Is uk one of the few blue bloods that doesn't have home cooking?

[Cali-Hawk]

No, we really don't. At least not 47 FTs worth, lmfao. We do not get what other blue bloods get, that's for sure.

However, I believe this is Kentucky's own fault. Officiating discrepancies between home and away is arguably the worst in college basketball, more than any other sport. And I think that's directly related to the atmosphere, where students are sometimes 5 feet from the officials. It's much easier to get a rocking basketball arena than a football stadium the size of some towns. And because of that, I do think officials placate to the home crowd.

Bring in Rupp Arena, which is in a way the anti-Allen Field house. No noise. Lame student section, people practically asleep. The other team can focus 100% cause it's quiet. The only thing intimidating is the number of people and history.. that's it.

They talked about Rupp getting some $30 mil renovations? I really hope those are to make a legit student section.

There's no question that playing at home makes a huge difference. I've been to games at both AFH and Rupp, and yes, there's a difference in how close the fans feel. Something both UK and KU get is that they go into a hostile road atmosphere every game. I still think the AFH advantage clearly outweighs the road disadvantage, but Oklahoma won't face the same pressure on opponents' homecourts as we will.

My guess is that your perception of UK not getting the same treatment as other bluebloods is mostly homerism. Refs almost always favor the home team. We have our officials that we dread regardless of location, Ed Hightower for one, but I think every program has those. The part that is frustrating is when you see the home team able to make more aggressive plays because they feel like the refs have their backs. There were obviously many calls on Saturday and therefore many questionable calls, but several of them that I questioned (that went against UK) were actually confirmed when I saw the replays. I don't think we were good enough to beat you in Rupp on Saturday and probably not on a neutral court either. Hopefully we square off again next year, much prefer home-and-home to neutral site games. Actually, I'd prefer if the Champions Classic rotated between the 4 home courts, but I'm sure that doesn't work dollar-wise.

 

[billCgmx]

FWIW

2015-16 Fouls Per Game (Home Games)

Duke +6
Kansas +5
Oklahoma +3.8
North Carolina +3.6
Kentucky +3
Louisville +1.4

 

[LineSkiCat14]

There's no question that playing at home makes a huge difference. I've been to games at both AFH and Rupp, and yes, there's a difference in how close the fans feel. Something both UK and KU get is that they go into a hostile road atmosphere every game. I still think the AFH advantage clearly outweighs the road disadvantage, but Oklahoma won't face the same pressure on opponents' homecourts as we will.

My guess is that your perception of UK not getting the same treatment as other bluebloods is mostly homerism. Refs almost always favor the home team. We have our officials that we dread regardless of location, Ed Hightower for one, but I think every program has those. The part that is frustrating is when you see the home team able to make more aggressive plays because they feel like the refs have their backs. There were obviously many calls on Saturday and therefore many questionable calls, but several of them that I questioned (that went against UK) were actually confirmed when I saw the replays. I don't think we were good enough to beat you in Rupp on Saturday and probably not on a neutral court either. Hopefully we square off again next year, much prefer home-and-home to neutral site games. Actually, I'd prefer if the Champions Classic rotated between the 4 home courts, but I'm sure that doesn't work dollar-wise.

Never complained about Kansas getting some degree of home calls. Any college basketball fan knows that going in, just like I'd expect some calls to go our way at Rupp. But what you haven't answered that several of us have brought up, is 47 free throws.

That would have never happened at Rupp. I'd imagine it's been decades since we had a 45+ FT game, and that's with dozens of the best slashers college basketball has seen in recent years.

Personally, seeing as how we're everyone's Superbowl because most teams don't have a single player who is good enough to play for Cal, and it angers them, I'd rather every game be on a neutral site. It's Gameday everytime we come to town to a level that Kansas doesn't even know, and I dread every game we have to play on the road..

 

[hills5]

Almost all home teams get some measure of "home cooking". UK is no exception to this. The difference is, we get ours every now and then and it is nowhere near as blatant as what KU got on Saturday. Some schools like Kansas and Duke get some form of home cooking almost every time they step onto their court.

So are people saying there is a conspiracy for KU at Phog? Does the NCAA tell the refs to favor KU? Or are the KU fans so amazing they influence the refs that much?

This is where I think the 'home cooking' argument is mostly flawed. I watched the KU/UK game and anyone who says "but KU got more calls" is right but that's a really lazy way of analyzing whether there is home cooking. As anyone who played knows there are different ways to drive and defend and KU drove in a way that attracted contact and the refs called it. It wasn't blatant home cooking but a difference in the way the teams play. In the first half UK got the calls so KU switched to a zone for much of the second half eliminating a lot of the foul potential from KU's big men (they also aren't 'blocking' style big men so they are less prone to foul going for blocks). UK plays a different way. Go back and watch the game. The announcers called out the poor calls when they happened and Bilas especially will call out home cooking when he sees but he didn't here because it wasn't there. Anyone who thinks only the KU, UNC, and Dukes of the world get the slight bias of refs at home and it doesn't happen at UK is an utter moron. UK lost a close game and fouled a ton so it's not surprising some are taking the tack of, 'it was 8-5'. If you actually watch the game not looking to cry bias everytime a foul is called I think you'll see the difference between styles and coaching and the game wasn't decided because the refs wanted KU to win.

 

[*Bleedingblue*]

Against Missouri I thought we got 2 calls in our favor. Those 2 were when they were called for a block instead of a charge.

 

[Jkwo]

Your are kidding right? No home cooking in Rupp? I believe most fans of schools who visit Rupp would disagree.
As for the KU game UK did get called for a lot of fouls and KU got a few calls down the stretch but the truth is the UK front line guys especially Lee & Skal foul a lot in games home and away.

I mostly agree with this sad birdy except for his final implication that the refs didn't decide the game at KU.

Yes, it is true that UK gets a favorable Rupp whistle.

Yes, it is true that our bigs foul out of games all the time.

I would even add that KU earned a couple (not 22 or whatever) more fouls called their way over the course of the game due to offensive decisions we made versus theirs.

But it is not true that a justly called game in the last 5 minutes of regulation would've had this result. UK would have won. Before that, yes, they got some of the expected home cooking, but nothing to write home about.

There were a couple of key plays at the end where refs swallow the whistle 99% of the time where they called ticky tack stuff on our guys and did not return the favor on the other end. If not for that, Bill would've had his (10th?) L at AFH.

 

[Jkwo]

So are people saying there is a conspiracy for KU at Phog? Does the NCAA tell the refs to favor KU? Or are the KU fans so amazing they influence the refs that much?

Well, Jay Williams said that it was the loudest environment he's ever heard at a basketball game, and he played at Duke when they were absolutely dominant.

And CBS's the off-the-record polling of D1 coaches regarding hardest arenas to play of course put AFH up in the top few, but a huge chunk of them also offered the unsolicited opinion that KU gets the worst home cooking in the game. And they would know vastly better than you and me.

You poo pooing it and suggesting a bunch of outrageous ways it could happen (do you think a talking fish swam up to the refs and told them to give the game to KU? durr hurr) does nothing to alter the reality of the situation.

No, this was not the worst home cooked game I've ever seen. Yes, UK gets calls at Rupp like anybody else at home (especially the big boys). But this was UK's game if the last 5 minutes of regulation were called straight. And if you come over here to our board and patronize us and tell us that we're supposed to feel good about that, you're gonna get a firm kick in the nuts. And deservedly so.

 

[hills5]

Well, Jay Williams said that it was the loudest environment he's ever heard at a basketball game, and he played at Duke when they were absolutely dominant.

And CBS's the off-the-record polling of D1 coaches regarding hardest arenas to play of course put AFH up in the top few, but a huge chunk of them also offered the unsolicited opinion that KU gets the worst home cooking in the game. And they would know vastly better than you and me.

You poo pooing it and suggesting a bunch of outrageous ways it could happen (do you think a talking fish swam up to the refs and told them to give the game to KU? durr hurr) does nothing to alter the reality of the situation.

No, this was not the worst home cooked game I've ever seen. Yes, UK gets calls at Rupp like anybody else at home (especially the big boys). But this was UK's game if the last 5 minutes of regulation were called straight. And if you come over here to our board and patronize us and tell us that we're supposed to feel good about that, you're gonna get a firm kick in the nuts. And deservedly so.

How is it outrageous to say those are two potential options? What other way does a home team get home cooking other than saying it's a conspiracy or the refs are seriously influenced by the home fans?

If you want to believe UK won if not for the refs so be it. I personally thought KU didn't deserve the win, but not because they were favored by the refs but because they missed chances to secure the win. I also think you answered the reason why UK likely struggled in the second half - the fans. The more the fans get into a game, the better the home team will play and the more frustrated and poor the road team will play, especially when you have young players. That usually leads to more fouls. KU also switched D, which dramatically cut the number of foul opportunities and started attacking much more.

Every home team will get the benefit of a few 50/50 calls a game. To say that KU is somehow unique in how much they receive or when they receive it is without merit. The stuff I've seen on this thread goes well into conspiracy and I'm sure if you took a poll of the SEC who gets the best home cooking the answer would be Rupp. Why? Because UK wins and it's easier to say, "we would have won if not for the refs" than admit the game was legitimately lost.

 

[Jkwo]

How is it outrageous to say those are two potential options? What other way does a home team get home cooking other than saying it's a conspiracy or the refs are seriously influenced by the home fans?

If you want to believe UK won if not for the refs so be it. I personally thought KU didn't deserve the win, but not because they were favored by the refs but because they missed chances to secure the win. I also think you answered the reason why UK likely struggled in the second half - the fans. The more the fans get into a game, the better the home team will play and the more frustrated and poor the road team will play, especially when you have young players. That usually leads to more fouls. KU also switched D, which dramatically cut the number of foul opportunities and started attacking much more.

Every home team will get the benefit of a few 50/50 calls a game. To say that KU is somehow unique in how much they receive or when they receive it is without merit. The stuff I've seen on this thread goes well into conspiracy and I'm sure if you took a poll of the SEC who gets the best home cooking the answer would be Rupp. Why? Because UK wins and it's easier to say, "we would have won if not for the refs" than admit the game was legitimately lost.

Do you make a habit of being retroactively beaten in debates? Because every point you've made here either does not contradict what I said, or has already been broken down by the very post you're replying to. That could be one of those useless superpowers - like the boy who is only invisible when nobody is looking at him.

When you come in with conspiracy theory talk, you're being patronizing, and it's a jackass way to behave on somebody else's board, and there's nothing ridiculous about the notion that the fans influence the refs, particularly in venues where peoples' teeth are rattling from the volume.

And what you describe as "without merit" includes the opinions of people who are vastly more qualified than you or I or anyone else in the world, for that matter. Does that alone prove the point? Obviously not - that would be the appeal to authority fallacy. But the burden of proof on you to substantiate your label of "without merit" is pretty immense when the majority of D1 coaches in the game disagree with your D1 coaching related claim.

 

[ZenCatFan73]

I find it amusing when opposing fans come to our board to spout nonsense and immediately lead off with a spelling error.

Further, a UL fan no less.

 

[awf]

Given the fact that UK drives the lane and makes it a point to attack, the foul disparity from Saturday was extremely revealing, especially when one re-evaluates the "arms-straight-up" approach many of those fouls were called on.

This is why people hate Kansas, and why people cheer for their doom in March. It will come. It almost always does.

Kansas is a lot like IU. They don't do too well outside of their own gym.

 

[Louis_Skunt]

This is the funniest thread..
No home cooking in Rupp? Thats like asking every year about going undefeated.

 

[hills5]

Do you make a habit of being retroactively beaten in debates? Because every point you've made here either does not contradict what I said, or has already been broken down by the very post you're replying to. That could be one of those useless superpowers - like the boy who is only invisible when nobody is looking at him.

When you come in with conspiracy theory talk, you're being patronizing, and it's a jackass way to behave on somebody else's board, and there's nothing ridiculous about the notion that the fans influence the refs, particularly in venues where peoples' teeth are rattling from the volume.

And what you describe as "without merit" includes the opinions of people who are vastly more qualified than you or I or anyone else in the world, for that matter. Does that alone prove the point? Obviously not - that would be the appeal to authority fallacy. But the burden of proof on you to substantiate your label of "without merit" is pretty immense when the majority of D1 coaches in the game disagree with your D1 coaching related claim.

You're jumping to conclusions. I completely agree fans can influence the refs but my point is people on here make it sound like KU gets some ungodly benefit unknown before to college basketball. The influence of fans will usually go to a few 50/50 calls or a foul here or there. Not elevating to the level people here seem to think. If it was such a disastrously called game in KU's favor, what is the reason it was so lopsided to KU's advantage? Every team gets home cooking, why do people on here seem to think that KU is so much better at getting it so often at home? There are really two options, either you believe it's a conspiracy, or you believe that KU fans are simply louder fans and therefore intimidate the refs into wild benefits. Are you saying it's the latter? And if you believe it's the former - that the NCAA is telling the refs what to do - that is a conspiracy, plain and simple, which is what I was referencing in the previous post.

As for this game, I think KU got the benefit of some calls this past game but no where near what people on here are claiming. KU changed their style of play and UK didn't. The way the style was changed meant KU was more likely to draw fouls. That was the difference. Most people would agree UK got the benefit of the doubt in the first half. If fans influence the refs as much as you and others on here seem to think, were the KU fans silent in the first half? Why the massive change?

As for you CBS poll, can you cite it? I'd be interested in seeing it.

 

[UKnCincy]

No reason a program like Kentucky shouldn't have a top3 hardest venue to play in. The other team shouldn't even be able to think as they dribble the ball up the court.

As far as I'm concerned, Rupp doesn't even crack the top25.

Why have we won nearly 90% of all of our games played in Rupp?

 

[Jkwo]

You're jumping to conclusions. I completely agree fans can influence the refs but my point is people on here make it sound like KU gets some ungodly benefit unknown before to college basketball. The influence of fans will usually go to 50/50 calls or a foul here or there. Not elevating to the level people here seem to think. If it was such a disastrously called game in KU's favor, what is the reason it was so lopsided to KU's advantage? Every team gets home cooking, why do people on here seem to think that KU is so much better at getting it so often at home? There are really two options, either you believe it's a conspiracy, or you believe that KU fans are simply louder fans and therefore intimidate the refs into wild benefits. Are you saying it's the latter? And if you believe it's the former - that the NCAA is telling the refs what to do - that is a conspiracy, plain and simple.

As for this game, I think KU got the benefit of some calls this past game but no where near what people on here are claiming. KU changed their style of play and UK didn't. The way the style was changed meant KU was more likely to draw fouls. That was the difference. Most people would agree UK got the benefit of the doubt in the first half. If fans influence the refs as much as you and others on here seem to think, were the KU fans silent in the first half? Why the massive change?

As for you CBS poll, can you cite it? I'd be interested in seeing it.

Everything in bold is either a straw man or was already responded to. I'll ask you to kindly reread what I typed, because I'm not wasting my time defending things I didn't say or re-establishing things that I did. I am more open than the average rafterian to rival posters on here, but you're being trollish out of either ignorance or malice, and it's getting old quick.

And I'm not gonna go scan the internet for you to find the old surveys, but Norlander mentioned the sentiment in a recent podcast based on another article from January, so here, I'll give you his exact words because I'm so GD generous and kind-hearted.

Read more carefully, stop putting words in my mouth, and stop sounding like a patronizing dick. I already told you what I believe to be the case, and I told you that other people vastly more qualified than you or me also believe it, and instead of doing the rational thing - taking a step back and asking to hear evidence before going further - you reflexively turn around and hit me with the same sloppy attempt at a syllogism which a. already received a response b. is not perfectly sound anyway and c. comes across like you're attempting to introduce me to the concept of logic, which is really, really not a path you want to go down.

Or maybe I'm just misjudging you by the logical missteps in the red text - You've got one unsupported statement submitted as fact around which your entire case is built (and which completely crumbles if someone rejects said unsupported premise), and then you rely on the inverse (equally inane) argument to "more fouls for one team = unfair officiating".

There is no logical reason why a team can't be called for fewer fouls in a half and still have been screwed by the refs, because were the game called straight, the foul disparity would have been even greater. There is no logical reason why a team can't have the appearance of a good whistle due to a few prominent plays but still have a net negative whistle. There is no logical reason why a referee's decision making (and by extension, the home court advantage) must be symmetrical between halves - many players play asymmetrically - you have your guys who crumble in the clutch, and on the other end, your Robert Horry types, so on what basis would you rule out similar phenomena with refs? There were tons of possible factors left unaccounted for when you dropped your cute line about silent KU fans. Oh, and that line itself is also built off of another assertion regarding the near-universal perception of the first half officiating, which itself should be subject to scrutiny before we even get to all of those other problems.


Anyways, here's a link for you:
Around 4 minutes into the 1/29 podcast

You throw out the platitude that "every team gets home cooking" in order to rebut claims that Kansas's treatment is any different than normal. Well, guess what? Coaches see all manners of home cooking, and they themselves don't agree that it's the same everywhere, and they singled out your school as a particularly bad offender.

You are, of course, welcome to disagree with them, with me, and with anybody else you please. And if you'd come in with a simple "agree to disagree" approach, you'd have encountered hardly any hassling whatsoever.

But if you show up one day on our home turf with no posting history and decide that you're gonna try to back us into a corner and force us to recant with some logical wizardry, you'd better be damn sure to mind your Ps and Qs. Thus far, you have failed to do so - pretty egregiously. There are plenty of people who don't accept your premises and so also reject your conclusions, and for excellent reasons.

 

[hawkin]

All this home cooking talk got me hankering for some chicken fried steak, taters gravy & some sweet corn.

 

[howercat]

said it many times, UK does not get home cooking at Rupp.

 

[namnik]

Thoughts?

Its called Blue tinted glasses. Every home team gets the calls and every home teams fans thinks they are being screwed by the boys in stripes. It's a human thing.

 

[Chairman Meow]

Tyler Ulis was hacked the entire game both with the ball and off the ball.

He shot a whopping 4 fts.

Selden shot 8 and Mason and Graham shot 6 each. Selden never committed a foul in the entire game and OT.

 

[Willy4UK]

All this home cooking talk got me hankering for some chicken fried steak, taters gravy & some sweet corn.

Go ahead little man. Whistle past the graveyard. Karma is a bitch and it will come back to get you all.

Just like OJ sitting in jail. You'll get yours in the tourney. Laugh all you want. But you all will get yours in the tourney.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

Why have we won nearly 90% of all of our games played in Rupp?

I always struggle with this.. Normally I think it's having NBA talent all over the floor that will get us a win anywhere.. But then I wonder if it's Gramps in the stands half asleep.. I'm sure both are equal factors for why we almost never lose at home..

 

[hills5]

Everything in bold is either a straw man or was already responded to. I'll ask you to kindly reread what I typed, because I'm not wasting my time defending things I didn't say or re-establishing things that I did. I am more open than the average rafterian to rival posters on here, but you're being trollish out of either ignorance or malice, and it's getting old quick.

And I'm not gonna go scan the internet for you to find the old surveys, but Norlander mentioned the sentiment in a recent podcast based on another article from January, so here, I'll give you his exact words because I'm so GD generous and kind-hearted.

Read more carefully, stop putting words in my mouth, and stop sounding like a patronizing dick. I already told you what I believe to be the case, and I told you that other people vastly more qualified than you or me also believe it, and instead of doing the rational thing - taking a step back and asking to hear evidence before going further - you reflexively turn around and hit me with the same sloppy attempt at a syllogism which a. already received a response b. is not perfectly sound anyway and c. comes across like you're attempting to introduce me to the concept of logic, which is really, really not a path you want to go down.

Or maybe I'm just misjudging you by the logical missteps in the red text - You've got one unsupported statement submitted as fact around which your entire case is built (and which completely crumbles if someone rejects said unsupported premise), and then you rely on the inverse (equally inane) argument to "more fouls for one team = unfair officiating".

There is no logical reason why a team can't be called for fewer fouls in a half and still have been screwed by the refs, because were the game called straight, the foul disparity would have been even greater. There is no logical reason why a team can't have the appearance of a good whistle due to a few prominent plays but still have a net negative whistle. There is no logical reason why a referee's decision making (and by extension, the home court advantage) must be symmetrical between halves - many players play asymmetrically - you have your guys who crumble in the clutch, and on the other end, your Robert Horry types, so on what basis would you rule out similar phenomena with refs? There were tons of possible factors left unaccounted for when you dropped your cute line about silent KU fans. Oh, and that line itself is also built off of another assertion regarding the near-universal perception of the first half officiating, which itself should be subject to scrutiny before we even get to all of those other problems.


Anyways, here's a link for you:
Around 4 minutes into the 1/29 podcast

You throw out the platitude that "every team gets home cooking" in order to rebut claims that Kansas's treatment is any different than normal. Well, guess what? Coaches see all manners of home cooking, and they themselves don't agree that it's the same everywhere, and they singled out your school as a particularly bad offender.

You are, of course, welcome to disagree with them, with me, and with anybody else you please. And if you'd come in with a simple "agree to disagree" approach, you'd have encountered hardly any hassling whatsoever.

But if you show up one day on our home turf with no posting history and decide that you're gonna try to back us into a corner and force us to recant with some logical wizardry, you'd better be damn sure to mind your Ps and Qs. Thus far, you have failed to do so - pretty egregiously. There are plenty of people who don't accept your premises and so also reject your conclusions, and for excellent reasons.

So I listened to the podcast and I'd still be interested to see the poll (which I haven't found). I found an article he wrote but it says nothing of this poll http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25459736 It also sounds like he was asking specifically about Allen, which doesn't help the argument that the "majority" of coaches think Allen provides a uniquely unfair benefit vs. other arenas nationwide. The coaches say they think Allen gets it more than other places, but without seeing how many coaches he talked to, where they coached (for instance, have they played a number of games in Rupp and/or Cameron?), or even how many games they coached, it's hard to give it much credence.

And interestingly the most recent podcast supports my position on the game. They discuss that KU was going hard at UK defenders, who have a tendency to foul, and the UK players drive but don't draw contact because of floaters and pull ups. They admit there is likely a quick whistle against opponents in Allen, but the way the two teams played is the reason you saw the foul disparity. They don't seem to agree with the position that the game was decided by the refs.

 

[wldktz8]

I mostly agree with this sad birdy except for his final implication that the refs didn't decide the game at KU.

Yes, it is true that UK gets a favorable Rupp whistle.

Yes, it is true that our bigs foul out of games all the time.

I would even add that KU earned a couple (not 22 or whatever) more fouls called their way over the course of the game due to offensive decisions we made versus theirs.

But it is not true that a justly called game in the last 5 minutes of regulation would've had this result. UK would have won. Before that, yes, they got some of the expected home cooking, but nothing to write home about.

There were a couple of key plays at the end where refs swallow the whistle 99% of the time where they called ticky tack stuff on our guys and did not return the favor on the other end. If not for that, Bill would've had his (10th?) L at AFH.

Not one foul was called on KU the remaining 10 minutes of regulation. In reality there 3 obvious no calls and 5 legit fouls on UK. Neither team really changed their style of play from the prior 30 minutes. Several of the fouls called on UK probably should have been jump balls.

 

[CatEye2010]

Just to see if there was any "home cooking" I compared the last three home games of both UK and KU (includes UK @ KU game):

• Both won all three home games: UK by +15.6; KU by +7.4
• UK beat Missouri, Vandy, Miss. St. and KU beat UK, Texas, TCU (KU had tougher games)
• FTM-FTA in 3-games: UK was 30-40/ ave. 10-13.3; KU was 59-84/ ave. 19.7-28
• Opp. FTM-FTA in 3-games: against UK 48-60/ ave. 16-20; against KU 28-46/ ave. 9.3-15.3
  
• FTM difference in 3-games: UK was -18/ ave. -6.0; KU was +31/ ave. +10.3
  
• FTA difference in 3-games: UK was -20/ ave. -6.7; KU was +38/ ave. +12.7
• PF in 3-games: for UK 51/ ave. 17.0; for KU 47/ ave. 15.7
• Opp. PF in 3-games: against UK 45/ ave. 15.0; against KU 82/ ave. 27.3
• "Home Cooking" PF difference: +2.0 more PF for UK than opp; -11.6 less PF for KU
• UK attempted -6.7 FT less than opp but averaged winning by +15.6
• KU attempted +12.7 FT more than opp but averaged winning by +7.4
• In 2-games excluding UK; KU averaged -6.0 PF less than opp and +6.5 more FTA than opp

Just some numbers........

Everyone needs to read this, and really look at what these numbers say. Then if you still think UK gets favorable treatment at Rupp, and KU is a "fair" place to play, then there's no hope for you.

 

[Mojocat]

Of course we get home cooking. Both players and officials are only human, they are impacted by atmosphere like anyone else. The notion that all home courts are worth 3 or 4 points is laughable to me. You telling me Southern Illinois playing Tulsa on a Wednesday night with a sparse crowd is the same benefit as KU playing UK on a Saturday night like we saw over the weekend? Some home courts are worthless, others are worth 10 points or more, IMO (just to throw out a number).

So, yeah, we get the benefit.

Having said all that, I'm doubtful we've ever had a free throw discrepancy like that in Rupp against a ranked team that was outplaying us for most of the game...

 

[The_Answer1313]

Why have we won nearly 90% of all of our games played in Rupp?

Some home cooking but more importantly because most years we are really really good.

 

[ZenCatFan73]

Perhaps there was some home cookin' going on at Rupp before, but I think that time's come and gone. We win at home because we've been really good for a really long-time.

 

[The_Answer1313]

It begs the question ........there's no doubt home court exist........college teams typically win 60% of their home games so it's significant.

Do people feel that home court is the same across basketball. Obviously there's places that are tougher to play at compared to others. Tho when u look at ranking systems, the home court advantage is applied equally no matter where the game is played.

So I wondered about that. Should different locations receive different home court advantage adjustments compared to others.

 

[The_Answer1313]

Here's my point
http://sagarin.com/sports/cbsend.htm

Go through that. The home field advantage i s 3.29 points. Doesn't matter if your ranked 1 or 351st.

I don't really think this is right.


Now Kenpom takes adds 1.4% of the offense efficiency and 1.4% to the defensive efficiency for the home team. So that's not static. The better team will receive a higher home court. While I think that's more accurate, shouldn't you really factor the location itself and not the efficiency of the teams?

I don't know I'm just thinking lol

 

[docholiday51]

It begs the question ........there's no doubt home court exist........college teams typically win 60% of their home games so it's significant.

Do people feel that home court is the same across basketball. Obviously there's places that are tougher to play at compared to others. Tho when u look at ranking systems, the home court advantage is applied equally no matter where the game is played.

So I wondered about that. Should different locations receive different home court advantage adjustments compared to others.

I think 'smart'money does that if you are talking about point spreads and betting as for computer models I think they just pick an average and go with it for stat purposes.

 

[The_Answer1313]

Perhaps there was some home cookin' going on at Rupp before, but I think that time's come and gone. We win at home because we've been really good for a really long-time.

Another part of it is that we most of our big games since Cal has been here have come on neutral courts and I think we are moving further and further to that. Aside from your occasional home and home vs a big school or your participating in say the SEC /Big 12 challenge, most of the non conference big games are at neutral sites.

When you add that to the fact the SEC hasn't been great in years, it makes for an easy home schedule. So that plays a role too.

 

[ZenCatFan73]

Another part of it is that we most of our big games since Cal has been here have come on neutral courts and I think we are moving further and further to that. Aside from your occasional home and home vs a big school or your participating in say the SEC /Big 12 challenge, most of the non conference big games are at neutral sites.

When you add that to the fact the SEC hasn't been great in years, it makes for an easy home schedule. So that plays a role too.

I think this is a fair point too.

 

[clevenger32]

Not only do we not get great home cooking like the other powers at home, none of the powers get hosed as badly as we do on the road in the SEC. Was that the first game this year in Knoxville where they had over 10,000 in the arena? Was that the first time this year they actually had people sitting in the upper deck in that arena? This is a team that cannot overcome the hose of the SEC. UK's great teams are able to overcome that...good UK teams do not.