It is still hard to accept that this team lost to Wisconsin. I always felt that if this team was going to lose it was going to be to a team that they did not see coming. I never dreamed after a week of hype and build up for this type of game that they would lose; as it seemed like we usually destroyed teams in that type of atmosphere. This one is still hard to take nearly three weeks later.
I still can't accept it
- Thread starter joester5612
- Start date
A classic example of what you get when you don't watch film of your opponent's games.
I know what you're saying.
I woke up this past Sunday morning, and the first thing running through my head was "I can't believe we let Wisconsin beat us".
This one is going to take a loooooong time to get over.
I woke up this past Sunday morning, and the first thing running through my head was "I can't believe we let Wisconsin beat us".
This one is going to take a loooooong time to get over.
It's gonna hurt for a very long time, I still keep playing the "if" game.
Yea, that part of Cal's strategy has always made me nervous. I still cant figure out why Devin Booker kept getting caught in one on one situations with Kaminsky. After the first time it happened I thought, well, Cal will not let that happen again; but it kept happening.
Amazingly it doesn't bother me that much. I was much more bothered losing to UConn last year, UConn before that and West Virginia and let's see oh Arizona in '97, LSU in '86, the dreadful Georgetown game.
The reason being is that I didn't really think we were the juggernaut that many were proclaiming. Yes we had a huge team length wise but we were not very fundamentally sound and could just disappear on occasions for good stretches of the game. We were just too offensively challenged.
We always played to the other teams style no matter what and a great team inflicts their will upon the other team and we never did.
We were just so much better in transition but yet we would never ever force the pace....ever. Only times we did play fast was when the other team would like Auburn or Ark etc. They paid for it, big wins for us. That should show everyone here how much better we were playing 94 feet instead 47.
When we played a half court game we always played into the other teams hands and they could keep it close and negate our advantages. Especially spread the floor and have their guys best us on the back door. Georgia showed the country on that, I saw that and was thinking we were going to have to change our D up but nope nothing changed and other teams started doing it and we ran into a team that could hit outside shots so we had to play them close and they just back doored us. We then gave them space and they hit threes, was just a back and forth game of that style.
In '96 we forced everybody to play our way and we shallacked em unmercifully. Routinely beating every team by 40+ then put the scrubs in to get themselves and the program ready for the future and the other team would cut the final score to 20-30 points.
That's why I said this team was not as good as the '96 team, '12 team or even the '97 team.
The reason being is that I didn't really think we were the juggernaut that many were proclaiming. Yes we had a huge team length wise but we were not very fundamentally sound and could just disappear on occasions for good stretches of the game. We were just too offensively challenged.
We always played to the other teams style no matter what and a great team inflicts their will upon the other team and we never did.
We were just so much better in transition but yet we would never ever force the pace....ever. Only times we did play fast was when the other team would like Auburn or Ark etc. They paid for it, big wins for us. That should show everyone here how much better we were playing 94 feet instead 47.
When we played a half court game we always played into the other teams hands and they could keep it close and negate our advantages. Especially spread the floor and have their guys best us on the back door. Georgia showed the country on that, I saw that and was thinking we were going to have to change our D up but nope nothing changed and other teams started doing it and we ran into a team that could hit outside shots so we had to play them close and they just back doored us. We then gave them space and they hit threes, was just a back and forth game of that style.
In '96 we forced everybody to play our way and we shallacked em unmercifully. Routinely beating every team by 40+ then put the scrubs in to get themselves and the program ready for the future and the other team would cut the final score to 20-30 points.
That's why I said this team was not as good as the '96 team, '12 team or even the '97 team.
Honestly, the fact that we don't watch game tape, or that much ever, of an opponent doesn't bother me at all. I'm a big believer in perfecting your own team, and let the other team worry all they want about stopping you.
I mean seriously, Billy Gillispie watched the most game tape of any coach in history of the sport. I rest my case.
I mean seriously, Billy Gillispie watched the most game tape of any coach in history of the sport. I rest my case.
I'm right there with you. Still fixating on it more than I should honestly. Not sure how to reconcile it in my mind.
Last year's run in the tourney was so unexpected that the loss in the title hurt, but the way they got there soothed the anguish. This year was very different. Just can't understand how a team that talented lost when they had a 4 point lead with under 4mins to play. Just so frustrating.
Last year's run in the tourney was so unexpected that the loss in the title hurt, but the way they got there soothed the anguish. This year was very different. Just can't understand how a team that talented lost when they had a 4 point lead with under 4mins to play. Just so frustrating.
Bo Ryan had a week to prepare for us . Calipari had a week to prepare for Wisconsin. I'm just going to stop right there .
Yeah - no.
'15 had the highest Kenpom rating and BPI rating in their databases (both of which account for SOS), the best margin vs ranked teams in the modern era, the best margin against the schedule since '96 UK - it was a juggernaut in every way.
Every once in a while, you run into idiot rival fans or chicken little UK fans who act like UK was caught up in more close games than most "great teams". And it's absolutely not true. Except for '91 UNLV and '96 UK, there is not a single modern era great team that had fewer close games. Even '12 UK had more close games.
This team CRUSHED people.
It's SO GD short sighted to look after the fact, turn around, and say "well, guess they weren't that great". It's idiotic, in fact. '91 UNLV WAS that great. '99 Duke WAS that great. '15 UK WAS that great. To say otherwise just makes you look like a statistical ignoramus. The best team just doesn't always win in a 1 game elimination tournament.
Even with all the numbers taken into account before the tourney, we were still like at 40% to win the whole thing according to the models. Get this through your head: WHAT OCCURRED WAS WHAT WAS EXPECTED. THERE WAS NO "EXPOSURE". NO TRUTH WAS SUDDENLY REVEALED. IT DOES NOT MATTER HOW GD GOOD A TEAM IS, YOU ALWAYS TAKE THE FIELD IN THE NCAAS, ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE ARE 3 OTHER TEAMS IN THE TOURNEY WHO ARE GOOD ENOUGH TO BE #1 MOST YEARS.
Wisconsin was just a slightly lesser juggernaut. They were the third highest rated BPI team in the database after '15 UK and '12 UK.
They were no damn joke, and they were gonna win 25% of the time we played, and that happened to be in that 25%. We got the better part of the odds in all those other games, just so happened to fall the other way that time.
A
anon_9qtxg60vqzy0y
Guest
Yea, I was so excited when we had that lead late, I was for sure we would score, extend it to six and that would be that; we would play Duke in the best match-up in my lifetime, on our way to title number nine. I am a thirty year old man that feels like I have lost a family member, and I realize that is a sad way to be at my age. lol. I have never been more devastated about a game though, I still have no desire to watch the NBA playoffs, or any other sports related programming. For now, I am just done. I keep telling myself that I need to take a step back from Kentucky basketball, but here I am wondering like crazy about which recruit we are going to get. It is a crazy cycle for sure.
This loss haunts me. It has lingered more than a loss has with me in a long time.
These losses I'll not forget or ever be ok with:
'84 GT
'92 Duke
'15 Wisconsin
These losses I'll not forget or ever be ok with:
'84 GT
'92 Duke
'15 Wisconsin
The team had 7 wins that were decided in the last 2 minutes. Most of those wins were against inferior opponents. That said, the Wisconsin loss wasn't an enormous shocker when looking at what this Kentucky team really was - a team with 8 very good players and one great player.
Our guards never took UK to that unbeatable level, and they could have done so with just one significant accomplishment: defensive rebounding. Had our guards actually learned to rebound in traffic, I think UK would be featuring 9 national titles right now.
Our guards never took UK to that unbeatable level, and they could have done so with just one significant accomplishment: defensive rebounding. Had our guards actually learned to rebound in traffic, I think UK would be featuring 9 national titles right now.
You guys that can't get over thst loss are dyed-in-the-blue Wildcat fans. You know. I know. We all know. We won't forget it. Yes, we had a super team, and we should not have lost that game. This bad memory will fade when we see what our 15-16 roster looks like. Then we'll do it all again. I just want to be competitive all of the time. Just like you guys. Before you know it, it will be March again.
Not since '93 has a loss gotten to me more. Sure, there have been others. 2010 WVU, 97 Zona. But 2010 was just so young and I didn't like the matchup against WVU going into the game, so it didn't surprise me when UK lost. In '97 UK had lost Anderson, so a championship would of just been icing on the the cake after the '96 title. This team should of won it all. How I feel about this Wisconsin game is how I would of felt if '96 or '12 team blew it. Plus as poorly as UK played, still up 4 with 4 minutes to go and stall ball killed it.
It happened all year.......there was NEVER any adjustment to the pick & roll or the pick & pop. The only saving grace was that there were a lot of blocked shots
There was a reason EVERY analyst pointed to one team all year who could give us trouble- Wisconsin. They matched up well against us. We get Arizona and then Duke, we win it all. The Cats didn't get the breaks in the bracket and didn't make the plays they needed to down the stretch. This one will haunt us all for decades.
Same exact scenario last year and Kentucky won. Good call, dude.
this is the post of the century. WE had an historically great team but we lost . It sucks but it happened.
But the poster's point seemed to be that if you give Ryan a week to prepare then Cal couldn't beat him.
I think FiveStarCat made a good point. The roles were reversed last year.
Cal's a much better coach than people give him credit for being. The whole twisted mythology behind "X's and O's" is such a tired thing used by fans out of frustration. I don't think I've ever come to the message boards after a big win and seen, "Man, Cal was great with the clipboard tonight!" X's and O's are something that people only notice after losses.
Basketball's a reactive game. An instinctual game. When you watch a lot of college basketball you notice that everybody runs the same iterations of stuff. This isn't college football where you've got tacticians with headsets over there. Basketball is a game that's more often than not won by players.
This idea that Cal is some doddering oaf who rolls the balls out is an argument of convenience. We were probably two possessions away from winning that game; you can't make any broad, sweeping claims about that sort of thing.
Last year we weren't odds on favorites to win it all! We got outcoached, plain and simple!
He referenced the coaching abilities of Calipari and Bo Ryan. Unless I missed something and one of the coaches dramatically altered their coaching styles in a span of one year, his point is invalid. Why wasn't Bo Ryan able to utilize his superior Xs and Os to beat Cal last year?
Kentucky was a 6 point favorite to beat Wisconsin. This was an upset but not a monumental one. It hurts because we were so close to not only a title but a historic season - but in a vacuum, Kentucky losing to that experienced, talented Wisconsin team is not a shocker in any way.
I think his point was, in this years game, both coaches had the same week to prepare. Bo used it to come up with a specific game plan for that one night against us. And it worked. Cal may have done the same, but his constant boasting to the effect of "we're gonna do what we do," as well as the seeming lack of any in-game adjustments, would leave one wondering if he did the same.
My counterpoint is you can't give Bo Ryan credit for masterminding some a gameplan against Cal this year and ignoring his failure in the exact scenario last season.
Clearly there are multiple ways to accomplish the same goal. Considering Cal's success v. Bo Ryan's success, I'll side with Calipari's methods for now.
But had Kentucky hung on to the lead and won--like last season--we wouldn't have seen anyone (not on this board or anywhere) say, "Give Cal a week to prepare..."
When Cal wins it's always assumed it's because of the players. When he loses it's because of "X's and O's" and he got outcoached.
Ok fine, but really, "but he did good LAST YEAR" is not really a valid response to what he did or didn't do just a few weeks ago, in my opinion.
That's why I hope Cal learns from this and works on his offensive schemes. They leave a lot to be desired. Actually, they suck!!! I'm still pissed!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Don't think the problem was the schemes as much as a methodology.
Cal tends to tighten games late rather than try to put the pedal down. Has a weird thing where he wants to get a lead and then sit. Afterward he'll often say to the media that his teams are comfortable doing that, but if you pay close attention his teams have been almost universally bad at UK when he tries to reign them in.
I see the stuff that happened at the end of Wisconsin being one in a piece with the sort of stuff Cal does when he gets a 20-point lead and then instructs the team to grind away the shot clock. I think he thought we could cut their possessions and get out of there with a W.
This one's just gonna keep hurting.
We were the biggest betting favorite EVER entering this tournament.
So many simple things that only one need to change.
The stall-ball ending.
Watching Duke win and hearing all the hypocrites praise them and K.
Absolutely fantastic kids off the court.
Most hype ever.
History in the making.
The list goes on and on. This one is going to take a while folks.
We were the biggest betting favorite EVER entering this tournament.
So many simple things that only one need to change.
The stall-ball ending.
Watching Duke win and hearing all the hypocrites praise them and K.
Absolutely fantastic kids off the court.
Most hype ever.
History in the making.
The list goes on and on. This one is going to take a while folks.
I don't totally disagree, but my only caveat there would be that we had the #1 draft pick in the middle. In this way I wish the ND game had never happened, because it lulled Kentucky into a predictable pattern that Wisconsin had the personnel to take away.
I do think Cal has at times become too one-dimensional offensively. There's this weird thing in college basketball where the big man becomes more efficient and the team becomes less effective simply because feeding the post causes a lot of standing around from the other guys. You saw some of this in '10 even as Cousins became a manchild.
Duke went the other way and started to use Okafor more as a garbage guy, a passer, a player that the guards played off of. Early in the year he was getting 25 points and Duke was having to fight to win.
Cal's teams, and college basketball teams generally, are far better when the guards fire the kiln.
