March 3, 201313 yr John Clay blogged: As Cal was walking off he heard some of the Arkansas staff say, "They're soft." "What can I say?" Cal told the press. That is not news.
March 3, 201313 yr Just disappointing! The guards looked very intimidated today. Mentally and physically weak.
March 3, 201313 yr Losing to Georgia would be a bad loss, the worst of the season for UK. They can't afford it now that they lost at Arkansas. Beat Georgia and it is 95% sure they are in the tourney. Lose to Georgia, they need to beat Florida or get to the SEC title game if they also lose to Florida.
March 3, 201313 yr As to the game, Poythress playing 17 minutes was the biggest reason for this loss. He got cheap fouls and couldn't stay on the floor. The Cat had to have him on the floor in this game with the athletes and style Arkansas plays.
March 4, 201313 yr Cats offense still looks terrible with the top of the key screen and just one on one play after that.....can we not run some sets on offense rather than dribble drive constantly? Very confusing for me to understand......
March 4, 201313 yr U.K. was intimidated, could not handle the Arkansas press or their half court pressure. Arkansas wanted this one more and played like it. Had the Razorbacks been any good at all it may have been around a 30pt. spread. Polson played his heart out as usual and I thought that WCS played hard. There is not much else to say other than what has been said. Arkansas deserved to win, the Cats didn't. Now U.K. has to win in Athens on Thursday night and maybe a game or two in the SEC tourney. Get beat at UGA and the Cats imo have to win the SEC tourney to get in. I don't think UK is as close as missing the tournament as people think. I think Joe Lunardi will even have UK listed as in the tournament as long as they beat Georgia and win at least just one in the SEC tournament. While UK doesn't have really any signature wins, their RPI, no horrible losses, and possibly finishing in the top 3 in the conference still with an SEC tournament win would be hard to keep them out. I know a lot of my fellow UK fan base has this opinion that the NCAA is always against UK. However as long as UK has a resume that's close enough to get in, which they do. Then they will have UK in the tournament IMO. It would be to costly for the NCAA money wise not to have UK in it, UK is a name you want in the tournament. It may not be right, but being UK does help out when it comes to being on the bubble.
March 4, 201313 yr I don't think UK is as close as missing the tournament as people think. I think Joe Lunardi will even have UK listed as in the tournament as long as they beat Georgia and win at least just one in the SEC tournament. While UK doesn't have really any signature wins, their RPI, no horrible losses, and possibly finishing in the top 3 in the conference still with an SEC tournament win would be hard to keep them out. I know a lot of my fellow UK fan base has this opinion that the NCAA is always against UK. However as long as UK has a resume that's close enough to get in, which they do. Then they will have UK in the tournament IMO. It would be to costly for the NCAA money wise not to have UK in it, UK is a name you want in the tournament. It may not be right, but being UK does help out when it comes to being on the bubble. Not sure where you get this logic at? UK is only 3 years removed from the NIT, the NCAA didn't care then. UK has 1 signature win and that was against Missouri. They have no horrible losses but having 20 wins and only 1 good one does not bode well. They are bad on the road and haven't beat quality opponents (what the NCAA tournament is made of) Their last two road games were a 30 point loss and a 13 point loss. They just stink on the road. They are considered out of the tournament according to a mock NCAA selection, from some committee members and Lunardi is pretty good at figuring who is close to in and who isn't. Plus with Kentucky losing and other bubble teams winning (Virginia against Duke) it doesn't help UK's chances any. Kentucky better not have the same mindset as some of the fans and just think that UK will get in because right now they'd be out, simple as that. They HAVE to win at UGA to show that they can win on the road.
March 4, 201313 yr I don't think UK is as close as missing the tournament as people think. I think Joe Lunardi will even have UK listed as in the tournament as long as they beat Georgia and win at least just one in the SEC tournament. While UK doesn't have really any signature wins, their RPI, no horrible losses, and possibly finishing in the top 3 in the conference still with an SEC tournament win would be hard to keep them out. I know a lot of my fellow UK fan base has this opinion that the NCAA is always against UK. However as long as UK has a resume that's close enough to get in, which they do. Then they will have UK in the tournament IMO. It would be to costly for the NCAA money wise not to have UK in it, UK is a name you want in the tournament. It may not be right, but being UK does help out when it comes to being on the bubble. Not sure where you get this logic at? UK is only 3 years removed from the NIT, the NCAA didn't care then. UK has 1 signature win and that was against Missouri. They have no horrible losses but having 20 wins and only 1 good one does not bode well. They are bad on the road and haven't beat quality opponents (what the NCAA tournament is made of) Their last two road games were a 30 point loss and a 13 point loss. They just stink on the road. They are considered out of the tournament according to a mock NCAA selection, from some committee members and Lunardi is pretty good at figuring who is close to in and who isn't. Plus with Kentucky losing and other bubble teams winning (Virginia against Duke) it doesn't help UK's chances any. Kentucky better not have the same mindset as some of the fans and just think that UK will get in because right now they'd be out, simple as that. They HAVE to win at UGA to show that they can win on the road. The saving grace for UK is not their resume, but the lack of a resume from the others on the bubble. The fundamental question will be what is the mood of the committee going to be on Selection Sunday? Are good wins cancelled by bad losses?
March 4, 201313 yr The saving grace for UK is not their resume, but the lack of a resume from the others on the bubble. The fundamental question will be what is the mood of the committee going to be on Selection Sunday? Are good wins cancelled by bad losses? The big unknown is how much they factor in the Noel injury. The Mizzou win will help some, but the big Ls away from home without him also have to be considered...
March 4, 201313 yr The big unknown is how much they factor in the Noel injury. The Mizzou win will help some, but the big Ls away from home without him also have to be considered... Being on the selection committe is an impossible job with no truly defined guidelines for how to select teams. They are in a helpless position and UK is prime example #1. On one hand we are told that the "last X amount of games" is not really used in making their selections. The entire body of work is evaluated. OK. We are also told that when an injury occurs that is factored in to their decisions. So, you don't base a team off how they finish down the stretch, unless they have an injury. Makes sense. So then you take Duke's scenario. They have done enough to warrant being knocked off the first line. However, an injury took place so should that catapult them back to the top line since they never have really lost when fully healthy? I guess so, but you probably do not count it against Miami, Virginia, et al. - teams that beat Duke when not fully healthy do you? You don't take it away from Tennessee that Noel was out of the lineup and UK was devastated in Knoxville? Ultimately those on the bubble have nobody to blame but themselves, but the evaluating of teams is not just at spots 62-68. It is very interesting.
March 4, 201313 yr The big unknown is how much they factor in the Noel injury. The Mizzou win will help some, but the big Ls away from home without him also have to be considered... The fact that nobody can win at Arkansas should also be considered. Win two more and I think UK gets in. Not the first or the last team to be intimidated by the environment at Arkansas. Its scary but it seems like this team plays well if Harrow does and not if he doesn't. Thursday is a must.
March 4, 201313 yr The fact that nobody can win at Arkansas should also be considered. Win two more and I think UK gets in. Not the first or the last team to be intimidated by the environment at Arkansas. Its scary but it seems like this team plays well if Harrow does and not if he doesn't. Thursday is a must. This. Does nobody remember how bad Florida looked at Arkansas?
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.