January 21, 200917 yr So, in your opinion. Who are some good teams. It appears no one in the Big East and no one ranked lower than 4th in the ACC. Those two conferences are regarded as the best two. That leaves about 4 teams. UNC, DUKE, WAKE and Clemson. So those are the only good teams in the country in your opinion. Using your logic, who did Wake and Clemson beat out of conference? Especially Clemson, look at the cupcake schedule. Wouldn't UK classify as a team that "haven't been good out of conference." I think there are tiers. There are IMO about 7 or 8 teams that look good enough to win it all. Those teams are very good. Then there are about 12-15 teams that I consider good..ie..(Mich St, Clemson, a few BE teams) Then there are above average or ok teams..ie..(UK, WVU, Nova, FSU, Memphis). The groups change to me the more I see from them. For example after watching Wake play very good or good teams there is no doubt in my mind that they are capable of winning it all. That was not the case a few weeks ago. UK was not good ooc, but they weren't terrible. The difference between them and other teams to me is I never thought UK was in the first or second group. They will win a bunch and get me to overrate them into the second group before the tourney, but honestly I don't think they are there.
January 22, 200917 yr UL won and is a better team then UK. But let's keep the facts as facts. 1. Louisville shot 55% from 3 point range; 2. Louisville shot 82.6% from the free throw line. http://uoflsports.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2008-2009/teamhigh.html#TGBG.THI Both of which are season highs. I'll say UofL played a good game but nowhere near the level they've played the last 4. Clark and Samuels both had absolutely awful games against UK and UofL got lucky that other players stepped up in their place but that was nowhere near their best ball.
January 22, 200917 yr I'll say UofL played a good game but nowhere near the level they've played the last 4. Clark and Samuels both had absolutely awful games against UK and UofL got lucky that other players stepped up in their place but that was nowhere near their best ball. There are reasons why Clark and Samuel didn't play well against UK. 2 big reasons are Patterson and Stevenson. Uk's inside guys have been putting the clamps on the other teams' big men quite well lately.
January 22, 200917 yr I'll say UofL played a good game but nowhere near the level they've played the last 4. Clark and Samuels both had absolutely awful games against UK and UofL got lucky that other players stepped up in their place but that was nowhere near their best ball. That's a completely different tune than UofL played average at best against UK.
January 22, 200917 yr That's a completely different tune than I changed it a little to make you a little more happy but UofL still played nowhere near their best ball against UK.
January 22, 200917 yr There are reasons why Clark and Samuel didn't play well against UK. 2 big reasons are Patterson and Stevenson. Uk's inside guys have been putting the clamps on the other teams' big men quite well lately. They were definitely part of the reason those 2 played bad but they both still had awful games regardless. If Pitt or ND couldn't shut them down then I don't think UK's players were the only reason they played bad.
January 22, 200917 yr I changed it a little to make you a little more happy but UofL still played nowhere near their best ball against UK. It was one of the better ones up to that point.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.