PDA

View Full Version : Featherston column / Kentucky SOS



RP_McMurphy
03-03-2008, 10:54 AM
Kentucky's schedule is not soft with SOS of 10 (if you have UNC, Louisville and Indiana....it aint soft).

Duvall
03-03-2008, 11:04 AM
Kentucky's schedule is not soft with SOS of 10 (if you have UNC, Louisville and Indiana....it aint soft).

You forgot Central Arkansas, Gardner Webb, Liberty, Texas Southern, Stony Brook, Tennessee Tech and Florida International. Not to mention playing in a weak, weak SEC.

77devil
03-03-2008, 11:05 AM
Kentucky's schedule is not soft with SOS of 10 (if you have UNC, Louisville and Indiana....it aint soft).

Included Cental Arkansas, Gardner Webb, Liberty, Texas Sourthern, Stoneybrook, and FIU. All over 200 in the Pomeroy ratings, most approaching 300 with one over 300. Overall SOS is 53. Looks pretty soft to me.

mnk1010
03-03-2008, 11:07 AM
Don't forget San Diego

-jk
03-03-2008, 11:10 AM
RPI has KY with a SOS of 10. Pomeroy and Sagarin have their SOS from 50-60.

-jk

EasternDB
03-03-2008, 11:14 AM
UK average point lost to UNC, Louisville and Indiana was 14 points.
UK = NIT....

dynastydefender
03-06-2008, 11:18 AM
No SEC team that has gone 10-6 or better in the SEC has not ever missed getting a nod fore the tourney. Sorry to ruin your bracket!

Duvall
03-06-2008, 11:22 AM
No SEC team that has gone 10-6 or better in the SEC has not ever missed getting a nod for the tourney.

I doubt there has ever been a 10-6 SEC team that had as terrible a non-conference performance as Kentucky.

Plus, the SEC is just awful this year.

Ignatius07
03-06-2008, 11:23 AM
I think the selection committee can absolutely leave Kentucky out based on precedent. They have already noted that they are willing to knock teams down a few pegs based on injury to star players (see Kenyon Martin and Cincinnati in 2000). Since UK was a bubble team anyway, I really don't see how they can be included given Patterson's injury. If they had beaten Tennessee, that'd be one thing. Now the close UT loss can only be appreciated for the effort put forth by the Kentucky players (considerable), not - unfortunately for Cats fans - as a tournament profile booster.

rtnorthrup
03-06-2008, 11:28 AM
Supposedly, injuries are only to be taken into consideration in seeding and have no bearing on whether a team gets invited or not.

Olympic Fan
03-06-2008, 11:28 AM
No SEC team that has gone 10-6 or better in the SEC has not ever missed getting a nod fore the tourney. Sorry to ruin your bracket!

And before last year, no ACC team with 20 wins on Selection Sunday had ever missed the field -- and last year TWO ACC teams had 20 and went to the NIT.

Actually, the guys on ESPN have said that "only two" SEC teams with 10 conference wins have missed the field. Kentucky -- with its odd mix of terrible losses, a mediocre overall record, a poor RPI (very few teams above 50 make it) and a great SEC record could be the kind of team that misses ... or just makes it.

Most of the guys that are good about the RPI -- I count Jerry Palm and Joe Lunardi -- suggest that Kentucky is right on the edge. Their final game with Florida could have a big impact -- bigger than normal, because Kentucky is trying to prove they still deserve a bid with Patterson out. It wouldn't hurt to win a few in the SEC Tourney.

I think it's clear that Kentucky is still in the at large picture, but anybody who points to something like their SEC record and suggests that's a major indicator is fooling themselves.

BTW I saw an interesting note on ESPN last night -- no team with a .500 conference record from either the Big 12 or Pac Ten has ever gotten an at large bid! Wow!

Chitowndevil
03-06-2008, 11:32 AM
Kentucky is a very stange case:

Pros
-- 11-4 SEC record
-- RPI of 47, well within at-large range
-- 4 wins against RPI top 50 teams, inc. UT (1) and Vandy (8)

Cons
-- Nonconference RPI of 203
-- 4-7 overall road/neutral record
-- Best R/N win is Georgia (RPI #146)

This is as strange an NCAA resume as I've ever seen. I think it all comes down to how the committee treats Patrick Patterson's injury, which means their remaining games are huge. Lose to Florida and in their SEC opener, and they're done. Win both and they're a lock.

dynastydefender
03-06-2008, 11:38 AM
Per "The Minutes" posted on ESPN.com on 3 March

Kentucky (31). Grade: guts plus. When the news came out Friday that stud freshman Patrick Patterson was done for the season with a stress fracture, the Wildcats' season appeared to be over. The selection committee would have little interest in a double-digit-loss team without its best player, and a nationally televised execution at Tennessee loomed. Except the Cats nearly won, pushing the Volunteers to the final horn. Now the committee will have to watch Kentucky closely in its final two games (at South Carolina, home against Florida) and in the SEC tournament to appraise it anew. Understand this: No team that finished 10-6 or better in SEC play has ever missed the tourney unless it declared itself ineligible for rules violations. Kentucky is 10-4.

UK beat SC
Now Florida next.

I am just as surprised as you but I am willing to face the fact that UK is getting an at large dance!

should_be_working
03-06-2008, 11:53 AM
While I don't think UK is deserving to get in because of their horrible early season losses, my bet is they make it (one reason simply being that they are UK). But the thought of having to play them in the first round, is a little unsettling given their late season performance - they could be a dangerous early round team. - that pains me to say

BD80
03-06-2008, 12:53 PM
It is only natural for Ky fans to want their team to dance, and to emphasize the positives of the season. But being objective, how can one justify making the tourney with such an awful out of conference performance?

10-6 in this year's SEC isn't that good.

HOWEVER, why not Kentucky, compared to the other "bubble" teams:
Maryland, Florida, New Mexico, Virginia Tech, Western Kentucky, Syracuse, Houston, Southern Illinois, Saint Joseph's, Dayton, Ohio State?

None has a resume that screams "we deserve to be in".

Frankly, I'd like to see Ky and VaTech rewarded for their improvement over the year. Dayton had a great start, but has faded. Don't know much about the rest.

Florida could easily argue they are one of the best 30 some at large teams, but they took a chance with their weak scheduling to break young kids in easy (like Ky did to break the kids into a new system). How about this, the winner of Ky Fla is in, with the loser having to win at least 2 games in the SEC tourney to move on.

KenTankerous
03-06-2008, 02:21 PM
With all the legitimate complaints from the mid-majors regarding deserving teams being passed over for the elite schools, I think the committee almost has to exclude Kentucky this year. I don't see how anything they have done off-sets Gardner-Webb and San Diego. If they make the dance without winning the SEC tournament, it is just more fodder for the harping from the smaller, less televised conferences.

No, this is a good year to give that dance slot to another George Mason or the next Gonzaga.

dynastydefender
03-06-2008, 02:39 PM
With all the legitimate complaints from the mid-majors regarding deserving teams being passed over for the elite schools, I think the committee almost has to exclude Kentucky this year. I don't see how anything they have done off-sets Gardner-Webb and San Diego. If they make the dance without winning the SEC tournament, it is just more fodder for the harping from the smaller, less televised conferences.

No, this is a good year to give that dance slot to another George Mason or the next Gonzaga.

History is on UK's side on this as I illustrated in a previous message.

dynastydefender
03-06-2008, 02:46 PM
Kentucky is a very stange case:

Pros
-- 11-4 SEC record
-- RPI of 47, well within at-large range
-- 4 wins against RPI top 50 teams, inc. UT (1) and Vandy (8)

Cons
-- Nonconference RPI of 203
-- 4-7 overall road/neutral record
-- Best R/N win is Georgia (RPI #146)

This is as strange an NCAA resume as I've ever seen. I think it all comes down to how the committee treats Patrick Patterson's injury, which means their remaining games are huge. Lose to Florida and in their SEC opener, and they're done. Win both and they're a lock.



More wins can't hurt thier chance however as I have said in other threads.
BG has taken TS's less talented recruits and run them through game day practices. This took it's toll on the team early on. Players were not used to that kind of regimen. UK fans were left scratching thier heads on the effect of those practices especially when Gardner Webb came to Rupp and beat them handily. However I am seeing a long term payoff for that kind of regimen. In fact...I think the rest of the country is seeing it to. That is why I believe that UK, if given the at large bid, can be competitive in the tourney this year.

Chitowndevil
03-06-2008, 03:28 PM
With all the legitimate complaints from the mid-majors regarding deserving teams being passed over for the elite schools, I think the committee almost has to exclude Kentucky this year. I don't see how anything they have done off-sets Gardner-Webb and San Diego. If they make the dance without winning the SEC tournament, it is just more fodder for the harping from the smaller, less televised conferences.

No, this is a good year to give that dance slot to another George Mason or the next Gonzaga.

That's fine. The problem is, there just aren't many George Masons or Gonzagas out there this year. Take a look at some of the mid-major bubble teams.

Illinois State and VCU, both of whom are ahead of Kentucky in the RPI, have a combined ZERO wins against RPI top 50 teams and 6 losses to teams ranked 100 or worse (including one loss each against teams below 200). Are they automatically disqualified too? Heck, Kent State, who most people have pretty safely in the field, has TWO losses to opponents rated 200 or worse.

Like Kentucky, both SIU and New Mexico are high 40s/low 50s in the RPI. SIU has 4 top 50 wins, but is also 11-7 in the Missouri Valley to Kentucky's 11-4 in the SEC. New Mexico has 2 top 50 wins but is only 10-5 in the Mountain West. The median RPIs in the SEC, MVC, and MWC are 54, 107, and 108, respectively. Shouldn't that 11-4 SEC record count for something?

I'm not necessarily arguing that Kentucky should get a bid. I am however tired of hearing how the committee passes over "deserving" mid-majors. The job is to pick the 34 BEST teams, and as much as I hate to say it, I think Kentucky does have an argument.