to win a championship all season...even now I hear Syracuse mentioned just as much, if not more, than UK.

 

If UK ends up with the roster you've suggested in your post, I see no reason why they couldn't be a serious title contender again next year. Will they go 30+ and 2? That's not likely in any season. Excluding the freshmen listed, the other guys have a lot of potential, so I'd expect to see some real improvement. And, adding a talented group of freshmen would only make it better.

 

Perhaps that hypothetical team wouldn't be able to develop chemistry. Or, maybe they'd struggle early on before developing into a team capable of competing for a championship. Or, maybe they'd come out of the gate like a juggernaut.

 

I'd say any of the three would be possible with a roster that talented. I wouldn't expect a 2 loss season, but a title contender by March wouldn't surprise me at all.

 

I'm just happy we're having this discussion. :idunno:

All persons involved with UK gave Cal almost 4 million a year to recruit KY level talent... well it's here.

I'd say Cal will replace them pretty well. He's off to a decent start on next years incoming class and it could really pick up in the next few weeks. I don't know if it will be a yearly problem but Cal will always bring in 1 and done type players as long as the NBA keeps the rule as they are.

Tradition and watching young men grow over their four year career means nothing anymore. :cry:

 

Not if you want to win. It's simply a different era.

 

Let's not forget that the team you are speaking of isn't even talked about today if there was no Jamal Mashburn.

I, for one, have zero problem winning with one-and-done players. That means we'll consistently be suiting up more talent than our opponents, which means we'll consistently win a lot of games. As a UK fan, that's what I want.

 

If you look at it over a 3-4 year span, it works the same way. If you get lesser prospects and develop them, you're hoping by the time they're juniors or seniors it all clicks and you can get a championship from them. With one-and-dones, you're hoping all the talent clicks and you can get a championship...so, which gives you better odds? Winning a title over a four year span with more turnover, but more talent. Or, winning over a four year span with the same guys, hoping they'll improve to the point they win a title.

I, for one, have zero problem winning with one-and-done players. That means we'll consistently be suiting up more talent than our opponents, which means we'll consistently win a lot of games. As a UK fan, that's what I want.

 

:thumb: