SEC continued...

[zipp]

Well, let's look at the ACC vs. SEC since Pitino Lite arrived. That's the six-year period 2010-2015. The ACC's NCAA record during that period excluding U of L's results was 49-28 (0.636). Again, you don't play yourself. The SEC's record without LPT was 23-19 (0.548).

Before you start saying the %'s aren't much different, you also have to look at the number of games/teams involved. In that same time frame, there were 30 bids to ACC teams and 19 to SEC teams not named U of L or LPT. [We can actually update those numbers including this year's bids: now 37 for the ACC, and 21 for the SEC excl. LPT.]

The updated NCAA record for ACC teams thru Sunday's games is now 61-29 (0.678). The SEC is now 25-20 (0.556). Again, these are tourney games since 2010 excl. LPT and U of L.

Except for LPT, the SEC has now played exactly half as many NCAA tournament games as the ACC excl. U of L in that time frame. The NCAA bids tell the same story. There are about half as many tournament-quality teams in the SEC vs. the ACC. And those fewer teams don't individually do as well as their ACC counterparts.

"Elite program", my a$$...

 

[thecycle21]

The SEC is horrible and is the exact reason UK was a 4 seed. I think the SEC gives their young kids the opportunity to learn without the real threat of losing. Other conferences don't have that luxury. The way Cal schedules the bigger non-conference games puts his players in a good environment. It really is a good system for March because they will always have a high RPI even with the weak SEC.

He couldn't run this system in the ACC, Duke is trending that way we will see how it works for them. They tend to have move veterans tied into their program that really contribute.

 

[jalovell23]

It still amazes me how Calipari was crying about the bracket region UK was in. Did you ever hear Indiana complaining about being in the same reigion with UK and UNC.

 

[Bill Derington]

Zipp, No one has said the SEC is as good of a basketball conference as the ACC, it isn't.

You can't take out UK from the equation, and use it as an example. You're trying to skew the stats heavily in your favor.
You throw out Louisville in the same 7 tournament time span, but they've only been in the ACC 2 years? If you're going to throw out the Best SEC team in that time frame why not throw out the best ACC team in that timeframe which would be Duke?

UK should've been higher than a 4 seed, IU should've been higher than a 5 seed. The committee wanted a big matchup for the second round, they got it.
While the ACC has had an awesome tourney, I believe they have yet to play a team seeded higher than 7, match ups matter in March.

 

[Jay Reimenschneider]

UK should've been higher than a 4 seed.

Based on exactly what? (And because we're Kentucky doesn't count). Going 12-6 in a mid major conference? Losing to Auburn, Tennessee, UCLA, Ohio St.? 3-6 agains the RPI Top 50? Hell I thought you should've been a 6 seed.

 

[Bill Derington]

Based on exactly what? (And because we're Kentucky doesn't count). Going 12-6 in a mid major conference? Losing to Auburn, Tennessee, UCLA, Ohio St.? 3-6 agains the RPI Top 50? Hell I thought you should've been a 6 seed.

Based on every metric there is Jay. The top 50 wins argument is garbage. The Big 12 and Pac 12 had several top 50 teams because they were perceived to be. They were playing each other!

Theres a reason Vegas had UK as the 5th most likely team to win the tourney, and it's not because they're UK fans.

 

[rockycard]

Based on every metric there is Jay. The top 50 wins argument is garbage. The Big 12 and Pac 12 had several top 50 teams because they were perceived to be. They were playing each other!

Theres a reason Vegas had UK as the 5th most likely team to win the tourney, and it's not because they're UK fans.

It's because Kentucky fans will bet them, that's why UofL fans will dominate the brackets this year.

The term P5 conference is football oriented, the Big East would easily take the 5th slot from the SEC in basketball.

 

[Senore2006]

Based on every metric there is Jay. The top 50 wins argument is garbage. The Big 12 and Pac 12 had several top 50 teams because they were perceived to be. They were playing each other!

Theres a reason Vegas had UK as the 5th most likely team to win the tourney, and it's not because they're UK fans.

The Heavy Water truth take on college basketball said the exact same thing UofL fans have said somewhat interminably - take away reffing gaffs, freak miracle shots by one of the Twins, and UK's general fate would be expected to be around what they accomplished this season. Living at the FT line following crashing drives into the mess of people guarding them took advantage of reffing gaps in rules-interpretation on a basis so consistent, it literally became the defining game-destroying tactic of the sport. It was offensive - and not in a good way. UK learned to take advantage and, watching Ulis, nothing has changed in their approach. That is not exactly a Tweak, lol. It's the exact equivalent of fans crying about Duke's long-term tendency to flop.

2012 was a very deserved, overpowering win. It was based on a breath-taking talent seen once every 10 years - about when we can expect another Calipari title.

Gee, the 5th ranked Las Vefas favorite!! In other words, Vegas picked UK to make it to - and lose - in the Elite 8.

Aim high, Bill. You guys sure are a force of nature.

 

[Bill Derington]

It's because Kentucky fans will bet them, that's why UofL fans will dominate the brackets this year.

The term P5 conference is football oriented, the Big East would easily take the 5th slot from the SEC in basketball.

UK fans aren't betting in those numbers to sway the odds. UK was playing extremely well to end the year.

 

[Bill Derington]

The Heavy Water truth take on college basketball said the exact same thing UofL fans have said somewhat interminably - take away reffing gaffs, freak miracle shots by one of the Twins, and UK's general fate would be expected to be around what they accomplished this season. Living at the FT line following crashing drives into the mess of people guarding them took advantage of reffing gaps in rules-interpretation on a basis so consistent, it literally became the defining game-destroying tactic of the sport. It was offensive - and not in a good way. UK learned to take advantage and, watching Ulis, nothing has changed in their approach. That is not exactly a Tweak, lol. It's the exact equivalent of fans crying about Duke's long-term tendency to flop.

2012 was a very deserved, overpowering win. It was based on a breath-taking talent seen once every 10 years - about when we can expect another Calipari title.

Gee, the 5th ranked Las Vefas favorite!! In other words, Vegas picked UK to make it to - and lose - in the Elite 8.

Aim high, Bill. You guys sure are a force of nature.

Reffing gafs lol that's funny. One of our teams took advantage of the rules so much they changed the enforcement of the rules, and that team doesn't wear blue Senore.

UK was beaten by the Big 10 reg season champs, No shame in that.

 

[Jay Reimenschneider]

Based on every metric there is Jay. The top 50 wins argument is garbage. The Big 12 and Pac 12 had several top 50 teams because they were perceived to be. They were playing each other!

Theres a reason Vegas had UK as the 5th most likely team to win the tourney, and it's not because they're UK fans.

Umm I don't think the Selection Cmte. is using Las Vegas odds in determining seeding. You're unbelievably dense and I pretty much think you just like to hear yourself talk. The top 50 wins argument certainly isn't garbage. it's rich that you say that it is a garbage argument and then in the next breath say that Las Vegas odds is a perfectly legitimate metric to determine seeding. You aren't very good at this.

 

[OlhamCardinal]

Bill, those "metrics" you like to mention were highly skewed due to the weak competition of the SEC. Sure they were playing well at the end of the season, they were playing extremely weak teams. Finally, the second round loss proves the committee was right. If anything, they seeded UK too high.

 

[OneEarWonder]

Bill, those "metrics" you like to mention were highly skewed due to the weak competition of the SEC. Sure they were playing well at the end of the season, they were playing extremely weak teams. Finally, the second round loss proves the committee was right. If anything, they seeded UK too high.

Not necessarily. It could just prove that they seeded IU too low. It doesn't matter now, since you have to play (and win) the match ups you have. It could be argued that UK should have been a 3 seed, but a 4 was not that bad. IU should have been a 4, no questions asked.

 

[OlhamCardinal]

I just don't understand the UK should be seeded higher argument. Their best win of the season was a 2 point win against us at Rupp. The a win against Duke at a time they where still finding themselves. Then what??? Losses to Auburn, Tenn. UCLA, Ohio, St, Vandy and others who did not make the tournament. Then they only shared the SEC regular season title (a very weak league by any standard) and struggled in the SEC tourney against Ga. and aTm. Simply put, they had a so-so record against a so-so schedule. That simply does not add up to anything better than a 5 seed, tops!

 

[Senore2006]

Reffing gafs lol that's funny. One of our teams took advantage of the rules so much they changed the enforcement of the rules, and that team doesn't wear blue Senore.

UK was beaten by the Big 10 reg season champs, No shame in that.

Bullcrap. There was lots of shame in blowing your precious 40-0 season. The reactions were hilarious. You are a consistent self-indulging spectacle on these boards - someone who is correct 23% of the time. Embarrassment to you is like Mother's Milk.

Not even a good effort if you somehow believe the ruckus made by your running back basketball players had nothing to do with rule changes, lol. I think you might actually believe that, which would be worse if anyone actually cared about your UK apologist endeavors.

I can't wait until the time comes - June?? - when you begin warning us how equal our football teams are, if not - you know - actually better in Lexington because of .0089 difference in your hero recruiting forecast numbers.

The knowledge of a UK fan - anyone have an Valentine Day envelope?

 

[Senore2006]

UK fans aren't betting in those numbers to sway the odds. UK was playing extremely well to end the year.

No they weren't, lol. They were playing well compared to how they played in the boring middle of the year, visiting basketball palaces in their Super Bowls, lol. They were overranked at #14, the truth is.

 

[rockycard]

UK fans aren't betting in those numbers to sway the odds. UK was playing extremely well to end the year.

The next to last weekend, vandy kicked you guys around.

 

[Bill Derington]

Bullcrap. There was lots of shame in blowing your precious 40-0 season. The reactions were hilarious. You are a consistent self-indulging spectacle on these boards - someone who is correct 23% of the time. Embarrassment to you is like Mother's Milk.

Not even a good effort if you somehow believe the ruckus made by your running back basketball players had nothing to do with rule changes, lol. I think you might actually believe that, which would be worse if anyone actually cared about your UK apologist endeavors.

I can't wait until the time comes - June?? - when you begin warning us how equal our football teams are, if not - you know - actually better in Lexington because of .0089 difference in your hero recruiting forecast numbers.

The knowledge of a UK fan - anyone have an Valentine Day envelope?

What does last year have squat to do with this year?

The rules were changed specifically to reduce the hackfest that 2013 was. That's why they went in place for the 2014 season. Freedom of movement is not a result of "running back" offense.

I speak the truth, you don't like it so you make stuff up, like somehow UK's offense was the cause of freedom of movement for the OFFENSIVE side of the ball. Pitinos defensive philosophy is they can't call all the fouls same as it was at UK during his time.

 

[Bill Derington]

Not necessarily. It could just prove that they seeded IU too low. It doesn't matter now, since you have to play (and win) the match ups you have. It could be argued that UK should have been a 3 seed, but a 4 was not that bad. IU should have been a 4, no questions asked.

I agree that IU was seeded too low as well. Too much stock was put into the Big 12 and Pac12

 

[shadow force]

I just don't understand the UK should be seeded higher argument. Their best win of the season was a 2 point win against us at Rupp. The a win against Duke at a time they where still finding themselves. Then what??? Losses to Auburn, Tenn. UCLA, Ohio, St, Vandy and others who did not make the tournament. Then they only shared the SEC regular season title (a very weak league by any standard) and struggled in the SEC tourney against Ga. and aTm. Simply put, they had a so-so record against a so-so schedule. That simply does not add up to anything better than a 5 seed, tops!

Exactly. Uk simply had several TERRIBLE losses to some really bad teams. That is why Uk deserved a 4 or even a lower seed.

 

[Bill Derington]

Exactly. Uk simply had several TERRIBLE losses to some really bad teams. That is why Uk deserved a 4 or even a lower seed.

UK also had injuries during at least 3 of those losses. Ulis had an arm injury when UK lost to UCLA and OSU.

 

[zipp]

Zipp, No one has said the SEC is as good of a basketball conference as the ACC, it isn't.

You can't take out UK from the equation, and use it as an example. You're trying to skew the stats heavily in your favor.

You throw out Louisville in the same 7 tournament time span, but they've only been in the ACC 2 years? If you're going to throw out the Best SEC team in that time frame why not throw out the best ACC team in that timeframe which would be Duke?...

I've explained this before, you just don't like the analysis... Our respective teams play in those conferences, but we don't play ourselves. If LPT joins and wins five straight national championships out of the Atlantic Sun Conference, that conference didn't accomplish anything and provides LPT with no significant competition.

The SEC would legitimately be a mid-major conference if LPT left. This year it would have had two bids and two subpar teams representing it. OTOH, the ACC wouldn't miss a beat without U of L.

Weak competition artificially inflates your results. Records like 38-1 are much more likely playing in poor conferences. LPT fans don't care because they've lowered the bar to where great seasons and Final Fours are now the goal. And that's probably a good thing since Pitino Lite is losing almost as many games in most seasons as Tubby did.

"Elite program", my a$$...

 

[Bill Derington]

Zipp, you can't take out the best team in a conference that has been in it the whole timeframe you're speaking of, while removing a team that's been the other conference 2 years.
In what world does that make comparative sense?
The ACC is a better basketball conference, but in order to be correct you would need to also remove the top ACC team in that timeframe.

We aren't comparing UK and UL, we're comparing conferences.

Great seasons and final fours are lowering the bar to you? You must always be disappointed then.

 

[Majestic Red]

I gotta hand it to TAMU. What a stunning collapse by Northern Iowa.

 

[Bill Derington]

I gotta hand it to TAMU. What a stunning collapse by Northern Iowa.

I wish I had stayed up to watch it. Heard this morning it's the biggest comeback in under a minute ever in any college game. The previous was 11 with 59 seconds left in 2005.

 

[Steelers2012]

One of our teams took advantage of the rules so much they changed the enforcement of the rules, and that team doesn't wear blue Senore.

Was UofL ONE of the more physically aggressive teams in 2013, and most other years, as well? Absolutely; it IS a Rick Pitino trademark. But to imply that rules were changed solely because OF UofL's 2013 defense is, and has been, a BBN narrative that simply isn't accurate.

 

[moe#8]

hey Zipp, assuming what you said is 100% correct, we still just downright love our cats and our beloved coach cal. have you ever contemplated leaving the dark side and joining big blue nation. you would really enjoy the ride.

 

[moe#8]

Was UofL ONE of the more physically aggressive teams in 2013, and most other years, as well? Absolutely; it IS a Rick Pitino trademark. But to imply that rules were changed solely because OF UofL's 2013 defense is, and has been, a BBN narrative that simply isn't accurate.

steelers, do you think UL had a hand in their ruling ??

 

[Bill Derington]

Was UofL ONE of the more physically aggressive teams in 2013, and most other years, as well? Absolutely; it IS a Rick Pitino trademark. But to imply that rules were changed solely because OF UofL's 2013 defense is, and has been, a BBN narrative that simply isn't accurate.

Ok Steelers

 

[Steelers2012]

steelers, do you think UL had a hand in their ruling ??

As I said, Louisville was/is ONE of the teams that could be pointed to as an example of a physically aggressive team. If rule makers were looking to reduce physical play, then yes, certainly Louisville's physical style could be an example of what they want to reduce. However, to claim the rules were changed in reaction to UofL winning the 2013 NC with their physically aggressive style would be inaccurate.

 

[Bill Derington]

Louisville winning the title that year played a big part in the rule change Steelers. Just like Arkansas winning in 94 brought about the rule on hand checking.

 

[Steelers2012]

Louisville winning the title that year played a big part in the rule change Steelers. Just like Arkansas winning in 94 brought about the rule on hand checking.

I'll disagree with that interpretation. If you can show me any evidence that rule makers (not the media, not other programs, and certainly not BBN) specifically cited Louisville as a "big" catalyst for the rule changes, then I would give your claim more credence than a rival seeking to minimize Louisville's accomplishment by implying some kind of unfair advantage.

 

[Bill Derington]

I'm not trying to minimize Louisville's accomplishment, they won the games.
Senore was stating that the rules changed because of UK's offense, which I'm not sure how he came to that conclusion.

I'm not saying Louisville was the only team that played that way, but winning the title brought it to the forefront. It was a hack and grab type of defense forcing the refs to either make games a free throw shooting contest, or let things slide.

 

[Steelers2012]

I'm not trying to minimize Louisville's accomplishment, they won the games.
Senore was stating that the rules changed because of UK's offense, which I'm not sure how he came to that conclusion.

I'm not saying Louisville was the only team that played that way, but winning the title brought it to the forefront. It was a hack and grab type of defense forcing the refs to either make games a free throw shooting contest, or let things slide.

That is a decidedly BBN interpretation. Just as Senore's interpretation of UK's bull-in-a-China Shop offense is a decidedly UofL slanted interpretation.

 

[Bill Derington]

That is a decidedly BBN interpretation. Just as Senore's interpretation of UK's bull-in-a-China Shop offense is a decidedly UofL slanted interpretation.

Steelers, I'm as fair a person as you'll meet on here. I'll call a spade a spade, the rules were changed because scoring hit a 50 year low in 2012-13, defenders had over the years been allowed to get too aggressive. Pitino coaches an ultra aggressive defense, and 2013 Louisville was the epitome of that. That's not a knock on your team, Pitino coached to how the game was called.

 

[Senore2006]

That is a decidedly BBN interpretation. Just as Senore's interpretation of UK's bull-in-a-China Shop offense is a decidedly UofL slanted interpretation.

Actually it is not. The concept of verticality was highly stressed coming after UK's miracle run in 14 precisely because of the growing tendency to play football at a hoops game..

Poor Bill. All that bullcrap in one little head.

 

[Steelers2012]

Steelers, I'm as fair a person as you'll meet on here. I'll call a spade a spade, the rules were changed because scoring hit a 50 year low in 2012-13, defenders had over the years been allowed to get too aggressive. Pitino coaches an ultra aggressive defense, and 2013 Louisville was the epitome of that. That's not a knock on your team, Pitino coached to how the game was called.

Again...that is a BBN interpretation...and a sour grapes one at that. And ultimately, it was an ineffective rule change as well, as evidenced by the NEW rule changes in 2016 to, once again, attempt to raise the scoring level.

The shorter shot clock and the increase in the restricted arc should help speed up men's games and increase scoring. Scoring in men's college basketball hit an all-time low in 2012-13 when teams averaged 67.5 points per game. Last season, teams fared only a fraction of a point better at 67.6 points per game.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-sn-ncaa-30-second-shot-clock-rule-20150608-story.html

 

[Senore2006]

hey Zipp, assuming what you said is 100% correct, we still just downright love our cats and our beloved coach cal. have you ever contemplated leaving the dark side and joining big blue nation. you would really enjoy the ride.

Pretty hard sell over here, stud. We know you too well to change, lol. That's not a statement of endearment.........just too much information. Who the f--- wants to be you? That's hilarious.

 

[Bill Derington]

Actually it is not. The concept of verticality was highly stressed coming after UK's miracle run in 14 precisely because of the growing tendency to play football at a hoops game..

Poor Bill. All that bullcrap in one little head.

Note the date Senore. http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/03/0...-get-more-room-to-maneuver.html?referer=&_r=0

 

[Bill Derington]

Again...that is a BBN interpretation...and a sour grapes one at that. And ultimately, it was an ineffective rule change as well, as evidenced by the NEW rule changes in 2016 to, once again, attempt to raise the scoring level.

The shorter shot clock and the increase in the restricted arc should help speed up men's games and increase scoring. Scoring in men's college basketball hit an all-time low in 2012-13 when teams averaged 67.5 points per game. Last season, teams fared only a fraction of a point better at 67.6 points per game.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-sn-ncaa-30-second-shot-clock-rule-20150608-story.html

Shot clock and freedom of movement are 2 different things Steelers.