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.

 

They look at who you played as a number, not who you actually played. It's how the Valley was getting 4 and 5 teams a year in recently...

Dukie V just said the Cats are in.

You guys who say VPI shouldn't be in, their resume looks an awful lot like UK's, and you think UK is a lock.

^ I must of missed it. Did he just know say it or what?

You guys who say VPI shouldn't be in, their resume looks an awful lot like UK's, and you think UK is a lock.

 

Good comparison. You could say Va Tech didn't beat a Tennessee but they also didn't lose to a Gardner Webb or a Vandy by 41. Also the UK team that beat Tennessee doesn't have their best player.

Dukie V just said the Cats are in.

 

No...he said that they have indeed struggled, but with 12-4 in a major conference they should be in.

If they are 12-5 in the SEC and 6-7 outside of the SEC, what does that say about the level of the SEC this year?

If they are 12-5 in the SEC and 6-7 outside of the SEC, what does that say about the level of the SEC this year?

 

 

Not much, when you consider that the out of conference schedule was at the beginning of the year for a team with a new coach teaching players a new system with not a full playing deck. Although this team still doesn't have a complete compliment of players it has, at least, learned the new system and came together as a team in the second half of the season.

Plus I wonder if they even look at the fact that the loss to Houston was without Patterson. That puts them at 2-3 without him...

Not much, when you consider that the out of conference schedule was at the beginning of the year for a team with a new coach teaching players a new system with not a full playing deck. Although this team still doesn't have a complete compliment of players it has, at least, learned the new system and came together as a team in the second half of the season.

 

They're 2-2 IN the SEC at the end of the year.

Not much, when you consider that the out of conference schedule was at the beginning of the year for a team with a new coach teaching players a new system with not a full playing deck. Although this team still doesn't have a complete compliment of players it has, at least, learned the new system and came together as a team in the second half of the season.

 

They still don't have a full roster. That is an excuse at this point. You are who you are.

 

If you call this game today coming together, I hate to see what being apart is.

 

IMHO, 18-12 with a 60 RPI doesn't do it. Yes, I realize they won 12 games in the SEC. That doesn't mean alot this year. I know people don't want to hear that, but it is true. The Tenn win is impressive. Arkansas and Vandy are decent wins, but they were at home. Look up Vandy and Arkansas's conference roads record.

 

This team has lost at least three games to teams outside the RPI top 130 now. Has not won a game, away from RUPP against RPI 140 or better. I give them credit for winning all their conference home games. I am just stating the facts.

UK just dropped to 62 in the RPI.

I feel like if the panel had them in before the loss, they are in after the loss, just a lower seed.

I feel like if the panel had them in before the loss, they are in after the loss, just a lower seed.

 

I think they are in for sure, but I just wanted to post the latest RPI.

IMHO, 18-12 with a 60 RPI doesn't do it.

 

Those are basically the same numbers that got Stanford in last year. They were widely considered the last team in. So there is precedent for Kentucky to get in, but it will be thisclose.