A. Wisconsin was a better team.

B. Kentucky has better players.

These statements don't mean that Wisconsin has bad players or that Kentucky is bad as a team. When you are this level of competition the difference between 1 seeds isn't that different. Both these statements are generally true. Wisconsin is often outmatched in terms of pure talent, but makes up for it with maturity, decision making, and playing smart within the system.

Besides, Kentucky can talk about themselves as brothers all they want, and aside from the Harrison brothers, it's hard to develop relationships with a quicker turnover and less playing time with the same players. A couple of things are important to note here. Kentucky players don't have the same opportunity to work with eachother as much. A rotation that goes 10 deep with players getting more than 10 minutes/game(Kentucky) is probably not going to know and trust eachother as a team that goes 6-7 deep (Badgers without/with Jackson).

Speaking of this rotation, it also helps if players have experience playing with eachother. Kentucky isn't built for this. It is built for high talent players to come in, play a little bit, and get out. Your rotation consisted of 4 Freshmen, 4 Sophomores, and 2 Juniors. A total of 14 years collegiate experience. Wisconsin's 7 consist of 3 Seniors, 2 Juniors, and 2 Sophomores. 22 years combined experience. Hayes and Koenig made some major strides this last year, and the other 5 guys have played together for 3 full seasons now. You can't coach experience. That just happens, and in a system that doesn't try to get a bunch of 1 and done prospects you are going to build rapport much better over time.

I'm ecstatic that my team won, but this isn't a controversial statement.