SC goes down!

[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.