Mario Chalmers forces overtime with a spectacular shot that will surely be remembered in title game history, and in doing so helps Kansas and Bill Self finally win it all. But does that make Kansas a historic team?
In the Final Four, I would argue that Kansas was the most anonymous team left because it is bereft of major stars: UNC has Hansbrough and Lawson, UCLA has Love and Collison, Memphis has Rose, CDR and Dorsey. Kansas has ... Rush and Chalmers? Will those faces last the test of time like Laettner, Hurley and Hill? I'm not sure.
No one's arguing that Kansas didn't have a great season or a great title game, but they were relatively under the radar all year. Will their lack of media attention relegate them to just another team that you have to check on Wikipedia to remember?
Please leave your opinion/thoughts/comments.
Photo Credit: Baltimore Sun
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Is Kansas a Historic Team?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Less sure about Rush...but since hoops fans can still name-drop CBA-lifer Keith Smart (and his shot versus Syracuse), Chalmers isn't going anywhere.
Chalmers' shot will definitely be remembered, but so will their return from the grave in the last two minutes from 9 down. True that KU didn't have tons of big names, but they were the best all-around team in the tournament. That's what made them so attractive and likeable. Selfless play and teamwork for once in a national champion! I was just glad to see smug UNC & Memphis go down!
Post a Comment