I didn't exist then....I care more about what's happening now brother man.
Pope's SOS and performance so far at UK
- Thread starter paulcalhoun_rivals397471
- Start date
I think you might take all this a little to serious...lighten up bud
I do like to stick with facts for the most part. Last season was a disappointment but I just don't see 2 games difference on the record going all the way from B+ to D+.
The Pope discussion is very nuanced but I always appreciate these threads as a time to really look at how we’re playing a whole different sport now than when I was at the height of my fandom(during the Cal years as I’m 34 years old). I used the thread’s premise of SRS rating and specifically looked at opponents with an SRS of at least 15.0. That was for convenience, fairness, and seemed like a good barometer. For instance this past season Santa Clara was just above 15 and Oklahoma just below. So for 2025 the 15.0 threshold computed to roughly top 40 Kenpom.
I used this threshold as I consider these actual losable games. Composite SRS or SOS includes cupcakes that are gimmes whether they’re team 120 or 360 for the most part. No one cares about those games.
Here were my findings by year. I removed the COVID year and these include all games(even postseason).
Record vs Opponents SRS Greater than 15.0
25: 8-13
24: 10-11
23: 5-4
22: 3-6
21: 4-6
19: 4-2
18: 11-5
17: 3-7
16: 5-5
15: 4-4
14: 6-1
13: 6-7
12: 2-4
11: 12-2
10: 9-5
09: 4-2
Pope average of 22.5
Cal average of 9.85
Pope win pct 43%
Cal win pct 56.5%
That Cal number of 9.85 is also boosted by more conference tourney and NCAA tourney opportunities especially during our better years. But he was considerably better in those games as should be no surprise as he had a great run here.
The concept of what’s acceptable in terms of number of losses each year is a fascinating one. With the new SEC strength and our current handful plus of good OOC games, it’s likely we continue to have around the low 20s in terms of number of these quality matchups. A 60% win percentage in those(so better than Cal) would be 9-10 losses a year, not counting if you drop any to approx sub top 40 Kenpom teams.
I used this threshold as I consider these actual losable games. Composite SRS or SOS includes cupcakes that are gimmes whether they’re team 120 or 360 for the most part. No one cares about those games.
Here were my findings by year. I removed the COVID year and these include all games(even postseason).
Record vs Opponents SRS Greater than 15.0
25: 8-13
24: 10-11
23: 5-4
22: 3-6
21: 4-6
19: 4-2
18: 11-5
17: 3-7
16: 5-5
15: 4-4
14: 6-1
13: 6-7
12: 2-4
11: 12-2
10: 9-5
09: 4-2
Pope average of 22.5
Cal average of 9.85
Pope win pct 43%
Cal win pct 56.5%
That Cal number of 9.85 is also boosted by more conference tourney and NCAA tourney opportunities especially during our better years. But he was considerably better in those games as should be no surprise as he had a great run here.
The concept of what’s acceptable in terms of number of losses each year is a fascinating one. With the new SEC strength and our current handful plus of good OOC games, it’s likely we continue to have around the low 20s in terms of number of these quality matchups. A 60% win percentage in those(so better than Cal) would be 9-10 losses a year, not counting if you drop any to approx sub top 40 Kenpom teams.
We lost 22 games in two seasons prior to popes arrival. 8 by double digits. Certainly not good. Since pope has entered the picture the losses have increased along with the average margin of defeat. 8 double digit losses in season 1 alone. 6 more in season 2 including an embarrassing 35 point beat down in front of a traveling BBN crowd. Another embarrassing 25 point beat down at Vanderbilt and yet another near 20 point loss at the hands of Michigan state at the champions classic. Pope has embarrassed the brand. He is our Matt Dougherty, no way around that.
Your dishonesty is repulsive. You trying to pretend like it was just some kind of light hearted humor is just more dishonesty.
You lost me man. What are you even talking about?
As far as what's acceptable or realistic when it comes to losses...I would say we need to have the least amount of losses out of the conference.
We should always expect to be number one. Cant be every year but that should be the expectation. We play little brother in football but I'm confused on why BBN is accepting the current state of things.
If everybody is losing 7-8 games in conference we shouldnt have anymore than that. So say 6 losses would be acceptable imo.
I think it would be easy for people to get excited for the following year if this team had a top 10 season like his initial team did. (10th in true seed list his first year). The problem was that team was full of super seniors and forced a new roster in 25-26 that Pope then botched. Of the current roster, only our backup C is a lock to be gone for 27-28. If things went well and we returned significant contributors(say at least 2 or 3 of the Zoom/Wilkins/Milan/Malachi core) the excitement for the following year would be high imo.
Did Juwan Howard have Michigan going in the right direction before he got canned? I don't demand a national championship, but blaming John Calipari for Mark Pope's failures is a joke. When you have the transfer portal and some of the best NIL money at your disposal that excuse goes out the window.
Ridiculous. Ad hominem attacks.
Any objective fan can see that UK basketball has continued to slip, and that Pope’s performance isn’t up to UK standards.
The rest is just a lot of BS by Paul Calhoun and others.
Do you remember the tourney loss to ISU last season? It was one of the most pathetic displays I have seen from a UK team. And it was in the defining moment of the season. We crapped the bed even worse than we did the prior season to UT.
Remember that game against ISU. Now tell me Paul, what in the world does that have to do with SOS?
We stunk last year, hard schedule or easy.
The rest is just a lot of BS by Paul Calhoun and others.
Do you remember the tourney loss to ISU last season? It was one of the most pathetic displays I have seen from a UK team. And it was in the defining moment of the season. We crapped the bed even worse than we did the prior season to UT.
Remember that game against ISU. Now tell me Paul, what in the world does that have to do with SOS?
We stunk last year, hard schedule or easy.
12 losses, 14 losses, 2nd found exit, no SEC hardware, abused on the recruiting trail, horrible PR.
Scoreboard.
Scoreboard.
I posted some factual perspective based on the numbers and he came back with the insinuation that I don't actually watch the games. If a certain group of posters didn't insist on whining and attacking anyone who doesn't engage in non stop negativity I wouldn't respond the way I sometimes do.
This is pretty rich coming from a guy who often reply's with vulgarities and hatred for anyone who is not constantly insulting the coach and the A.D.
The head "Popesplaner" has spoken. We can all rest easy.Pope has faced the two most difficult schedules in UK's history rated at 14.04 and 12.96 for an average of 13.50 while winning 63.9 % of his games. UK has played schedules rated above 10.60 seven other times with an average rating of 11.44 while winning 60.8% of their games.
While we all agree Pope needs to upgrade the outcome in the near future I think this perspective as well the injury situation he has dealt with gives some reason to exercise a bit more patience for now.
Kentucky Wildcats Men's Basketball Index | College Basketball at Sports-Reference.com
Check out the Kentucky Wildcats College Basketball History, Stats, Records, Polls, Leaders and More College Basketball Stats at Sports-Reference.comwww.sports-reference.com
He is goofy.
He's also had a career that requires one to "explain" his "success". Meaning? His career has been just like his first two years at UK. Meh.
Haven’t you been around this thread, calling people crybabies, for different views? Don’t fall off your horse, clown. Mark Stoops is still the right man for the job, right?
Here's some more "factual balance".
Never won a regular season conference title.
Never won a conference tourney title.
Never been past the S16.
He's the absolute definition of mid...so far. He better change that if he wants to keep his current job.
I showed you what UK's actual standard is when playing schedules even close to but not as difficult as the two Pope has played. That was a winning % of 60.8 as I showed in the original post.
You say negative entitle crybabys. I say fans of the greatest program in college basketball history. And it got that way because the leaders had a standard and the fans had an expectation.
I'd say your approach and your attitude breeds a society where everyone gets orange slices after practice and a trophy at the end of the season. Translation? I'm a negative crybaby. You're a non-competitive wuss.
And his greatest accomplishments in those other 9 years was a couple 2nd place finishes to Gonzaga in the WCC? Is that accurate?
You always try to turn things into something different than what was ever actually said in regards to Stoops. Your implication that I denied calling your group of negatives whiners crybabies is stupid as that never occurred either. I get attacked for making factual posts based strictly on numbers and I'll not apologize for occasionally snapping back with a bit of what I so frequently receive. I do manage to do it without the vulgarities so many of the detractors commonly resort to.
"Pretty successful" and "given situations"....This folks, is Popesplaining at the highest level. Well done.
This guy defended Stoops until the minute he was canned. He’s a shill.
You obviously have zero concept or use for context or nuance and respond with anger anytime anyone tries to enlighten you with some perspective.
In the NIL/Transfer portal era? That's "factual evidence", no? Or does it not fit your agenda? I struggle to keep up sometimes.
You are just an entitled fool with zero patience or understanding of circumstance. Did you totally miss the part where I said Pope needs to improve the outcome in the near future?
It is actually known as reality. You think since he did not outright win a conference that contained a team that finished #1 and #2 in the nation those years he therefore sucks. This objectively stupid.
Weren’t you just complaining about people calling you names? What is “entitled” about expecting the coach of KENTUCKY MENS BASKETBALL to win at a higher level, than 14 and 12 loss seasons?
Anger? It's not anger. I feel sorry for you. Anyone that spends the energy you do trying to Popesplain the successes deserves my pity. I honest to goodness feel sorry for people that lower expectations like you do.
I posted honest facts and perspective about Stoops and you couldn't handle anyone not onboard with your nonstop irrational rage fest. I did not make a case for patience with him following the Vandy and U6 games and never made one complaint when he was removed.
You are a master of clownish responses. Pity from an absolutely miserable person such as yourself is laughable.
There's your true colors. Name calling. Popesplain again. You're on a roll today.
I didn't miss that part. He does need to improve. If he doesn't, he'll be gone after this season.
You should have showed the athletic department and Mitch, those “honest facts and perspective”. Could have saved his job.
It’s interesting that the AD didn’t look at those “honest facts”.
That's two seasons. How'd he do in the other seven? Or the two at UK? Like just hard evidence. Try not to take a paragraph or two to Popesplain it to me.
I do not recall ever complaining about people calling me names. I do remember calling a guy out for always avoiding actually addressing what was being discussed and instead just always accusing people of doing gay acts with Pope and or Mitch. This thread has devolved into this sort of thing as usual because you guys try to intimidate anyone from introducing facts that don't fit your negative agenda.
He doesn't have the emotional capacity not to resort to name calling if you don't agree with all the Popesplaining he does. Ironic from someone that calls others crybabies. Don't agree with him? Throws a tantrum and name calls. Interesting approach.
I have already posted these answers so I'll not bother repeating it for someone who is just going to continue whining and attacking anything that is said anyway.
Last edited:
People come back at you with some facts like you love and you call them angry. You always call people angry when the conversation isn't angry at all. You seem like a person that would say you don't have a drug problem you just love the smell of cocaine.