SC goes down!

[Charliebball]

South Carolina is just not a great offensive team..............they depend on their defense and offensive rebounding to overwhelm physically inferior teams........they can be beaten and will be if UConn plays them and is in sync offensively.........

 

[nwhoopfan]

Okay, separate issue. I think South Carolina is completely deserving of a #1 seed, probably #1 overall. But how many times do they get to lose and still stay #1 in the poll? That's not how it works for most teams. LSU dropped 3 spots in the latest poll for losing to the same Kentucky team who beat South Carolina. Huh? Stanford hasn't lost since December, but just can't pass SC, who has lost twice since then. I'm not saying they should plummet, but w/ Stanford and NC State both taking care of business in their conference tourneys, SC should probably be at #3 in the rankings today. But nope, still sitting there at #1.

edit--ESPN's Power Rankings agrees w/ me: Stanford, NC State and South Carolina in that order

 

[Carnac]

I never bet. I'm smarter than that. I would only bet on something I have control of.

me either I learned my lesson a long time ago

 

[FormerCTrez]

Hey Cockfanfan, don't get your BVD's in a bunch. Don't try and psychoanalyze these fans. Across the broad spectrum of fans here in the yard, there are some that are extremely knowledgeable about ALL THINGS WCBB, and some that are merely "casual" recliner chair fans who really don't know some of the many things YOU take for granted. You've got new fans coming to the Boneyard everyday, then you've got your "old codgers" that have been here since the dawn of man. I'm somewhere in the middle. I know what I don't know.

My post really was a reprint of a question asked by a poster here. I was not me. If I don't know something, I'm not afraid or ashamed to ask. Momma said "if you don't know, ask." That was a question I did not know the answer to. I'm not a historian. I've only been a WCBB fan since I retired in 2008. Didn't have the free time while I was working. Anyone that has been following WCBB this year knows that SC is the most dominant team in the country. It's a given that SC will still get a 1 seed despite their loss yesterday.

They loss that battle, but will win the war. If I had to bet everything I own on one team to win the NC, my meager holdings would be on South Carolina. They've lost all the games they're going to lose this year. I thought SC was the best team in the country at the begging of the season, and I think so now!! I watched that game. To me it was a simple case of SC taking their foot off the gas in the 4th quarter (only scoring 7 points), and Kentucky putting theirs on it, and not conceding (including the loss) anything.

I'm won't lie. I was glad to see Kentucky win yesterday. I'm ALWAYS glad to see any team lose that beat us. Let the Wildcats have their 15 minutes of fame and glory. We all know who is going to be holding up the trophy after the horn sounds in championship game in Minneapolis. The only thing that loss did was to galvanize your team, and made them re-focus their attention and resolve on these last 6 games. I'd congratulate you on winning the NC, but my team is still in the running.

Nicely stated Carnac.

 

[sivad40]

I believe most of the time we saw this was when Henderson was injured. Amihere was the closest thing to a PG that they had at the time with the freshman still getting up to speed.

The Gamecocks backup freshmen pg Raven Johnson tore her his acl. At the time,, she was getting most of the minutes out of the freshmen.

 

[GCKSFN4L]

Okay, separate issue. I think South Carolina is completely deserving of a #1 seed, probably #1 overall. But how many times do they get to lose and still stay #1 in the poll? That's not how it works for most teams. LSU dropped 3 spots in the latest poll for losing to the same Kentucky team who beat South Carolina. Huh? Stanford hasn't lost since December, but just can't pass SC, who has lost twice since then. I'm not saying they should plummet, but w/ Stanford and NC State both taking care of business in their conference tourneys, SC should probably be at #3 in the rankings today. But nope, still sitting there at #1.

edit--ESPN's Power Rankings agrees w/ me: Stanford, NC State and South Carolina in that order

Any other year I would agree, but South Carolina has played the top schedule in the country and has beaten both the #2 and #3 team head to head and still has less losses than those teams.
It's hard to justify dropping them from being first even after that. As for LSU they were barely ahead of the teams that jumped them in the polls last week, losing in the first round of the tournament didn't help their case, especially by double digits.

 

[cancontent]

The Gamecocks backup freshmen pg Raven Johnson tore her his acl. At the time,, she was getting most of the minutes out of the freshmen.

Good point. At the time Henderson was injured Johnson was out for the season. Doesn't excuse me for not noting this however.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Polls are reactionary. Kentucky went from unranked to #16. You can't get much more reactionary than that. I'm sticking by my point, SC should have dropped in the poll. I agree w/ @TheFarmFan , the selection committee looks at the season in its entirety, but polls are more of a snapshot of right now. What have you done for me lately?

 

[GCKSFN4L]

Polls are reactionary. Kentucky went from unranked to #16. You can't get much more reactionary than that. I'm sticking by my point, SC should have dropped in the poll. I agree w/ @TheFarmFan , the selection committee looks at the season in its entirety, but polls are more of a snapshot of right now. What have you done for me lately?

They did react, they recognized how hot Kentucky is right now,( maybe too much)and they also minimizes South Carolina's lead on everyone else. Last week they had a maximum 750 points and 30 first place votes, now they have 735 points and 17 first place votes. Stanford has 729 points 11 first place votes and they are literally neck and neck by the poll. If they hadn't lost by such a small margin I'm sure they polls would have reflected a change in the ranking as well.

 

[sun]

I'll admit that I've been biased about Stanford being the team to beat all season.
Even though it was only a 1 point loss that Kentucky may not be able to repeat if they ever played again, I'm surprised by how soft the support is for SC to remain #1 among those polled.

Rhyne Howard is All American and has won tons of awards.
Some have said she's the best player in the country.
And Edwards was able to make crazy good shots when she needed to.

IMO the softness in the voting that supports SC to remain #1 reflects the relative strength of SC to win it all.
They've hung on by a thread, but now there's a lot of doubt all due a single point loss.
And it's not just to an unranked team, but to a team that should have been ranked.

It shows that if they can mis-rank Kentucky properly for this much of the season then they're capable of mis-ranking SC too.
And also, the nature of the game and the amateur young adults who play NCAA BB is all wishy washy.
They're not pros. they're only young adults and some are slightly more talented than others which can give a team an edge on any given night.
It's like betting on dog races, you never know who will win because youth are not always as consistent as they could be.
There's plenty of excuses but it still comes down to having a hunch, or biorhythms, or the alignment of the stars.
You never know how much sleep any kid will get the night before a game or what they're going to eat for lunch that might affect their game.
A lot of them aren't old enough to develop superstitions like the pros do.
I think that which team is truly #1 is highly elusive and a lot is based on wishful thinking.
Not every team in the top 10 - 16 will ever play each other under tourney conditions, and throw in referees and you never know what could happen.
All we know is that a bunch of AP voters now suddenly have a doubt about their choice to be #1.
Being #1 or #2 doesn't really matter, it's only a story line and at this juncture, the focus is on how SC has a target on its back, and Kentucky got lucky and hit the bullseye.

 

[Plebe]

Polls are reactionary. Kentucky went from unranked to #16. You can't get much more reactionary than that. I'm sticking by my point, SC should have dropped in the poll. I agree w/ @TheFarmFan , the selection committee looks at the season in its entirety, but polls are more of a snapshot of right now. What have you done for me lately?

Who overtakes them? Stanford, the team that beat no one better than a bubble team to win the Pac-12? I'm guessing that's your angle here.

 

[nwhoopfan]

It shows that if they can mis-rank Kentucky properly for this much of the season

Did they though? Kentucky was not even mediocre for most of the season. On a 10 game winning streak dating back to mid February, before that they were really NOT good. At 19-11, that means they were 9-11 before the streak started. They couldn't have been ranked with a losing record.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Who overtakes them? Stanford, the team that beat no one better than a bubble team to win the Pac-12? I'm guessing that's your angle here.

I said NC State too. You lose, you drop. That's how it works 99% of the time. But not for South Carolina...twice this year.

 

[Plebe]

I said NC State too. You lose, you drop. That's how it works 99% of the time. But not for South Carolina...twice this year.

Well, I'll let you take that up with Muffet McGraw. According to her, there's no such thing as pro-SC media bias and it's always "South Carolina against the world".

 

[nwhoopfan]

Well, I'll let you take that up with Muffet McGraw. According to her, there's no such thing as pro-SC media bias and it's always "South Carolina against the world".

Dawn has always had a South Carolina against the world mentality, I didn't know McGraw was feeding that as well.

 

[bballnut90]

I said NC State too. You lose, you drop. That's how it works 99% of the time. But not for South Carolina...twice this year.

It's how it works in the early part of the year but as teams get established, it doesn't always work that way. Just earlier this year Stanford was #2 and lost to SC and stayed #2. The next week SC lost...so should Stanford (9-3) have jumped SC (13-1)? At that point SC had wins over UCONN, Maryland, NC State and Stanford. SC's body of work all year has been stronger than anyone else's in the country.
Them losing a game to a red hot team after destroying everyone in the SEC doesn't mean their season outlook has changed. They deserved the #1 ranking after losing to Missouri, they deserve it now. (Especially when you consider that Stanford almost lost to last place Washington about 10 days ago.)

 

[sun]

Did they though? Kentucky was not even mediocre for most of the season. On a 10 game winning streak dating back to mid February, before that they were really NOT good. At 19-11, that means they were 9-11 before the streak started. They couldn't have been ranked with a losing record.

No, I can't say that Kentucky should have been ranked.
They were 8-8 in the SEC at the end of the season and had beat #24 Georgia, otherwise didn't get noticed.
But they were ranked #13 in an AP pre-season poll which appears to be a prophesy fulfilled.

However, there's not much difference between a #20 or #30 on any given day, perhaps a basket or two, or a talented player or two.
It can sometimes be the same between a #1 and a #10, or a #1 and a #26.
The difference is only a single basket, so polls can't be given too much weight.

 

[jumpstart]

Those girls needed a jolt to get them back on track. I think the loss could be a positive thing going forward. This is the "I told you so" speech that teams sometimes need to see.....not just hear. They may not win it all....but this game is nothing but a bump in the road.