- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 3,051
- Reaction Score
- 6,254
I always enjoy watching Mike&Mike in the Morning, but my gosh are they both ill informed about UConn and no one, including Jay Bilas is correcting them. I can't remember which Mike it was, but one of them keeps on saying how neither UConn nor UK were ranked coming into the tournament. UConn ranked 18th in the AP poll and 17th in the Coaches and had an RPI of 22.
As for Kentucky, they weren't ranked in the AP Poll (according to points they were 28th) but were ranked 22nd in the last Coaches Poll. I was surprised to see that the last poll rankings were post-conference tournament (dated 3/17 & 3/18 according to cbssport.com). I would have thought that UK would have snuck back in there while UConn rose even higher than 18, say around 15 or 16, ahead of NM, Creighton and maybe even Cinci who they beat down the stretch, including in the AAC Semis.
People keep on pointing out how under-seeded UK was, which I did agree when I first saw the seedings, but rarely mention, afterthought at most, that UConn was under-seeded as well.
If you go by their RPIs...not saying that's completely the way to go...both teams should have been seeded between 5 and 6. If you take into account how they played leading into the tournament in addition to their RPIs, seeing that both made it to their conference finals but lost a 3rd time to their conference regular season and tournament champions who were ranked #1 and #5 respectively in the polls, IMO both should have been seeded at least 5 if not 4.
I'm sure I'm preach to the choir, here. One things for sure, this team has plenty of fodder to get fired up and prove so many people wrong.
As for Kentucky, they weren't ranked in the AP Poll (according to points they were 28th) but were ranked 22nd in the last Coaches Poll. I was surprised to see that the last poll rankings were post-conference tournament (dated 3/17 & 3/18 according to cbssport.com). I would have thought that UK would have snuck back in there while UConn rose even higher than 18, say around 15 or 16, ahead of NM, Creighton and maybe even Cinci who they beat down the stretch, including in the AAC Semis.
People keep on pointing out how under-seeded UK was, which I did agree when I first saw the seedings, but rarely mention, afterthought at most, that UConn was under-seeded as well.
If you go by their RPIs...not saying that's completely the way to go...both teams should have been seeded between 5 and 6. If you take into account how they played leading into the tournament in addition to their RPIs, seeing that both made it to their conference finals but lost a 3rd time to their conference regular season and tournament champions who were ranked #1 and #5 respectively in the polls, IMO both should have been seeded at least 5 if not 4.
I'm sure I'm preach to the choir, here. One things for sure, this team has plenty of fodder to get fired up and prove so many people wrong.