Correct, 8 and 9 seed will be two tough games back to back where as I think 11 or 12 would be better,and easier.

I'm looking forward to where Lunardi has it. None of the speculation here adds to a hill of beans. But this loss was so damaging.

Correct, 8 and 9 seed will be two tough games back to back where as I think 11 or 12 would be better,and easier.

 

How is it easier to play a 5 seed first rather than an 8?

He didn't really say anything....though he did say the ACC will not have a bunch in.

How is it easier to play a 5 seed first rather than an 8?

It's the same type of thinking that led fans to get upset about the 2 games in one day thing instead of focusing on the fact that they needed to win the first one. They're thinking of the second round game rather than thinking of the first round.

It's the same type of thinking that led fans to get upset about the 2 games in one day thing instead of focusing on the fact that they needed to win the first one. They're thinking of the second round game rather than thinking of the first round.

 

^ True. If they get a 12 seed I don't look for UK having to worry about that 2nd round game.

If they were 12-4 in the Big East with a #12 SOS, it would.

SOS no longer 12.

SOS no longer 12.

19 is not that much lower, but certainly the downward trending of these numbers is concerning.

They're still in now just as a twelve seed. But no question that was a terrible loss.

2-2 now without Patterson and a bad loss. 60 RPI. It's going to be close. Last 4 in/last 4 out close...

 

Very possible...I dont think UK is last 4 in...but you never know.

 

Atlanta area is getting pelted.

 

Tornado warnings are out in the ATL right now...more on the way...

The College Game Night guys talked about UK being in as if it were an afterthought.

 

I still feel decent given that Lunardi had UK as a lock, and let's face it, that guy is almost never wrong. But GT says they might be out. I'm torn. It's hard to go against the "when in doubt listen to GT" mentality.

Here's the main problem I have with the selection committee. One of them was on CBS and said "the conference a team plays in doesn't matter. Its how they do on the court." Fine.

 

He then followed it up by saying "we look at who they've played and how they've done against them."

 

That completely negates the first comment. The first comment is just to make the smaller conferences feel better despite reality.

The College Game Night guys talked about UK being in as if it were an afterthought.

 

I still feel decent given that Lunardi had UK as a lock, and let's face it, that guy is almost never wrong. But GT says they might be out. I'm torn. It's hard to go against the "when in doubt listen to GT" mentality.

 

I think I read that Lunardi has missed a total of 8 teams in something like the last 5 years.

I think I read that Lunardi has missed a total of 8 teams in something like the last 5 years.

Since 1998, he has correctly picked 33 out of 34 at-large teams every single year. So he's missed 10 teams in 10 years. Now, granted, that is based on his last projection, but I have to feel that he wouldn't move a team to lock status unless he was prepared to keep them in his projection no matter what happened.

 

Of course, UK could always be that 1 out of 34 he gets wrong.

Patterson is what makes it tough to project. With Patterson and that resume, they are for sure in right now. It's just hard to gauge how much weight it will carry in the room after this loss. At 3-1 it's not an isue. At 2-2 with a loss to a +100 team, I'm not so sure...