When your school puts up 9 more championships and 99 total then you can talk. Wow, those grapes must be really, really sour. Tell you what, how about I just talk whenever I feel like it. As far as UCLA is concerned, yes, the 99 National Championships earned by the school are number one in NCAA history. Congratulations. If you'd like to write a column about the Bruins' athletic prowess over the years, I'd gladly read it. For the purposes of this discussion, however, we've been dealing with recent basketball championships; since UCLA hasn't won one of those in over a decade (and even then, Jim Harrick was breaking NCAA regulations), I don't know that you have much to add to the discussion. In fact, given that UCLA has been beaten twice in a row by the Gators on their way to National Championships, one might say it's bad form at best for you to come in here crowing about UCLA. And as far as history is concerned, you seem to be claiming that "March Madness" wouldn't exist without UCLA basketball. While I don't know if you can really prove that claim, I can tell you this: without the University of Florida, you wouldn't have Gatorade. So there. Also, when it comes to history, the University of Florida is the first school in Division I history to own both the men's basketball championship and the football championship in the same year. You may remember, they beat UCLA for that basketball championship. Since Pat Summitt picked up her seventh national championship last night, and shows no signs of slowing down, maybe Wooden will soon have company in the ten-timers club. I'm sure you and all the folks who revere the Wizard of Westwood will give her the respect she deserves, and not just wallow in sour grapes.
Also, how many other schools can brag about an alum winning Dancing with the Stars?
ucla512, It is total suicide trying to relate to any tradition / history because as I have said before, any type of backround knowledge expressed related to a sport on this thread is for some reason a very negitive thing to express. As for the Jim Harrick problems with the NCAA, that was one case that UCLA probably has egg on their face, just like most major D-1 college programs. But if The_Black_Hand truly wants to deal with current basketball maybe he ought to recognize the fact that the Florida basketball program is being investigated by the NCAA as we converse. This investigation started a long time before the NCAA tournement started and grows daily. Everything ucla512 said about John Wooden was exactly right. The game today would not be where it is without contributions from coaches like Mr. Wooden, or Tony Hinkle, they are the pioneers. I think if there was a poll taken on who had the biggest inpact on basketball today wether it be current or past John Woodens name would be the most mentioned by far. I would challenge anybody out there to give me a more influential figure in basketball in the last 45 years than JW.
ucla: Your arguments about required eligibility would be much stronger if you could provide some proof. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm far from convinced and see no reason to take your arguments seriously given your obvious bias. That said, the sort information you speak of can be provided by a school as long as it is anonymous and there is no way to link a grade to a player, protecting their privacy. I don't understand how the APR fails to measure whether programs "make the grade," especially given that that is the primary purpose of the meter. Unless you're saying that nobody is qualified to determine if they're failing to "make the grade," in which case one way to meter it is how the program fares against most other similar programs and NCAA averages. UCLA does exceed Florida in many of the programs' Multiyear APR. But not enough to call their standards stringent. From programs with statistics available, UCLA has no programs that rank among the top 90% within their sport. See the public report for yourself: http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/
apr2005/110_2005_apr.pdf. Says the website: "... [The] APR awards two points each term to student-athletes who meet academic-eligibility standards and who remain with the institution. A team's APR is the total points earned by the team at a given time divided by the total points possible." Academic-eligibility standards are also set by the NCAA, so the measure is constant among all Universities. Next time you're on campus, stop by your athletics office or office of information and ask if they have any reports on GPAs per sport or other statistical analyses (i.e. SAT/ACT averages, modes, distributions, etc.). They may choose not to give it to you - in which case you can choose to appeal to whatever legislative system UCLA employs - but it would not be unfathomable for them to help you out.
I can tell you this: without the University of Florida, you wouldn't have Gatorade. It would be Bruinade of course.
UCLA takes a few special steps to admitting athletes, according to this story.
any type of backround knowledge expressed related to a sport on this thread is for some reason a very negitive thing to express. No, any suggestion that The Good Old Days were superior simply because they occurred in the past is met with derision and mockery. As it ought to be.
I would challenge anybody out there to give me a more influential figure in basketball in the last 45 years than JW. Michael Jeffrey Jordan.
Red Auerbach. Define your terms. Dean Smith's coaching tree is probably much bigger than Wooden's; does that make him more influential? Larry Bird is The Other Son of God. I'm just throwing it out there.
As it ought to be. And saves me from having to bring up that comparing Wooden's era with today's is ludicrous if only because of star player retention rates. Lot of good that did. If we're forced into a good old days discussion I'm saying that the art of the pass is best left dead. Simply to be difficult. on preview: Pete Maravich
1. I did not suggest that "the good old days" were superior.I simple said that the foundation for the modern day game of basketball was laid by John Wooden. And I would bet that Dean Smith, Red Aurbach, Larry Bird, and MJ would agree with that 100%. In all honesty I don't think you can compare basketball in the NBA to that of college, they are much different games. Bobby Knight has a bigger coaching tree than Dean Smith so what has that got to do with anything. All the above except for Red Aurbach were drivers in the game of basketball, John Wooden refined the car they drove. Please define to me what "star player retention rate" is. I still think developing a computer game that pits the old era NBA/COLLEGE against the new era would be a money maker. It could be done as 2 different games.
Please define to me what "star player retention rate" is. Players staying in school for 4 years. I still think developing a computer game that pits the old era NBA/COLLEGE against the new era would be a money maker. It could be done as 2 different games. There used to be a web site for comparing any baseball team across eras (and other sports as well) but I forget the name. Think it was posted here years ago. The Sports Guy posted it as well. It may have stopped being free some time ago.
Adolph Rupp had 4 championships before Wooden ever started. I think you could say he laid a little foundation as to how college basketball would be played. Sure Wooden added to the game. So did Smith, Knight, coach K, even Pitino. Give any of those coaches Kareem and Walton back to back and see how many titles they would have. I think Wooden was ONE of the best coaches ever, but to say he is the end all of college basketball is absurd. College basketball is much bigger than any one coach. The game has and will continue to evlove.
There used to be a web site for comparing any baseball team across eras (and other sports as well) but I forget the name. you mean what if?
Adolph Rupp had 4 championships before Wooden ever started. I think you could say he laid a little foundation as to how college basketball would be played. I'm pretty sure James Naismith belongs on this list. Also Phog Allen. Maybe Don Haskins? Wooden deserves all the respect he gets, but is he really the be-all end-all of college basketball? The more interesting question to me is, how did a thread devoted to Ohio State/Florida basketball end up being all about John Wooden?
But if The_Black_Hand truly wants to deal with current basketball maybe he ought to recognize the fact that the Florida basketball program is being investigated by the NCAA as we converse. That's funny, try as I might, I can't find a story about this investigation. Kindly provide a link to something factual, so I can be enlightened. Thanks.
how did a thread devoted to Ohio State/Florida basketball end up being all about John Wooden? Because UCLA lost to Florida? ...again
