Joe Namath, its over, lets move on.

I could say the same thing about UCLA and the championships...which would you rather have wins or championships???

 

Boom Roasted.

 

Difference is I wasn't trying to discredit Bama's championships, like you were UK wins. Just pointing out that you had a weak arguement bringing up Lexington YMCA etc. Every school has dubious wins that are counted from the late 1800's / early 1900's.

 

Obviously, one would rather have championships as opposed to wins. I'm sure UK could be creative and close the gap on UCLA. How about 1954. UK finished undefeated and ranked #1 in the final AP poll. UK declined a post season invitation and was awarded the Helms National Championship. The school does not count that, but perhaps for the purposes of this thread we should.

Some of those alltime wins include games against the powerhouses known as the Lexington YMCA, Louisville Coliseum, Lexington High, Louisville YMHA, Louisville YMCA, Ashland YMCA...just to name a few.

 

No other schools in the top 5 claim similar wins?

The difference is we don't claim that as an accomplishment like uk does when it comes to all time wins. We celebrate championships, not longevity.

 

Well obviously you can't since Michigan and 4 other schools can claim more wins, but don't try to tell me that if Alabama were to top the list that you wouldn't celebrate that accomplishment as well.

 

Exactly what I was thinking Irish, not a lot of schools bragging about being 5th best all time in wins....

I could say the same thing about UCLA and the championships...which would you rather have wins or championships???

 

Both mean a lot I would say, I think most would say championships but would also feel that most are in agreement that UCLA's title run was slightly tarnished.

Obviously, one would rather have championships as opposed to wins. I'm sure UK could be creative and close the gap on UCLA. How about 1954. UK finished undefeated and ranked #1 in the final AP poll. UK declined a post season invitation and was awarded the Helms National Championship. The school does not count that, but perhaps for the purposes of this thread we should.

 

If we are going to do that....Bama has actually been awarded 18 national championships but they only recognize 14 of those.

If we are going to do that....Bama has actually been awarded 18 national championships but they only recognize 14 of those.

 

And some of those, as I've already pointed out, were reputation and luck as much as winning a title on the field. I really don't know what all this fuss is about to be honest. Alabama has one of the best traditions in college football. Kentucky has one of the best traditions in college basketball. It's really as simple as that.

And some of those, as I've already pointed out, were reputation and luck as much as winning a title on the field. I really don't know what all this fuss is about to be honest. Alabama has one of the best traditions in college football. Kentucky has one of the best traditions in college basketball. It's really as simple as that.

 

The fuss began in an Alabama basket thread. When it was pointed out that Alabama put about as much emphasis on basketball as Kentucky does on football. Alabama Larry mentioned how spoiled they were winning all of their titles in football and that Kentucky's basketball was not on the same level in their sport. I said that Kentucky's accomplishments in basketball are just as impressive as Alabama's in football.

And some of those, as I've already pointed out, were reputation and luck as much as winning a title on the field. I really don't know what all this fuss is about to be honest. Alabama has one of the best traditions in college football. Kentucky has one of the best traditions in college basketball. It's really as simple as that.

 

I believe it's called penis envy. And since the thread was started by an Alabama fan

Both mean a lot I would say, I think most would say championships but would also feel that most are in agreement that UCLA's title run was slightly tarnished.

 

I don't think you can say most. I think most people don't pay that much attention.

One key is that most of Bama's championships were "awarded" all of Kentucky's were won.

 

Not Bama's fault but college football is broken.

I don't think you can say most. I think most people don't pay that much attention.

 

Most people that give a crap is what I was referring to. I personally think most people are complete idiots but thats for another thread.

Joe Namath, its over, lets move on.

ur right .... it's over.... Boom Roasted

I know I know, UK Basketball has a history of two drunk coaches and the very dishonorable Mr. Farmer. Just pointing out Joe Willie doesn't settle anything. Now if you had said Paul "Bear" Bryant, then you might have had something, but not Namath.

Both mean a lot I would say, I think most would say championships but would also feel that most are in agreement that UCLA's title run was slightly tarnished.

 

More than slightly, but for some strange reason the media folks never bring that up. They like to mention UK's point shaving in the early '50s and the $1000 package in the late '80s, but Sam Gilbert buying UCLA and John Wooden many of their championships is rarely mentioned (and I'm not pretending that UK is innocent in money changing hands either, but it was discovered to be on a grand scale at UCLA). Wooden went from a very average coach the first 15 years of his career to a mega-coach when he started getting NBA squads, compliments of his wealthy booster.