Toggle sidebar

Just reminiscing, but that 1978 team was probably…

CELTICAT

CELTICAT

Heisman
May 21, 2002
19,204
18,672
113
78 was pre-shot clock and pre-three point line. Go watch those old games and it looks like a different sport altogether. Pitino pressing and trapping a team with one sure fire ball handler would have been a closer to a blood letting than a basketball game. Mercer and Anderson would have eaten Goose Givens alive.

I agree that Phillips and Robey would have been tough up front, but I’m not convinced they would have gotten the ball much between Epps and Delk flying around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smeegs
M

mhs1964

Junior
Feb 8, 2018
299
317
58
Smeegs said:
You’ve gotta be kidding. You are stoned if you actually believe this. 78 did not have anything REMOTELY CLOSE to the same depth as 96. Perhaps you need a refresher on what the 96 roster looked like:

www.sports-reference.com

1995-96 Kentucky Wildcats Men's Roster and Stats | College Basketball at Sports-Reference.com

Check out the detailed 1995-96 Kentucky Wildcats Roster and Stats for College Basketball at Sports-Reference.com
www.sports-reference.com www.sports-reference.com

That, my friend, is the deepest roster in CBB history. For cripes sake, a junior Jeff Sheppard was merely the NINTH man in mpg. Do you know how deep a team has to be for a third year Shep to be the ninth man? Hell, Nazr Muhammed was the TWELFTH man on that team. Can you name any other 12th men that went on to have a 17 year NBA career?

You’re letting your nostalgic feelings override your brain in this thread. I loved the 78 team too, but they did not have anywhere near the athleticism, depth and overall talent that the 96 team did. And they also didn’t completely destroy opponents the same way that 96 team did. 96 absolutely was the best team in UK history …even if some of our fans don’t want to admit it.
Click to expand...
I’ve been a fan since before the 58 team. My opinion, for whaits worth, is that 78 & 96 were the best And impossible to say which was better. It would have been a hell of a seven game playoff. To compare the two is very difficult because of their different styles and the different rules. I do agree that 96 had more depth but the game is still 40 minutes and you can only play five at a time.
 
FireWentOut

FireWentOut

All-Conference
Jul 2, 2025
569
2,318
93
1996 Untouchables were the best UK team I have ever seen, followed by 1997.

Unpopular opinion. A healthy 97 team was better than 2012 and 2015.
 
I’m The Village Idiot

I’m The Village Idiot

Heisman
Jul 30, 2024
5,775
10,951
113
1.) 1996
2.) 2012
3.) 1978
4.) 2015

^ You could almost pick any order of those teams, but my idiot eyes sees that as the pecking order. I wasn’t around in ‘78 and wasn’t old enough to analyze in ‘96, but the tape doesn’t lie. Or maybe it does, I’ve been told if you weren’t there live, your opinion doesn’t really count lol. Film analysis is something I regularly enjoy though and I don’t think anyone beats 1996.

Everyone correctly points out how great 1997 was, but I’ll say 1995 was an outstanding team as well.
 
T

TNCatfanforever

Heisman
Apr 3, 2003
21,973
13,697
62
As far as talent 2012 and 2015 were the most talented teams ever. 78 for the time period. 75 was awesome but officials took care of Wooden
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom