Objective? Why would I be even remotely concerned about that with Puke and Rat Face? I'm more objective than their ad and recruiting agency.
UK v Duke Game
- Thread starter Random UK Fan
- Start date
Objective? Why would I be even remotely concerned about that with Puke and Rat Face? I'm more objective than their ad and recruiting agency.
As far as this game goes? I think it comes down to whether or not Cal can avoid peeing himself in the presence of coach at again.
Kentucky has the better roster on paper. Duke has the better coach however as much as I hate to say that. He'll have to pass the torch eventually though. Nothing would give me more pleasure than seeing Cal yank it from him forcefully.
Kentucky has the better roster on paper. Duke has the better coach however as much as I hate to say that. He'll have to pass the torch eventually though. Nothing would give me more pleasure than seeing Cal yank it from him forcefully.
Ulis > Thornton
Briscoe < Allen
Murray > Jones
Poythress < Ingram*
Labissiere > Jefferson
*I don't think Poythress will be 100% (and "rust" free) that early in the season.
Briscoe < Allen
Murray > Jones
Poythress < Ingram*
Labissiere > Jefferson
*I don't think Poythress will be 100% (and "rust" free) that early in the season.
Briscoe is better than allen, Briscoe eill take allen of the dribble and absorb the contact and get to the line.he said thats his bread and butter
If Allen continues to grow as a player like he did last year, then he gets the edge on Briscoe. Especially with it being early in the season. Both are very talented and very athletic. Allen has better size and is a better shooter.
Yeah, I'm not getting the Allen slurpage. He had a handful of good games last year. One of them happened to be in the title game. He was very hot and cold. Not saying he won't or can't do well this year, but I'm not seeing a year to match some of the hype he's getting.
This guy is a Kentucky fan. One blue cap in a sea of thousands. Who knows, maybe this insane fan will see you in Novemember. If not, there's thousands in the blue fog just like me that aren't particularly fond of Puke or Ratface either.
I just can't stand how Duke fans claim they're the King of college ball. They didn't even win their first title until 1991, when UK already had 5. They have had a great run the last 25 - 30 years or so but to say Duke is King of college basketball is ridiculous. Hell, the team down the road from them has more wins than them if I'm not mistaken. Duke may or may not be the King of college ball in their own state of North Carolina. Lol I mean come on. I wonder how many titles UK would have if they got to play their opening two rounds in state and have a gift wrapped stroll to the Final Four every year? Not being a hater, that's just how it is.
Last edited:
Duke hasn't had the historical success of, say, Kentucky, but we have been the kings of the last 30 years. For a lot of people that's a lifetime, and to a lot of people that's a lot more important and impactful than titles won around World War II. Not saying it's right or wrong, just the way it is.
No, you've had a thirty year cakewalk. You got a coach that pisses all over the refs till he gets what he wants. A media outlet with their nose so far up his butt that they couldn't smell the roses if they wanted. Tournament seedings that are utterly inexplicable and still you often can't get past the first or second round. Players that hack opponents from the back or stomp them on the ground. A bunch of sexual deviants for students that can't stay out of the national news. The worst part is a fan base so gullible they think they've earned it all as evidenced by present company.
So you come here and talk about the irrelevance of history. That's only done by fans that have no history or fans so blatantly stupid they don't realize its value. Or both. I see which bucket you crawled out of. Your rat is aging. Soon, he'll be gone and Puke will fade. We were here before Cal. We'll be here after. We make great coaches, they don't make us. HISTORY has proven this.
I wonder, are the porn queens a recruiting tool? Now go choke on your cake. It's getting stale.
Yep yep yep. I get it. What can I tell you... History of course has a place. At the same time, bragging about what has been accomplished in your lifetime/fan lifespan is usually more impactful. I don't know a lot of Americans who brag about winning the AWI, for example. When you look at, say, a 35 year old American and basketball, are they going to be blown away by UCLAs titles back when basketball wasn't even the game we know? Or will they be more in tune with what has happened in their lifetimes?
Listen, I know you guys are really, really touchy about Duke. Kentucky obviously has more basketball history and historical accomplishments than Duke. But for the last thirty or so years, Duke has been the premier program. You can complain about it being because of cakewalks and ref love and ESPN and all of that other partisan stuff. I get it; that sort of hyper crazy over the top venom is a part of the BBN, as most of you have joked about (although I am sure an outsider pointing it out will bring it on full force!) But end of the day, Duke has won, and won big, more than anyone else since the NCAA tournament became what it is, and the rules of basketball because what they are, and has been the most talked about, more focused on team in the nation. Sorry.
Listen, I know you guys are really, really touchy about Duke. Kentucky obviously has more basketball history and historical accomplishments than Duke. But for the last thirty or so years, Duke has been the premier program. You can complain about it being because of cakewalks and ref love and ESPN and all of that other partisan stuff. I get it; that sort of hyper crazy over the top venom is a part of the BBN, as most of you have joked about (although I am sure an outsider pointing it out will bring it on full force!) But end of the day, Duke has won, and won big, more than anyone else since the NCAA tournament became what it is, and the rules of basketball because what they are, and has been the most talked about, more focused on team in the nation. Sorry.
Last edited:
I have to say beyond the friendly ribbing, I largely agree with this. It's tough to swallow being a UK fan. I don't like to live in "what could have been" based on a missed call - and there have been some, as shown on slo-mo of the semi-finals, etc - I ultimately think that UK had the talent over the years to beat the UConn's, Wisconsins, et al. You don't visit the final four 4/5 years without that talent and ability to beat any team out there. It irritates me that for most of the game we can control it, but fail to insert the dagger the final few minutes. We let other teams/players get into the highlights for some reason, instead of just finishing it or putting the lead far enough ahead that an errant call is of no consequence. But (sigh) we don't. As for Duke and what they do, I don't really concern myself over what they do or don't do . . . but no matter what stance someone takes, the trophy at the end of the year remains up-for-grabs to the team that executes the best.
In my lifetime, UK has won 4 titles. In my dad's lifetime, UK has won 8 titles. So UK's accomplishments should mean more to him than me?
So I guess it's personal, which means it's opinion.
Let's stick with the facts and the whole body of history. This way people can't qualify things to make their school look better.
Do you think UConn is superior to Duke because they have 4 titles to Duke's 3 titles in the last 20 years or so? If you are only 20, then UConn is the best program.
Don't be like UofL fans who think NCAA time began in 1980, so they have the same amount of titles as UK. LOL!
So where do we draw the line. How about we talk about all of NCAA history? Nah, that makes UK look better than Duke and we can't have that. So we draw some imaginary line in the sand and say, "but it only really matter from this date on." That is weak sauce. Man up and look at the whole picture.
Great post but it will fall on deaf ears. It's not what ESPN has told him to believe.
Again, I'll say this, Briscoe just isn't getting as much love these days since Murray came on board, but he's 6'3", has a huge wingspan for a guard, is built like a linebacker, and has the mindset that he wants to destroy you on the court coming out of Newark, NJ.
One thing our team lacked last year amongst the historic depth and size was a mindset of wanting to literally rip our opponents heart out and stomp on it, while talking trash in the process.
Murray and Briscoe bring that to the court. Between Ulis, Briscoe, Murray, Poythress, and Skal, UK will simply be too athletic, too talented, and too much for Duke this year. Oh, and Lee, Mulder, and Matthews are pretty good themselves. We could always throw Humphries in just to make Plumlee look like the pansy he is as well.
One thing our team lacked last year amongst the historic depth and size was a mindset of wanting to literally rip our opponents heart out and stomp on it, while talking trash in the process.
Murray and Briscoe bring that to the court. Between Ulis, Briscoe, Murray, Poythress, and Skal, UK will simply be too athletic, too talented, and too much for Duke this year. Oh, and Lee, Mulder, and Matthews are pretty good themselves. We could always throw Humphries in just to make Plumlee look like the pansy he is as well.
And that, my friend, what you just said, is why Duke basketball has never been, is not, nor ever will be, Kentucky basketball.
TUL you're better than that. Only simple-minded fans of weakass teams have to take a cherry picked time frame to discuss their programs relevance. Watch-- I can do it too. Over the last 20 years, Kentucky has as many titles as Duke, has been to more final fours, and has had exceptionally more national coverage. And 20 years, y'know, is only reasonable to talk about, because all high school basketball players are under 20 years old.
Usually you bring good stuff to the table, but obvious troll is obvious this time.
Usually you bring good stuff to the table, but obvious troll is obvious this time.
Let's just take last year's tournament draw as an example, shall we? I'd imagine that almost everyone's top 5 last season would be UK, Duke, Wisconsin, Arizona and Notre Dame. Everyone knows Nova wasn't a top team last season and you can throw out Virginia because they weren't the same team after the Anderson injury. Gonzaga? Give me a break. Fact is 80% of the top 5 was on UK's side of the bracket: UK, ND, Zona and Wisconsin. Pretty ridiculous seeing as how UK was the overall number 1 seed and undefeated. Duke got UK's draw in the tourney, plain and simple.