Do Duke fans hate UK the way UK fans hate Duke

[CatsCatsCats]

Quick on the edit button.

 

Excellent work. I was thinking that had that been to my post it would have not made any sense at all.

[GRC4LIFE]

Let's be clear. Never said you called anybody a cheater. I happen to have some friends who are both UNC and DUKE fans. They are always bashing Cal and calling him a cheater among other things. Only one problem, they can never cite one example or shred of evidence. They just say he is out smarting the NCAA, I just laugh. Duke has been very good, but it's a shame that you could careless about anything outside of your personal lifetime. Do you know who Pistol Pete is? What about the Holocaust? Might want to broaden your horizons outside of your own personal lifetime. There are alot of cool things (and not so good) that happened prior to your arrival. Hope you will be pulling for the Big Blue today.

 

I for one believe Coach Cal was the best thing that could've happened to UK. And maybe I should've rephrased what I said a bit, I do know and am aware of college basketball history. Like you said, there are some amazing moments and players and then there are some not so good. I just put priority on what has happened in my era since that is what I know the best. One thing that always gets me is when I talk about how good Duke is/has been is the only response I get by UK fans is 7 national championships. I may be in the minority and will probably get bashed hardcore but I find it WAY more difficult to win the national title say, within the 30 thirty years, as opposed to when UCLA went on their run or when UK won in 48, 49, 51 and 58. For those first two championships, how many games did they have to win? 3? And then in 51 and 58 they had to win 4. If somebody has a better view of how it was back then that could shed me some light I'd love to hear it because I'm always open to knew views. I just can't value a championship back in that time period as opposed to winning one now.

[CatsCatsCats]

I for one believe Coach Cal was the best thing that could've happened to UK. And maybe I should've rephrased what I said a bit, I do know and am aware of college basketball history. Like you said, there are some amazing moments and players and then there are some not so good. I just put priority on what has happened in my era since that is what I know the best. One thing that always gets me is when I talk about how good Duke is/has been is the only response I get by UK fans is 7 national championships. I may be in the minority and will probably get bashed hardcore but I find it WAY more difficult to win the national title say, within the 30 thirty years, as opposed to when UCLA went on their run or when UK won in 48, 49, 51 and 58. For those first two championships, how many games did they have to win? 3? And then in 51 and 58 they had to win 4. If somebody has a better view of how it was back then that could shed me some light I'd love to hear it because I'm always open to knew views. I just can't value a championship back in that time period as opposed to winning one now.

 

Remember there were less games to win, but it was also alot harder to get into the tourney at that point as well. Just about every team that made it was extremely good. It was a different era, but the rules were the same for everyone.

[GRC4LIFE]

Remember there were less games to win, but it was also alot harder to get into the tourney at that point as well. Just about every team that made it was extremely good. It was a different era, but the rules were the same for everyone.

 

One thing I was wondering as I was typing that out was to what were the qualifications of making the tournament back then? Since there were only either 8 or 16 I wondered if you had to win a "conference tournament" similar to what the smaller schools of this era have to do. If that is the case, then that could possibly make the playing field a bit more even. I'm just not as educated on the past as much as some people which is why I have the view that I do...

[CatsCatsCats]

One thing I was wondering as I was typing that out was to what were the qualifications of making the tournament back then? Since there were only either 8 or 16 I wondered if you had to win a "conference tournament" similar to what the smaller schools of this era have to do. If that is the case, then that could possibly make the playing field a bit more even. I'm just not as educated on the past as much as some people which is why I have the view that I do...

 

I want to say you had to win your conference or conference tourney but I could be wrong. I don't think there would have been more than 2 or 3 teams per conference that made the tourney. Maybe an old geezer (:lol: sorry guys just having fun) could enlilghten us?

[Original Rookie]

I'd guess Ohio St football fans might be guilty as well. UK fans, as a group, are the most guilty and I'd challenge anyone to refute it.

 

Of course, I shouldn't have to type "this doesn't apply to EVERY UK fan."

 

I'm all for a good strong rivalry. I like when UK fans and UL fans have fun with each other prior to a contest.

 

The part I call sad though is the part that a)deals with the "hate" aspect and b)the part the deals with UK basketball success being one of the top 2 or 3 MOST IMPORTANT items in a person's life and one that DEFINES them. You probably aren't guilty of this, OR(I hope not) but sadly there are way too many who fall into this pitiful group.

 

Agree. Sometimes it is tough not getting frustrated with the "18%".

[Jim Schue]

Remember there were less games to win, but it was also alot harder to get into the tourney at that point as well. Just about every team that made it was extremely good. It was a different era, but the rules were the same for everyone.

 

Yeah, but UK plays in the SEC. If you think fans at the other SEC schools are apathetic about basketball now, it was even moreso then, plus the schools' administrations didn't much care about basketball either. Football was all that mattered.

 

While there is no question Kentucky was a dominant national program in those days, they did pretty much get a free pass from the other SEC schools in most years because of the others' single-mindedness.

 

Also, weren't there a couple occasions where other teams won the SEC, yet UK took the conference's lone bid because the other schools wouldn't play in the NCAA's because of Jim Crow considerations?

[PurplePride92]

Wow...we are on page 3 huh?:lol:

 

What defines being the best college basketball program since 1980? Can we get a hard set of standards?

[PurplePride92]

By my count Duke has 831 wins, 4 national titles, 8 final games, 11 final fours, 12 elite eights, 20 sweet 16' and 25 total conference titles(12 regular season and 13 tournaments).

 

 

Anybody have any other teams numbers from 1980 until now? I think only UNC has as many national titles.

[Hatz]

I don't believe Duke nation (which is broad based and not really regional IMO) really hates UK with a passion.

 

That said, it's funny right now on our local sports radio facebook. UNC and Duke fans are trashing UK with talk about Cal, probation, crooked, dirty, et al.

 

I don't think their fan base is any different than UK's. There are crazy people in each one that can not win with class or lose with class. :thumb:

[Clyde]

There are wackos with every team. I've never met someone who literally lived and died with their sports team. .

 

"Literally?"

[LRCW]

By my count Duke has 831 wins, 4 national titles, 8 final games, 11 final fours, 12 elite eights, 20 sweet 16' and 25 total conference titles(12 regular season and 13 tournaments).

 

 

Anybody have any other teams numbers from 1980 until now? I think only UNC has as many national titles.

 

 

All of that is since 1980? If that is so then that is impressive as heck.

[SEMPERFIFALCON]

I just checked the Duke link I posted earlier and the hate coming from Duke fans is amazing. Several are talking about how torn they were in having to support anyone, one said he had to take a shower after pulling for UK. If you think Duke Fans could care less about UK or think they hardly notice them read that board for 5 min's.

[Henry521]

I know several Duke grads and quite a few Duke fans. They could care less about Kentucky and their fans. Never think about them, really. North Carolina? That's another story. That's who they hate.

 

So do you think Duke fans were pulling for Kentucky today?

[PurplePride92]

I just checked the Duke link I posted earlier and the hate coming from Duke fans is amazing. Several are talking about how torn they were in having to support anyone, one said he had to take a shower after pulling for UK. If you think Duke Fans could care less about UK or think they hardly notice them read that board for 5 min's.

 

It still doesn't equal the hate UK fans have for Duke. A lot of the Duke hate for UK on the message board I frequent stems from UK fans 'flaming' on their board but yeah, there is still hatred for UK from Duke fans. As a whole, most were rooting for UK to win today.