JDEaston

No need, screw the committee. We got this on our own.

Once again, the NCAA shows their incompetence at getting anything right.

Interesting...

Should UC accept the NCAA bid and refuse the NIT bid? Or should they ask the NIT if they would welcome them into their tournament?

Well I guess this thread was pointless. UC got a 9 seed.

Now that I think of it your right. I thought Louisville was part of the Midwest. UK will likely be placed in the midwest.

That would be right on par for the committee.

I would be surprised if they don't play in Louisville.

I'd rather them not be because I believe UK will be seeded in the Midwest.

They should, if it comes to that. I would never let the NOLA media persuade my opinion though. Just sayin.

Ok. You win, I'm gonna take my ball and go home. Before I do I have to ask, have you watched much college ball this year? Pretty much every team has bad losses, even those that will be awarded #1 seeds. UC will make the tourney. Even if they don't they will accept an NIT bit, why wouldn't they?

What makes you think they are NIT bound, just curious?

:thumb:

I think UC makes the tourney. But if they don't, why wouldn't they accept an NIT bid?

At the beginning of the season they did remind me of the 2013 team. However that team folded as the season went on, this one has progressed significantly. Cal has done a great job with this team and Ullis and Murray are difference makers between this years cats and the 2013 cats. They are playing well at the right time and seem to be having a lot of fun. I love it.

The kid is Wiltjer 2.0. He can flat out shoot the rock, but he's not a terrible defender like the 1.0 version. I love it for the kid. I told a guy I work with at the beginning of the season that Willis would help carry UK this season, he didn't believe me and let me hear about it early and often early in the season. Willis has came a long way since then.

I thought that was him but wasn't sure. A&M has an excellent staff.

:ohbrother:

A lot of players can take others off the dribble, that's what help side D is for. It's a big thing in college ball, a lot of teams thrive off playing in your face man to man with help if the defender gets beat off the dribble. Not so much in the NBA.

I've watched plenty of NBA games this century, I just don't watch it as often as I used to. If someone would get out and get in Steph's face he wouldn't be putting up the numbers he does. But they just let him shoot, knowing he's one of the best shooters in the world. I call that bad defense, but to each their own.

:lol2:

I had no idea he was playing behind Towns and Stein last year. That certainly changes things, I imagine his numbers would have been much better if he were playing at the 4 or 5. Most teams wouldn't have a guy that could step out and guard him. Where is Ukfan with his calcantcoach rhetoric when you need him.

I've already stated I don't watch a ton on NBA games since they decided to go on strike. I have watched every game Booker played in during his college year though. Like I said, he's good, great even. But the fact that he kept similar percentages from his year in college to his year in the NBA (on a terrible team) tells me that the NBA as a whole doesn't play great defense. If they did, his percentages would have taken a hit.

I'm not underestimating him one bit, I know he's good. What I don't get is if the NBA defense is so good, why didn't his percentages drop off given the fact that he was thrown to the wolves with little experience.

Yes, several. I was a big Miami fan when Alonzo played for them and used to vacation in Naples, Florida. We would make trips from Naples to Miami to watch them play.