Looks like the overrated Trees are getting chopped down by the latex Trojans at Maples... Oh look, Oregon laid 115 on WSU. The Trees are maybe better than UCLA, who sucks. I would rate that Pac-10 like this. Oregon USC Arizona Cal Stanford UCLA The Trees don't have enough talent after Borchardt and Jacobsen. If Childress didn't have such a nice fro, he wouldn't be so highly rated.
Cal will beat U$C on Sunday. And Stanford is overrated. But that's neither here nor there. Desert Scar hit the nail on the head -- the Pac 10 has six excellent teams but no great ones. Unlike recent years, there will not be a Number One seed out of the Pac 10. The Pac will probably have its usual 3-4 teams in the Sweet 16, maybe one team in the Elite Eight if it's lucky, and zero in the Final Four. I say that, and I'm a huge Pac 10 fan. It's just a down year in terms of having elite teams.
Is the Pac-10 not as "strong" because they beat each other up? Or because they just lack great teams? I'm a Pac-10 fan (went to ASU), and my biased side tells me that the Pac-10 looks weaker than it is, because of equally high level of play from the top 5-6 teams. I think the Pac-10 teams will be more battle tested than the Big 10 chumps, and the always overrated Big 12. To me, the Pac-10 teams who will make it, have better athletes than the schools that will represent the other conferences. Cal might be able to beat USC. Winning on the road in the Pac-10 is one tough row to hoe. Go Pac-10!
Also, the Pac-10 conf overall has the highest SOS rating than any other conference. That shouldn't hurt come March. UCLA always does this crap where they act like their dead and then turn it on somewhat in the tourney. I think UCLA can go to the Sweet 16.
I thought it was pretty clear in my post. This year, in my opinion, the Pac 10 does not have an elite team. For at least the past four years, the Pac 10 has had at least one legitimate threat to win the National Championship. This year, I don't see a single one. So they're not as strong as previous years when they had legit title contenders. More balanced, maybe, but there was a lot of balance last year (5 teams in the tourney) and there were also legit Final Four threats (two teams in the Elite Eight). Yes, the good teams in the Pac 10 are beating each other up this year, and that hurts the Pac 10 in the polls and leaves us (I'm a Cal alum) ignored by the media. Yes, the Pac 10 will do better than the Big 10 and Big 12 in the tourney. I think we basically agree -- notice I predicted 3-4 Pac 10 teams in the Sweet 16 in my post above. Tell me, though, which Pac 10 teams this year do you honestly think are Final Four or national champ material? You say that 5-6 teams are playing at an equally high level (and I agree). But is that high level Sweet 16 caliber or Final Four caliber?
Warth-Logically, no there are no Final 4 teams on paper from the Pac-10. However, many times, logic goes out the window during March Madness. I don't think any Big 12 team but KU could give a Pac-10 team much trouble. Even OU. Ditto for the SEC. I don't think UF is all that tough. Outside of Duke and MD, I think basically anyone can get the other 2 Final 4 berths.
Gonzaga (outside shooting will get them in the final 4) vs Maryland (inside play and dixon will get them in) Duke (of course) VS Stanford (solid team able to beat Kansas)
How can anyone still like Stanfraud? They are getting pummeled at home by the overrated Bruins. Stanfraud will be lucky to reach the Sweet 16.
Texas went 3-1 versus Pac-10 teams in its Out Of Conference schedule. So, I disagree with your point.
Ahem. Go Bears. Maybe I know who my dark horse is in the Final Four ... (Not so sure about Florida anymore.)
Didn't they have Owens for those games? Also, 2 of UT's 2 Pac-10 wins were against Oregon St and Washington State, arguably the 2 worst teams in the Pac-10. That Stanford win was decent I guess.
I agree with that. did you see the game today? 32-point turnaround! WOW! I just got home and I'm horse as hell. I'm still pissed at Herb for waiting till like 50 seconds left up by 20 to put in Keeter on Senior Night. <b>WE'RE GOING DANCING BABY!!</b>
Stanford looked awefully bad this weekend. If they get swept in their Arizona swing and lose in the 1st round of the Pac 10 turney (5 loses in a row) they might be NIT bound. Regardless, if Stanford makes the turney (just 1 more win for sure would do it) and IF they get to the sweet 16 that is a big upset and quality darkhorse pick if they get this far. The Pac 10 is still up for grabs. We will see a lot about Oregon this week. I can assure you they will be happy to get a split in LA. The Ducks only have 1 quality road win all year, and that was against a depleted Arizona team. UCLA has the most talent in the Pac 10 and can play the best defense because of the quickness and size of their wings when they want to . But they are so unpredictable, they could lose in the 1st round or make it to the great 8. Anyones guess. I haven't written off Stanford yet, but there no-stars were aweful last weekend. I also do believe the 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th (ASU) teams in the Pac 10 are better than the comparable in any other conference--but the 2nd 3 also are in reality as good as the top 3 teams. Boy the ACC totally sucks after the top 2 teams.
Scar-UCLA will do well in the tourney, they always play like crap and then play up to potential when the tourney comes. As for Stanford, they will have a tough time getting 2 wins in the tourney. They will most likely get a 6-8 seed or so, and will prob face a better team in the 2nd round. Therefore, an upset will be needed for Stan to get sweet 16. There's a good chance Stanfraud gets swept in the AZ swing. ASU is a pretty tough team at home, and has better athletes than Stanford. Stanford hung on to beat ASU at Maples, thanks in part to Casey getting 40+ points. Casey has not been anywhere near as good as he was last year. Whether it's because he is attracting more of the defense's attention or not. Josh Childress is Stanford's X factor. He has shown flashes, but more often than not, he gets a 5 pt game. He will need to provide Stanford with 15 ppg or so from this point on, for Stan to go anywhere. Is there a worse college bball player than Giovacchini?
But they usually have good guard play, especially at the 1. They could go deep in the turney with good play from No-J Boze or from their other young point. On the other hand, they could get pressed, panic, and run into a good pair of guards in the first game and get bounced. I'll have to see their draw and their performance from here on out to get a better handle on their outlook--even then it may be a turney guess No, unless they they win another game they are going to be a 10 or 11 seed if they make the turney at all (the last Pac 10 team picked). But I'll tell you, if I am a #1 seed, Stanford (or UCLA) is NOT a team I want to draw in my second game. The pressure will all be on the #1 seed (usually it has been on Stanford since their final 4 run), and Stanford is talented. Their SG and C are as good as you can find in college. Also, Johnson, Barnes and Childress have quite a bit of talent. But they are running out of time to get in snych and be a confident team. I have always wondered how he got a college scholarship to Stanford myself, let alone why Montgomery, who otherwise is a good coach, plays him outside of scrub time. It seems like he has been a scrub for 3 years.
Stanford and Gozaga, I would be really surprised but I guess anything can happen in the tournament..Michigan State is stepping it up at the right time and I really think Pitt has a very sound team and could surprise some folks.
The Illini do appear to rounding in shape as well. They are not a team I would want in my braket if I am a #1 or #2 seed.
