[Scotty doesn't know]

The only people on this board that have a problem with Duke's draw are UK fans.

Bullcrap, if you think that Duke had an even kind of bracket to Kansas and Kentucky than that is your opinion. But me, this board (which is 90% UK fans), and all of the nation agrees that they got the easier draw (regardless of most teams fan). Please do not tell me that it is bad sportsmanship. " To quote you in one of the other post, "It is fact".

[PC_You_Know]

Bullcrap, if you think that Duke had an even kind of bracket to Kansas and Kentucky than that is your opinion. But me, this board (which is 90% UK fans), and all of the nation agrees that they got the easier draw (regardless of most teams fan). Please do not tell me that it is bad sportsmanship. " To quote you in one of the other post, "It is fact".

It was proven Duke had the harder road, it was on ESPN, so that's a fact. And it is also a fact that WVU played better against Duke.

[Scotty doesn't know]

It was proven Duke had the harder road, it was on ESPN, so that's a fact. And it is also a fact that WVU played better against Duke.

Really, it was on espn as a poll. Give me the link, it could be one sports writers opinion. And to think that WVU played better against Duke.....that is just crazy, you may have not watched both games.

[theVILLE]

Really, it was on espn as a poll. Give me the link, it could be one sports writers opinion. And to think that WVU played better against Duke.....that is just crazy, you may have not watched both games.

DUKE played Defense and didnt let them shoot at will the entire game! Duke made there Free throws and made there open shots! Read my first post on this thread i had it broke down!

[theVILLE]

[quote=Scotty doesn't know]They split in the reg season. WVU was on the rise at the end of the season hence the reason that they were a stronger seed worthy of the last 1. Villanova was on a little bit of a slide down so it was a shock for them to get a strong two seed.[/Q#1 UOTE]

WV was worth of a #1 seed, i agree 100%! however it should have been syracuse or someone not duke! Duke has played great all season! They have beaten the teams they had to play! Its not there faught that UNC was down this year (that the execuse you use for UK's weak schedule) I think the seeding was right! I think that duke had the 2nd toughest bracket of the 4!

[Scotty doesn't know]

[quote=Scotty doesn't know]They split in the reg season. WVU was on the rise at the end of the season hence the reason that they were a stronger seed worthy of the last 1. Villanova was on a little bit of a slide down so it was a shock for them to get a strong two seed.[/Q#1 UOTE]

WV was worth of a #1 seed, i agree 100%! however it should have been syracuse or someone not duke! Duke has played great all season! They have beaten the teams they had to play! Its not there faught that UNC was down this year (that the execuse you use for UK's weak schedule) I think the seeding was right! I think that duke had the 2nd toughest bracket of the 4!

SOrry man. I have to disagree. When you give a team the opening round winner and the worst 2 and 4 seeds that qualifies as a weak field. Duke did what they needed to and they should be congradulated on winning and beating who was placed in front of them. But you can not convince me that Duke had the second hardest bracket.. Come on now.

[theVILLE]

NYY10 and PC, im taking up for you here, i hope you got my back!

The seeds were
1. UK < Duke
2.WV < Nova
3. New Mex < Baylor
4. Wisoncsin < Purdue
5. Temple < Tex A&M
6.Marquette > Notre Dame
7.Clemson < Richmond
8. Texas < California
9.Wake Forest < Louisville
10. Mizz< St. Marys
11 Washington > OD
12. Cornell > Ut St.

And opponets each had to play to get there were
[COLOR="Red"]Duke:
Ark Pine Bluff
California
Purdue
Baylor
WV

UK:
ETSU
WAKE
Cornell
WV[/COLOR]
Who had the toughest road??

Look at this! in the red... yeah and look at the top part as well...PC and NYY10 i need your back up here! lol...But really look at that...you can convinve me other wise when you break the bracket down like this...I mean no bracket was tougher than the kansas bracket though

[Scotty doesn't know]

Look at this! in the red... yeah and look at the top part as well...PC and NYY10 i need your back up here! lol...But really look at that...you can convinve me other wise when you break the bracket down like this...I mean no bracket was tougher than the kansas bracket though

Head to head I would say that UK and Duke got about an even draw. BUT the teams that their respective opponents had to beat causes more or less rest and pushes the team further. UK had a weak WF team but NO WAY is it close to a struggling pac 10 school to play in the second round. Either game was not even close so it is not an issue. Purdue with their 2nd leading scorer missing caught up with them and they struggled against the Blue Devils where as Cornell was an up-start club with energy but I will say it was a wash. Now in the regional final Baylor was a hard draw but they where now where close to as good of a team as WVU even without Bryant. UK played the potential 4th number one seed in as their 2 seed and Duke got to play (arguably the 2rd best 3 seed) Baylor. I know that you will disagree but I will not make a statement that Duke had a hard run to the final four.

[PC_You_Know]

Head to head I would say that UK and Duke got about an even draw. BUT the teams that their respective opponents had to beat causes more or less rest and pushes the team further. UK had a weak WF team but NO WAY is it close to a struggling pac 10 school to play in the second round. Either game was not even close so it is not an issue. Purdue with their 2nd leading scorer missing caught up with them and they struggled against the Blue Devils where as Cornell was an up-start club with energy but I will say it was a wash. Now in the regional final Baylor was a hard draw but they where now where close to as good of a team as WVU even without Bryant. UK played the potential 4th number one seed in as their 2 seed and Duke got to play (arguably the 2rd best 3 seed) Baylor. I know that you will disagree but I will not make a statement that Duke had a hard run to the final four.

This is the problem most people have with die hard UK fans. You are claiming that your team is dead even with the national champion, yet your team couldn't get out of the Elite 8. WOW!

That struggling Pac-10 team knocked off Louisville who almost beat your Wildcats.

WVU didn't have their PG and they kicked UK's butt.

[theVILLE]

Head to head I would say that UK and Duke got about an even draw. BUT the teams that their respective opponents had to beat causes more or less rest and pushes the team further. UK had a weak WF team but NO WAY is it close to a struggling pac 10 school to play in the second round. Either game was not even close so it is not an issue. Purdue with their 2nd leading scorer missing caught up with them and they struggled against the Blue Devils where as Cornell was an up-start club with energy but I will say it was a wash. Now in the regional final Baylor was a hard draw but they where now where close to as good of a team as WVU even without Bryant. UK played the potential 4th number one seed in as their 2 seed and Duke got to play (arguably the 2rd best 3 seed) Baylor. I know that you will disagree but I will not make a statement that Duke had a hard run to the final four.

And duke beat that team that you say was worthy of a 1 seed by 21 points! And baylor was arguably the best 3 seed seed! A struggling pac 10 team?? They had a team in the sweet 16 didn't they...there is not an easy road 2 the final four but by the braclets I think kansas had the toughest then duke, then kentucky the syracuse

[theVILLE]

This is the problem most people have with die hard UK fans. You are claiming that your team is dead even with the national champion, yet your team couldn't get out of the Elite 8. WOW!

That struggling Pac-10 team knocked off Louisville who almost beat your Wildcats.

WVU didn't have their PG and they kicked UK's butt.

Great post pc! He needs to take his blue shades off

[Scotty doesn't know]

This is the problem most people have with die hard UK fans. You are claiming that your team is dead even with the national champion, yet your team couldn't get out of the Elite 8. WOW!

That struggling Pac-10 team knocked off Louisville who almost beat your Wildcats.

WVU didn't have their PG and they kicked UK's butt.

And Duke almost got beat by a sub-par Boston College team and Miami team, and did get beat by and awful NC St team. UK got beat by and awful South Carolina team and pushed by a Georgia team. You can do that who played this team and did this, all you want my friend. And I am a firm believer that UK matched up well with Duke and would have handled them 6/10 of the time. Look, what we know about the tourney is that any team can have a great game at any point and beat a stronger team playing poorly (see Kansas and Kentucky and Syracuse for that matter), does that mean they were the better team, yes on that night (which is the beauty of the tourney-the best team may not always win it). Take the KY sweet 16 this year. Shelby Valley won the tourney with beating a team that had more size and talent, and when you break it down Ballard could probably beat them 6 out of 10 times (but it is just never gonna be set up like that). That is why the tourney format is so exciting. I am IN NO WAY TAKING ANYTHING AWAY FROM DUKE. UK was not nearly the best team when they won it in 1998 and Arizona was not nearly the best team when they won it in 1997 but they clicked perfectly on the nights that they needed to and that is what Duke did!!!

As for that struggling Pac 10 school beating Louisville, did you see some of the teams Louisville played poorly against and lost to? I mean they lost to Charlotte and St. Johns, but had the kind of team dynamic to play and beat Syracuse twice...... Louisville showed why they got a 9 seed in the tourney, they were wildly inconsistent and never knew what team could play out on the court that particular night. Hence a loss to a team like Cal who was not tested in a weak pac 10 and was particularly hot that night to beat UL.

WVU did not have their point guard and that showed in the Duke game when Mazzulla who had averaged around 3 points the whole year did just that and could not pick up Bryant's slack (Mazzulla had 4 points). And with Bulter having a rough game all the end until he got hurt (10 points). These guys, were supernatural in the game against Kentucky being a team that averaged 1-2 three pointers a game and hit 8 in the first half but that is the beauty of the tourney. Do I think WVU is a better team because of that game.... NO, but they were that night.

Please do not fault me for saying that UK and Kansas had rough brackets in the tourney, Duke was right there with them and deserved have a chance for the 1 seed but not to get the weaker 2 and 4 seeds. But when it came down to it, I think that most people would have agreed going into the tourney that WVU had a better argument for that 1 seed. WVU beat the teams in front of them and lost their point guard in the process but relied on their star and a random secondary player to step up which happened in the UK (which they did in fact kick our butts that night) but not in the Duke game. Mazzulla did not bring the same game in the final four and he was their main point guard.

So stop taking offense to a UK fan on a Kentucky sport board. Do you honestly think that everyone would have the same opinion as you. Duke is the national champions, have 4 titles and are in elite company with UK, UCLA, UNC, Indiana and Kansas. That is where they belonged even without the title but they are indeed one the powers and rightfully so. Im sorry that I may disagree with you all on some of the matters but I am not going to sit here and say that agree with it if I dont.

[theVILLE]

Uk squeaked by a miami of ohio team also! Fact is you can get beat any given night by any given team! UK beat 3 teams in the tourney this season! If that shows the schedule they played! and got beat by a team that didnt make the NIT! That shows college basketball is tough! I mean KU was #1 start and ended season at #1 and then get beat by N.Iowa!

[Scotty doesn't know]

Uk squeaked by a miami of ohio team also! Fact is you can get beat any given night by any given team! UK beat 3 teams in the tourney this season! If that shows the schedule they played! and got beat by a team that didnt make the NIT! That shows college basketball is tough! I mean KU was #1 start and ended season at #1 and then get beat by N.Iowa!

Exactly, that is why the tourney is so unique in comparison to the NBA playoffs and MLB playoffs. You must come with your game plan and execution in order each night or you will get beat and it will be over..... I know that every team will have teams that sneak up on them through out the season, UK it was Miami and South Carolina, Kansas it was Cornell and Northern Iowa, Duke it was NC st and Miami. Every game helps prepare you fro how the end of the year will be and should help the team to realize that you can not just squeak by or play a better game once the tourney hits.

[theVILLE]

Exactly, that is why the tourney is so unique in comparison to the NBA playoffs and MLB playoffs. You must come with your game plan and execution in order each night or you will get beat and it will be over..... I know that every team will have teams that sneak up on them through out the season, UK it was Miami and South Carolina, Kansas it was Cornell and Northern Iowa, Duke it was NC st and Miami. Every game helps prepare you fro how the end of the year will be and should help the team to realize that you can not just squeak by or play a better game once the tourney hits.

I can agree with that...But there was alot more teams snuck up on UK than the others...not knocking UK or anything, but they were so young but found a way to win...I mean sam houston st. i think ws another team that snuck up on them...Thats what makes college basketball though...I was talking to an old man today that wanted to get rid of cal! He said with 5 lottery picks in the NBA and he cant even get them to the final four, thats sad...lol...thats UK basketball for ya though

[Scotty doesn't know]

I can agree with that...But there was alot more teams snuck up on UK than the others...not knocking UK or anything, but they were so young but found a way to win...I mean sam houston st. i think ws another team that snuck up on them...Thats what makes college basketball though...I was talking to an old man today that wanted to get rid of cal! He said with 5 lottery picks in the NBA and he cant even get them to the final four, thats sad...lol...thats UK basketball for ya though

Forever, will there be interesting fan opinions like that. I wonder what see thinks if we still had Billy.

[theVILLE]

Forever, will there be interesting fan opinions like that. I wonder what see thinks if we still had Billy.

He was a tubby fan! He didnt like his style..Yeah tubby won a championship once with pitinos boys but nothing after that!

[Scotty doesn't know]

He was a tubby fan! He didnt like his style..Yeah tubby won a championship once with pitinos boys but nothing after that!

It was with Pitino's boys but he had to coach them, it wasnt like the 96 team. But yea you are right, the state just got fed up with the style of ball.