Our SEC brethren have their troubles, too.
The opening loss to VMI hurts a bit less when you take a peek at some of the trouble our conference mates have been having so far this season.
The best records in the conference belong to the undefeated LSU Tigers, and the one-loss Arkansas Razorbacks and South Carolina Gamecocks. In addition to belonging to the “One or Fewer Losses Club,” these three programs have something else in common – they comprise 50% of the six weakest schedules in the entire country.
That’s right – of the 344 rated schedules, Arkansas’ schedule is rated 339th toughest, South Carolina’s is rated the 341st toughest, and the LSU Tigers are 344th and dead last in the country.
That’s one way to do it. (Don’t brag just yet – only one SEC team is in the top 100 in Strength of Schedule.: UT 17, Mississippi 102, UK 144, Vandy 197, Florida 211.)
As easy as these three schedules have been, LSU’s eight quality wins include an impressive six-point home blow-out of Centenary (Pomeroy Ranking 320). Arkansas has already lost to Missouri State and beat South Alabama by a whopping two points (Pomeroy Ranking 182). South Carolina has lost to the College of Charleston (Pomeroy Ranking 125).
Tennessee has lost to Temple and Gonzaga, and Florida has lost to both Florida State and Syracuse, and beaten Washington State by a pair of free throws.
Everyone else in the conference has as many losses as Kentucky does, or more.
Vandy’s three losses include a 19-point home loss to Illinois Chicago.
Alabama’s three losses include the season opening loss to Mercer (Pomeroy Ranking 212), and a 23-point beating at the hands of Oregon (Pomeroy Ranking 101).
Loyola Chicago (Pomeroy Ranking 224) beat Georgia by 21.
Mississippi (Strength of Schedule 301st) has four losses, including a 33-point whoopin’ at the hands of New Mexico (103-70).
Also with four losses, Auburn has lost to both Mercer (at home) and Northern Iowa (Pomeroy Ranking 225).
Mississippi State’s four losses include a home loss to the 3-6 UNC-Charlotte 49ers.
Against this background, our three losses don’t seem quite so hideous. We lost to the highest scoring team in the country on opening night, to the best team in the country on our second night, and to a top 25 team on a night when our guards missed 21 of 23 shots from beyond the three-point arc, and our starting point guard played with ten stitches in his head.
Pomeroy puts us presently at number 32 in the country with the best defense in the SEC and the 13th best defense in the country. Tennessee, Florida, and Mississippi are all rated as having top twenty offenses (at 12th, 15th, and 20th, respectively). We are fourth in the SEC in overall offensive efficiency; we would rank much higher in this category were it not for our high incidence of turnovers.
The www.KenPom.com site generates predictions for future games based on a team’s year-to-date performances. According to those computer-generated predictions, the University of Kentucky is specifically predicted to lose only three more games during the coming regular season – to Louisville, and the away games at Florida and Tennessee.
CAVEAT: the away games with Vandy and South Carolina are predicted to be very close, and the home victory over Tennessee far from certain (all three are predicted to be two-point wins).
Taking into account the vicissitudes of fortune (and the observable fact that teams do not win every game they are “supposed” to win), the computer generated end of regular season record predicted for UK is 23-8, with a predicted SEC record of 12-4.
This does not include any tournament games, and would mark a significant (6-game) improvement over last year’s pre-tourney experience.
0 recs |
79 comments
Comments
SEC Weaker This Year
This may be the weakest SEC (1 through 12) in 15 seasons.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 20, 2008 8:59 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
And this was written before UT needed a last second three to beat Belmont by two.
by Ken Pomeroy on Dec 20, 2008 10:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, are them Gophers for real this year?
I wasn’t impressed until the victory over the Cards, but now I wonder whether Tubby’s back.
by Ken Pomeroy on Dec 20, 2008 10:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Young Team
Tubby never went anywhere. But he is a much better fit there.
He took a 9-22 team (2007) to 20-14 (2008) with virtually the same players.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 21, 2008 7:26 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It helps that they are all a year wiser... hummm..?
Steelers fan 1st! UK is my 2nd love.
by vinceuk1 on Dec 21, 2008 10:21 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope
The Gophers were just a better COACHED team in 2008 than 2007.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 21, 2008 10:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Come on, Forty...
Always give credit where credit’s due, but one year does make a considerable individual difference in college athletics. Obviously Tubby had something to do with it, but experience is a priceless asset. Why do you always have to smugly shoot Vince down?
by mrmondaynite on Dec 21, 2008 11:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That said,
I’m not impliedly painting myself as a Tubby hater. He was the man for the entire 4 years I was at UK, and I’ll follow him until the day he retires.
by mrmondaynite on Dec 21, 2008 11:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I Saw them Play
I talked to some of the players.
They would attribute the turnaround in 2008 (over 2007) to coaching, not birthdays.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 21, 2008 1:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm used to it with him... lol
It does make one shy about posting though, I’ll have to admit…
Steelers fan 1st! UK is my 2nd love.
by vinceuk1 on Dec 21, 2008 11:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Getting A Year Older
The 2005 UK team was 28-6 and made Elite 8 as #2 seed in NCAA.
If getting older were a factor, the 2006 team would have been much better.
It wasn’t. Because getting older is not a factor in becoming a better basketball team.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 21, 2008 5:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That ...
… simply cannot be true, and it isn’t. Of course it is a factor. It may or may not be the most important factor, but it certainly is a factor.
There were also personnel changes between the 2005 and 2006 team that are pretty darn important, don’t you think? The loss of Chuck Hayes and Kelenna Azibuike kinda mattered.
Your arguments have been kind of lame lately, Forty. They needn’t be. Yes, one year does make a difference. No, it isn’t dispositive of the argument at hand — clearly there are other factors involved, and better coaching is arguably one of them. But it is by no means indisputable.
You could also argue, persuasively, that Smith’s recruiting has made a significant impact. Colton Iverson and Ralph Sampson have been big pickups for the Gophers, and their presence has definitely mattered.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 21, 2008 6:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
sorry Tru...
… you stole my thunder….lol
Steelers fan 1st! UK is my 2nd love.
by vinceuk1 on Dec 21, 2008 6:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Heh.
Well, great minds think alike. :-)
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 21, 2008 6:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry
But getting a year older does not turn a 9-22 team (with largely the same players) into a 20-14 team. It takes more than birthdays to do that.
The players themselves, the AD, and the folks around the program have said it was the coaching staff. Not just the head coach but assistants, too.
Hayes and Azubuike left the 2005 team but everybody else was back and a year older. The old saying The Best Thing About Freshmen Is That They Become Sophomores applied to Morris, Rondo, Crawford, and Bradley.
Did the 2004 UTEP team simply get a year older when it flipped 6-24 into 24-8? Or the 2005 TAMU team when it flipped 7-21 into 21-10? No to both.
Coaching MATTERS a lot. Getting a year older doesn’t matter as much.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 22, 2008 8:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But you said ...
… it didn’t matter at all. And that was not correct.
Hayes and Azubike represented two players that could not easily be replaced the next year. As we all know. That made a bigger difference than anything else.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 22, 2008 10:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It Didn't Matter At Minnesota Last Year
The players worked harder, prepared better, etc. Getting older had nothing to do with that.
The 2006 UK team had plenty of talent to match the 2005 results. Perry had gotten a year older. Thomas recovered from his surgery. Rekalin Sims was the #1 JuCo forward recruit. Enough F talent to replace Hayes and Azubuike in the lineup.
And the G (Rondo, Sparks, Crawford, Bradley) were MUCH better in 2006 than 2005. That should have made up any difference at F.
Losing Morris for the first half of 2006 hurt but UK actually had a better record before he came back than after he became eligible.
The 2006 team took #1 seed UConn to the wire in their NCAA game.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 22, 2008 10:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i'll give you bobby perry
but sheray thomas and rekalin sims had no chance of replacing hayes and azubuike. no matter how talented they were. and sims being the #1 JuCo prospect means nothing anymore. all it shows is that he underperformed here.
GO BIG BLUE!! GO BIG BLUE!!
by UKWildCatFanatic on Dec 22, 2008 10:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
In The Lineup
UK went to 3 G offense in 2006.
F = Perry, Thomas, or Sims.
C = Morris with Woo and Alleyne as back-ups.
3 G from Crawford, Bradley, Rondo, Sparks.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 22, 2008 11:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
that's great
but what does just listing the lineup do here?
GO BIG BLUE!! GO BIG BLUE!!
by UKWildCatFanatic on Dec 22, 2008 12:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
UK Had Enough Talent To > 22-13 In 2006
The 2005 team had a different lineup but both teams were talented enough to get 27 or 28 W.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 22, 2008 12:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
so what?
give addressing my point a try…all i said was that sims and thomas couldn’t replace hayes and azubuike.
GO BIG BLUE!! GO BIG BLUE!!
by UKWildCatFanatic on Dec 22, 2008 1:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I Did
Crawford moved over to 3 to replace Kaz.
Perry, Thomas, Sims replaced Hayes in lineup.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 22, 2008 1:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
replaced them in the lineup
not level of play.
GO BIG BLUE!! GO BIG BLUE!!
by UKWildCatFanatic on Dec 22, 2008 3:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They Replaced Hayes' Production At 4
Look at their stats in 2005 and 2006.
The increased numbers are similar to the numbers lost from Hayes and Kaz.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 22, 2008 4:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hayes
BULL
They may have posted similar stats combined but that doesnt replace Hayes production on the defensive side of the ball or from a leadership prospective. Bobby Perry and Sheray Thomes replace Chuck Hayes is the weakest argument i’ve ever seen from you.
DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!
by davw83 on Dec 22, 2008 5:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Leadership, Yes
Hayes was a 6-6 PF. Good defender when the opponent was that size. Not so good with he was 6-8 or 6-9 PF.
What I meant to say (and thought I said) was that UK got similar production from 3 and 4 spots in both 2005 and 2006.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 22, 2008 6:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wrong Again
Chuck Hayes IS a 6-6 power forward in the NBA who makes his living guarding NBA power forwards and centers (he plays some five too) . If he is only in the NBA due to this defense how then can you try and tell me that he wasnt so good defending players taller than that at the college level.
DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!
by davw83 on Dec 22, 2008 11:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He is 6-6 F In NBA
He plays a good bit in reserve role.
He is not NBA size PF. If he were 2 or 3 inches taller, he’d be an NBA star.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 23, 2008 8:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Correct
You are correct but you didnt at all address my comment. You have a habit of doing this to people. I asked “How can you tell me he doesnt play good defense on taller players than himself when the only reason he is in the NBA at all is becuase of him playing great defense on players taller than himself?” you said
“He plays a good bit in reserve role.”
“He is not NBA size PF. If he were 2 or 3 inches taller, he’d be an NBA star.”
That’s correct but it does not at all adress my question and your earlier comment.
DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!
by davw83 on Dec 23, 2008 9:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He Doesn't Play D On The Bench
His 6-6 height may be a strong reason why he doesn’t play much.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 24, 2008 5:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
College Career
You still did not address my comment because you are wrong.
The only reason he is in the NBA is because of his defense. He is getting less clock this year than last but my premise that he was a great defender of even players larger than himself makes sense if thats the only skill thats keeping him in the NBA where he encounters players much better than he faced off against in college.
DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!
by davw83 on Dec 24, 2008 7:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Of course it did.
You are defending the indefensible. Give it up. Your argument is flawed and can’t be rescued by saying the same thing over and over.
Sims was injured most of the year, there is no way Bobby Perry was as good as either Azubuike or Hayes and you know it. By your argument, Rondo, Sparks, Crawford and Bradley could not have been much better. You just insisted that age had nothing to do with it. Now, you try to use experience as dispositive while at the same time insisting it is worthless.
Stop trying to argue this. You are arguing against yourself, it’s an obvious waste of time and diminishes your credibility every time you try. There are other fights to fight. This one is a loser. Time to cash in your chips. :-)
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 22, 2008 10:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Perry
But he was a year older. That IS my point. Talent > than being a year older.
The 2006 team was capable of much better than 22-13.
Sims butted heads with coaching staff but was able to play.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 22, 2008 11:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The 2005 UK team was 28-6 and made Elite 8 as #2 seed in NCAA.
If getting older were a factor, the 2006 team would have been much better.
It wasn’t. Because getting older is not a factor in becoming a better basketball team.
This is the argument we are talking about. Bobby Perry was better. So was everyone else. They just weren’t better enough to make up for the loss of Azubuike and Hayes.
Getting older is unquestionably a factor. Your original argument was that a 9-22 team can’t be that much better with the same personnel. But that isn’t what happened. They got better with better personnel and due to being one year older. No doubt the coaching change was a factor as well.
I can’t understand why you are twisting yourself in knots on this. It is going nowhere.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 22, 2008 6:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I Don't Agree
UK missing Morris half the season (Woo and Shag did not replace his production) was a bigger factor.
Hayes’ leadership was absent. But UK got similar numbers from the 3 and 4 spots in 2005 and 2006 seasons.
That was not the primary reason for 28-6 team going 22-13 the next year with with plenty of talent.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 22, 2008 6:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Which even ...
… proves my point further. UK was missing one of their starters who was a year older and considerably better. The layoff prevented him from making the full impact.
But Hayes and Azubuike were also big factors.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 22, 2008 6:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You Get Shag And Woo To Replace Morris
I get Perry and Sheray to replace Hayes.
i think I’ll win.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 22, 2008 7:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Probably ...
… but that was never your point.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 23, 2008 11:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My Point
The 2006 team had talent and got older.
Neither mattered in the end.
Getting older is not a major factor in success.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 24, 2008 5:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree
The 1995 team lost Rodrick Rhodes and then gained Ron Mercer in 1996. Other than that, the only major change was that they got an extra year of experience. The results speak for themselves IMO.
Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."
by chirop1 on Dec 24, 2008 11:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
oh yes....
…we are back to my original point… (many-many-many post ago)
They were a year older and a year more experienced…
Steelers fan 1st! UK is my 2nd love.
by vinceuk1 on Dec 24, 2008 11:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
1995 To 1996
Mercer replaced Rhodes.
Derek Anderson became eligible (DNP in 1995). I’d call that major since DA started over Mercer most of the 1996 season.
Wayne Turner became back-up PG to Anthony Epps. UK had no one like that in 1995. Anther major upgrade.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 26, 2008 2:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Same Talent, By And Large
2 freshmen and 1 transfer replaced 3 players who transferred but 9 of 12 were the very same players.
And the 3 seniors (in 2008) all produced less than they had in 2007, yet the team flipped its W-L record.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 22, 2008 6:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Is that right...
Now why would you expect the 2006 team to be better then the 2005 when the 2005 team lost The heart and sole of their team in Hayes, not to mention a NBA player in Azubuike…
But once again, you look too deep into my post and inject thoughts that i didn’t make… I simply started that being a year older and a year wiser helps…
Forty, please do not respond to any of my post in the future… I don’t know why you get you jolly’s by trying to bait me…
Steelers fan 1st! UK is my 2nd love.
by vinceuk1 on Dec 21, 2008 6:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wait just a second here.
Anyone may respond to anyone here. This is an open forum. You don’t get to pick and choose who comments on your comments. When you make a comment, others are entitled to take issue with them, keeping in mind my insistence upon respect and decorum for our fellow-members.
You made a good point. No need to go further. Let it speak for itself.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 21, 2008 6:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
it gets old tru...
.. and for some reason it appears that it just baiting.. maybe I’m wrong, but geez.. I’m getting to the point where I hate to post anymore…
Steelers fan 1st! UK is my 2nd love.
by vinceuk1 on Dec 21, 2008 6:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dude
You replied to his post. ;) It’s good manners for him to reply back when you’re having a discussion.
I think it’s a little unreasonable to reply to his posts but expect him not to respond to yours… You can’t just call “last word!!”
Sometimes Forty goes over the top, and Tru takes him to task most of the time, but those were perfectly reasonable, IMHO.
by EEWildcat on Dec 21, 2008 7:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
vince
Don’t ever stop commenting here. You are a valuable member and add a lot to the threads, but as EE said, just don’t ever expect to get the last word. I have seen it go for days at a time.
Hey bud, there is one consolation. Forty very rarely comments on football. You will get a much needed reprieve! :-)
I have to give a shout out to Forty too. It seems his knowledge of stats re UK basketball is unlimited, and he also adds to this blog.
So just everyone stay mellow and spread the love.
Should have been a lawyer Forty! Been saying it for the last 9 months. Lol
by kykat51 on Dec 22, 2008 1:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Engineer
Industrial engineer by education. Stats are a big part of IE education.
Insurance uses stats a lot, too. That’s how we (try to) predict what may happen to our insureds.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 22, 2008 8:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dear god...
…this explains so much.
by BBallSophist on Dec 22, 2008 6:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't take it so seriously, Vince.
Just relax. They are just comments on a blog.
Forty is not picking on you, and I certainly am not. You’ve heard the old saying that “When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail,” right? Forty will take any opportunity to defend Tubby Smith — he can’t help himself. Do like the rest of us do — get used to it and learn to enjoy it.
JL told us earlier to embrace the hate when it comes to UK — try to embrace the eccentricities of your fellow UK fans. It’s more fun than you think. :-)
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 22, 2008 6:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just The Facts
I’ve gotten to know the Minnesota AD. That’s what HE says, too.
I think Joel Maturi knows the facts.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 21, 2008 12:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You know ...
… you are confusing facts with informed opinion. The two are not the same thing.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 21, 2008 1:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How did you get so close
with so many big names? Maturi? Andy Kennedy?
by mrmondaynite on Dec 21, 2008 2:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I Just Sent Joel M An E-Mail One Day
The Purdue AD is a classmate of mine from the early 70’s. Joel’s secretary is a native Kentuckian (and closet UK fan) so that got me in the electronic door.
A friend who runs a Bearcat fan website had friends on the coaching staff in 2005-06. That’s how I met AK.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 21, 2008 5:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
A few things about that game:
1. Tubby Smith is one of, if not the best, coaches in America when it comes to preparation. If you give him ten days to prepare for an opponent, he could likely beat you with almost any team he was given.
2. This was a classic example of how effective the ball-line defense can beat a more talented team when they are not shooting well from the perimeter. If the Cards had made a decent percentage of open threes, they would have easily won. Louisville shot 23.5% from three.
3. The Cardinals were coming off a tough game, and had to turn around and fly all the way out to Arizona with no time to acclimate. Any time you cross three time zones and play right away, it’s going to affect you.
4. Smith did a great job of making in-game adjustments, despite having lots of foul problems. Pitino, not so much.
5. The officials made foul calls seemingly at random. An erratic whistle generally favors the weaker team.
6. Louisville’s press was ineffective against Minnesota’s quick, mature point guards. If we learned anything from beating UT at home last year, it is that a pressing team counts on turnovers. UM only turned the ball over 16 times, and Louisville’s turnover margin was 0.
All this game tells me is that the circumstances favored the Gophers, and they took full advantage of it. Defensively, Minnesota just refused to allow the Cardinals to get any uncontested shots near the basket, which is exactly what Smith’s defense is designed to do. The Cardinals got a number of open threes, but failed to make enough of them to force UM’s interior defense to loosen up at all.
On offense, Minnesota did a great job of breaking down the Cards off the dribble, particularly in the second half. Also, Minnesota made their open threes, and made a solid percentage at the line. The Cardinals, as usual, shot poorly from the line.
I don’t think Minnesota could have even come close in Freedom Hall, and there is no doubt whatever that Louisville played a poor game offensively, and in the second half, defensively. Pitino needed some shooters on the floor, but the Louisville team was determined to fly into the teeth of the Minnesota defense and dunk over them. That didn’t work out too well.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 21, 2008 9:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Minnesota PG
Nolen is sophomore, Joseph is frosh (PG).
I think UK can W in the KY Fair & Exposition Center next month. Cats have done it before under similar circumstances.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 21, 2008 9:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ah ...
… I thought Nolen was a senior. That’ll teach me to read the stat sites before writing. :-)
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 21, 2008 9:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nolen
Perfect example why recruiting lists and rankings are overblown. You won’t find him on any Best Of 2007 HS Class lists. He committed early to Minnesota and had a subpar Sr year, not even making All-State teams.
But he has become a dandy young PG for the Gophers.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 21, 2008 9:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So let's just pretend ...
… “mature” has a strikethrough over it now. :-)
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 21, 2008 9:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
As to Kentucky winning ...
… sure we can.
Louisville is more talented, experienced and athletic, but not by a huge margin. If Meeks is playing at a decent percentage of the level he was at against the Mountaineers, the Cards will have a real fight on their hands.
I am hoping we have a Samuels-Patterson matchup. That aught to be very interesting, and will tell us a lot about both players. But Gillispie may well put Stevenson on Samuels and Patterson on Clark. Either way, it will be interesting.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 21, 2008 9:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good post.
The SEC seems very weak to me this year as well.
That’s one of the reasons I bemoaned the Miami loss so much — we really needed that game to help our RPI and give us a strong argument for a higher seed should we drop that extra game or two in the SEC.
Unless we defeat Louisville, our best OOC win will be against West Virginia at this point, and even though they are 29th in the RPI and probably a top 30 or 35 team, it isn’t exactly what I call a signature win.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 20, 2008 9:53 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
How About 14-2 Versus SEC Then?
That would be 25-6 (presuming L to Louisville) going into SECT and 27 or 28 W on NCAA Selection Sunday.
Should be good for 3 or 4 seed, maybe.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 20, 2008 10:05 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Oh, yeah.
I would agree with that. Even though the SEC is down, they aren’t so down that winning the conference or having single-digit season losses would get you an 8 seed.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 20, 2008 10:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
SEC
I think a first or second place finish in the SEC still guarentees you a pretty decent seed.
DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!
by davw83 on Dec 20, 2008 10:40 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I just read ...
… that Chris Warren, star Ole Miss point guard, blew out his knee against Louisville. ACL tear. Ouch.
Kennedy is having a real bad week.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 20, 2008 11:31 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Read Decourcy (And Katz) Article On How The Facts Don't Match The Cab Driver's Stories
AK was hosed by the Cincy police and the cab driver. Cincy PD are one the worst in the nation.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 20, 2008 12:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I heard ...
… he filed suit against the driver and a witness for defamation.
I hope it works out for him. AK just doesn’t seem like the kind of guy to do something like that, even with a bit of good cheer under his belt.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 20, 2008 6:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I've read multiple versions of the Arab's story already.
On one blog he says AK called him “Chinky,” as though he were an Asian. On another it appears he told the police AK called him Osama Bin Ladin. The first blog has the Arab claiming AK was trying to shove a 200 pound hooker into the car.
I absolutely do not believe it.
AK has filed a defamation lawsuit against the cab driver and the alleged witness already.
by Ken Pomeroy on Dec 20, 2008 2:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I saw that as well.
I am suspicious of this whole affair, as well. This would be an extraordinary departure for Kennedy, for what I know of him.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 20, 2008 6:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Kennedy
I have no doubt that Kennedy is being smeared by the cabbie, BUT, what the hell was he doing out running around in the ‘early morning’ hours the night before a game.
Bad, bad judgment on the coaches part.
by Ken Howlett on Dec 20, 2008 5:23 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The Decourcy/Katz Articles Explain The Timeline
The Ole Miss coaching went out for a late dinner then for a drink or two with AK’s friends from Cincy area.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 20, 2008 5:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I know the timeline. Other than visiting a sick family member, I can think of no good reason a head coach ...
… is out that late the night before a game.
If I were a player’s parent I would have to ask, “Coach, who’s looking after my kid?”
by Ken Howlett on Dec 20, 2008 5:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe that's why they needed the hooker?
Somebody had to babysit. (Couldn’t resist.)
by Ken Pomeroy on Dec 20, 2008 10:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Pom
Good post.
It seems as though everyone is in agreement that the SEC is down this year, but I see some young talent out there. Arkansas, UK, LSU, UFA, UT all have more than a few good young players.
The SEC has had some ‘bad’ years, but the league rebounded to have a good NCAA Tournament. It would not surprise me in the least to see some of the aformentioned teams make solid tourney runs.
by Ken Howlett on Dec 21, 2008 12:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 












