13th Region Top 5 (December 17, 2005)

[The Riot]

There are several teams in the region that are better than Corbin at this time.

 

What are the reasons that make you that it is so cut and dry that North is #2?

 

North beat Cawood by 15, played South Laurel better than anyone has in the region, best backcourt in the region, toughest schedule in the state, beat 14th region contender Leslie Co. on the road, played 2 Top 5 teams in 2 days(Lost to Bryan Station by 15 and Lost to SL by 16).

 

These reasons are pretty convincing to me, my opinion may change, but right now NL is the second best team in the region.

[ukbellco14]

North beat Cawood by 15, played South Laurel better than anyone has in the region, best backcourt in the region, toughest schedule in the state, beat 14th region contender Leslie Co. on the road, played 2 Top 5 teams in 2 days(Lost to Bryan Station by 15 and Lost to SL by 16).

 

These reasons are pretty convincing to me, my opinion may change, but right now NL is the second best team in the region.

 

:thumb: i think those reasons are very convincing. although I would debate you on the best backcourt in the region, but thats another story. NL's backcourt is very solid though.

 

I think the most convincing reason is that they beat Cawood as solidly as they did (considering how Cawood has played since then) and played SL better then anyone in the region.

[ukbellco14]

Hummm, let's see. South-65 North-47 at North. South-72 Corbin-37 at South. What exactly is your point? When you consider were the games were played and the scores, I would have to rate the outcomes equal!

 

So you mean to tell me that NL playing SL to within 18 points at NL is the same as SL dismantling Corbin by 40 at SL. This would mean that if SL played Corbin at Corbin, that SL would only win by 18. So SL's homecourt advantage over Corbin was good for 22 points. Doubt it. SL is just that much better then Corbin.

 

SL's homecourt advantage over Corbin meant nothing in their win. Here is why:

1.)Corbin had the best officials it could hope for in the SL game, the beloved Charlie Kirk crew.

2.)Its not as if Corbin had to drive across the state to get to SL, so you cant tell me that travel time played a factor.

3.)Corbin had just as many fans at the game as SL, and there student section was almost as impressive.

4.)Its not as if NL's officials stuck it to SL when SL played at NL. It was a very good officiated game, so its not as if NL's officials influenced the final score of the game or made NL any better of a team by giving them all the calls.

 

IMO, and I'm willing to bet most ppl's, if SL played Corbin at Corbin, it would be a pretty similar outcome, and if NL played SL at SL it would have probably been a pretty similiar outcome as well.

[The Riot]

So you mean to tell me that NL playing SL to within 18 points at NL is the same as SL dismantling Corbin by 40 at SL. This would mean that if SL played Corbin at Corbin, that SL would only win by 18. So SL's homecourt advantage over Corbin was good for 22 points. Doubt it. SL is just that much better then Corbin.

 

SL's homecourt advantage over Corbin meant nothing in their win. Here is why:

1.)Corbin had the best officials it could hope for in the SL game, the beloved Charlie Kirk crew.

2.)Its not as if Corbin had to drive across the state to get to SL, so you cant tell me that travel time played a factor.

3.)Corbin had just as many fans at the game as SL, and there student section was almost as impressive.

4.)Its not as if NL's officials stuck it to SL when SL played at NL. It was a very good officiated game, so its not as if NL's officials influenced the final score of the game or made NL any better of a team by giving them all the calls.

 

IMO, and I'm willing to bet most ppl's, if SL played Corbin at Corbin, it would be a pretty similar outcome, and if NL played SL at SL it would have probably been a pretty similiar outcome as well.

 

 

I agree ukbell.

 

For you, addout, to say that Corbin didn't get a fair shake at SL is a very incorrect statement. The officials gave Corbin every single call, trying to keep them in the game, and they still got beat by 40. SL is just that good. To compare a 40 point difference to a 18 point one based on the officiating that was in these two games is just insane.

[addout]

So you mean to tell me that NL playing SL to within 18 points at NL is the same as SL dismantling Corbin by 40 at SL. This would mean that if SL played Corbin at Corbin, that SL would only win by 18. So SL's homecourt advantage over Corbin was good for 22 points. Doubt it. SL is just that much better then Corbin.

 

SL's homecourt advantage over Corbin meant nothing in their win. Here is why:

1.)Corbin had the best officials it could hope for in the SL game, the beloved Charlie Kirk crew.

2.)Its not as if Corbin had to drive across the state to get to SL, so you cant tell me that travel time played a factor.

3.)Corbin had just as many fans at the game as SL, and there student section was almost as impressive.

4.)Its not as if NL's officials stuck it to SL when SL played at NL. It was a very good officiated game, so its not as if NL's officials influenced the final score of the game or made NL any better of a team by giving them all the calls.

 

IMO, and I'm willing to bet most ppl's, if SL played Corbin at Corbin, it would be a pretty similar outcome, and if NL played SL at SL it would have probably been a pretty similiar outcome as well.

1. 72-37=35 not 40

2. It is worth 10 points playing at home no matter who you are IMO of

course. Players play better at home and officials give most questional

calls to the white team again IMO. IMO, I think that most ppl who have

attended seky basketball games would agree to my 10 point built in home

court advantage for all teams.

3. The answer to your question is yes I think that South's 35 point win over

Corbin at South is about equal to their 18 point win over North at North.

4. Yes I would like to see North play South at South.

5. Yes I would like to see South play Corbin at Corbin.

[ukbellco14]

1. 72-37=35 not 40

2. It is worth 10 points playing at home no matter who you are IMO of

course. Players play better at home and officials give most questional

calls to the white team again IMO. IMO, I think that most ppl who have

attended seky basketball games would agree to my 10 point built in home

court advantage for all teams.

3. The answer to your question is yes I think that South's 35 point win over

Corbin at South is about equal to their 18 point win over North at North.

4. Yes I would like to see North play South at South.

5. Yes I would like to see South play Corbin at Corbin.

 

1.)My bad on the math. I just remember SL being up by close to 40 (may have been 40+) at one point and mistook that for the final score. My apologies.

 

2.)Still yet, a 35 point win compared to an 18 point win. You are talking about a 17 point swing due to home court advantage. That doesnt even match up with your 10 point theory. Come on. Even if we go with your 10 points home court advantage theory, then you are still saying that SL would only beat Corbin by 25 at Corbin and NL would get beat by 28 at SL. In this case NL is still 7 points (25-18=7) better then Corbin based on the outcomes of their games against SL & if your theory is correct.

 

I dont even think your theory really applies in the SL Corbin game however, considering the officials for the game were a Pro-Corbin officiating crew. Everyone that knows SEKY basketball knows that Charlie Kirk and his crew are the kindest crew Corbin could have asked for in the SL game. If you were at the game (which you may have been) then youd know Corbin got the majority of the questionable calls. If not for Kirk and his crew Corbin could have gotten beat alot worse.

 

3.)IMO it would have been just as bad for Corbin at Corbin, and most who saw the SL Corbin game IMO would agree (unless of course you are from Corbin). Corbin was outmatched and outmanned before the game even started, and once the whistle blew they got outhustled and outplayed. It would have been no different at Corbin. But I guess we all are entitled to our opinions, and they really dont mean squat anyways. :thumb:

 

4 and 5.) If Im not mistaken, you may have the oppurtunity to see both of these games later on in the season!

 

The real reason we are discussing this though is because you didnt think NL was neccesarily the #2 team in the region. IMO, the way NL played SL at NL isnt even the best evidence for NL being #2. It's just icing on the cake.

 

IMO, the best evidence is the fact that NL beat Cawood by 15. When you look at the fact that Cawood beat Corbin, Barbourville, and Bell (who beat Harlan last night) I dont see how you DONT put NL at #2. The only team I think that can make a legit argument for being #2, besides NL, is Clay Co. However, they havent played any 13th region games, and so are still somewhat of an unknown when comparing them to NL.

 

On a side note: the NL Cawood game was at NL. So using your 10 point theory, NL still beats Cawood by 5 at Cawood. Just an interesting tidbit. Also, SL and Cawood matchup tommorrow night at SL. :thumb:

[The Riot]

1. 72-37=35 not 40

2. It is worth 10 points playing at home no matter who you are IMO of

course. Players play better at home and officials give most questional

calls to the white team again IMO. IMO, I think that most ppl who have

attended seky basketball games would agree to my 10 point built in home

court advantage for all teams.

3. The answer to your question is yes I think that South's 35 point win over

Corbin at South is about equal to their 18 point win over North at North.

4. Yes I would like to see North play South at South.

5. Yes I would like to see South play Corbin at Corbin.

 

Corbin got alot better calls against South Friday night. South didn't play that well, either. I do however agree though that in MOST cases there is a homecourt advantage, however, that has was not the case at South Laurel Friday night. The score would have been the same or higher at Corbin, unless what happened there two years ago would have occurred. Your saying a 35 point loss is not as bad as an 18 pppoint loss, how? They are both losses, it doesn't really matter, but I've seen both teams play against the defending state champs and NL has alot better chance to beat them than Corbin.

 

At the NL/SL game the referees did a great job, calling the game very fair IMO.

[4chs]

North beat Cawood by 15, played South Laurel better than anyone has in the region, best backcourt in the region, toughest schedule in the state, beat 14th region contender Leslie Co. on the road, played 2 Top 5 teams in 2 days(Lost to Bryan Station by 15 and Lost to SL by 16).

 

These reasons are pretty convincing to me, my opinion may change, but right now NL is the second best team in the region.

 

1. The Cawood game was actually pretty close for most of the game and it was the first start on a hostile court for a Cawood team replacing 4 starters.

2. Leslie Co.'s record is 1-3.

3. North has a very good schedule, but it is not the toughest in the state or probably not the hardest is Laurel Co.

4. Losing by double digits to good teams proves what?

5. I agree with you though, I think that North Laurel is the 2nd best team in the region, but others who do not have the above to base their case on, at least until they play North Laurel.

[4chs]

I agree ukbell.

 

For you, addout, to say that Corbin didn't get a fair shake at SL is a very incorrect statement. The officials gave Corbin every single call, trying to keep them in the game, and they still got beat by 40. SL is just that good. To compare a 40 point difference to a 18 point one based on the officiating that was in these two games is just insane.

 

Who said that Corbin did not get a fair shake in the game????? I have yet to hear that or read that anywhere. Corbin did not get every call in that game and that shows a complete lack of credibililty on your part. In fact, one member of the South staff that I discussed the game with was very pleased with the officiating in the game, he thought that it was as close to 50/50 as they could have hoped for.

[ukbellco14]

I think if any team has an argument to be #2, BESIDES North Laurel, it would be Clay, and possible Barbourvile.

 

Clay could argue the #2 spot for the sole reason that they have played no 13th region opponents at this point in the season, and therefore are sort of an unknown in how they will fare against other 13th region teams.

Barbourville could argue the #2 spot because they have been very solid this season, despite their loss to Cawood. Barbourville's loss to Cawood at Barbourville is too much for me to put Barbourville at #2 over North Laurel (who beat that same Cawood team). However in the Cawood loss several of Barbourville's best players, including Cox, did not play. Not sure how strong an argument this is for Barbourville being #2, but I could see how one could see it this way.

 

I personally believe NL is #2, and dont see how you can argue otherwise when you look at what they have done thus far this season, ON THE COURT. However, I could see where Clay and Barbourville could have an argument for being #2. Thats the only teams I could see having an argument for being #2 though.

[addout]

This is an exact quote about the Corbin game taken from the Times Tribune.

"Its obvious this was the best game we've played so far," Wright said after the win.

That says a lot when you look at the scores of South's games so far this season.

[ukbellco14]

Who said that Corbin did not get a fair shake in the game????? I have yet to hear that or read that anywhere. Corbin did not get every call in that game and that shows a complete lack of credibililty on your part. In fact, one member of the South staff that I discussed the game with was very pleased with the officiating in the game, he thought that it was as close to 50/50 as they could have hoped for.

 

In defense of The Riot. I dont think he was arguing that SL didnt get a fair shake, but was just trying to say that officiating had no outcome on the score of the SL Corbin game.

 

Addout made a comment that SL playing at home had an outcome on the SL Corbin game, and that the game would have been closer at Corbin. It seemed that Addout was insinuating that officials played a role in the final score of the SL Corbin game. The Riot was just arguing that if the officials were anything to Corbin, it was that they were very kind and if this game had been played at Corbin, the outcome would have been no different. :thumb:

[4chs]

 

I dont even think your theory really applies in the SL Corbin game however, considering the officials for the game were a Pro-Corbin officiating crew. Everyone that knows SEKY basketball knows that Charlie Kirk and his crew are the kindest crew Corbin could have asked for in the SL game. If you were at the game (which you may have been) then youd know Corbin got the majority of the questionable calls. If not for Kirk and his crew Corbin could have gotten beat alot worse.

 

Kirk rarely calls Corbin games and he is probably the least popular official amongst Redhound fans(you may be too young to remember the Clay Co. debacle in the region a few years back when Kirk gave Clay Co. a second chance in a game that was already over and won by Corbin), so you obviously have him mistaken for someone else. He would have been the last official the Corbin coaches would have picked to call the game. :irked:

[ukbellco14]

This is an exact quote about the Corbin game taken from the Times Tribune.

"Its obvious this was the best game we've played so far," Wright said after the win.

That says a lot when you look at the scores of South's games so far this season.

 

Yeah it does and then again no it doesnt. Probably just coach speak in all honesty. I know personally that from a coaches perspective, saying that it was their "best game" to the media could be a way of softening the loss for Corbin, while simultaneously pouring salt on their wounds. It could also be a way of saying that SL is progressing each game and getting better with each game.

 

It could also mean several things: Could mean it was there most complete game, could mean it was there best defensive game, could mean ....etc etc etc. It obviously wasnt there best scoring game which is a credit to the Corbin defense. I'm really not sure what "Its obvious this was the best game weve played so far" really means. I wouldnt put to much into it, considering that after a HUGE, RIVALRY win most coaches say this as a way to pat their team and staff on the back for a job well done.

[ukbellco14]

Kirk rarely calls Corbin games and he is probably the least popular official amongst Redhound fans(you may be too young to remember the Clay Co. debacle in the region a few years back when Kirk gave Clay Co. a second chance in a game that was already over and won by Corbin), so you obviously have him mistaken for someone else. He would have been the last official the Corbin coaches would have picked to call the game. :irked:

 

That may be the view you and other Corbin fans have of Kirk. However, I know that when I was a player and the coaches that I knew then dreaded playing Corbin when Kirk has one of your games. I think in the case you are speaking about you ran into the team Charlie Kirk loves more then Corbin.... CLAY! :thumb: