That would dictate going back and checking the attendance. I don’t care enough to do so but maybe someone has some interest in it.
We get everyone's best is a fallacy!
- Thread starter LmdCat
- Start date
I think it would be hard to determine. Attendance I think for college basketball in general has been down in recent history tho.
Dude….you’re just wrong here. Especially when it comes to the SEC. Did you watch Arkansas A&M last night? Forget their shooting performance, the atmosphere in Bud Walton last night was like a funeral in the closing moments. But bet you come January 27th Bud Walton is going to be breaking decibel records when UK comes to town.
Most of the time when Kentucky comes to town, your will to win goes up and your averages do too. Not to mention all of the other perks for the fans and the atmosphere for the game. Even Cal says it, like at halftime by saying they can't play any better than they have the first half. This fact has been noted by every coach, even Sutton said it was amazing how other teams raised their level of play against Kentucky. He said he watched other SEC teams go at it and it doesn't even compare. I knew Texas A&M would lose their next game, beating Kentucky doesn't mean the next team you play is going to lay down. there is some truth to that.
Yes, this is the right answer Thunder. It is both. We usually get their best shot and this particular UK team can't defend itself out of a wet paper bag. And our offense, which is one of the quickest per possession in the nation, also gives opponents more opportunities to score. Add to that, our team didn't shoot as well as they usually do. If only Reeves made his usual 3pt percentage Saturday, we win in regulation easily and we're not having this conversation. So, that should be considered as well. Calipari's defense has always been a strength for his teams, but that was when we ran more of a ball control kind of offense.
Yep exactly.
There's no doubt that teams get up for the big teams. It's like that in every sport with every big team.
Sometimes it makes them play better but I would also suggest that sometimes it makes them play worse
How many points are teams given for having highly ranked players? Who gives a crap what someone's ranking is if they perform poorly in almost every aspect of the game? Recruits' rankings are good conversation topic during the off season but mean very little when it doesn't result in points, rebounds, blocked shots, and overall good defense during the season.
Last edited:
I guess Kentucky bends towards playing worse when playing better teams.
Last edited:
Absolutely, and tell me how many other SEC schools get the tee shirt giveaways and blackouts, redouts, white outs, etc. like UK always has against them on the road. They do get up for UK games more than others, no debate about that. Could Cal do better against those teams? Absolutely, not denying that part. But to say we don't get their best is just wrong.
I dunno i mean we did take Miami to the woodshed and probably played our best game this season from North Carolina.
If anything this season I would say we play down to our competition at times (ie UNC-W)
I am talking about in general and not any specific game.
That's before the bigs came back. When Thiero was able to play and Reed wasn't being forced into a stagnant offense where two bigs who can't jump over a box of matches started being an integral part of Cow's offense. I'd bet anyone here ten bucks that if Cal were to let his team just play (there's a reason his former player had to tell him to do so) and ONLY use the bigs for lobs or kicking it back out, we'd start blowing out good teams again. Not going to happen of course.
The UNC game was not "before the bigs came back". Both Ugonna and Bradshaw played in that game and Bradshaw had 12 including the clinching free throw.
Also, besides you being completely wrong about the bigs being back for UNC, I thought we were over people saying "Cow" for Cal. Super cringey
Similar threads
