I just caught the last 5-10 minutes of Wimp Sanderson's interview on SportsTalk, and found the following comments of some interest (bear in mind, I'm giving as accurate of a summary as possible, but from memory): He believed that Tennessee had made the 'AA field after they beat Mizzou, but has since become, "not so sure". He followed up by saying that they "should" get in, but wasn't positive. He believes that the SEC will get 4 teams in, but wouldn't be too surprised if only three make it. He believes that neither Alabama nor Ole Miss can make it into the field without winning the SECT, and he hates that for Ole Miss because, "beat Tennessee twice". He believes that the difference between Kentucky's chances of making the field and Tennessee's is too tough to call - literally said that he didn't know which way it might or should go if only one of those two can make it. When asked if he thought that Kentucky might get the nod over Tennessee simply because of a grander tradition he didn't believe that they would, but added, "Well, I hope they wouldn't" He believes that Ole Miss should not and will not fire Andy Kenndy if he fails to make the tournament, saying that Ole Miss has gone "football crazy" with the money they've spent in that direction, and don't have the financial means to make a move in basketball, considering the cost of a buyout and hiring a new coach. He said that he believed that Tennessee had a much better chance of advancing in the 'AA tourney (if selected) than Kentucky, because they are strong on the perimeter, and are now making much better shot selections, and are "pretty good" on defense. He said that they struggled in the Puerto Rican (actually, he said it was Hawaii) tourney and the middle of the season because of poor shot selection, but that he felt like they've now corrected that. When asked what kind of a job Cuonzo had done, considering this is the second year that he has finished the SEC season with 8 of 9 wins - and he was complimentary, but not glowing. He said, "he's done a good job", but did praise him for getting his team better as the season progressed. When asked about his thoughts on Jarnell Stokes.... "Well, I'll tell you this - he's not nearly as good as you guys up there probably think. He's a good player, and they'd be in a mess without him, but I wouldn't consider him to be a good offensive or even a particularly talented player. He's sort of a big bruiser in there, and is good on the boards....when he wants to be. But I don't think he always wants to be, and doesn't play as hard as he should or could, all of the time. I think he takes minutes off, to be honest. I think he plays hard most of the time, but not all of the time, for sure." I don't know I he's wrong, right or somewhere in-between on his assessment of Stokes, or otherwise, just thought his comments were interesting.
i think that's a pretty accurate assessment of Stokes. i also think all things being equal and only 1 getting picked, kentucky gets the nod over tennessee, because they just will.
