UCLA Loses at Home to Washington, Now 12-9

[Wildcat-in-STL]

Just because its their super bowl doesnt mean they are going to win it. So what type of cop out is that?

By cal saying we are everyone's super bowl he's saying we have to match the intensity and urgency or we can lose. We have to bring it every game. The 4 games we lost , we lost because we didnt bring it.

 

[UKCatsFan10]

Just because its their super bowl doesnt mean they are going to win it. So what type of cop out is that?

By cal saying we are everyone's super bowl he's saying we have to match the intensity and urgency or we can lose. We have to bring it every game. The 4 games we lost , we lost because we didnt bring it.

Absolutely agree with everything you said in the second paragraph.

As for the cop-out, perhaps I read into it wrong but I typically see "super bowl" used in two ways which are as follows.

1) Heading into a game against a lesser opponent knowing that it will be their "super bowl", or in other words knowing that they are going to play hard. This is basically every game because even games against equal or better opponents, such as Saturday vs Kansas, you know the opposing team is going to try to bring their A game against us. I don't hate the phrase when used in this manner but just think that it goes without saying that UK should always play hard regardless of opponent. The fact that they are hyped to play us should be irrelevant. Now to expect UK to play their best every game is obviously unreasonable, but I just think the fact that it's a "super bowl game" doesn't matter.

2) Lost to a lesser team and it's because it was their "super bowl." This is the context I hate seeing it used for reasons I've already explained and is the same context in which it was used in this thread.

Again, obviously I'm in the minority in terms of my opinion but that's alright. We all agree on the premise behind what "super bowl" means. I just choose not to use the particular phrase anymore. That's not going to stop anyone else from using it.

 

[madison1329]

I can explain it, we arent a very good basketball team, pretty simple. This team is making progress and getting better, and we are lucky in the sense that its a weird, horrible year in college bball so there is some hope. But it doesnt change the fact that this is a pretty average team that can lose to anyone.

Our best wins are over a soon-to-be unrated Duke team with 6 losses that will likely lose 10-12 games and a UL team that everyone on this board says sucks and is overrated, at home. I wish people understood that when they say UL sucks this year all they do is put down our team because that is by far the best win we have.

Kansas is a great opportunity for a great signature road win, which we need because we have NONE. But everyone around here thinks Kansas sucks too, so Im not sure it will help, according to Rupps Rafters.

Great post.

 

[kyjeff1]

Three of those four teams shot really well most of the game.

Because we allowed it to happen but that's to be expected. This is a complicated, but effective, defense. Watch what our guys do on D in halfcourt sets. Their switching is incredible and now they are good enough at it where they don't even have to talk. This is where veteran teams should be crushing UK early in the season, they know their defense, our guys don't.
Had we played defense in any of those 4 losses the way we played our last 3 games we would have won each game going away.

 

[KneeBurns]

UCLA stinks, we blew them out by 30 in Maui

 

[kyjeff1]

It's just an elitist attitude and comes across as whining to me.

"Oh man we lost because we are their super bowl. They had a packed gym, handed out T-shirts, and were fired up to play us."

No... We lost because they played hard, played smart, executed well, defended well, etc. We did none of those things, and therefore we lost. Instead of making an excuse that the opposing team had more motivation than us, I choose to give them credit for being ready to play. I don't see the value in trying to downplay it with excuses. Upsets are part of what makes the game great. It would be incredibly boring if the team that was supposed to win actually won every time.

I agree with everything you said but the whole "super bowl" thing is brought up because when you watch the Auburn's and the UCLA's and the LSU's they don't play with the same heart and grit that they have when they play UK which blows my mind. You have 2 games per week, you should play hard every game but that's part of coaching. Keeping players motivated is part of it. Our coach is the best at that.

 

[kyjeff1]

I can explain it, we arent a very good basketball team, pretty simple. This team is making progress and getting better, and we are lucky in the sense that its a weird, horrible year in college bball so there is some hope. But it doesnt change the fact that this is a pretty average team that can lose to anyone.

Our best wins are over a soon-to-be unrated Duke team with 6 losses that will likely lose 10-12 games and a UL team that everyone on this board says sucks and is overrated, at home. I wish people understood that when they say UL sucks this year all they do is put down our team because that is by far the best win we have.

Kansas is a great opportunity for a great signature road win, which we need because we have NONE. But everyone around here thinks Kansas sucks too, so Im not sure it will help, according to Rupps Rafters.

Like X 1000.

 

[KneeBurns]

I agree with everything you said but the whole "super bowl" thing is brought up because when you watch the Auburn's and the UCLA's and the LSU's they don't play with the same heart and grit that they have when they play UK which blows my mind. .

You're right. But there are others who claim programs like KU, who's ranked higher and is favored Saturday, also make it their "super bowl". That's really lame.

 

[kyjeff1]

UCLA is a very bad team. However, that wasn't a game where we simply beat ourselves. UCLA played that game at a very high level too. Part of the reason we looked bad was being a little shell shocked by both UCLA's intensity and strategy. Their performance in that game was clearly an outlier, but they earned that win nonetheless. I would agree with you on our other losses in that I think we mostly beat ourselves in those.

I think the difference is that the beat down we gave UCLA last year was of historic proportions. They had guys that hadn't forgotten that. Going into their home court, along with some expectations among their team / fan base that they'd be better this year, really set up a perfect storm. I think the best thing to do with a game like UCLA is burn the tapes and move on. Not much to take from it other than a lesson about matching intensity.

That's the one thing that has me nervous about Kansas despite our recent improved play. We're heading into Allen Fieldhouse under some similar conditions and Kansas is certainly better than UCLA. I hope we play well, and believe we have a chance to steal a win. However, I also hope that if we are blown out, that we don't overreact to it. It might simply be another perfect storm that doesn't really indicate our chances in March. Would be great to get a win though.

You saw that UCLA game differently than I did. We couldn't stay in front of Steve Aford's kid, he was sporting old man "dipsy do" moves on us and having fun at our expense. Than we did the same exact thing in Brooklyn against OSU. We stunk it up. Play that game now and we win by 20 regardless of venue. UCLA is NIT at best.

 

[Bungalow Bill]

It's just an elitist attitude and comes across as whining to me.

"Oh man we lost because we are their super bowl. They had a packed gym, handed out T-shirts, and were fired up to play us."

No... We lost because they played hard, played smart, executed well, defended well, etc. We did none of those things, and therefore we lost. Instead of making an excuse that the opposing team had more motivation than us, I choose to give them credit for being ready to play. I don't see the value in trying to downplay it with excuses. Upsets are part of what makes the game great. It would be incredibly boring if the team that was supposed to win actually won every time.

Cal doesn't really use that line after the game. He uses it before games to warn his team to be ready to compete and not underestimate the opponent. After the games we lose he usually talks about how the opponent played harder than we did or whatever they did better than us to beat us. Cal's not really an excuse maker. He tells it like it is after losses and usually takes the blame for not having his team ready. Some of you guys just like to spin things so it fits your bitching narratives. Pretty sad.

 

[beamer_at_uk]

You're right. But there are others who claim programs like KU, who's ranked higher and is favored Saturday, also make it their "super bowl". That's really lame.

Your coach likely doesn't treat it that way. Your team might not treat it that way. Your marketing team may not.

And yet, here you are... trying to make this about you.

 

[CatFanInTheBathtub]

I'll tell you all why the theory is bunk. Because dumb ass lil brothel fans use it to justify us beating them then turning around and losing to inferior SEC teams. Does anyone agree with the theory when used in that context?

 

[WildMoon]

we lost to UCLA because

Ulis was still injured
Lee was gone
Willis was still MIA

Compared to now, it's a completely different team. Ulis now would completely destroy that team.

I don't think it's as big of a deal as people make it out. We were young and still searching.

 

[ganner918]

Willis was still MIA

Willis had what was maybe his best game of the year prior to Auburn against UCLA. 11 points and 6 rebounds in 14 minutes, so I wouldn't pin any of UCLA on him. Poythress sucked, Skal sucked, Lee got knocked out, and Humphries did little to nothing with the 27 minutes he got.

 

[Skutt]

We're all in agreement here that teams can reach a different level of intensity when playing top programs such as UK, Duke, Kansas, etc. Nobody is arguing against that fact. It happens at every level all the way from high school to the NBA. Was Robert Morris fired up to play against UK. Absolutely... I'm simply speaking to how we handle the loss after the fact.

Essentially, saying that it's their super bowl is a way of accepting that the opposing team wanted it more than we did and in most cases that's true. I just simply don't like using the phrase because I feel like it's a crutch. It insinuates that the opposing team had a motivation to play harder than us and personally I don't find that as a viable excuse for losing a game. Not to mention it belittles their win and ipically used in a way that seems to insinuate that they got lucky.

Your opinion may differ, and that's okay.

I agree it's an excuse if players use it. Great teams don't play up or down to anyone. Alphas have one speed.

But as spectators after a great team loses to inferior competition, and that competition plays well above its usual standard, it gives the appearance that they played up due to a perceived importance for that particular team.

I think you're conflating issues here.

 

[KneeBurns]

Your coach likely doesn't treat it that way. Your team might not treat it that way. Your marketing team may not.

And yet, here you are... trying to make this about you.

You evaded my point completely

 

[the nail at the foul line]

That was then, this is now. Tyler was hurting against UCLA. UK is much better than they were.

 

[Skutt]

You evaded my point completely

It's not a single year. KU's jealousy regarding UK goes back a long time. Our legend played for KU and made UK a much bigger product. Through the next 50 years we would not only overtake the legend status of KU, but we would completely destroy them where it matters most, on the court. Add to the fact that UK nearly TRIPLES KU in hardware, and it's easy to understand why UK is your super bowl.

Last year we beat the brakes off of KU. Your seniors only know humiliation at he hands of Kentucky, much like your fans.

You can pretend we aren't your big step bother all you want. You're not fooling anyone.

 

[beamer_at_uk]

You evaded my point completely

Did I? I think I addressed it perfectly.

UK Message board. UCLA Thread. Here you are.

Something tells me your not perusing Oklahoma message boards, hijacking Iowa State threads, making tangential, condescending comments.

You care about this game more than any game on your schedule because A) You're good and you're confident you can win, B) You've lost 3 in a row to us in national-spotlight situations, and C) we've beat you for ~80% of 5-star recruits over the last 7 years.

But you could easily prove me wrong by disappearing. Try it.

 

[Bkocats]

I agree with everything you said but the whole "super bowl" thing is brought up because when you watch the Auburn's and the UCLA's and the LSU's they don't play with the same heart and grit that they have when they play UK which blows my mind. You have 2 games per week, you should play hard every game but that's part of coaching. Keeping players motivated is part of it. Our coach is the best at that.

even so - one of my biggest concerns about some of our games is that we don't take our opponents seriously. I was worried about that before the Missouri game; never thought we would lose it, but would look "meh" in the process

I'm not crazy about the Superbowl analogy either - but it HAS been used for a while, and well before we played any of these games. Other teams treat our game with them differently than they do other teams. Have you seen SEC arenas when they aren't playing UK? They are usually at least half empty - oftentimes more than half. Yet, when UK comes to town - they fill the seats, they have tshirts, or white/black/red/garnet/blue whatever outs, they have giveaways and halftime shows and all sorts of things. And that's just the fans -the teams seem to be more engaged. I swear it seems that some of these coaches actually prepare their teams all year for the one (or two) games against UK. So, that analogy almost applies in at least in conference games. -
OOC games aren't quite the same, with the exception of one - we're an important game for them, but not what I'd call a "Superbowl"

 

[Dablueman]

This has been a theory of mine for a while. I believe it's a combo of things teams to get up emotionally for us. We take teams for granted sometimes. However, if I am an opposing coach for a non elite team. I might focus alot of scouting and practice time on us if u notice alot of times those teams that bear us don't always perform great the next game. These coaches know if they can add a victory over UK and Cal to their resume it will buid their resume or maybe cool off a hot seat.

 

[Bkocats]

oh, and btw - I wouldn't call the game this weekend KU's superbowl. That term doesn't apply to bluebloods, IMO
A revenge game? Certainly. A confidence rebuilder? Most definitely. A Superbowl? That's just silly

 

[kyjeff1]

yeah we had a player out for each of our 4 losses. Willis' scoring could of completely changed the OSU game if he had been available. UCLA might of turned out different with a healthy Ulis and Lee not getting punched out in the game within the first couple of minutes. I think we lose to LSU with a healthy Hawkins because it was our interior that lost us the game ..... But we absolutely win against Auburn with Hawkins because of his defense and him allowing our guards to rest more instead of being tired late in the game.

I hate when people do this. "We lost because so and so was out injured". This is the worst I've see though. Now all the sudden Hawkins, a guy that gets ZERO pt, is the reason we lost to Auburn. Just stop.
Briscoe and Tyler are the best on ball defenders we have but that didn't matter. Our defensive focus wasn't there, we got up 12 and thought we had it won. Superman Hawkins had 1 good game now all the sudden his absence is the reason we lost to Auburn. Give me a break.
That Loss might be the best thing that happened to this team. They were embarrassed by how they played and went into Alabama, who is ten times better than Auburn, and waxed the Tide without Superman Hawkins.
Then they went into Arkansas, again without Superman Hawkins, and spanked the hogs (sounds dirty).
Fans like you just need to face reality. Sometimes we get beat because we didn't bring our A game.
We didn't lose to Wisconsin because AP was out, we lost because we had 3 straight shot clock violations and played dumb.
We didn't lose to UConn in tge 2014 title game because WCS was hurt, we lost because we couldn't stay in front of a guard that beat our guards off the dribble over and over and over. Michigan State couldn't stop them and neither could Florida. We lost, end of story.

 

[kyjeff1]

Also UCLA is very talented. IN the SEC they would be the 3rd most talented team. People trying to paint UCLA in the AU or OSU light are sadly mistaken . They are much more like LSU - a team loaded with a bad coach.

I disagree. The SEC has really good talent on most teams, it's poor coaching that keeps the SEC at the bottom.
UCLA has Alford who is simply a shooter that gets some points in the paint when the defense breaks down and they have a good big that would be about average for what the SEC has.
UCLA is garbage.

 

[kyjeff1]

Arkansas played just as hard against us as they did Texas A&m.... the difference is... we were better offensively than A&M.

This.

 

[kyjeff1]

Just because its their super bowl doesnt mean they are going to win it. So what type of cop out is that?

By cal saying we are everyone's super bowl he's saying we have to match the intensity and urgency or we can lose. We have to bring it every game. The 4 games we lost , we lost because we didnt bring it.

This. Excellent post. We are miles better than the 4 we lost to, those teams brought their effort like it was a do or die game, we didn't and it overwhelmed us.

 

[Dablueman]

I hate when people do this. "We lost because so and so was out injured". This is the worst I've see though. Now all the sudden Hawkins, a guy that gets ZERO pt, is the reason we lost to Auburn. Just stop.
Briscoe and Tyler are the best on ball defenders we have but that didn't matter. Our defensive focus wasn't there, we got up 12 and thought we had it won. Superman Hawkins had 1 good game now all the sudden his absence is the reason we lost to Auburn. Give me a break.
That Loss might be the best thing that happened to this team. They were embarrassed by how they played and went into Alabama, who is ten times better than Auburn, and waxed the Tide without Superman Hawkins.
Then they went into Arkansas, again without Superman Hawkins, and spanked the hogs (sounds dirty).
Fans like you just need to face reality. Sometimes we get beat because we didn't bring our A game.
We didn't lose to Wisconsin because AP was out, we lost because we had 3 straight shot clock violations and played dumb.
We didn't lose to UConn in tge 2014 title game because WCS was hurt, we lost because we couldn't stay in front of a guard that beat our guards off the dribble over and over and over. Michigan State couldn't stop them and neither could Florida. We lost, end of story.

I agree to some extent about some of our losses I don't really think players being out really made a big difference to any of our other losses. I do feel Tyler being no where near a hundred percent and Lee being out could have made a big difference in the UCLA loss. Lees shot blocking and offensive rebounding would have made a difference as well.

 

[kyjeff1]

I'll tell you all why the theory is bunk. Because dumb ass lil brothel fans use it to justify us beating them then turning around and losing to inferior SEC teams. Does anyone agree with the theory when used in that context?

Zipp is the one doing that because it makes him feel better. Bottom line is RP's style of play doesn't work against Calipari.
Louisville as a program is not at a level where anyone looks at them as their super bowl.

 

[irishcat1965]

Plenty of teams in the top 25 have losses to bad teams. And some in the top 25 have zero quality wins. No reason to wring your hands over it. UK will be fine.

 

[kyjeff1]

I agree to some extent about some of our losses I don't really think players being out really made a big difference to any of our other losses. I do feel Tyler being no where near a hundred percent and Lee being out could have made a big difference in the UCLA loss. Lees shot blocking and offensive rebounding would have made a difference as well.

I get it, UK without Tyler is not a recipe for success but to say we lost to Auburn because Superman Hawkins was out might be one of the dumbest posts I've ever read on here.
What are we going to do next, wait for Johnny David to twist an ankle and blame the crisis in the middle east on it?

 

[loublue22]

So many people wanted to believe UCLA was a good team because they beat us but I saw a really bad UCLA team play a UK team that was a shell of itself. We played awful in that game. Same with our other 3 losses. Those teams didn't beat us, we beat us.

Auburn and Ohio St beat us, granted their level of play on those games was a complete fluke.

Regardless, all our losses are bad.

 

[Bkocats]

I get it, UK without Tyler is not a recipe for success but to say we lost to Auburn because Superman Hawkins was out might be one of the dumbest posts I've ever read on here.
What are we going to do next, wait for Johnny David to twist an ankle and blame the crisis in the middle east on it?

well you know if anything happens to Johnny David our whole season is over

Hawkins is good player - and who knows what would've happened if he'd played in that game. But, I agree, we didn't lose because we were without him. We lost because we blew it - plain and simple.

 

[Wildcat-in-STL]

I hate when people do this. "We lost because so and so was out injured". This is the worst I've see though. Now all the sudden Hawkins, a guy that gets ZERO pt, is the reason we lost to Auburn. Just stop.
Briscoe and Tyler are the best on ball defenders we have but that didn't matter. Our defensive focus wasn't there, we got up 12 and thought we had it won. Superman Hawkins had 1 good game now all the sudden his absence is the reason we lost to Auburn. Give me a break.
That Loss might be the best thing that happened to this team. They were embarrassed by how they played and went into Alabama, who is ten times better than Auburn, and waxed the Tide without Superman Hawkins.
Then they went into Arkansas, again without Superman Hawkins, and spanked the hogs (sounds dirty).
Fans like you just need to face reality. Sometimes we get beat because we didn't bring our A game.
We didn't lose to Wisconsin because AP was out, we lost because we had 3 straight shot clock violations and played dumb.
We didn't lose to UConn in tge 2014 title game because WCS was hurt, we lost because we couldn't stay in front of a guard that beat our guards off the dribble over and over and over. Michigan State couldn't stop them and neither could Florida. We lost, end of story.

Actually ..

Hawkins was averaging 8 mpg ..... and is known for his defense of the perimeter. you do remember it was 3pt shots that helped Auburn come back from 12 down right?
Tyler Ulis played 40 minutes and Murray 36. even 2-3 minutes from Hawkins when we were up by 12 would of helped keep those two fresh.

We should of won anyways..... you are right there. But that Auburn game came down to the wire... its not crazy for 1 player to change the out come.

 

[KingOfBBN]

Cop-out? Really?

View embedded media

Heck they even made a mini documentary about it!

View embedded media

I absolutely did not care about that loss. The season was over for me after Vanderbilt. I find NIT games to be an embarrassment regardless of the outcome. I was glad it happened just so we could finally put that season to bed.

 

[stoneycat_20]

All very very very (little BCG there )bad losses..we beat Auburn 97 times out of 100..OSU about 90 % UCLA 90% just not ready to play those games..Auburn was the really really bad loss...and had a 12 pt lead...

 

[UKCatsFan10]

Cal doesn't really use that line after the game. He uses it before games to warn his team to be ready to compete and not underestimate the opponent. After the games we lose he usually talks about how the opponent played harder than we did or whatever they did better than us to beat us. Cal's not really an excuse maker. He tells it like it is after losses and usually takes the blame for not having his team ready. Some of you guys just like to spin things so it fits your bitching narratives. Pretty sad.

Wasn't referring to Cal at all. Was referring to our fans that defend a loss to a bad team by saying "... but, but, but it was their super bowl."

Speaking of spinning things...

 

[screwduke]

...certain as the sun, rising in the east
Tale as old as time
song as old as rhyme
Beauty and the Beast

sorry - couldn't help myself
Question is, are we Beauty? Or are we the Beast? - Kinda think I'd prefer us to be the Beast

Pilgrim is the beast.

 

[screwduke]

I'm not f'in kidding you. I think the super bowl analogy is a cop-out. It's a way of mentally justifying a loss to an inferior team. Instead of just admitting we were outplayed which is the truth, we take the easy way out and say "well ya know, it was their super bowl after all."

Nobody uses it to justify a loss.

 

[michaeluk26]

I hate when people do this. "We lost because so and so was out injured". This is the worst I've see though. Now all the sudden Hawkins, a guy that gets ZERO pt, is the reason we lost to Auburn. Just stop.
Briscoe and Tyler are the best on ball defenders we have but that didn't matter. Our defensive focus wasn't there, we got up 12 and thought we had it won. Superman Hawkins had 1 good game now all the sudden his absence is the reason we lost to Auburn. Give me a break.
That Loss might be the best thing that happened to this team. They were embarrassed by how they played and went into Alabama, who is ten times better than Auburn, and waxed the Tide without Superman Hawkins.
Then they went into Arkansas, again without Superman Hawkins, and spanked the hogs (sounds dirty).
Fans like you just need to face reality. Sometimes we get beat because we didn't bring our A game.
We didn't lose to Wisconsin because AP was out, we lost because we had 3 straight shot clock violations and played dumb.
We didn't lose to UConn in tge 2014 title game because WCS was hurt, we lost because we couldn't stay in front of a guard that beat our guards off the dribble over and over and over. Michigan State couldn't stop them and neither could Florida. We lost, end of story.

Having WCS in that 2014 title game would have helped tremendously when those guards beat ours off the dribble. Would we have won? There is no way to know but I personally think we would have had a much better chance. Then again the dude was a virtual no show against Notre Dame and Wisconsin last year. Still ticked he basically gave no effort in those games after he was stellar all year.

 

[michaeluk26]

UCLA stinks, we blew them out by 30 in Maui

That was on a neutral court when you returned every single player from last year outside of Oubre.