South Carolina @ Georgia

[Tidepool]

Ahem: the media never hypes; the media HYPE.

And for the record, the media hype the SEC because ESPN has invested heavily in it. Meanwhile, the Sun Belt has grown in population, increasing the market value of many areas around the SEC.

I don't really resent espn's hyping of the league in WCBB. I do however, resent their horrific hyping of unsavory folks like Tim Tebow, Cam Newton, and Johnny Manziel.

I understand how you can resent the hyping, but though I am not a fan of Tim Tebow, I don't see how you can call him "unsavory" or put him in the same category as Manziel in that regard.

 

[Frodo]

Georgia IS 7th in scoring defense; it's not like they haven't played good defense this season.

For starters, scoring defense is one of those stats that needs to be examined closely and not just taken at face value. I remember a few years ago when Utah was number one or two almost every year, but no one seriously argued that they were one of the best defensive teams in the country...same could be said for a lot of the Villanova teams...their points allowed had a lot more to do with their deliberate style offensively than it did with their defense and that is often the case. I can tell you for certain that the Georgia team that SC played last night was not the 7th best defense in the country. In fact, the Georgia team that played last night is probably not a top 50 team. When you realize that they were missing two of their top three scorers and their two best rebounders from a team that wasn't, frankly, a top team to begin with it's not hard to see why. Keep in mind that Georgia got thumped by Seton Hall back when they had their full roster...a Seton Hall team that is 44th in Sagarin and 24th in Massey ratings...a solid team but not an outstanding one. Georgia also had close wins against Furman, TCU and a dreadful Georgia Tech team. Even their win over MSU, which at the time looked like a good win, turns out to be a phantom since MSU has turned out to be a pretty weak team after all. Andy Landers is practically famous for pulling the same shtick every year...he fattens up the record by playing a lot of poor to middling teams at the start...often starting the year 11-0 or 12-0...to pump up their ranking and then gradually they slide down.

 

[Tonyc]

USC's own scoring defense isn't exactly terrible. UConn has played against 9 opponents with scoring defenses ranked in the top 200, compared to USC having faced 16 opponents with top-200 scoring defenses. The Gamecocks have gone up against only 6 opponents who fell from 201-on in scoring defense rankings, compared to the Huskies facing 13 opponents with such poor defenses.

And while how well a team keeps it's opponents scores low can depend highly on the quality of opponents that team plays, UConn has played against 15 opponents with SOSs ranked in the top 100, 5 in the top 200, and 2 outside of the top 200. USC has played 17 opponents in the top 100, 3 in the top 200, and 2 outside of the top 200 as well.

So UConn plays against the lesser scoring defenses compared to USC, and against a slightly but definite lesser quality list of opponents than USC has played. Further when you add in that UConn has played it's starters more minutes per game in those games than what USC has played, and that UConn has the more experienced and older roster, the difference in scoring offenses makes more sense.

The best-ranked scoring defense UConn has faced this season prior to USC was St. John's who currently has the 32nd-ranked scoring D. Better than Stanford's (96th), Duke's (47th), and Notre Dame's (104th). St. Johns also has a fairly decent SOS at 83rd, meaning that they played that great defense against a solid lineup of opponents. They held UConn to their lowest point total of the season at 70 pts.

USC will bring a much better scoring D that it built against a much better quality of opponent to Storrs this Monday: The Gamecocks haven't faced a #1-ranked scoring D yet this season, but they have played against some pretty solid scoring Ds owned by teams that have gotten theirs against better competition that UConn has faced. So we'll see.....

Here are the facts. If Geno didn't pull back and call off the press and fast break and zone defense and in many games clear the bench UConn would win by more and hold opponents to less. SC head to head with UConn imo will lose no matter what and most likely UConn will at some point be up 20 or more points. Im not arrogant btw Im stating this because I believe it. SC is not an AAC team I know that. Yes some of UCOnns numbers are inflated because the AAC is weak. SC lacks good ball handlers, quickness, outside shooting. UConn is much better in all areas. You have no idea what it will be like going up again UConn. SC is a good team, last season so was Duke Ohio ST Maryland Penn ST and Stanford and with KML and Tuck hurt on the bench and most of those games on the road UConn beat them easily. This season UConn has 5 prolific scorers who can shoot the trey and handle the ball. UConn doesn't make many turnovers against top teams. SC does. I don't see SC coming close in this game unless UConn as a team is in foul trouble or injured and I hope the refs let them play and fouls for either team don't come into play. All your stats are great but imo do not apply to this game because Geno will not clear the bench early and will not let up unless the game is out of hand. You don't know how good this UConn team is. Im sure you've seen what they do to good teams like SC. Do you think you height and depth will be the difference? UConn has height and depth. Let me finsh by saying Stewart was NPOY 2 years straight, KML was number 1 out of HS, MoJeff was ranked 1 & 2 out of HS, Morgan Tuck was ranked number 1 in HS until she got hurt and Kia Nurse played on the Olympic team since she was 17yrs old. That's tuff to defend. Bottom line as I keep saying I don't see SC scoring over 60 pts against UConn unless Geno lets up and calls off the dogs and I don't see SC keeping UConn under 70.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

For starters, scoring defense is one of those stats that needs to be examined closely and not just taken at face value. I remember a few years ago when Utah was number one or two almost every year, but no one seriously argued that they were one of the best defensive teams in the country...same could be said for a lot of the Villanova teams...their points allowed had a lot more to do with their deliberate style offensively than it did with their defense and that is often the case. I can tell you for certain that the Georgia team that SC played last night was not the 7th best defense in the country. In fact, the Georgia team that played last night is probably not a top 50 team. When you realize that they were missing two of their top three scorers and their two best rebounders from a team that wasn't, frankly, a top team to begin with it's not hard to see why. Keep in mind that Georgia got thumped by Seton Hall back when they had their full roster...a Seton Hall team that is 44th in Sagarin and 24th in Massey ratings...a solid team but not an outstanding one. Georgia also had close wins against Furman, TCU and a dreadful Georgia Tech team. Even their win over MSU, which at the time looked like a good win, turns out to be a phantom since MSU has turned out to be a pretty weak team after all. Andy Landers is practically famous for pulling the same shtick every year...he fattens up the record by playing a lot of poor to middling teams at the start...often starting the year 11-0 or 12-0...to pump up their ranking and then gradually they slide down.

I always thought Andy became famous from starring in Brylcream commercials?

 

[Zorro]

I shudder to remember the shockingly unflattering things they used to call poor Andy over on the Summitt.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

I shudder to remember the shockingly unflattering things they used to call poor Andy over on the Summitt.

I never visit the Summitt, so I don't know what they used to call him. I do visit Vol Nation on occasion.

 

[Tonyc]

I never visit the Summitt, so I don't know what they used to call him. I do visit Vol Nation on occasion.

I don't visit the Summitt anymore. It was a cesspool and that's a compliment believe me.

 

[Bestiarius]

I always thought Andy became famous from starring in Brylcream commercials?

Nah, that was Matthew Mitchell.

Some good interviews from Staley, Cuevas, White & Mitchell. Apologies if this has already been posted. http://www.gamecocksonline.com/sports/w-baskbl/mtt/scar-w-baskbl-mtt.html

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

Nah, that was Matthew Mitchell.

Some good interviews from Staley, Cuevas, White & Mitchell. Apologies if this has already been posted. http://www.gamecocksonline.com/sports/w-baskbl/mtt/scar-w-baskbl-mtt.html

They both keep Brylcream in business. Matthew Mitchell is annoying; he whines incessantly.