I didn't know if anyone else was aware of this. I know we're not happy with going home in the second round or 12 losses, but this speaks to the toughness of the schedule and the SEC, as 3 teams are still alive.Noah made a statement on tv yesterday as to how much harder teams play against them now. Welcome to UK's world.

Hadn't noticed that, but I did however notice that 3 of those losses are to #1 seeds.

Didn't know that. Interesting stat.

Kentucky was 0-7 this year when they played teams ranked in the top 25. At the time they played them.

 

They just couldn't get it done against the better teams in the country. The losses were by an average of 9 points.

 

Memphis, UCLA, North Carolina, Vanderbilt and Florida twice.

I don't agree with the SEC tough from top to bottom. Yes Tennessee is good Fla. is great and Vandy......is Vandy. However look at the other SEC teams not invited to the tourney. They only had 5 teams invited for a reason and those not invited had no business being in.

 

KY. losses have come against some great teams...so I guess it is in all how you look at it. Is it good for KY. to be a team satisfied with losing to top teams...........or is that not okay?

 

As a fan of NC that would not be okay................

And UK's only win in 10 games played against Sweet 16 teams was against a Lofton-less Tennessee.

 

UK had more opportunities than any squad this season for a signature victory and came away oh-fer.

And UK's only win in 10 games played against Sweet 16 teams was against a Lofton-less Tennessee.

 

UK had more opportunities than any squad this season for a signature victory and came away oh-fer.

 

Thank you for putting this in the right perspective.

 

pigman's twist on the sheer facts would lead some to believe the season wasn't a total loss. I guess it wasn't because UK made it to the tourney.

 

But when you go oh-fer against schools in the Top 25 you really shouldn't have been invited to the big dance anyway.

Hadn't noticed that, but I did however notice that 3 of those losses are to #1 seeds.

I think that would be four. Two to Florida, one to UNC and one to Kansas.

Don't forget two to a #2 seed also, Memphis and UCLA.

 

1/2 of their losses were to what turned out to be the top 8 teams in the nation. And they had chances to win at least 3 of these games.

 

Their failure to execute and win big games is where this team differs from Tubby's successful seasons.

I think that is very interesting.

Kentucky was 0-7 this year when they played teams ranked in the top 25. At the time they played them.

 

They just couldn't get it done against the better teams in the country. The losses were by an average of 9 points.

 

Memphis, UCLA, North Carolina, Vanderbilt and Florida twice.

 

You're point proves that Kentucky isn't necessarily a bad team. Their talent level is just down from the top 15-20 teams in the country. Can they get back? Of course. Are they close right now? I'm not so sure.

You're point proves that Kentucky isn't necessarily a bad team. Their talent level is just down from the top 15-20 teams in the country. Can they get back? Of course. Are they close right now? I'm not so sure.

 

You could make a case that they aren't that far off...of those losses, almost all of them were games UK could have won. The only ones that come to mind immediately is the Kansas game in the tournament, the Memphis loss after UK had played 5 games in 7 or 8 days and just ran out of gas in the second half, and the loss at Florida. Oh yeah, and the North Carolina game.

 

The most glaring difference between Kentucky and the elite teams from my view is the difference in athleticism...UK just can't match up with these teams from an athletic standpoint and over the course of a 40 minute game, that ultimately is what does them in. Of course, I don't think that is news to anyone who has watched them much.

My problem with the "UK lost to good teams, and therefore weren't half bad" logic is that UK had SO MANY chances to pull off a win over those teams. Did any other team have so many chances and failed to capitalize? UK's best wins this year were against a Louisville squad that was struggling at the time, a Tennessee team that was playing without Lofton, Nova in the tournament, DePaul and Bama.

My problem with the "UK lost to good teams, and therefore weren't half bad" logic is that UK had SO MANY chances to pull off a win over those teams. Did any other team have so many chances and failed to capitalize? UK's best wins this year were against a Louisville squad that was struggling at the time, a Tennessee team that was playing without Lofton, Nova in the tournament, DePaul and Bama.

 

I'm not trying to make a case that UK was better than they're getting credit for...I don't think they were. My point is that they probably aren't as far away from getting back in the mix as it might appear...think of it like this...Chris Lofton, Corey Brewer, Brandan Wright, Thaddeus Young...these are guys that UK missed out on for one reason or another. If you added a couple of them to our roster, I think UK would be a completely different animal...which again, points back to the recruiting failures. Fix that, and you fix the program for the most part, IMO, which is why I think it's paramount that Tubby closes the deal on Patterson and Lucas...if he doesn't, we're going to be looking at years like this one for the foreseeable future.

I'm not trying to make a case that UK was better than they're getting credit for...I don't think they were. My point is that they probably aren't as far away from getting back in the mix as it might appear...think of it like this...Chris Lofton, Corey Brewer, Brandan Wright, Thaddeus Young...these are guys that UK missed out on for one reason or another. If you added a couple of them to our roster, I think UK would be a completely different animal...which again, points back to the recruiting failures. Fix that, and you fix the program for the most part, IMO, which is why I think it's paramount that Tubby closes the deal on Patterson and Lucas...if he doesn't, we're going to be looking at years like this one for the foreseeable future.

Let me ask you this. Say Patterson choses UK and ends up never living up to the hype. While at the same time Moses ends up being a stud and a lottery pick. Will UK fans once again say Tubby blew it taking PP over Moses?

I don't agree with the SEC tough from top to bottom. Yes Tennessee is good Fla. is great and Vandy......is Vandy. However look at the other SEC teams not invited to the tourney. They only had 5 teams invited for a reason and those not invited had no business being in.

 

KY. losses have come against some great teams...so I guess it is in all how you look at it. Is it good for KY. to be a team satisfied with losing to top teams...........or is that not okay?

 

As a fan of NC that would not be okay................

The SEC only had 5 teams get in because they beat up on each other during the regular season. Look at the Big East for example. They may get 6 or 7 teams in every year but that doesn't mean they're a better conference. the bottom half of that conference is weak. Look at Syracuse and West Virginia, winning records in league play but didn't make the tourney. The SEC is tied with the PAC-10 for the most teams left in the touney at this point. The SEC year in and year out IS the strongest conference to play in, in the country. Its the most physicial conference to play in.