How About We Play a Little of Bilas' "Who should be in?"

by Truzenzuzex on Mar 13, 2008 6:25 PM EDT in Basketball Comment 73 comments

Jay Bilas famously played a "Who should be in?" comparison between Kentucky and Villanova the other day during the Villanova-Syracuse game, claiming that Villanova had a better argument for getting in the NCAA tourney than UK. How about we play a little of that ourselves?

Here are Kentucky, Villanova, and three other teams who are expected to be in the tournament:

School
School	Kentucky		School K		School B		School C		Villanova
Region	KY		Midwest		Southwest		West		PA
Founded	1865		1863		1845		1880		1842
School Type	Public		Public		Private		Private		Private
Enrollment	26,545		23,182		13,799		32,000		6,250
Rankings
Conf Standing	2		3		4		3		8
AP Rank	0		0		0		0		0
RPI	0.5778		0.5817		0.5912		0.5915		0.5761
RPI Rank	48		45		32		31		50
SOS	0.5776		0.5676		0.5661		0.5741		0.5543
SOS Rank	12		24		29		14		52
Wins & Losses
Overall	18-11	(62.1%)	20-10	(66.7%)	21-9	(70.0%)	20-10	(66.7%)	20-11	(64.5%)
Home	14-4	(77.8%)	15-2	(88.2%)	12-4	(75.0%)	10-5	(66.7%)	12-3	(80.0%)
Away	4-6	(40.0%)	3-5	(37.5%)	6-4	(60.0%)	7-4	(63.6%)	4-7	(36.4%)
Neutral	0-1	(0.0%)	2-3	(40.0%)	3-1	(75.0%)	3-1	(75.0%)	4-1	(80.0%)
Conference	12-4	(75.0%)	10-6	(62.5%)	9-7	(56.3%)	11-7	(61.1%)	9-9	(50.0%)
Top 25	2-4	(33.3%)	2-3	(40.0%)	2-4	(33.3%)	3-6	(33.3%)	2-4	(33.3%)
Blowout (> 19)	5-1	(83.3%)	9-1	(90.0%)	6-0	(100.0%)	6-1	(85.7%)	4-1	(80.0%)
Close (< 6)	5-3	(62.5%)	2-2	(50.0%)	2-3	(40.0%)	1-2	(33.3%)	4-3	(57.1%)
Overtime	1-1	(50.0%)	1-1	(50.0%)	1-1	(50.0%)	1-1	(50.0%)	0-0	(0.0%)
NCAA Tourney	0-0	(0.0%)	0-0	(0.0%)	0-0	(0.0%)	0-0	(0.0%)	0-0	(0.0%)

Who is the better team among these 5? Who is the most deserving of an invitation to the tournament? Let's have some sound reasoning and brilliant arguments.

0 recs | Comment 73 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Purely by the

numbers, there is no way I could say UK is undoubtably more deserving of a bid than any of the other schools listed. All the numbers are so close, it is like splitting hairs. If I was forced to do such a task though, I think the CATS would have been closer to the bottom of the list frankly. Nonetheless, what the numbers do not show is how well the CATS have played as a team and with character, through such adversity, for the past 16 games - nor do the numbers show that as things got even worse with Patterson going down, the team still managed to find another level of play, demonstrating a pure will to win.
I also think that the CATS are a much scarier of an 'out' in the tournament compared to someone like Villanova.
Oh yeah, and Kentuck's fan base is monumental and a solid draw at the gate and on the tv.

By the numbers, it doesn't look good, but everything else is saying the contrary. I think we are in. Moreover, I think we might get screwed with a 9 seed, or if we do get a ten seed it will be in a braket with Kansas as the 2.
If things really fall the CATS way, they will win the SECT with at least one big signature win and sneak out a 7 seed somehow.

by cdnWildcatfan on Mar 13, 2008 7:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Quickly....

...I'll have more later, but one caveat has to be mentioned. The extenuating circumstances surrounding UK cannot be overlooked when evaluating their Tournament worthiness.

School C from the west seems to me to be the most deserving of those listed. (I'm guessing, I promise, Stanford)-- They are 10-5 away from home, with a 14 schedule rank--Both impressive. RPI of 31 couple with a 11-7 conference record should be more than ample numbers to get this team in, and will probably be a 5 to 7 seed.

By the way, Bilas is delusional if he sincerely thinks 'Nova and UK have similar resumes.

My theory, Ashley rebuffed his awkward advances.

Sound reasoning and brilliant argument? Probably not, but it's the best I can do right now :)

by Ken Howlett on Mar 13, 2008 7:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Not Stanford, they are ranked in the Top 25

by Ken Howlett on Mar 13, 2008 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Correct.

None of the teams are Standford.

by Truzenzuzex on Mar 13, 2008 10:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

UK looks a lot better...

...since 'Nova just lost in grand fashion.

But just on these #s: conference wins have to count for something. If you just squeak by .500 in conference, you should be much further down the bubble. I think UK goes by against any of these teams based on that fact alone. I also like School C's resume; the rest, not so much.

(And our San Diego loss now looks pretty good. And nice that two other bubble teams, Houston & UAB, lost too. & congrats to Tubby on pulling one out today.)

by CW on Mar 13, 2008 7:44 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Shake 'em out

#1 School C (sorry, but I checked RPI/SOS and know who they are - school B was the only one I had trouble guessing) is probably the #1 here, although 1-2 in close games bodes ill for them.

#2 The numbers say school B, what the numbers don't show is B is 5-5 in its last 10 games.

#3 Kentucky

#4 School K, These numbers here would have these schools tied, but the last 10 games is 8-2 vs 5-5, that's why Kentucky is ahead.

#5 Villanova - dead last just because the East Coast establishment is trying to make them relevant.

by sweasyf on Mar 13, 2008 7:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I would rank this way, if forced to.

School C. Best overall on RPI and SOS. Best overall on away and neutral games (similar to tourney conditions). Most top-25 games (though not any better than any other). No significant negative.
School B. Best overall remaining RPI and SOS. Best remaining away/neutral record. Best overall record.
School K. Best remaining RPI. Fair away/neutral.
Villanova. Similar RPI to Kentucky, but worse SOS. Much, much better away/neutral record. 20 wins.
Kentucky. Sorry, Cats fans. I tried to move them higher. My preferences are explained next:

Things I weight highly:

RPI. I like this much better than SOS. Faulty it may be, it does a better job at correlating than SOS does.
Away/Neutral. This is more like tourney conditions. I even think road games are better for tourney estimation than home games. That 4-1 neutral of 'Nova really sways me strongly.
Numerical values rather than rankings. Such as RPI, where the numerical gap between Kentucky and School K is much larger than the ranking would suggest, and vice versa for Kentucky and Villanova.
Top 25. This is more of an in-between, but it's high enough to put here. Again, the scheduling is too sketchy to put too much value into this, but good performance against good teams should be rewarded. So I don't penalize much if few games are played, but a lot of good top-25 games is worth noting.

Things I weight low:

SOS. As mentioned before, I don't give it much thought. Unless a team obviously lowballed the nonconference schedule (none of them did) for the sake of wins, then it shouldn't matter. I certainly don't discount for a weak conference, because no team has a real choice in those games. I'll use this to validate RPI, but that's it, and even that's sketchy.
Overall A significantly better overall should be more deserving than a lesser overall. But that's usually not a factor when comparing bubble teams.

Things I don't even consider:

Conference Standing. Again, I don't fault teams for tough or weak conferences. (BTW, I'd put Kentucky at 3 in-conference behind MSU, but that's irrelevant for my post.)
Blowout/Close/Overtime You can make conjectures about these, but I don't think they're worth consideration. Unless a team makes a habit of blowing out top-10 teams, they're usually blowouts against Little Sisters of the Poor. And those who blow out good teams usually don't have to worry about this argument in the first place.

Having said all that, I'll also say that 1 and 2 are clear to me, while I could accept any order for 3-5. Other factors not listed here (and usually not mentioned):

School size. I think bigger schools are favorably treated anymore due to fan draw.
Overall fan base. Like school size, it's all about the money. When it's all said and done, the tourney cares about profit, not about which teams are in. Better put, they care about the teams only so far as the profit margin is concerned.
Location. I do think they try to balance the tourney with teams from across the country (to a minor degree). It helps assure viewership in the earlier rounds in all time zones, which helps sell ad time.

by hooper on Mar 13, 2008 8:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Oh, and with this

I only used the data listed in the table. No trends, no games of interest, etc. Every team up there likely has things to crow about beyond the table, so I didn't even try factoring that in.

by hooper on Mar 13, 2008 8:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You place ...

to much weight on road/neutral games in my opinion, and not enough emphasis on strength of schedule. For instance, schedule strength is the only reason some teams are even in the conversation as bubble teams, like Arizona, who have two more losses than UK and a losing conference record. Arizona is 11-6 at home, for God's sake.

For neutral games, Kentucky has had far fewer opportunities in the neutral arena due to an early loss to Gardner-Webb. That loss not only counted as a home loss (which it was), but prevented UK from playing at least two and possibly 3 neutral-site games. So you really can't draw any conclusions at all from the "neutral" side of the equation, because Kentucky has only played one neutral game, which was not all that neutral -- it was at Freedom hall in Louisville against UAB, a game which I attended and which was 100-1 in favor of UK. So saying a team like Villanova has a "much better road/neutral record" is only technically correct. In reality, you can't really make a comparison including neutral games due to the incomparable number of attempts.

On the away side, Kentucky has a better record than 3 of the five teams in question. Add in a 12-4 conference record in the fourth toughest RPI conference in the land, a very comparable record against the top 25, and putting them last simply makes no sense at all. I could understand putting them 3rd or even fourth, but it is simply not defensible to put them below Villanova, especially considering their significantly weaker SOS and weaker RPI.

Kentucky, of these five, has the strongest SOS and the forth best RPI, the third best road record and much the best conference record. That matters more than many think because games in conference are against teams that know you best, your strengths, weaknesses and tendencies. You can't hide your flaws in conference like you can outside the conference.

As far as the other considerations go, we could only speculate. I have no idea about those things, and frankly, hope you are wrong about all that. It would be troubling to think people got overlooked because they were too far west, or too small. If that is the best the NCAA can do, they should stop pretending that the process is supposed to be fair and equitable.

by Truzenzuzex on Mar 13, 2008 10:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

All good points.

Last things first, those last few points were simply a nod to the more, um, distasteful matters. The NCAA is out to make money on the tournament, and things like UK fans' ability to travel well does give the team a boost against other teams. All things being equal, UK will get a nod over nearly every other team in the nation simply because they draw.

I don't doubt that my weighting is different than most. To be honest, I don't like using only a table like this to separate similar teams. As noted by KH early on, there's a lot more to the story. And I don't have a problem with the way that other people weight the numbers; that was simply the logic I used. I don't like SOS simply because it doesn't tell you anything about how the team actually did; it tells you how well their opponents did. (I know that opponent strength tells you about the value of the record, but it's not as clear as it seems, and it's indirect evidence. I disagree with about 99% of people on that, and I'm ok with that. I don't think less of any differing opinion.)

Well, whether my reasoning was sound or my argument brilliant, it was honest. And equally honest is that I don't really see any separation between the bottom three. Any other order of them wouldn't faze me in the least.

by hooper on Mar 13, 2008 10:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

In hindsight,

I wasn't clear that I didn't use those last factors in my rankings. At all. They were a last-second addendum that I failed to properly transition to.

by hooper on Mar 13, 2008 10:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree ...

that separating the last three is splitting hairs, but then, that's what you have to do in this exercise. 64 teams make it, no more, no less, and saying that all three are equally deserving is just not possible.

So hairs must be split, sometimes to molecular thickness.

:-)

by Truzenzuzex on Mar 13, 2008 10:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Unless

we add three more play-in games!

by hooper on Mar 13, 2008 10:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Indeed. :-)

by Truzenzuzex on Mar 13, 2008 10:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ha! Gotcha...

team C is actually LSPU (Little Sisters of the Poor University.) They are a smallish Div-1 school with an absolutely huge fanbase located in the exact center of the country.....surprised you didn't catch that. Now what say you? ;)

by wldcatsfreak on Mar 13, 2008 10:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's hilarious!

(Especially because I peeked afterward!)

But I guess I say, "I'm got!"

by hooper on Mar 13, 2008 10:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

neutralsite games

there are no neutral site games when the CATS play in a post season tournament. every game is a home game for kentucky.

by i got the blues on Mar 13, 2008 10:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

heh

Same goes for Duke, UNC, Texas, USC, Kansas, Georgetown, Connecticut...

But you're right that you get a favorable crowd more often than not.

by hooper on Mar 13, 2008 10:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Brilliant Mathmatical Analysis

I've selected Tru's blog to unveil my in-depth, highly complicated mathmatical equation which determines the worthiness of competing teams for the Big Dance.

I rated each team 1 through 5, with 1 being best and 5 being worst, in the following categories: RPI Rank, SOS Rank, Overall Record, Away/Neutral Combined Record, Conference Record, and Win/Loss Versus The Top 25. The team with the best "record" in each category received 1 point, the second best "record" 2 points, etc..

I did not include where each team finished in conference, because I don't know how many teams are in the conferences of the teams represented. Besides, their conference records are sufficient data for this highly analytical experiment. I did not include home records, because they are not considered "weighty" to the Selection Committee. I also did not consider margin of victory(or overtimes), because those stats are totally irrelevent.

Drum roll please; remember, less is more,

School C- 10 points
School B- 15 points
School K- 16 points
Kentucky- 18 points
Villanova- 24 points

So there you have it sports fans. My bet is that C, B, K, and UK all make the Tournament. 'Nova will probably not be so fortunate.

by Ken Howlett on Mar 13, 2008 11:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Kentucky Is Best Of Those 5

(1) one of only 3 teams to beat Tennessee. Memphis didn't.

(2) 12-4 in SEC.

(3) I don't root for K, B, C, or Villanova.

by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 13, 2008 11:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Hey, while you're at this.

There's yet another one of these "mystery team" analyses at ESPN.com. Here you go!

by hooper on Mar 13, 2008 11:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Gar. Posted too fast.

Meant to add that it is a mystery team compared to Kentucky. Also meant to add that all this "mstery team v. Kentucky" talk is evidence of how much the media focuses on UK. That will weigh in your favor.

by hooper on Mar 13, 2008 11:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for the link.

How teams perform in their last 12 games weighs heavily in the Committees mind. That, and UK's SOS, along with Kentucky's performance since Patterson went down should be enough to ensure a happy Selection Sunday for 'Cat fans.

If one scrolls down to the breakdown of the SEC and who has "work to do", Glockner states that UK needs to beat "Mississippi" to remove itself from the perilous bubble. Mr. Glockner assumes a lot considering Ole Miss is being spanked at the moment by Georgia. There is still 11 minutes left, though.

I'm rooting hard for Georgia because of Dennis Felton. I am a huge fan of his. He is an excellent coach who has encountered some major player issues unrelated to his ability to coach and recruit.

by Ken Howlett on Mar 13, 2008 11:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Honestly ...

at least your argument came down to a matter of where you put the emphasis. Glockner fails to note that Dayton has a 5-3 record at home in their own conference, which is way weaker than Kentucky's 8-0. They have a slightly better record (9-6) vs the top 100 than UK (7-8).

You have to keep in mind which conferences these teams play in. Dayton plays in the A-10, a conference with an average team RPI rank of 127 vs 58 for the SEC. Dayton also lost to Xavier 3 times if you include the conference tourney. Xavier is a great team, but surely no better than Tennessee.

Then we have the "beat Pitt and won at Louisville" argument. They beat Louisville when they were 48th in the RPI and Pitt when they were 7th. Kentucky beat Vandy when they were 12th in the RPI and Tennessee when they were #1 in the RPI. And those two cancel each other out?

Glockner's argument, in my judgment, simply doesn't hold water. And that goes without even noting that Dayton lost 5 out of their last 10 games. Compare that to Kentucky's 8-2 in a much stronger conference, and you'll have to forgive me for not being impressed with his reasoning.

by Truzenzuzex on Mar 14, 2008 7:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

IMO...

I don't think the importance of how a team finishes the season can be overstated. Last ten games is ALWAYS talked about after the field is announced. I have never seen the selection commitee head honcho interviewed afterwards and him not bring that up, repeatedly.

by wldcatsfreak on Mar 13, 2008 11:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Bubble teams going down today...

...including Florida & Ole Miss both choking. Looks like they're done; hopefully with OT & high emotions, Georgia won't bring their A-game tomorrow.

Even if they do, Ramel has already said how much he likes playing in the SEC tournament. Good news.

by CW on Mar 14, 2008 12:48 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Check out Donovan going nuclear on his team......

....I don't read HIM taking any responsibility for his teams perceived lack of success.

Conversely, our Coach Gillispie takes NO credit for the play of Bradley and Crawford, as it pertains to their one-on-in skills.(Tipton's article)

by Ken Howlett on Mar 14, 2008 1:35 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

LINK

Duh, I suppose I should link you.

http://www. courier-journal.com/blogs/bozich/blog.html

by Ken Howlett on Mar 14, 2008 1:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Once again

http://www.courier-journal.com/blogs/bozich/blog.html

by Ken Howlett on Mar 14, 2008 1:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Donovan going ballistic

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/champweek2008/columns/story?columnist=schlabach_mark&id=3292573

Schlabach on ESPN.com has a similar article with those quotes. I admit... I'm stunned.

""It's in front of our guys, what it takes to win," Donovan said. "For whatever reason, I haven't brought it out in them. They're not committed to it. But I'm not necessarily really that excited about these guys being sophomores, to be honest. I don't think people change a whole lot, and I don't think you've seen the basketball team change at all this year. So it's hard for me to get overly thrilled or excited.""

""I think we have some talent issues on the defensive end of the floor, footspeed-wise, that sometimes is not all their fault," Donovan said. "But I think we have a commitment issue, too, which bothers me as a coach because I just got done coaching a group the last two years that was so committed. And to be with this group, I don't think just because they're going to be another year older that all of a sudden, everything gets resolved. I don't see that.""

"When Parsons told reporters Florida simply wasn't ready to play against Alabama, Donovan bristled at the suggestion. To say the team wasn't ready to play, I've got to take responsibility for that because I think that's my job," Donovan said. "That's disappointing to hear." "

Those are certainly some damning and disheartening comments from Billy D... I guess we've just been lucky at Kentucky in that I could never picture Pitino, Tubby, or Billy G saying those things. I wonder if Donovan has a sign on his desk that says "The buck stops over there -->"

What makes it even more disturbing is that they may not be done this season. Obviously the NIT isn't what top tier teams play for, but its still a quality tournament with growing experiences for your team going into next year. How do you get ready to play a tourney game in a couple weeks with quotes like that floating around teh intrawebz?

by chirop1 on Mar 14, 2008 6:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know ...

I don't see anything in here that troubles me. I think Donovan is right. Another year may not be a cure-all for his team's lack of consistent effort, or even a cure-most.

The problem seems to be that all the basketball smarts is vested in one person right now -- Calathes. The other guys are talented, but they remind me very much of Kentucky on defense earlier this year, too often in the wrong place.

I think Donovan took appropriate responsibility, and he is right in the sense that it is shared by everyone on the team, including its members. I found the assessment honest, if a bit harsh, about his players.

by Truzenzuzex on Mar 14, 2008 7:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Somewhat agree

It sound mostly like motivational rhetoric, but the kind that is usually reserved for closed doors talks with the team....not in a post game interview. Its like he was using that stage to try to get through to them.

Now, contrast what he said about players not changing with what we have seen happen at UK this year. I think I'd have more respect for him if he stood up and took a little responsibility for his teams lack of effort since clearly the coaching job he did this year was sub-par.

by sylvar on Mar 14, 2008 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ditto

I find no shocking revelations in Donovan's words, only that he said such things publicly. Truly Pitino-esque.

He takes a bit of responsibility early in his comments, but the overriding theme was that his team sucks, and he sees the suckage continuing because he doesn't thnk they will get any better. He doesn't think people change....what? That's just an ignorant comment borne from his frustration.

Like his mentor Traitor Rick who called G-Town "lucky" after a recent loss to the Hoyas, Donovan needs to simply say, "we were outplayed, we'll get better" and be done with it. Diatibes such as this make one look like a sore loser, in my view.

Anyway, good luck to the team PPat should be playing for. The NIT has a FF in New York, that should be the Gator goal.

Addendum: Don't kid yourself folks, Florida will be a top 10 team next year. I suspect this hiccup will not bleed over to '08-'09.

by Ken Howlett on Mar 14, 2008 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Donovan gets an F

He was by far the worst coach in the SEC this year. His team got worse as the season progressed, they were spastic on offense and their half court defense was terrible.

Kudos for going back to back but UF is the current version of UNLV, not the new Duke.

by BeatUL on Mar 14, 2008 6:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Worse ...

than Gotfried? Brady?

You're joking, right?

by Truzenzuzex on Mar 14, 2008 7:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Gottfried

Gottfried just beat Donovan's team didn't he? I'd say that removes him from this discussion. ;-)

Brady is probably a fair comment. I would say Felton too... except for the fact that he also won a tourney game.

by chirop1 on Mar 14, 2008 7:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes worse...

Brady didnt finish the season so I do not consider him, but of course he could easily win the WCOY award. However, Billy D.'s team got worse, much worse as the year progressed and became less disciplined, yada, yada, yada... easy call in my opinion.

One thing about Tubby, for the most part, he was consistent in coaching and what his teams looked like at the end of the year. Inconsistent in recruiting. Billy D., just the opposite, for the most part.

by BeatUL on Mar 14, 2008 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

UNLV

Won almost 80% of its games under Tark and its 90 and 91 teams were the most dominant of the 90's.

by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 14, 2008 8:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Where are they now?

I think the point was that they were a flash in the pan.

by sylvar on Mar 14, 2008 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They were the most dominate or 90 and 91

but to say the most dominate of the 90s is a real stretch. My vote goes to the '95 and '96 cats as the most dominate.

Can't wait for more meaningless stats.

by BeatUL on Mar 14, 2008 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Vegas.....

....Truly the best team money could buy.

Stating that the '90 and '91 UNLV teams were the most dominant team of the '90's is wrong, in my opinion. It was Duke who won back-to-back Titles, beating Vegas along the way in '91.

They were very, very talented without a doubt, but to be truly dominant a team has to sport rings as tangible evidence of said dominance. Vegas has one, Duke has two, plus Duke played in 3 straight championship games.

A solid argument can be made that UK from '96-'98 was the most dominant program during the '90's. Three straight championship game appearances made by 3 significantly different groups of players.

I love the way Tark snubbed his nose at the NCAA, but his lack of committment to following the rules troubles me when evaluating his success.

by Ken Howlett on Mar 14, 2008 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Let's ask more valid question -

Which team will sell more Tickets to an NCAA game?

by blueblood on Mar 14, 2008 2:01 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Easy call..

The second place SEC team should ALWAYS be chosen over the 8th place Big East team.. or the 7, 6, 5 and I would even say the 4th ranked Big East school.

by BeatUL on Mar 14, 2008 6:26 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The road forward.. .

Well, I think the road forward just got a little easier. I'd rather play Georgia tonight than Ole Miss. And now Florida is out of the equation completley.

I'm rooting for Alabama today too. I'd rather face them tomorrow than Mississippi State and that beanpole foul-immune shot blocking machine.

Just some thoughts from a guy stuck at home with food poisoning. I'm in absolute hell right now, but at least I can watch as much basketball as I want.

by blbskue on Mar 14, 2008 9:10 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Bilas responds ...

... Just sent this post to Jay and got his basic response:

"[The Cats] ... have done a magnificent job of clawing into it again. I use Kentucky as an example to make a point, primarily because so many people are familiar with UK. That's all.

In comparing resumes, UK makes a pretty good case, but it is much closer than many seem to believe, that's all. The good news is, there are relatively few good teams at the end of the line.

I prefer to look at the entire body of work, and use my basketball judgment to determine the 34 best teams. I believe that UK will make it, but it will be a healthy discussion.

... And, if people doubt that I like and respect UK, consider my past effusive comments about the Cats and the fact that my neice is a senior at UK right now.

So there you go ...

The Online home of Big Blue Nation ...

by JL Blue on Mar 14, 2008 10:41 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Backtracking at its finest.....

....I wonder why he hasn't uttered those words on air?

I'll give him this; he has been very fair and even-handed when evaluating UK over the last several years.

Perhaps his niece received a perceived unfair grade in one of her classes which caused Bilas to turn anti-'Cat this year.

by Ken Howlett on Mar 14, 2008 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I've ...

always liked Bilas. I think he is wrong in his earlier comments about UK, but I think he is correct in this one. As Ken suggested, he may be backtracking again here, but I agree that he has been very fair to UK overall.

I think his earlier comments are misguided, but that is more opinion than anything else. He's certainly entitled to his.

by Truzenzuzex on Mar 14, 2008 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Off topic, but....

....must see.

http://www.1530homer.com/cc-common/mlib/1120/03/1120_1205465299.pdf

by btcoop71 on Mar 14, 2008 11:08 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Fantastic

Especially the last question and answer choices.

C! A! T! S! CATS! CATS! CATS!

by NYCCats on Mar 14, 2008 7:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Classic!

by Ken Howlett on Mar 14, 2008 8:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Tonight's game..

will it be nationally broadcasted? Any way to watch it online?

by BeatUL on Mar 14, 2008 11:39 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

online

http://sports.yahoo.com/top/collegebroadcast/teams/jps

i don't understand this...they showed all four games yesterday, but apparently only showing the first two games online today. i hope that gets updated later in the day.

the only game i can watch on tv is sunday's championship game, so it would really suck if raycom doesn't show all the games before that.

GO BIG BLUE!! GO BIG BLUE!!

by UKWildCatFanatic on Mar 14, 2008 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yahoo

gets a little slow. I was wondering if they were going to show a game once and it was 30 minutes before the game that I was sure that there would be video. They will update later.

by bluecrip on Mar 14, 2008 12:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Somewhat off topic

But not entirely...Check this site out:

http://bracketproject.atspace.com/comparison.htm

Its a compliation of 50+ bracket projections showing the avg seeding of each team across those brackets. Pretty interesting.

We get a 10 seed on avg.

by sylvar on Mar 14, 2008 12:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

10 Seed

would be ok.

by kentuckygirl0724 on Mar 14, 2008 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

11 would be better...

Unless we can somehow play our way into a 6 or 7 seed....not sure how possible that is though. This is one year that I would absolutely love to be in the center of the bracket...my biggest fear is that the guys are going to play their hearts out and get rewarded with an 8-9 seed.

by sylvar on Mar 14, 2008 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Mine, too.

8/9 is the absolute worst seed in the tournament other than 16.

by Truzenzuzex on Mar 14, 2008 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Guessing.....

but are the teams:

Kentucky
Kansas State
Baylor
USC
Nova

C....A....T....S CATS CATS CATS

by MartinGolf9 on Mar 14, 2008 1:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sure but I don't ...

...believe USC is a private school. I didn't think they came in third in the Pac 10, but once again I'm not sure.

by Ken Howlett on Mar 14, 2008 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They are Private....

but that is what "C" is as well. USC finished tied for 3rd in their conference at 12-7 (I am assuming Tru's numbers above are a little old). All signs point to "C" being USC to me.

C....A....T....S CATS CATS CATS

by MartinGolf9 on Mar 14, 2008 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

My thinking was...

....that usually directional schools are publicly funded institutions, but obviously not in this case.

You nailed it.

by Ken Howlett on Mar 14, 2008 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Right ...

on the dot.

:-)

by Truzenzuzex on Mar 14, 2008 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

One Point Game

at the half between Tennessee and South Carolina

by kentuckygirl0724 on Mar 14, 2008 2:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Wow

I figured SC would fold in the second half, but with 4 min to go they are only down 2.

by sylvar on Mar 14, 2008 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

News

Anyone see this?

http://www.kentucky.com/276/story/346377.html

by kentuckygirl0724 on Mar 14, 2008 3:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Sadly....

...once again poor, incompetent officiating directly affects the outcome of tournament game.

by Ken Howlett on Mar 14, 2008 3:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Really

thought South Carolina was going to pull off the upset.

by kentuckygirl0724 on Mar 14, 2008 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Couldn't catch the game.

In your non-UT eyes, do you think the officiating hurt USC or UT more? Everybody seems to agree it was horrible; was it one-sided as well?

by hooper on Mar 14, 2008 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

IMO

I agree that the officiating was horrible. I think it hurt both the teams but in different ways. The NUMEROUS round of foul calling (28 fouls in 25 minutes, I think it was) definitely aided South Carolina on a pretty good point run, but on the flip side, the no-call on Tyler Smith's push under the basket could have cost South Carolina a shot at overtime. Those are just two examples of many that make me think that while the officiating WAS terrible, I believe that both teams got their share of calls and no-calls.

by kentuckygirl0724 on Mar 14, 2008 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It sounded to me like the bad officiating

hurt both sides somewhat equally. UT got nailed in the earlier play, and USC got nailed late. The T. Smith call/noncall will get all the attention because of the game situation, but perhaps it might be said that the situation wouldn't have happened if the calling had been square earlier.

At least, that's how I've come to understand it by indirect means. I couldn't catch the game, so my information and guesswork is secondhand and prone to error.

by hooper on Mar 14, 2008 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What the hell ...

was that non-call on the flagrant Tyler Smith shove right in front of the official?

That was really unacceptable as a no-call. I sympathize with the unwillingness of the officials to make game-impacting calls in the last few seconds, and I generally agree with it, but you just can't let that one go. It was egregious, almost flagrant.

I can't say much about the rest of the game, but that no call was just wrong with a capital W. Odom should protest to the league about that one. It happed directly in front of the official, and he was looking directly at the incident. Not acceptable.

by Truzenzuzex on Mar 14, 2008 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs