If Humphries doesn't get the technical....
- Thread starter Icecoldbrewdoggy
- Start date
No way to know , our front line was soft and inconsistent .Bottom line is our frontline was awful , they were the weak link and not a final four level frontline .
Not sure we could have beaten Oklahoma, but Murray vs. Hield would have been fun to watch. Agree that we were weak inside, so it doesn't matter.
Something tells me "they" would've found another way to screw us, one way or another
and yes I know it's a conspiracy theory thing, but it's my story and I'm sticking to it, dammit!
and yes I know it's a conspiracy theory thing, but it's my story and I'm sticking to it, dammit!
We were going to play IU no matter what bracket we were in. Its about tv ratings with matchups to draw an audience. NCAA has done it for years and will continue to do so.
We lose in the Sweet Sixteen to Oklahoma, IMHO.
But, that would have been a better matchup than IU or UNC. Our weakness was size inside, so we got the worst possible draw with those two being in our way.
But, that would have been a better matchup than IU or UNC. Our weakness was size inside, so we got the worst possible draw with those two being in our way.
Last year was an imperfect team, like in 2013. That year we had no PG and last year we had no inside player. But the real issue both years was subpar Defense for a Calipari team. We had no defense inside last year, and outside of Ulis and Briscoe, everyone else had issues defensively. 2013 at least had Noel to help clean things up.
I actually think, 2013 and last year were very similar in ceilings, just last year we didn't have an injury to our best player. Just think if Murray or Ulis got hurt 2/3rds into the season. We may have not made the tournament...
I actually think, 2013 and last year were very similar in ceilings, just last year we didn't have an injury to our best player. Just think if Murray or Ulis got hurt 2/3rds into the season. We may have not made the tournament...
I think the same exact bracket would have came out. The bracket is all about ratings as others have mentioned.
Good thread OP.After much thought I say 1 more game at best.Last year Skal should have been behind Humphreys.We were a donut team.Win a lotta games with 3 guards hard to be natl champs.Cal put players first team second and.
Sadly I don't have a problem with it cause tourney winner is usually hot team at seasons end.good thing is no tubby and no Clyde.We are back to the top of the ladder to stay.
I don't believe it's a theory. Do you think a Duke player would have gotten a technical for that? Hell they had a player tripping people on three different occasions that I can remember. No technical was ever called.Something tells me "they" would've found another way to screw us, one way or another
and yes I know it's a conspiracy theory thing, but it's my story and I'm sticking to it, dammit!
No doubt about this,whoever "they" are they can't stand it when the Cats do well or get an even break. Looking back on this particular play it told us(if we were sharp enough to notice) that Humphries has the fire in his belly to play valuable minutes at UK and that he will be a factor before he is done here.Something tells me "they" would've found another way to screw us, one way or another
and yes I know it's a conspiracy theory thing, but it's my story and I'm sticking to it, dammit!
I THINK the conspiracy theory she is referring to is the way UK always gets shady seeding in brackets. Not if someone besides Hump would have got the T he got at the A&M game
No technical mean we wipe them twice. Kentucky is then a 3-seed. That means no Indiana.. much harder for the SC to screw us with a bad match-up.
I'd say a Sweet16 is almost a given with our guards, probably an Elite8. Grabbing a Final4 would still be pretty tough.
I really think Kentucky beats IU 7 out of 10 times. They played like it was their last game on earth, like most teams... That's gonna give Kentucky a loss every now and then.. just happened to be in the tournament.
I'd say a Sweet16 is almost a given with our guards, probably an Elite8. Grabbing a Final4 would still be pretty tough.
I really think Kentucky beats IU 7 out of 10 times. They played like it was their last game on earth, like most teams... That's gonna give Kentucky a loss every now and then.. just happened to be in the tournament.
I don't think anything would've changed. UK/IU was the match-up they wanted and lots of different variables could've changed and they still would've gotten it. Bottom line is...like Cal says, you have to win the next game. Ours was a higher seeded team we were favored to beat and didnt. It just was what it was this year.
We played IU on a neutral court and lost, that's all that mattered. We were seeded about right.
Ratings and they always make sure there's a Duke/unc cakewalk to the final, no matter what.
last year was much much better then 2013. last year could of easily got to the final 4 with a good draw . 2013 even with Noel is a 2nd round exit team .
Huh.. that's not the question, being seeded right or not. If we beat A&M then Kentucky is a 3 seed.
And it's a lot harder to screw a team over the higher seed they are. The SC had more wiggle room with us at 8 losses. They could have given us the Duke bump with a 3, or left us in the 4 range. They had more to play with and saw the goldmine that was IU/UK.
As a 3 seed, they'd have to bump UI down a spot to ensure a 2nd round matchup.
#1 seeds are concrete.. #2 seeds are right there.. but as you drop down in losses and seedings, things get murky and the SC can puppeteer the bracket much better.
And it's a lot harder to screw a team over the higher seed they are. The SC had more wiggle room with us at 8 losses. They could have given us the Duke bump with a 3, or left us in the 4 range. They had more to play with and saw the goldmine that was IU/UK.
As a 3 seed, they'd have to bump UI down a spot to ensure a 2nd round matchup.
#1 seeds are concrete.. #2 seeds are right there.. but as you drop down in losses and seedings, things get murky and the SC can puppeteer the bracket much better.
I don't think we would have gotten any farther.The whole team was basically Ulis/Murray.It was way too much pressure on the 2 of them.If one of them had a bad game it was over.
They were better than 2013 but no type of better draw would've put this team in the final four. They had a debilitating weakness that was easy to exploit with the right personnel and a coach that had half a brain. And all the success they did have last year is truly testament to just how great Tyler Ulis and Jamal Murray really were.
I think they could have won any game on any night......so a deep run could have been possible with A&M's seed.
I know you didn't bring it up but I'm using it as a talking point . I don't think our seeding is the problem as much as our bracket being stacked all the time . Not only stacked but teams that match up with us the best , it's almost as if they ask a coach who would best exploit UK's weakness and then they put those teams in with us . The NCAA needs to outsource almost everything they do to reduce corruption .
True but if they reduced the corruption they couldn't call it the NCAA.
I really don't think they are out to get us. I think it's about ratings and money. That is why we always seem to end up facing WVU, IU, UofL, etc. It's good for ratings. It gets more people to watch those 2nd round and Sweet Sixteen games. Cal vs. Huggins is hyped up. IU keeps crying that they don't get to play us. UofL is our biggest rival. Those are the big match ups that the Selection Committee just can't pass up.
For those who think we were rightfully a 4 seed and coulda got a 'duke bump' with a 3 seed. We were ranked #10 in the polls when the rankings came out. Duke was like 24? And somehow Duke and UK Managed to get a 4 seed. If we were given a DukE bump we wouldve been a 1-2 seed. That was the argument for us. We were either a 2 or 3 but most likely a 3. Us beating AtM on a neutral floor after they beat us on a Bs technical foul in college station. Our SECT win earned us a 3 seed at worst. We were the regular season SEC Champs and SECT champs. We got screwed heavy with a difficult draw. Duke had the easiest 4 seed draw when they should've been at best a 5 seed but the argument with them was are they a 5 or 6 seed maybe a 7 if they took injuries into consideration. They were much more a 7 seed than a 4 seed after getting knocked out early in ACCT. They got the easiest 4 seed draw. We got the most difficult 4 seed draw as if we were the worst 4 seed.
Every year we are not a 1 seed we get heavily under seeded. Every year. The Randle team was a 8 seed after coming on real strong at the end of the season. The Knight team got a 4 seed but deserved a 2-3 seed. This year we got a 4 but deserved a 3 with an outside shot at a 2. How Duke loses early in ACCT. and going into the conference tourney they were ranked 21st. So they get an early loss as the 21st ranked team. We win our conference tourney, going into the tourney ranked 12-14 believe. And somehow dukes first round loss in ACCT was much more impressive than us winning the SECT. And the fact we beat them when they had Jefferson apparently meant nothing. And the fact they had 11 losses (compared to our 8) going into the NCAAT was good enough for them to leapfrog us in the seeding process (they were a higher rated 4 seed than us).
What the selection committee does on a yearly basis is almost criminal. Even when we're a one seed we get by far the toughest road of all the one seeds. Notice how the teams we've been playing in NCAAT in last 7 years, there has never been an upset team that won to where we had to play the lower seeded team? (besides UCONN a couple times deep deep into the tourney). We always play the highest possible seed because the selection committee makes sure there are no chances for upsets as far as our opponents go. I swear what the selection committee has been doing has been very much so criminal. And more so than not deserves a lawsuit. I'm tired of us having successful season's thrown into the trash because we get the toughest draw of all the teams in the field.
Every year we are not a 1 seed we get heavily under seeded. Every year. The Randle team was a 8 seed after coming on real strong at the end of the season. The Knight team got a 4 seed but deserved a 2-3 seed. This year we got a 4 but deserved a 3 with an outside shot at a 2. How Duke loses early in ACCT. and going into the conference tourney they were ranked 21st. So they get an early loss as the 21st ranked team. We win our conference tourney, going into the tourney ranked 12-14 believe. And somehow dukes first round loss in ACCT was much more impressive than us winning the SECT. And the fact we beat them when they had Jefferson apparently meant nothing. And the fact they had 11 losses (compared to our 8) going into the NCAAT was good enough for them to leapfrog us in the seeding process (they were a higher rated 4 seed than us).
What the selection committee does on a yearly basis is almost criminal. Even when we're a one seed we get by far the toughest road of all the one seeds. Notice how the teams we've been playing in NCAAT in last 7 years, there has never been an upset team that won to where we had to play the lower seeded team? (besides UCONN a couple times deep deep into the tourney). We always play the highest possible seed because the selection committee makes sure there are no chances for upsets as far as our opponents go. I swear what the selection committee has been doing has been very much so criminal. And more so than not deserves a lawsuit. I'm tired of us having successful season's thrown into the trash because we get the toughest draw of all the teams in the field.
Last edited:
Where were the games played in that bracket? I remember ksr saying that UK fans didn't have a good showing in Iowa.
Something tells me "they" would've found another way to screw us, one way or another
and yes I know it's a conspiracy theory thing, but it's my story and I'm sticking to it, dammit!
Years ago, I dated this red head. My god she was a looker. She was smart and funny, successful too.
We disagreed on everything. We fought 24/7. One day, she made breakfast and I told her I like eggs better over easy than scrambled. She lost it. She told me all I ever did was nitpick, and that I didn't deserve her.
It's easy to sit here and ask if I'd just eaten the damn eggs if we'd still be together, but...
That team had so many close calls and collapses. You can easily pick out several individual moments in time, and say if that ONE moment had gone differently. But it was a series of things.
At the end of the day, I don't think it matters where you put us with that group.
We disagreed on everything. We fought 24/7. One day, she made breakfast and I told her I like eggs better over easy than scrambled. She lost it. She told me all I ever did was nitpick, and that I didn't deserve her.
It's easy to sit here and ask if I'd just eaten the damn eggs if we'd still be together, but...
That team had so many close calls and collapses. You can easily pick out several individual moments in time, and say if that ONE moment had gone differently. But it was a series of things.
At the end of the day, I don't think it matters where you put us with that group.
Like Cal says, it's the other teams who you really hurt when the committee underseeds UK. Wichita St was a great example. What I'm curious of is how many times the underseeding of UK would've ever hurt Duke by having to face us much earlier than a potential finals or final four game. You just never see that. You would think two teams in such close proximity and in different conferences (as the case with others like UNC, WVU, UL, IU) would cross paths a lot more often in tourney especially when not seeded 1-3.
With our weak frontcourt play last year, i don't know if it mattered what region we were in. When you have Skal, Lee and Poythress as your bigs, can you really expect to go far in the Ncaa tourney? I don't think so. After watching our guys play 10+ games, most of us knew we were screwed once we played a team with a decent frontline. Like others have said, even if we win that game and placed elsewhere, IU still would have been put in our bracket. Too much money on the line with TV ratings not to make that game happen. I mean how many times do we have to keep playing IU in the Ncaa tourney before it gets old? I don't blame Humphries. The kid was playing with emotion that some of our bigs on that team just didn't have. If Poythress or Lee had that type of energy, we might have had something to work with. Our bigs were just not talented enough and it was sad considering how talented our guard play was.