I'm not a guy who really believes in luck and superstition so I don't care to do this one. The debate on the 2010/2012 has me thinking... I'm really wondering: historically, how will UK fans end up painting the 2015 team if they go 38-1 or 39-1?

 

To me, there's no question that had 2010 not had one of their worst games of the season at such an inopportune time, that people would be raving about them. 2012 was good, and had some really good college players, but outside of Davis, who really blossomed once in the pros, there wasn't a ton of top-end talent.

 

Fair or unfair, where do you see the 2015 version of UK going down in these hypotheticals if they lose one? IMO, they are still up there, and the best team doesn't always win the tournament, especially in a one-off, but I'm interested in seeing what everyone else has to say.

To be fair they havent played teams of ND, Wisconsin or potentially Duke's caliber all year.

As a UK "hater" even though I dont have a problem with UK as much as I do their fans, I would still chalk it up as one of the greatest seasons in college basketball in a long time.. One comparison I would make would be the Pats team that went undefeated then losing to the Gaints in the Super Bowl.

I've posted this too many times the past week or so, we don't talk about this sort of things!

I've posted this too many times the past week or so, we don't talk about this sort of things!

 

I'm the exact opposite. I'm talking about it as much as I can :lol2:.

To be fair they havent played teams of ND, Wisconsin or potentially Duke's caliber all year.

That is such garbage. Look at who they played at the beginning of the year and where those teams were ranked at the time.

 

That is as stupid as someone saying that if UK were in the ACC they would have at least 4 losses this year. UK played ND and won, they also beat UNC, they beat Louisville and UCLA and Kansas to name a few. They beat the two teams that made it to the ACC tournament champinship game. People can say ND didn't play anyone of UK's caliber all year either and when they did UK beat them.

Im not saying UK will win it all. I hope they do but I'm pretty worried. I don't thnk there is a team left that they wouldn't beat in a 7 game series, but I do think any team can win in a 1 game win or go home series. It's the pressure that wil play as big of a role as anything else in the remainder of the tourney.

 

One thng is garunteed, there will be 90% of the country rooting against UK this week. UK is also the only team with this much pressure on them. UK "is supposed to win it all" the other teams left aren't which means if any of the other 3 teams wins it all it is an upset. This year it is much better being in the David role than being in the Goliath role, if David loses its no big deal, if Goliath loses everyone will be cheering his downfall and make it out as the biggest upset in 2 decades.

To be fair they havent played teams of ND, Wisconsin or potentially Duke's caliber all year.

 

at Louisville

North Carolina

Kansas (neutral)

Texas

Providence

UCLA (neutral)

Buffalo (conference winner)

 

That's a pretty solid non-conference slate. They can't really help how weak the SEC is in one given year, but in terms of what they actually could do with their schedule, I don't think you can really say they ducked people or played a soft schedule either.

 

I'd take the teams you listed over those, and think that they are considerably better, but there aren't many other teams you could add to that list either.

I'll take the Goliath role over the David role every time.

at Louisville

North Carolina

Kansas (neutral)

Texas

Providence

UCLA (neutral)

Buffalo (conference winner)

 

That's a pretty solid non-conference slate. They can't really help how weak the SEC is in one given year, but in terms of what they actually could do with their schedule, I don't think you can really say they ducked people or played a soft schedule either.

 

I'd take the teams you listed over those, and think that they are considerably better, but there aren't many other teams you could add to that list either.

You can add ND also now.

I'll take the Goliath role over the David role every time.

I agree, but this year Golliath has a lot more pressure than he usually has in past years. There hasn't been this much pressure on a team I'd think since the 76 Hoosiers. Even in 2012 and 96 there wasn't as much pressure and I remember 96 Pre season it was UK's to lose and they did win the title but that team I always felt had similar pressure on them as the 95 UCLA team. Both teams were expected to win it all, but they didn't have history like this weighing them down either.

 

I loved the last week those 2 years (96 and 2012) but this year I'm sick to my stomach over this week ever since they won against ND, and I'm not even on the team lol. I think a lot of us are feeling more nervous than we did the last 2 champinship years.

That is such garbage. Look at who they played at the beginning of the year and where those teams were ranked at the time.

 

That is as stupid as someone saying that if UK were in the ACC they would have at least 4 losses this year. UK played ND and won, they also beat UNC, they beat Louisville and UCLA and Kansas to name a few. They beat the two teams that made it to the ACC tournament champinship game. People can say ND didn't play anyone of UK's caliber all year either and when they did UK beat them.

Im not saying UK will win it all. I hope they do but I'm pretty worried. I don't thnk there is a team left that they wouldn't beat in a 7 game series, but I do think any team can win in a 1 game win or go home series. It's the pressure that wil play as big of a role as anything else in the remainder of the tourney.

 

One thng is garunteed, there will be 90% of the country rooting against UK this week. UK is also the only team with this much pressure on them. UK "is supposed to win it all" the other teams left aren't which means if any of the other 3 teams wins it all it is an upset. This year it is much better being in the David role than being in the Goliath role, if David loses its no big deal, if Goliath loses everyone will be cheering his downfall and make it out as the biggest upset in 2 decades.

 

Sigh. Guess I will get suckered into this. First, thanks for letting me have an opinion on the matter. Second, my point that I was hoping to get across was the fact that they are playing the most ELITE teams they have played this year. That is 100% true. Third, I dont know where you got that 4 loss in the ACC from? Fourth, yeah you can say that about ND and their schedule that's your opinion. Fifth, saying a team that is ranked high early in the season is good makes no sense. I really didnt want to get suckered into this but I guess I had too.

Sigh. Guess I will get suckered into this. First, thanks for letting me have an opinion on the matter. Second, my point that I was hoping to get across was the fact that they are playing the most ELITE teams they have played this year. That is 100% true. Third, I dont know where you got that 4 loss in the ACC from? Fourth, yeah you can say that about ND and their schedule that's your opinion. Fifth, saying a team that is ranked high early in the season is good makes no sense. I really didnt want to get suckered into this but I guess I had too.

Then why use UK as the team that hasn't played anyone of this caliber yet. Why not use every single team that is left? Duke hasn't played anyone of UK's caliber and neither has Wisconsin or Mich St.

 

You only got suckered into this because you made the comment that sounded like you were saying UK hasn't played anyone yet. I very well

could have read into it wrong but that is how it came across.

2012 was good, and had some really good college players, but outside of Davis, who really blossomed once in the pros, there wasn't a ton of top-end talent.

 

I know you are using this to try and fit your POV on the 2012 team, but please stop. Davis was the NPOY, Defensive POY, Tournament MVP and so on.

 

He was a generational great from day 1, and saying he didn't blossom until he was in the NBA is a disservice to his incredible season at UK...

I know you are using this to try and fit your POV on the 2012 team, but please stop. Davis was the NPOY, Defensive POY, Tournament MVP and so on.

 

He was a generational great from day 1, and saying he didn't blossom until he was in the NBA is a disservice to his incredible season at UK...

I missed that in his post but you are 100% correct. Davis blossomed before getting to the NBA. He was a man among boys when he played at UK.

I know you are using this to try and fit your POV on the 2012 team, but please stop. Davis was the NPOY, Defensive POY, Tournament MVP and so on.

 

He was a generational great from day 1, and saying he didn't blossom until he was in the NBA is a disservice to his incredible season at UK...

 

I'm not saying he didn't blossom while at UK, but he's continued to get better while in the pros. He's added weight and offensive repertoire. Those are the same things people were saying about him in the Davis/Durant debate.

 

A better way to put what I was saying would probably be to say which UK player under Cal has shown more improvement than him once he got into the pros? I was just using it to counter arguments that I was thinking of Wall and Cousins as pros instead of as they were in their time in college.