UT vs Vanderbilt ESPN 2
- Thread starter CatfanMike47
- Start date
You should get your vision checked.
Maybe he should have threw his arms and legs around and smacked his head on the ground and drew blood, it worked for Auburn. Calling the one on PJ and not on that, these refs are getting worse and worse by the game.
He wasn’t fouled on that run out the second view clearly showed that it was a clean block with zero contact!
Wouldn't UK beating UT take care of that? We do play them twice after all?
would having a win over the #1 team not be the best case scenario to getting a 1 seed? What would sound more convincing to you: We beat the #1 team in America? Or, We beat the #5 team in America?
Also, beat UT twice and we can win the SEC. Your scenario assumes that the only way to get ahead of UT in the sec is another team beating them for us.
Vandy may have had a couple of calls not go their way, but they completely fell about the last 90 seconds of regulation and played like total dog-**** in OT. They jacked up a bunch of dumb threes and continually missed FT. If we do the same, I would expect a loss as well.
Would beating UT not accomplish that? We do play them twice you know?
Wouldn't the best way to get a one seed be to have a win against the #1 team in the country? You guys seem a little confused or new at this. Beating #1 is more impressive than beating a lower ranked team. It's even bigger when your resume has a loss 30+ point loss to the highest ranked team you've played so far. Without us playing and beating a top 5 team the rest of the way, the chances of us actually getting a 1 seed aren't that great.
We are one game behind UT. We play them twice. Instead of expecting everyone else to do our dirty work and beat them, why would we not want to just beat then ourselves. What is it with this generation wanting the easiest possible way and having things handed to them.
That's a great story and all, but most of the talking heads don't decide the bracket or seeding. However, there is no denying that if UT remains #1 and we beat them, we will still have a win over the #1 team in the country. The voters, some of which are these "talking heads" you speak of, did vote UT #1 by s significant margin over Duke.
One can’t assume UK will sweep UT or that UK will win out. Therefore, having UT lose other games will put UK in a better position in NCAA seeding. It really isn’t that difficult to understand.
The bottomline of this game was the flagarantn foul when Vandy got the rebound turned into a 4pt trip for UT.
This going to the monitor and making up flagarant fouls is wayyyy to much control for a ref. This call basically cost Vandy the game. And put the UK - Auburn game back in jeopardy on PJ's bogus flagarant.
The going to monitor is ruining the game and refs need less control.....certainly not more as these two cases show.
This going to the monitor and making up flagarant fouls is wayyyy to much control for a ref. This call basically cost Vandy the game. And put the UK - Auburn game back in jeopardy on PJ's bogus flagarant.
The going to monitor is ruining the game and refs need less control.....certainly not more as these two cases show.
Lol, nice try, but you're assuming they lose and we wouldn't lose again. So even by your scenario, you're still assuming. Beating the #1 team is better than beating any other ranked team. Which part of that is tripping you up so bad?
If this is that difficult for you you to understand, that’s your problem.
I think his objective is about winning the SEC where as your concern is more about a chance to knock off number one.
Can't knocking off #1 win us the SEC? Why not accomplish both, if we can? Having a huge game in Rupp vs the #1 team in the country would be great for recruitment visits, would be great for fans and media recognition. Would be great for ranking, seeding and all the other metrics. There is far more to gain from beating #1 UT than there it for beating a lower ranked UT. Either way, ultimately the goal is to win, but you want the win to mean as much as possible! So, therefore, why would you not want them to be as highly ranked as possible? They can lose to someone else after we beat them, ideally us again. It doesn't need to be before.
Last edited:
Tennessee is our main competition here. Vandy is no threat to win the league. This is really amazingly simple to understand.
Yes, it is very simple. Beating #1 is better than beating a lower ranked team. Having #1 come to your home court is a great opportunity, especially when you have legit shot to beat them. You don't hope and wish some insignificant opponent beats them first so you can feel better about your standing. If you want to feel better about it go earn it. All that them losing to Vandy accomplishes is putting us in a TIE and greatly impacting the significance of the win we could get against them at #1. In either scenario, we still have to beat them, likely twice, to win the SEC regular season. Why would you not want them ranked as highly as possible? Only so many teams can claim a win over the #1 team to the selection committee. Why would you not want to be one of them?
Last edited:
All due respect, I believe I know where JFC is coming from in that. Wouldn’t call him an idiot
Yes, refs hosed Vandy on a couple of big calls, and I agree that Grant was getting the star treatment. We all remarked on it at the time. But Vandy also shot themselves in the foot. They had some horrendous passing at the end that led to a couple of turnovers, not to mention dribbling off their own foot a few times.
The officiating was awful, but the Dores didn’t help themselves either
So you just totally confirmed the point i made in the first place. "You don't hope and wish some insignificant opponent beats them first so you can feel better about your standing. If you want to feel better about it go earn it." This quote from you is staggering. I have never heard any true fan with even the slightest knowledge of how things work espouse such foolishness. I really should have just listened to Irishcat when he told me not to waste my time with you.
UT may get beat before UK plays them so it may not matter anyway. They have to go to South Carolina on the 29th of January. Either way they will still be top 10
Ohh, I fully expect them to lose. We rarely ever get the opportunity to play the top ranked team at home. Top 10 is good, but #1 is better. Beating the #1 team is a great opportunity, especially at home. You don't hope they start losing games to insignificant teams so you can tarnish the impact of a potential win over them.
What point? Would you rather Mitch Barnhart go into the committee room and be able to say we knocked off the #1 team on the country, who was unbeaten in conference play at the time? Or would you rather him go in there and say we beat a top 25 UT team who has home loss to Bama, road loss to Vandy and so forth? Which sounds better to you?
You don't hope other teams beat them to diminish the impact of a win against them. The idea to getting the highest seed is having the most wins against the highest level of competition. One of the main reasons we have continually gotten screwed out of seeds is because we don't have enough in conference wins against top teams. Why in the hell would you not want the best opportunity possibly against the highest ranked team? Losses against teams does nothing but lessen UT's ranking and the potential impact of a win against them. What about that do you not understand?
When their ranking is placed. He is allowed to make a case for UK having a 1 seed. Especially to all the other members before they decide.
I see where they are coming from and you as well. It is definitely a better win for our resume if we beat #1 UT. But as they have stated, it is definitely easier to win the SEC regular season if UT loses some other games as well, because it is not likely we win out. Just two different perspectives and both are valid points.
It's as likely we don't win out as it is for UT. Still, beating a #1 is better than beating any other. There is no scenario where it is not better to beat them as #1. Literally, not one.
Ok. I could be wrong but it was stated when he was placed on the committee that he could not be involved in any discussions involving UK. Not every team has a representative on the committee and that would be an unfair advantage in the NCAA's eyes.
Like I said, I agree with you it definitely looks better if we beat them as #1. But I also agree with them that if they had lost to Vandy, it would have made it easier for us to win the SEC. It looks good to beat the #1 team but it also looks good to be the SEC regular season champ. But those two things don't have to be mutually exclusive, as you said we can beat them when they are #1 and go on to win the SEC. Myself, I don't care if UT is ranked #1 or not when we play them. I only care that UK beats them and wins as many games as possible and wins the SEC.
Winning the regular season championship while nice, is not all that important. It only highlights conference play, which is only half the season. You could easily have the better overall record and lose your conference. You could easily play in a **** conference and have all your quality wins out of conference play, i.e Gonzaga. However, having the highest possible quality wins is very important. That quality lessens when the opponents lose to inferior teams.
This is true. But AP poll and coaches poll are not that important when determining quality wins. The selection committee will use the NET ratings much more so than either poll. If UT had lost to Vandy, it would not have effected their NET rating that much (still would have been top 5-10). If we beat them it will be a quadrant 1 win either way. And the selection committee has used winning the regular season conference championship in the past as justification for giving a team a 1 seed over another team. The SEC is a very good conference, so winning the regular season means something. I would much rather we beat a #4 UT team and win the conference than beat a #1 UT team and finish second to them in the conference. If it came down to us and UT for a 1 seed and we beat UT when they were #1 and UT still won the conference, I guarantee you that 1 seed would go to UT.
But what you're missing it seems is that winning the conference championship doesn't mean jack **** if the teams records crumble because they lose to the crap teams, or really lose much at all. We need UT, UA, MISS St, Ole Miss, LSU and Bama to do as well as possible. The other teams all suck. Beating them does very little for our resume. Losing to them hurts it, whether it's us or any other top team in conference losing to them. The only way we work ourselves into a 1 seed is amassing quad 1 wins, preferable the highest possible quad one wins. Them losing to any team diminishes that, even if slightly. Thus diminishing our opportunity for a 1. We need them to win, and we need to beat them if we want a 1. It's that simple. If you're fine with a 2 or 3 seed, then by all means root for them to lose. If you want a 1, you better hope good teams we beat continue to win.
Last edited:
I don't dispute any of this. I am fine with a 2 seed or 3 seed and an SEC championship. We will have one of the toughest paths no matter what our seed is.
If you're fine with that then cheer away. I would much prefer the grab a 1 and get to play the 2nd weekend in Louisville. I prefer our chances to make a final four best in that scenario.
Being in Louisville is definitely preferable. I think if we are to get a 1 seed, it will have to be at the expense of UT. Since we are in the same conference, our conference record compared to UT's will be important. If we split with them, which I think is the most likely scenario, they will have to drop another game for us to pass them in the SEC standings. And if it comes down to UK and UT for the 1 seed, the team with the higher finish in conference will almost certainly get that 1 seed. And we could still be put in the Louisville region as a 2 seed and possibly as a 3 seed.
Not true. That also contradicts your earlier claim that quad 1 wins or more important, which I do beleive is true. Currently, UT has top wins against Gonzaga, UL and Bama. They have a loss to KU. We have wins again UL at UL; UNC on a neutral court; AU in AU; and Miss St at home. We also play KU this week, AU again at home, Miss St in Starksville, Ole Miss, LSU and UT twice. UT doesn't play as many highly ranked teams. In theory, we can lose 1 or 2 and still end up with as many or more quad 1 wins. Particularly at the higher spectrum of that quad. However, that isn't possible of they are losing continually to lesser teams.
It is highly improbable we will be put in Lousiville with anything but a 1. They will not let us be a 2 or 3 to a 1 seed in Louisville. That would essentially be giving us a 1. Not going to happen. We want the Yum center, we will have to be a 1!
The ruling on that is that Mitch can only answer questions that are factual like, did certain player play against a certain team, he must leave when any discussion about Kentucky’s seeding is being discussed.
Of course, but he is allowed to lobby before and point out that other teams have better resumes when other teams are being mentioned for seeds. That's how lobbying works. These people aren't sequestered from each other. They talk and make pleas to each other. I would much prefer ours be as strong as possible.