Where'd you go in the other thread Jim?

 

His argument was destroyed in that thread. He's hoping it gets buried under new threads.

 

It was obvious you guys didn't hear what I had to say, so I wasn't interested in banging my head against the wall. I still am a firm believer in the power of a rugged schedule -- featuring a slate of real road games -- in making the team better over the long haul.

I heard on the radio that the ref that called the T on Cal worked a game last night. The radio guys were questioning why a ref works a Friday night game and then a noon game the next day. Does that happen often?

It was obvious you guys didn't hear what I had to say, so I wasn't interested in banging my head against the wall. I still am a firm believer in the power of a rugged schedule -- featuring a slate of real road games -- in making the team better over the long haul.

 

I heard it loud and clear. It was just wrong.

It was obvious you guys didn't hear what I had to say, so I wasn't interested in banging my head against the wall. I still am a firm believer in the power of a rugged schedule -- featuring a slate of real road games -- in making the team better over the long haul.

 

Who are they going to play? You saw the slate of out of conference road games that the last several national champions have played. If the other power teams don't want to play road games how do you schedule home and home series? The last 10 national champions haven't played a tough out of conference road schedule--they seem to have done just fine....or is a national title not good enough?

Who are they going to play? You saw the slate of out of conference road games that the last several national champions have played. If the other power teams don't want to play road games how do you schedule home and home series? The last 10 national champions haven't played a tough out of conference road schedule--they seem to have done just fine....or is a national title not good enough?

 

There's no rule that says the only road games a UK (or anybody else) can play is against another elite team. Play a perceived "lesser-than."

There's no rule that says the only road games a UK (or anybody else) can play is against another elite team. Play a perceived "lesser-than."

 

Why would you give up a big payday at home to go on the road and play a MAC team or Liberty or someone like that? You never had addressed the fact that the teams that are cutting down the nets each season aren't doing it. Don't you think that winning the national championship is proof that your theory is unnecessary?

You don't think the rest of the SEC is licking its chops for when Kentucky visits after how they've been exposed the past two games? They have shown they are quite ordinary on the road, despite having a gross talent advantage over the opposition. If you take your lumps early on the road, you're a tougher team down the stretch, and how a team finishes is far more important than how it starts in terms of NCAA seeding.

 

 

Ive only been alive 33 years but for atleast the last 33 years the rest of the SEC has licked its chops for when Kentucky visits. This year is no different, 90% of the time you can add 10 or 15 points to a teams performance when the Cats are in town. I wish I had a dollar for everytime I watched a UK game and seen a guy has more points then he is averaging on the season in the first half.

Ive only been alive 33 years but for atleast the last 33 years the rest of the SEC has licked its chops for when Kentucky visits. This year is no different, 90% of the time you can add 10 or 15 points to a teams performance when the Cats are in town. I wish I had a dollar for everytime I watched a UK game and seen a guy has more points then he is averaging on the season in the first half.

 

They may have been licking their chops, but it wasn't very often that they had a real chance to win. Most of the time the SEC teams would fold over in fear of the jersey during that time. In recent years, though, that has gone away, for the most part, even in during Calipari's time when they've had an embarrassment of riches in the talent department.

Why would you give up a big payday at home to go on the road and play a MAC team or Liberty or someone like that? You never had addressed the fact that the teams that are cutting down the nets each season aren't doing it. Don't you think that winning the national championship is proof that your theory is unnecessary?

 

Kentucky's not winning national championships! That says they need to do something different than everyone else.

 

And who says it has to be a MAC team? Why not a Gonzaga, a Butler, a Xavier? Why not a home-and-home with a Virginia or West Virginia? Maybe a Pac 10 team? The bottom line is Kentucky sucked on the road last year, and I'm of the opinion that had they been better challenged early in the season, they wouldn't have gone 2-6 in conference, would have gotten a better seed and possibly even won it all. Lord knows they had more talent than anyone else; they were just seriously deficient in the mental toughness department.

Kentucky's not winning national championships! That says they need to do something different than everyone else.

 

And who says it has to be a MAC team? Why not a Gonzaga, a Butler, a Xavier? Why not a home-and-home with a Virginia or West Virginia? Maybe a Pac 10 team? The bottom line is Kentucky sucked on the road last year, and I'm of the opinion that had they been better challenged early in the season, they wouldn't have gone 2-6 in conference, would have gotten a better seed and possibly even won it all. Lord knows they had more talent than anyone else; they were just seriously deficient in the mental toughness department.

 

So it would have made them better to have lost the games out of conference instead of in conference? I fail to see the logic. The team was plenty tough by the end of the season. They won the SEC Tourney, beat North Carolina, beat the overall #1 seed in Ohio State and made the Final Four. They lost to the National Champions by 1 point in the Final Four after losing by 17 to them earlier in the year, they defeated North Carolina by 7 in the tourney after losing to them by 2 during the regular season. It seems to me that their schedule did plenty to get them ready for the postseason as they were playing their best basketball when it counted. The regular season conference title means very little to most UK fans. As for the talent level, last year's team was not the most talented team in the country--they beat 2 more talented teams in the NCAA tourney.

 

Every bit of evidence goes against your theory. As for the National Championships. This is only Cal's 3rd season after taking over an NIT team: Elite Eight, Final Four...I think he knows what he's doing with the schedule. The results are indisputable.

You don't think the rest of the SEC is licking its chops for when Kentucky visits after how they've been exposed the past two games? They have shown they are quite ordinary on the road, despite having a gross talent advantage over the opposition. If you take your lumps early on the road, you're a tougher team down the stretch, and how a team finishes is far more important than how it starts in terms of NCAA seeding.

I honestly don't think any team in the SEC is licking their chops to get a piece of this team .

So it would have made them better to have lost the games out of conference instead of in conference? I fail to see the logic. The team was plenty tough by the end of the season. They won the SEC Tourney, beat North Carolina, beat the overall #1 seed in Ohio State and made the Final Four. They lost to the National Champions by 1 point in the Final Four after losing by 17 to them earlier in the year, they defeated North Carolina by 7 in the tourney after losing to them by 2 during the regular season. It seems to me that their schedule did plenty to get them ready for the postseason as they were playing their best basketball when it counted. The regular season conference title means very little to most UK fans. As for the talent level, last year's team was not the most talented team in the country--they beat 2 more talented teams in the NCAA tourney.

 

Every bit of evidence goes against your theory. As for the National Championships. This is only Cal's 3rd season after taking over an NIT team: Elite Eight, Final Four...I think he knows what he's doing with the schedule. The results are indisputable.

 

What? You fail to see the logic in an illogical argument? 2 years ago UK basically played the same road schedule as this years team and they lost 3 games all season. Last years team was terrible on the road, according to Jim, and made the Final Four. Now do you see his logic? I thought so.

Kentucky's not winning national championships! That says they need to do something different than everyone else.

 

And who says it has to be a MAC team? Why not a Gonzaga, a Butler, a Xavier? Why not a home-and-home with a Virginia or West Virginia? Maybe a Pac 10 team? The bottom line is Kentucky sucked on the road last year, and I'm of the opinion that had they been better challenged early in the season, they wouldn't have gone 2-6 in conference, would have gotten a better seed and possibly even won it all. Lord knows they had more talent than anyone else; they were just seriously deficient in the mental toughness department.

 

Seriously, are you going to go to the grave with this one???

 

Mentally tough teams win games when it matters. Last year's team got hot and was mentally tough down the stretch. Tell Josh Harrelson he wasn't mentally tough going up against Sulinger from OSU or Henson from UNC.

 

For real, your trying to pair OOC games with mental toughness? Your lost.

Edited January 15, 201214 yr by Lucky Charms

How many non-con road games did Connecticut play last year?

How many non-con road games did Connecticut play last year?

 

1, against Texas.

 

We went through the past 10 national champions in a previous thread. Jim does not acknowledge that because it weakens his argument.