At first I was leaning towards Joker's side, but I officially think you start:

 

Andrew

3 Walkons

WCS or KAT

 

Give them their quick moment.

I didn't know that walk-ons even got recognized on senior day. I understand people saying they have earned the recognition and that they should start, but I don't buy it. Every one of those walk-ons feels like they get rewarded every day by just being in the gym with these guys. Sure, let them have the picture and walk on the floor with their parents. Start them? No way. And before you jump on me, think about this. You start the walk on and he proceeds to turn the ball over the first two times he touches it, gets beat bad on defense and just looks silly out there. How is that for senior day?

I didn't know that walk-ons even got recognized on senior day. I understand people saying they have earned the recognition and that they should start, but I don't buy it. Every one of those walk-ons feels like they get rewarded every day by just being in the gym with these guys. Sure, let them have the picture and walk on the floor with their parents. Start them? No way. And before you jump on me, think about this. You start the walk on and he proceeds to turn the ball over the first two times he touches it, gets beat bad on defense and just looks silly out there. How is that for senior day?

 

Where's the rule that you have to leave them in for a set amount of time when you start a guy? Seriously, one offensive possession. Have one foul as soon as it ends. How does that hurt them at all? It allows those 3 guys to get to not only start, but enjoy the thrill of 24K giving them a standing ovation as they are subbed out. Regardless of what they do on the floor, that's a memory that will last a lifetime for these guys. There's no viable argument as to why they shouldn't start.

I didn't know that walk-ons even got recognized on senior day. I understand people saying they have earned the recognition and that they should start, but I don't buy it. Every one of those walk-ons feels like they get rewarded every day by just being in the gym with these guys. Sure, let them have the picture and walk on the floor with their parents. Start them? No way. And before you jump on me, think about this. You start the walk on and he proceeds to turn the ball over the first two times he touches it, gets beat bad on defense and just looks silly out there. How is that for senior day?

 

Just because they don't have a scholarship and are walk-ons, doesn't mean they aren't part of the TEAM. They should be recognized like any other member of the TEAM. It's their Sr. Day. They put in the work just like everyone else on the TEAM. I think it would be an embarrassment if they don't get the recognition any other member of the TEAM would get.

Cal will start the seniors. No doubt in my mind about that. Cats will roll in this one either way. Cal could let them play until the first tv timeout and the game still wouldn't be in doubt.

Cal will start the seniors. No doubt in my mind about that. Cats will roll in this one either way. Cal could let them play until the first tv timeout and the game still wouldn't be in doubt.

 

My thoughts as well.

Seniors receive special recognition on Senior Day that no other players get. I think that's honor enough.

 

It's fine if a coach starts seniors that wouldn't otherwise, but I would always start my five best/most deserving players every single game.

I agree. It's not going to hurt anything to let these 3 individuals start 1 game - the last game of their careers at Rupp!

 

It also could be WCS, The twins, Booker, Towns and Lyle last game of their careers in Rupp too , if they go pro this year. I have mixed emotions on it, why I asked the question to see how others felt.

Even Chris Gettlefinger started his Senior Day. :thumb:

Willie, Karl, and the three seniors. Get the tip, run your O, get the best shot possible, then when Florida gets the ball, one of the three fouls Kasey Hill real hard, but not hard enough to get a Flagrant. :thumb:

Where's the rule that you have to leave them in for a set amount of time when you start a guy? Seriously, one offensive possession. Have one foul as soon as it ends. How does that hurt them at all? It allows those 3 guys to get to not only start, but enjoy the thrill of 24K giving them a standing ovation as they are subbed out. Regardless of what they do on the floor, that's a memory that will last a lifetime for these guys. There's no viable argument as to why they shouldn't start.

 

What's the purpose of starting a guy for :10 seconds? If they wanted to do that, why not just do the ceremonial tip thing like they did when Heisenbuttell was injured. I'm thinking people would be fine with them playing 5 seconds, but to me that's pointless.

Yeah I'm sure the 3 walk-ons' reactions would be "we still got the number 1 seed even though I played a minute on Senior Day?!? WOW!"

 

Yea... that'd definitely be the reactions if they played the seniors and eventually lost, especially if it were by one or two. It definitely wouldn't be "UK no longer unbeaten... no chance at a perfect season". Kentucky fans as a whole are so rational anyway, and it's not like this is a chance at making history and having that record possibly stand for quite awhile would play into it. The only "good" that comes from starting the seniors is to their own egos and to the people around the program or fans in general who always want to see the seniors start. If they start the seniors and lose, it has the potential to be a disaster.

 

Yea... that'd definitely be the reactions if they played the seniors and eventually lost, especially if it were by one or two. It definitely wouldn't be "UK no longer unbeaten... no chance at a perfect season". Kentucky fans as a whole are so rational anyway, and it's not like this is a chance at making history and having that record possibly stand for quite awhile would play into it. The only "good" that comes from starting the seniors is to their own egos and to the people around the program or fans in general who always want to see the seniors start. If they start the seniors and lose, it has the potential to be a disaster.

 

Honestly, it wouldn't be a potential disaster. Kentucky hasn't lost a game and they are a lock for the overall number one seed. Tomorrow's game has no implications as to where Kentucky will be seeded or how they will perform in the tournaments.

 

Sure it would be nice to finish the regular season undefeated, but win or lose, it affects nothing as far as conference and national championships. That said, Cal can let these kids play several minutes tomorrow and they still won't lose to Florida. So why not follow tradition and let them start, what could it possibly hurt?

Honestly, it wouldn't be a potential disaster. Kentucky hasn't lost a game and they are a lock for the overall number one seed. Tomorrow's game has no implications as to where Kentucky will be seeded or how they will perform in the tournaments.

Sure it would be nice to finish the regular season undefeated, but win or lose, it affects nothing as far as conference and national championships. That said, Cal can let these kids play several minutes tomorrow and they still won't lose to Florida. So why not follow tradition and let them start, what could it possibly hurt?

 

I think people are overlooking the narratives that the media will spin and the kind of pressure it will put on Kentucky if they lose.

 

I don't know why people are talking about a #1 seed. Where has anyone argued that they wouldn't be?

 

Here's what I see: a chance at history, the team running at an optimum level. Why mess with it?

 

Florida played us close and will be getting their leading scorer, Kasey Hill back after he's sat out around 7 games. Why take a chance on letting him get off to a good start by blowing by a walk-on and seeing the ball go through the net?

 

Who is really going to be hurt if the kids don't start? Sorry, it's Kentucky, and Cal's Kentucky has always done things differently. They knew what they were signing up for. Taking it a step further, I'd say that there are student managers who are just as dedicated that sacrifice and do just as much as the walk-ons in some ways. Why don't we let them play too?

 

I saw a Clay County team in the late 90's have an unreal home winning streak snapped on Senior Night in a big upset to Cawood. Cawood took advantage of some of the guys getting shots up and all that, had some quick baskets, and led most of, if not all of, the game. One guy who was a senior on that team told me candidly that he'd told the coach before the game that he shouldn't feel obligated to start him just because if it meant they'd be in danger of losing. That kind of stuck with me as a kid because he was a guy who was more of an 8th man that got a few limited minutes each game, but it meant more to him to protect the streak and all that than it did to start (when I don't think he'd ever started in a game).

 

I think people are overlooking the narratives that the media will spin and the kind of pressure it will put on Kentucky if they lose.

 

I don't know why people are talking about a #1 seed. Where has anyone argued that they wouldn't be?

 

Here's what I see: a chance at history, the team running at an optimum level. Why mess with it?

 

Florida played us close and will be getting their leading scorer, Kasey Hill back after he's sat out around 7 games. Why take a chance on letting him get off to a good start by blowing by a walk-on and seeing the ball go through the net?

 

Who is really going to be hurt if the kids don't start? Sorry, it's Kentucky, and Cal's Kentucky has always done things differently. They knew what they were signing up for. Taking it a step further, I'd say that there are student managers who are just as dedicated that sacrifice and do just as much as the walk-ons in some ways. Why don't we let them play too?

 

I saw a Clay County team in the late 90's have an unreal home winning streak snapped on Senior Night in a big upset to Cawood. Cawood took advantage of some of the guys getting shots up and all that, had some quick baskets, and led most of, if not all of, the game. One guy who was a senior on that team told me candidly that he'd told the coach before the game that he shouldn't feel obligated to start him just because if it meant they'd be in danger of losing. That kind of stuck with me as a kid because he was a guy who was more of an 8th man that got a few limited minutes each game, but it meant more to him to protect the streak and all that than it did to start (when I don't think he'd ever started in a game).

 

Win or lose, the media will spin anything and everything to put pressure on Kentucky, that's always a given. Personally, I believe this team is much more mature than their age would indicate and can handle the pressure.

 

Sure Florida gave them a good game, but the game was at Florida, when they were desparate for a good win and college gameday was there. The game was hyped up, they were desparate for a win and were playing at home, but they still lost.

 

This time the roles will more less be reversed. The players will be pumped up for senior night along with the chance for an undefeated regular season. I think this Kentucky team is much better than Florida. I seriously can't imagine them losing at home, on senior night, with an undefeated record on the line, just because a few walkons started the game. If they lose its because they simply played a bad game, not because Cal started walkons or because Florida is actually the best team in the country.