Historic upset? | Syracusefan.com

Historic upset?

bevosu

bevosu

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
10,097
Like
22,592
Good basketball game...historic upset? I don't buy it.

Kentucky's great record...helps to play in a weak conference. Wisconsin had the more experienced players. Wisconsin isn't chopped liver. They know how to play the game. I thought they had a good chance, and I think a lot of other people did.
 
I think what UK did was impressive, but historic? Only historic in the sense that no team was ever 38-0 before a loss.
 
Wisconsin was "bigger" in the big moments. They just plain played better when it counted. Kentucky folded up where Wisconsin refused to. The media talking heads, who anointed Kentucky as their darlings, got some 'splainin' ta do.
 
Last edited:
No. UK was certainly a great team but they were on the ropes in the last round, again here, and if they had won, every reason to think it would be a toss up against Duke.
 
bevosu said:
Good basketball game...historic upset? I don't buy it.

Kentucky's great record...helps to play in a weak conference. Wisconsin had the more experienced players. Wisconsin isn't chopped liver. They know how to play the game. I thought they had a good chance, and I think a lot of other people did.
Expand...

Agree 100%.

UK was good, but not nearly as great as their record would indicate.
 
UNLV had 3 draft picks on their entire team

UK will have 7 draft picks this year (assuming andrew harrison will get drafted - which at this point, i think he lost that. so make it 6)

and UK made the finals last year and final 4 this year and went 38-0 in a better conference than UNLV played in. just saying.
 
CusefanATL said:
UNLV had 3 draft picks on their entire team

UK will have 7 draft picks this year (assuming andrew harrison will get drafted - which at this point, i think he lost that. so make it 6)

and UK made the finals last year and final 4 this year and went 38-0 in a better conference than UNLV played in. just saying.
Expand...

So what. Draft picks aren't a good measurement, given the dregs that the NBA draft has devolved into.

This would have been "historic" if UK had gone undefeated and won it all. In that event, you couldn't take it away from them. I'm not convinced that this was a "great" team, despite the talent they possess. They were very good in a down year--great depth, great size, great rebounding, somewhat pedestrian offense, somewhat inconsistent guard play. They were primed to be taken down by an experienced, disciplined team that was better offensively than they were.

Not many teams could match up with their size. Wisconsin could, and to their credit they got the job done.

Somewhere in Harlan, there's a moron with a 40-0 tattoo that is still a dumb idea.
 
RF2044 said:
So what. Draft picks aren't a good measurement, given the dregs that the NBA draft has devolved into.

This would have been "historic" if UK had gone undefeated and won it all. In that event, you couldn't take it away from them. I'm not convinced that this was a "great" team, despite the talent they possess. They were very good in a down year--great depth, great size, great rebounding, somewhat pedestrian offense, somewhat inconsistent guard play. They were primed to be taken down by an experienced, disciplined team that was better offensively than they were.

Not many teams could match up with their size. Wisconsin could, and to their credit they got the job done.

Somewhere in Harlan, there's a moron with a 40-0 tattoo that is still a dumb idea.
Expand...

I didn't agree with everything you said, but the like was for the comment about that tattoo. ;)
 
I thought UNLV was over hyped too.

A historic upset is Villanova over Georgetown...Florida Gulf Coast over Georgetown...Richmond over xxxxxxxx.

When a decided underdog beats a heavy favorite...that's historic. This was a good team beating a good team.
 
PoppyHart said:
Wisconsin was the 2nd best team in the country this year. This is mildly surprising but not shocking.
Expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the top 3 preseason were UK, Wisconsin, and Duke -- right?

Three of them made the final four. Two are in the finals. Pretty good prognostications.
 
RF2044 said:
So what. Draft picks aren't a good measurement, given the dregs that the NBA draft has devolved into.

This would have been "historic" if UK had gone undefeated and won it all. In that event, you couldn't take it away from them. I'm not convinced that this was a "great" team, despite the talent they possess. They were very good in a down year--great depth, great size, great rebounding, somewhat pedestrian offense, somewhat inconsistent guard play. They were primed to be taken down by an experienced, disciplined team that was better offensively than they were.

Not many teams could match up with their size. Wisconsin could, and to their credit they got the job done.

Somewhere in Harlan, there's a moron with a 40-0 tattoo that is still a dumb idea.
Expand...

I was just stating the facts. Not really throwing my opinion 1 way or the other.

If i had too... I would have said this UK team could have taken that UNLV team. Not as confident about this Wiscy team vs that Duke team - but thats certainly not to say it couldn't happen.
 
RF2044 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the top 3 preseason were UK, Wisconsin, and Duke -- right?

Three of them made the final four. Two are in the finals. Pretty good prognostications.
Expand...

I think Arizona was #2, UK, Wisconsin, and Duke were the others in the top 4. If this tourney was seeded correctly Zona would have been a #1 over Nova, and would have made the Final Four as well.
 
After watching Notre Dame-Kentucky this was no historic upset. It was two even teams and Wisconsin scored in the last 5 minutes while Kentucky ran the. Syracuse stall ball offense and were outplayed.
Duke-UNLV was more of a historic upset.
 
Wisconsin was only a 4 point dog, however this game will be remembered for a very, very long time.

They did what the overwhelming majority didn't think they could do.

Nova over Gtown, Duke over unlv, then it could be argued this game as the biggest perceived upsets in final four history.

The fact that it wasn't the final game will hurt its "big game" legacy, but this was a tremendously entertaining and exciting game.
 
I wouldn't call it an historic upset, mainly because that undermines how good Wisconsin actually is. I'm hopeful the narrative doesn't become "Kentucky lost" rather than "Wisconsin won."
 
bevosu said:
Good basketball game...historic upset? I don't buy it.

Kentucky's great record...helps to play in a weak conference. Wisconsin had the more experienced players. Wisconsin isn't chopped liver. They know how to play the game. I thought they had a good chance, and I think a lot of other people did.
Expand...
Vegas didn't think so. The 5-point spread was modest, to say the least.
 
bevosu said:
Good basketball game...historic upset? I don't buy it.

Kentucky's great record...helps to play in a weak conference. Wisconsin had the more experienced players. Wisconsin isn't chopped liver. They know how to play the game. I thought they had a good chance, and I think a lot of other people did.
Expand...


They were both #1 seeds. I find it hard to even call this an upset. Everyone knew they played in a weak conference, and had several close games. Sure they dominated most teams, but they were far from invincible. Historic upset? That thought makes me have coffee coming out of my nose right now at the thought of it.
 
In a best-of-7 series UK would win, but I think the series would go at least 6 and possibly 7. The Wildcats would have home court and would win in the end. The game last night was compelling and fun to watch. That, and the fact that Kentucky came so close to going undefeated makes it memorable in my mind.
 
I wouldn't even call it an upset. While several players on Kentucky have better long term potential, the two best players on the court last night were both wearing Wisconsin jerseys (for the record I think Frank Kaminsky is the best COLLEGE basketball player I have seen in a long time). Wisconsin wins that game 6 or 7 times out of 10.

Bad year for Kentucky to have the team they did. Last year they would have rolled through the tournament on size alone. This year there were five very good teams, that also had very good 7 footers - Kentucky, Wisconsin, Duke, Gonzaga, and Arizona. Its one thing to be a very good team, but you go to another level when you are a very good team with that kind of size. If you notice, none of those teams lost to anybody but each other in the tournament. In my bracket I have Wisconsin and Gonzaga in the championship game. Really the only team capable of stopping Gonzaga from getting there was Duke, and you have to give credit to them, they stepped their game up a ton. The team that beat Gonzaga and destroyed Michigan St. doesn't even resemble the Duke team from the regular season or the one Notre Dame ran out of the ACC tournament.

Its going to be a great national championship, and the two best teams in the country are playing in it.
 
UK has been overrated all season.

Not taking away what they did. 38-1 is an incredible year.

But this is why you would rather have one Anthony Davis than a combo of Towns/WCS/Dakari/etc.

UK should have dominated everyone on the glass, but they couldn't.

For all the short bench complaints we have, I think it would have done Cal well to limit his rotation with this crew.

Wisconsin has legit talent and a legit coach. They earned that win.
 
It depends on the outcome of the championship game. A Wisconsin victory will make this game equivalent to UConn's win over Duke. A Duke victory and everyone will write that the historic upset allowed an easier path to a championship.
 
CusefanATL said:
UNLV had 3 draft picks on their entire team

UK will have 7 draft picks this year (assuming andrew harrison will get drafted - which at this point, i think he lost that. so make it 6)

and UK made the finals last year and final 4 this year and went 38-0 in a better conference than UNLV played in. just saying.
Expand...

That unlv team would beat the out of this uk team
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
170,343
Messages
4,885,774
Members
5,992
Latest member
meierscreek

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
17
Guests online
793
Total visitors
810
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom