Random thoughts (long post)

[runt#69]

Please bear with me, thanks for those that can take the time to read my post... Cutting to the chase :

1) Some of the posters on the Rafters posted where they picked UK to end up with IU and UNC both in the same region AND UK as the 4 seed. I think many of us (including me) thought that was likely. As for those of you that thought UK was a lock for #3 seed? Well .... maybe now it'll sink in that the NCAA has it out for us.

2) Speaking of the NCAA's everlasting vendetta against us .... The thought crossed my mind that UK has played our biggest rivals alot in recent years, and faced the other blue bloods often, in the NCAAT. But I thought : What about everyone else? The Dookies? UNC, MSU? KU? Get a load of this - UNC and Duke have NEVER met in the NCAAT. NEVER. And on top of that, only ONCE were they placed in the same region. Think about that ! All the times they have been in the tourney combined, they've NEVER MET. As I looked over their collective history, they seemingly have been on opposite sides of the brackets too !

OK, so what about the others? KU - Mizzou - never met. MSU - UM have never met. Michigan - OSU - only met once. IU - PU ? NEVER met. UCLA and .... anyone like usc or ...whomever you choose - never met. Syracuse - Hoyas Never met! Florida - FSU - never. I stopped looking up rivalries after I saw all of that.

Hell, UK has met UL and IU more than any of those other teams COMBINED. Not to mention even being placed in the same region with SEC teams that we played 3 times in one season, and then had to play them a fourth time. That's happened multiple times, it's never happened for those other schools.

Think about that for awhile and decide if that's not another meaningful stat as to the NCAA having a beef with us. Hell, just in the time since Cal has been here, this has happened multiple times - and all the other teams combined - it hardly has ever happened in the entire history of the NCAAT.

3) My alma mater (MTSU) - best team in the state of TN, Austin Peay #2, and Vandy #3 (just by judging them like that because they have to play the play-in game, and aren't officially considered making the NCAAT unless they win that game. What a laugher !

4) It's unreal watching the treatment Duke gets every year. Even when they get a hard(er) road, it's always only true if the teams that are seeded ahead of them actually win out to make it to play them.

5) I'm actually glad we got IU and UNC. It really makes us look great when we consistently blow up the haters hate. We're going to do it again this year, I suspect.

6) The selection committee has really only 1 basketball guy (they're all AD's of schools). They're basically admins that don't neccessarily have any knowledge about CBB. This is a huge part of the problem. They need to get knowledgeable basketball people in there. It won't ever help us, but maybe it will make it better for everyone else, and a better tournament overall.
Secondly, have you looked over the entire selection process closely? Here's the link :

http://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2016-03-13/march-madness-bracket-how-68-teams-are-selected-division-i

There's the whole part at the end (additional considerations) and each one starts off saying : "If Possible." That's entirely a subjective area that lets them do whatever they want to without any set criteria. Several of the other points gives them the leeway to simply do whatever the hell they want to as well.

In fact, the whole process is so convoluted and complex, they can basically do whatever they want to and dodge any responsibility for what they've done. They've moved the goal posts so often, Kentucky (or anybody else) doesn't know what to do to make it more likely to get a bid.

7) Douggie Gotdweeb giving UK some props on Matt Jones show. Let's see if he keeps with the positive vibe not only the rest of the tourney, but in future years. Otherwise, I'm not sold on him NOT being the kiss of death for us. Nevertheless, I'm glad he's said some good stuff about us.

8) I won't be shocked if IU loses to Chatt. Just like when we lost to MTSU in 82' before the possible Lil' brothel "dream game". Of course, it happened the next year, though. Some interesting parallels there.

9) Moving the SECT to a Sat. finish will still not make a damn difference for us as far as seeding. They aren't going to change the many ways they take jabs at UK. It just isn't.

10) Coach Cal's deadpan/hamming it up interview yesterday was the best response I've ever seen from a coach regarding the selection process. I love Coach Cal !!!

Thanks for reading my post. For those of you that went tl;dr, please take it easy on me.

Go Big Blue !

 

[EnglandWildcat]

Great stuff there. After reading point #2, I had to pick my jaw up off the floor.

A poster somewhere else on here pointed out that of course we play teams like IU and WVU and UL a lot because of the focus on geographic seeding. I was sympathetic to that because if they do use geography to place, and traditional rivalries are often the result of proximity, then it makes sense we would meet rivals regularly.

But point #2 pretty much sinks that theory. How have so few of those geographically close schools never met?!! Bias. After reading this, anyone who argues otherwise is insane.

I hope our players feel slighted and go out and crush people. Let's do this. Eff you NCAA.

 

[caneintally]

Yeah wouldn't shock me if we don't play IU or UNC as Chatty and Providence ain't no joke. And I was wrong as I thought there was no way we couldn't get a 3 seed as we obviously are playing like a 2-3 seed AND had a ton on injuries all season but you are right the committee has it out for us just like they have hard ons for Puke. doesn't matter though we will be in Houston IMO while Puke and the like are sitting at home.

 

[runt#69]

Great stuff there. After reading point #2, I had to pick my jaw up off the floor.

A poster somewhere else on here pointed out that of course we play teams like IU and WVU and UL a lot because of the focus on geographic seeding. I was sympathetic to that because if they do use geography to place, and traditional rivalries are often the result of proximity, then it makes sense we would meet rivals regularly.

But point #2 pretty much sinks that theory. How have so few of those geographically close schools never met?!! Bias. After reading this, anyone who argues otherwise is insane.

I hope our players feel slighted and go out and crush people. Let's do this. Eff you NCAA.

thanks, England. I only spent enough time to go through all the details, but after simply looking at what they have historically done with UNC/Duke, I knew it would be the same for everyone else.

Except UK. And maybe I might have missed like, one or two things in there, because I didn't take a WHOLE lot of time to do it, but I'm pretty sure if anyone here takes more time to investigate it, it will be pretty much be the same thing.

 

[Wildcat-in-STL]

The title game should move to Saturday . For the best interest of the conference.

 

[jarms24]

Damn good post. Very telling about the rivalry match ups, or lack thereof.

 

[SmyrnaCatFan]

Thank you Runt for this informative piece. Just because you and I attend a directional University doesn't diminish our cognitive abilities. I hope that one of the many journalistic types who read this board take the time to jot down these points, even if you don't get the credit for the digging.

For the committee in my best Gomer Pyle voice, "Shame, shame, shame, shame, shame."

 

[runt#69]

Thanks for your time, guys. Yeah, that second point really illustrates the biased nature of how they treat Kentucky. It just doesn't get any plainer than that, I think.

 

[majgun]

Great stuff there. After reading point #2, I had to pick my jaw up off the floor.

A poster somewhere else on here pointed out that of course we play teams like IU and WVU and UL a lot because of the focus on geographic seeding. I was sympathetic to that because if they do use geography to place, and traditional rivalries are often the result of proximity, then it makes sense we would meet rivals regularly.

But point #2 pretty much sinks that theory. How have so few of those geographically close schools never met?!! Bias. After reading this, anyone who argues otherwise is insane.

I hope our players feel slighted and go out and crush people. Let's do this. Eff you NCAA.

While I agree that they seem to put us in "heated" rivalry games in the tournament, many of the rivalry games mentioned in point #2 are in conference opponent. The committee never puts teams in a position where they play a conference opponent before the elite eight. I may be wrong on that in that it might be the round of 16. But I do know that they won't put conference teams in a position to play each other early in a tournament. I saw an interview on that subject a couple of years back.

 

[jackcarlson]

I think they just want a marquee prime time game for next week, so we will get UNC. That should be a real ratings bonanza. They may even bill it as the real Championship Game.

 

[docholiday51]

Great opening post,the combination of Cal and UK is almost more than the NCAA can bear(and will continue to be for some time to come) It would be so fitting if the UNC scandal would explode and bring down the NCAA as we know it.The day that Coach K retires should be celebrated throughout college basketball as a day that the playing field became more level

The NCAAT is a wonderful sporting event,too bad it is marred by agenda driven favoritism and unreasonable biases

 

[Jkwo]

Yeah - most of those rivalries you mention are in conference, and those teams are not allowed to meet early according to committee rules. Same reason we've never run into UT or Florida or Ark early.

 

[redsweaterblackjeans]

point 2 - uk and uofl are not in the same conference. uk and iu are not in the same conference. uk and unc are not in the same conference. all those other rivalries you listed were in-conference rivalries.

how many times have we played florida in the ncaa tournament? vandy? tennessee?

 

[runt#69]

While I agree that they seem to put us in "heated" rivalry games in the tournament, many of the rivalry games mentioned in point #2 are in conference opponent. The committee never puts teams in a position where they play a conference opponent before the elite eight. I may be wrong on that in that it might be the round of 16. But I do know that they won't put conference teams in a position to play each other early in a tournament. I saw an interview on that subject a couple of years back.

Great counter point, Maj. However, I still find it strange at how many of those teams have NEVER met. Sure, it's hard to get to the EE or a FF to finally get that meeting, but that it's NEVER happened is more than just a standalone coincidence in my book.

 

[majgun]

Great counter point, Maj. However, I still find it strange at how many of those teams have NEVER met. Sure, it's hard to get to the EE or a FF to finally get that meeting, but that it's NEVER happened is more than just a standalone coincidence in my book.

I'm with you, it is amazing the number of times we are in a region with all of these teams, yet you never see any of them matched up with each other.

 

[truebluewildcat]

Yeah good stuff OP...

The gig is up and NCAA is no longer fooling people...Cal called them out loud and clear last night...whether or not that changes anything in the future remains to be seen, but at least now it is known...

The NCAA likes to reference their "criteria", and they may very well use a system when it comes to most of the field but it is clear that with a few programs the system is not applied consistently with everybody else...

It used to be very subtle, and not extremely noticeable to most outside the BBN who don't pay as close attention to basketball and UK basketball...but after that gauntlet they put us through a couple years back...wichita state, ul, michigan, wisconsin...there's not even any subtlety any more...it's in your face "we are the NCAA...we do what we want...we have know reasonable method, and if we do we don't apply it consistently..."

if we're not on a path to a big time rival, they seem to like to put us on a path to big time rematches against teams that have beat us...in 2010-11 we had UConn and UNC on our side and eventually had to play them...both had beat us in the OOC that year...2011-12 IU and UL both on our side and likely to cross our path...IU had beat us that year and UL had played us close...13'-14' UL rematch again...

last year...everybody that could play spoiler was on our side of the bracket...KU, Wisconsin, Notre Dame, IU, Arizona, Wichita St...all on our side...Duke got to coast...

this year...obvious...didn't play UNC and everyone knows we won't play IU...so what do they do...they put both in our bracket...and I don't know if anyone noticed Wisconsin lurking in the bottom half of our bracket...that may not seem like much right now...but rest assured there is a reason for that...should we cross paths they can bill a big time rematch from last season...

no big time rivals or potential rematches with teams for Duke...the get to cake walk...

and i know folks would argue that Michigan St should be a 1...that they were "snubbed"...but NCAA loves them some Izzo...if they were a 1 they may have taken Oregon's place and been on Duke's side...that would be bad for both K and Izzo as they would cross paths and both couldn't end up in the finale 4...I mean how easy is their bracket...tubby tech could come out of that and I wouldn't be shocked...

 

[Jazzycat]

Don't forget UTC playing IU in the first round. The Mocs of Chattanooga are poised for an upset! Beat the Hoosiers!

 

[runt#69]

I really appreciate the feedback and discussion. I think we all want to see a better overall product, and less perceived bias and favoritism both in the selection for the national tournament and in officiating.

It's all perception and subject to one's own take. The way it should be.

For me, when my family down here in Nashville watch games with me, I find that they're asking questions about "why did they call that on Kentucky, and not on the other team?" or "what just happened?" and the announcers aren't saying anything about what just happened, all you see is that the possession changed without any clear understanding of why, and no clarification by the CBS or ESPN announcers (because face it, they plain suck)

They turn to me (because my family down here are eally only casual fans - and like most - only at NCAAT time) to tell them what happened. I'm more and more at a loss to tell them, because it seems like I apparently don't understand the game like I thought I did, and know - for ceretain - like I used to.

Maybe it's the cancer in my head eating away at my brain more and more, hell I dunno. I won't use that as an excuse, but it seems like I can't keep up with understanding the game like when I was younger. I'm not afraid or ashamed to admit that. I just know that I'm missing something.

When that happens, it's when I go back in my mind to when me and my dad listened to Cawood on the radio and we always knew exactly what was going on. Even when the radio signal faded in and out (god how i hated that static!) I felt like I was there at the game with Cawood.

I'm just very, very happy I'm still alive and able to cheer on the Cats and still be able to post on the rafters. You all really are my friends, even if I bicker with ya' some of the time.

I look forward to seeing what everyone thinks is going to happen in the NCAAT and enjoy another great ride!

 

[docholiday51]

The only fly in the ointment is that they can't hide Duke from everyone.There are multiple teams in the field that Duke wants no part of,they will be exposed early.They finished 5th in the ACC(even with all the help they get from the officials)

 

[Slowwalker]

 

[ukalum]

As pointed out several times above, UK is the only basketball power whose rivals are not in the same conference. I would not exactly call UF-FSU a big basketball rivaly.

 

[kats23]

I think it's pretty easy to say UK vs the other blue bloods is always a rivalry. Due to past tournament games and our history. I do wonder how much say Duke has faced the other blue bloods like Kansas in the tourney? UNC vs Kansas? For me there are 4 blue bloods of the college sport. UK, UNC, Duke, and Kansas. For IU, I know it's a rivalry but that's because of our borders. UNC and Duke really have no border competition that isn't in their conference so that's why I think the IU-UK thing is so unique. Like someone else said above KU-Mizzou may be big between the schools, but I'm not exactly licking my chops to watch that matchup. Remember, the committee put Wichita St against KU once. UK-UL only met once before their 2012 matchup. I guess my point is, IU-UK is always going to be a sexy matchup in the committee's eyes. Don't fool yourself, they do these things for ratings. There just aren't a lot of other sexy matchups in college basketball that are OOC like UK-IU, UK-UL, UK-UNC, UK-Duke. UK is lighting rod for ratings in these matchups.

End of the day, I don't think the committee is out to get us but they certainly aren't doing us any favors. I touched on this yesterday but when Cal rails on the committee before and after the Selection Show on national TV, what do you expect. If you ripped your boss publicly within earshot of him and didn't get raises despite earning it, would you be surprised there too?

 

[CharlieT71059]

Life is never fair, especially when you bleed blue

 

[bthaunert]

You're better off looking at all the blue bloods (I will use UK, Duke, UNC, Kansas & Indiana for discussion) OOC from one another and how many times they have played one another in the tournament (many have pointed out why rivals in conference rarely play) prior to the Final Four since the tournament expanded to 64 teams. Here is a look:

North Carolina
Kansas - 2012, 2013
Indiana - Never
Kentucky - 1995, 2011

Duke
Kentucky - 1992, 1998
Indiana - 1987, 2002
Kansas - 2000, 2003

Indiana
Duke - 1987, 2002
North Carolina - Never
Kansas - 1991, 1993
Kentucky - 2012

Kansas
North Carolina - 2012, 2013
Duke - 2000, 2003
Indiana - 1991, 1993
Kentucky - 1999, 2007

Kentucky
North Carolina - 1995, 2011
Duke - 1992, 1998
Indiana - 2012
Kansas - 1999, 2007

If you take out the Duke - UNC rivalry due to restrictions, it's pretty damn close on how many times the remaining 3 blue bloods have played one another since 1985.

Kansas - 30 appearances, played another blue blood in 27% of those tournaments prior to the Final Four
Indiana - 24 appearances, played another blue blood in 21% of those tournaments prior to the Final Four
Kentucky - 26 appearances, played another blue blood in 27% of those tournaments prior to the Final Four

 

[Neue Regel]

You're better off looking at all the blue bloods (I will use UK, Duke, UNC, Kansas & Indiana for discussion) OOC from one another and how many times they have played one another in the tournament (many have pointed out why rivals in conference rarely play) prior to the Final Four since the tournament expanded to 64 teams. Here is a look:

North Carolina
Kansas - 2012, 2013
Indiana - Never
Kentucky - 1995, 2011

Duke
Kentucky - 1992, 1998
Indiana - 1987, 2002
Kansas - 2000, 2003

Indiana
Duke - 1987, 2002
North Carolina - Never
Kansas - 1991, 1993
Kentucky - 2012

Kansas
North Carolina - 2012, 2013
Duke - 2000, 2003
Indiana - 1991, 1993
Kentucky - 1999, 2007

Kentucky
North Carolina - 1995, 2011
Duke - 1992, 1998
Indiana - 2012
Kansas - 1999, 2007

If you take out the Duke - UNC rivalry due to restrictions, it's pretty damn close on how many times the remaining 3 blue bloods have played one another since 1985.

Kansas - 30 appearances, played another blue blood in 27% of those tournaments prior to the Final Four
Indiana - 24 appearances, played another blue blood in 21% of those tournaments prior to the Final Four
Kentucky - 26 appearances, played another blue blood in 27% of those tournaments prior to the Final Four

I would add also that with Duke and Kentucky, they also would have had chances to meet in the same region in 1994, 1996, 2001, 2012 and 2014. (in addition to 1992 and 1998 when they did meet)

I do wonder how much say Duke has faced the other blue bloods like Kansas in the tourney?

bthau answered that above in terms of meetings in the regional in 2000 and 2003. In terms of the Final Four they met in the 1986 National Semi-Final (Duke-W), 1988 National Semi-Final (Kansas-W) and 1991 National Championship (Duke-W)

 

[bthaunert]

I would add also that with Duke and Kentucky, they also would have had chances to meet in the same region in 1994, 1996, 2001, 2012 and 2014. (in addition to 1992 and 1998 when they did meet)

I do think if you looked at any team and who they potentially could have played, you will probably see similar results. For example, Kansas and Duke were in the same region, but did not play, in 1990, 1993, 1994, 1997 and 2007. So, Duke and Kansas have been in the bracket together the exact same amount of times that Duke and UK have.

 

[runt#69]

Great discussion, everyone. I appreciate the added info and opinions on all of it.

 

[HenryMuto]

I am not sure if anyone else mentioned this didn't feel like reading every post but the reason Duke and UNC have never played in the NCAA tournament is they are in the same conference and for many of the years there was a rule in place that the top 3 teams of a conference had to be in different regions so they could only play in the final 4 since they are usually in the top 3 of the conference back then and also there was a rule no matter what teams from same conference could not meet until the elite 8 until recently changed so now they play 2-3 times a year so they will never be allowed to meet before the sweet 16 with the new rules and if they are both top 4 seeds then they can't meet until the final 4.

Indiana and Louisville are not in the same conference so we can play them anytime.

You would have thought though they may have met once in an elite 8 or final 4 some year but never happened...oh and they are just 8 miles apart!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Elliott Tim]

Great opening post,the combination of Cal and UK is almost more than the NCAA can bear(and will continue to be for some time to come) It would be so fitting if the UNC scandal would explode and bring down the NCAA as we know it.The day that Coach K retires should be celebrated throughout college basketball as a day that the playing field became more level

The NCAAT is a wonderful sporting event,too bad it is marred by agenda driven favoritism and unreasonable biases

Good post. Mr. Huckleberry.

 

[BoulderCat]

#2 is definitely an eye opener. Thanks for digging into that. It's easy to think well sure we end up in UL/IU's region because the 3 are all so close together. But so are many of those other rivalries, and for them to never or rarely meet in the NCAAT, and yet we seemingly have UL or IU every year does seem a bit odd doesn't it.

About the only thing I quibble with is I think it might help to finish up the SECT on Sat. OTOH, what I heard the chair basically say was our loss to UCLA on the road in December outweighed having beaten A&M yesterday in a head to head game. When you've got a selection committee basically saying head-to-head games don't mean anything, then IMO you've got problems. Of course one of the many problems, as Cal so wonderfully pointed out in his rant, is what means something changes from year to year, heck from minute to minute at the whims of the SC. We need a better way!

 

[dave5164]

I think it will help if they moved the SEC Tournament to Saturday instead of Sunday. All of the Power Conferences are done Saturday night except SEC and BIG10. IT was funny because Michigan State and Kentucky both won there Conference Tournaments on Sunday and Mich State was a #2 Seed and they thought they were a #1 and we thought at least we were going to be higher than TA&M. I just believe that the NCAA Committee like Cal said doesn't have the knowledge needed for the Seeding of the NCAA Tournament. I also liked it when CM Newton was over the NCAA Mens Basketball Committee fro 1992 to 1999. I do think they need to look at the NCAA Committee and make sure we have the right people in there doing the seeding. Why have the rankings and rpi sites we have like Kenpom, Pomeroy, and Realtime and the Rankings if we not going to use them. When they were asked last night about Kentucky being #4 seed and TA&M a #3 seed and he answered by saying we were beaten by schools not in the Tournament. Well, if you look at the other top schools they were beat by schools that are not in the NCAA Tournament. This year that was the norm because many top schools were getting beat on the Road in there Conferences. This was talked about so much in the last 2-3 weeks that how difficult the Power Conferences were having winning on the Road. We need to look at putting together a better Committee for the Men's NCAA Basketball Tourney.

 

[the nail at the foul line]

You're better off looking at all the blue bloods (I will use UK, Duke, UNC, Kansas & Indiana for discussion) OOC from one another and how many times they have played one another in the tournament (many have pointed out why rivals in conference rarely play) prior to the Final Four since the tournament expanded to 64 teams. Here is a look:

North Carolina
Kansas - 2012, 2013
Indiana - Never
Kentucky - 1995, 2011

Duke
Kentucky - 1992, 1998
Indiana - 1987, 2002
Kansas - 2000, 2003

Indiana
Duke - 1987, 2002
North Carolina - Never
Kansas - 1991, 1993
Kentucky - 2012

Kansas
North Carolina - 2012, 2013
Duke - 2000, 2003
Indiana - 1991, 1993
Kentucky - 1999, 2007

Kentucky
North Carolina - 1995, 2011
Duke - 1992, 1998
Indiana - 2012
Kansas - 1999, 2007

If you take out the Duke - UNC rivalry due to restrictions, it's pretty damn close on how many times the remaining 3 blue bloods have played one another since 1985.

Kansas - 30 appearances, played another blue blood in 27% of those tournaments prior to the Final Four
Indiana - 24 appearances, played another blue blood in 21% of those tournaments prior to the Final Four
Kentucky - 26 appearances, played another blue blood in 27% of those tournaments prior to the Final Four

There is a problem here.

UK 2007 is an 8 seed? That should not count. Same as KU 1999, 6, KU 2000, 8 and Duke 1987, 5 seed.

Also, UK played Mich St in 1999 and 2005. UL in 2014.

UK played Kansas once as a higher seed. IU once. And UNC once. Never played Duke as higher seed. 3/7

Duke was always seeded higher than us, split with IU, and split wth KU when they faced one another. 4/6

Not all blue blood meetings are between blue bloods that year.

 

[king of cali]

In regards to #2, weren't rules in place for years that prevented teams from the same conference from playing each other until the Elite 8? I seem to remember that, then it was relaxed recently when the schools were a low enough seed. But that would explain why Duke and UNC have never played in the tournament, along with the others. All of them were in the same conference, and some still are. UK has never been in a conference with UL, IU or anyone else.

 

[fatkat41]

We should just schedule all of our rivals every single year in the non conference.