VTTW Board Index

And defensively we were terrible in the first half. Mercer is a far more disciplined and smart basketball team than us, and we aren't shooting free throws for shizzle either.

We're lucky to only be down 5.

He kinda looks like he'd rather go on spring break next week  :frown: :frown: :frown:

Horrible basketball. Half the team clearly DNGAF. Some are at least giving effort . . . Stokes, Richardson, Chievous . . . but when you miss a ton of FTs, allow a ton of easy layups, and jack threes like there's no tomorrow, you're not going to beat a team that clearly wants it.

Yep.  It's pretty obvious that he would rather be elsewhere. 

I agree.  Stokes was 100% and so were the other two.  McRae not just no, but hell no, and Golden only in spurts.

Team has no heart whatsoever Tonight.

For major college programs, these NIT games are completely meaningless.

If they meant anything, there would be more than 4,000 in the stands.

Still suxes to watch, and IMO a game is a game.  A team that lacks heart to win a "meaningless" NIT game does not have the heart of a champion.  A true competitor wants to win everything.

You can take absolutely nothing away from these NIT teams. Sure you want to see the team win. But they mean nothing and they imply nothing about the team.

They do imply something about the team and the coach, IMO. It could be an opportunity to get better, if you choose to use it. We clearly would rather not.

I'll say it again, true competitors always want to win.  Losers dial it in.

Have you ever played competitive sports?

Is your argument that losing in the first round of the NIT vs. winning five straight to be NIT champs really gives you no information about the players or the coach of a team?

100% agree!!

I did, and I never played on a team that laid down, no matter what may or may not have been at stake. 

What we saw tonight was absolutely inexcusable.  It certainly didn't look like Mercer had any problem being up for this game and playing with some heart and effort. 

A team that runs the table in the NIT tells you plenty. But you cannot really take anything away from a first round game where a team fails to show up. The same team and same coach could very easily come back and gut out a conference championship the next season. Is anyone honestly going to say that last night's loss by UK takes anything away from Calipari's coaching ability?

On a different level, this isn't unlike the Christmas tournaments the high school teams play in. Invariably there will be a team that will stink it up because they don't want to be there and then go and do very well in the state tournament.

Making blanket statements about players and coaches based on a single game is completely foolish. I mean, heck, if Bandit's assessment is correct, Hart should fire Cuonzo tomorrow. What justification would there be for keeping him around?

I don't like it, but it is what it is.

And yet only 4000 showed up. The fans don't care about the game and we expect the players to?

it Was A Worst Effort Than I Even Imagined,Though We Shouldn't Really Be Surprised Since Cuonzo Basically Announced There Would Be No Effort Given.  Really,Really Disappointing.

Calipari has a national title and virtually perennial NCAA tourney appearances. I think Cuonzo's failure to make it in-- ever, in his career-- adds a little context to his apparent inability to motivate even a mediocre effort in his teams' NIT appearances. When you can't get to the big dance, don't you think you'd try to make at least some statement about pride in your program, especially when you bitch locally and nationally about belonging in the NCAA tourney? What does this failure, added to that, do for his image or Tennessee's? Do you think we'll get the benefit of the doubt by the selection committee next time around? Hell no we won't.

There were things at stake in this game. We shat the bed. It means something.

Yes.  The players should even care if they are playing in a high school gym with 40 people watching.  It's called competing, which is something we saw none of tonight.  

I hate to sound like Wes Rucker because I really don't like him, but I think you're reading waaaaay too much into this.

I'm still not sold on Cuonzo being a good coach at this level. But to me the lack of effort UT showed against Alabama means way more than what we saw tonight. And, btw, if Cuonzo really did indicate that it would be hard for his team to get motivated for this game I might feel differently. But I didn't personally hear him say that and I've yet t see the quote.

If I am competing against you I have one goal: WIN. Whether or not anyone other than the two of us ever knows about it, we will both know about it - and that's enuf motivation for me to play for nothing short of the W.

Exactly dad....I played HS and college and we were taught to fight our asses off. Excuses are for losers.

Dude. I'm seeing the continuation of a pattern when what we need to be seeing is something better. I'm not reading into one game, because it did not occur in a damn vacuum.

Alabama was bad. This was bad. I just think it's silly to pretend it means nothing. It means there's not much pride backing up Martin's contention that we were an NCAA tourney team.

You and 101stdad missed my point. It has nothing to do with playing well because of the size of the crowd. It simply means that we, as fans, knew this game didn't mean jack; that's why we weren't there. Why are we surprised that the players might have felt similarly?

Btw, those who blame a bad performance on a team's lack of character probably aren't taking into account the exhibition games where teams typically turn in a less than stellar effort.

No, I'm not missing anything.  Every time you play it means something, or at least it should mean something. 

What was saw tonight we saw over and over this year.  It wasn't just a one time thing in a game which you seem to think didn't mean anything. 

Without Googling, tell me who won the NIT last season. 

Yeah, that's what I thought.

I understood your point. I simply disagree with it. Whether I care if they won, played well, gave effort or not - someone who is a 'winner' will never give less than their best effort in competition.

Whether or not I, you, or any other fan knows who won the NIT last season is irrelevant - the guys who played in that game know, and will never forget it.  For a true competitor, imo, the motivation is from within. I am reminded of the motto: 'If winning was easy, losers would do it!'

yes.  I should probably resent the implication, but I don't.  LOL!    :dunno:

To go to your point Creek, don't read in to what we - or I should say I, because I don't speak for everyone - are saying as some massive indictment of the team or Martin.  It isn't.  It's simply a statement on this one game.  I didn't like the effort.

I am pretty much in the mainstream in my attitude to Cuonzo and the team's prospects for next year.  There was good and bad this year - this last game definitely was bad.  I have no respect for a team that dials it in just because "it's the NIT".  I should say SOME of the team.  I do think there were some good individual efforts but overall they stunk it up.

It's funny because I see a big contrast in your attitude about "it's just the NIT" vs. the "we might not even go to a bowl game" statement that it was allegeda  football player made before we lost to UK in 2011.  Quick, who won the Liberty Bowl in 2011?  Yeah, no one gives a shizzle about that either, but that's no reason to lose to Kentucky.

And if you lay down against Mercer in the NIT, likely you don't have the stones to beat bammer next year when the NCAA is on the line again, or your first round opponent in the NCAA, or.....

Bowl games and the NIT is an apples to oranges comparison. Besides, I just didn't like Tyler Bray, so there's that... :dance:

One man's trash is another man's treasure.  I actually think the bowl game example is 'spot on'.  Playing for a lower level bowl or playing in a lower level tournament... seems relevant to me. 

I guess the biggest difference between the NIT and a lower-tier bowl, at least to me, is that you typically know mid-way through the season whether you have a shot at a major bowl. If that's all you're playing for, you can cash it in right then. It isn't like Bray and Rogers woke up after the Vanderbilt game and said, "Hey, wait a minute. We're not going to a major bowl." It's completely different when you've battled for weeks to put yourself in position for an NCAAT bid, win 9 of 11 games, and then find out that you aren't getting in and have to turn around and play an NIT game in 72 hours. It's just an apples to oranges scenario.

Ok, from that perspective I can see your reasoning.  As far as from being competitive in either, though, I see a correlation.

I want to state that I am not in the "trash Martin" mindset.  I saw great effort and good hustle through the end of the season stretch.  I also know that working with young people is challenging, especially so when trying to convince them to give their all for an effort.  That said, it is his job to find ways to motivate and inspire his players to achieve their best.  I simply do not feel that we saw that in the last two games this season.

I can see both sides of the argument.  You never want to think that your team is giving less than 100%, but in cases like this, it's just human nature.  If I had time, I'd look up the last 10 years of teams that had a legitimate hope of going to the big dance on Selection Sunday and see how they fared in the NIT.  I'd bet it's not very good.  When you think you're going to get a chance to play for all the marbles and then have the rug yanked out from under you at the 11th hour, it's going to affect your mental state.

And if you think that the idea of spending their Spring Break in Provo, Utah didn't enter their subconscious, well, think again. :frown:

FIFY    :dance: