Updated Tournament Watch! - Page 10

ajcardfan · March 16th, 2008, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Jesus

.

I agree though, ASU got snubbed, but the only reason they are being compared is because they both have ARIZONA in their title. It shouldn't be a case of one or the other, as I said other schools like Kentucky or Villanova should be compared with ASU.

I agree with that based on the seeding. But, it's inevitable that the two Arizona schools are compared side-by-side. Even if we weren't guys like Vitale and Bilas keep bringing it up.

ASUCHRIS · March 16th, 2008, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arizona's Finest

I think its pretty obvious that you guys lose the first game in Tempe if Bayless is healthy. He wasn't but that was what a 3 point game? I would say one of the five best players in the Pac-10 ultimately might have made a difference. You might say its conjecture, i would say its logic.

It's stupid logic. It's the same logic that had U of A fans saying after the first win, "if we had Bayless we would have won". I forget, did Bayless play in the second game?

HooverDam · March 16th, 2008, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arizona's Finest

I think its pretty obvious that you guys lose the first game in Tempe if Bayless is healthy. He wasn't but that was what a 3 point game? I would say one of the five best players in the Pac-10 ultimately might have made a difference. You might say its conjecture, i would say its logic.

Actually, thats quite far from logic. Thats just not how sports, especially basketball, works. If Bayless is healthy, its not as if the game is exactly the same, plus UA gets Bayless' 17 or so points. It becomes a completely different game, and who knows what would happen?

If UofA fans can honestly look in their heart and tell themselves that UA is deserving of a 10 seed in the tourney, more power to ya, but your heart is an alcoholic.

boldinfan18 · March 16th, 2008, 07:32 PM

Man such crap we didn't get in over oregon, but those two loses to cal and washington and then not winning a pac 10 torunament game really killed us. Also the fact that Georgia won also put a dagger in us. I really think Harden will lead the devils to the tournament next year though so close just didn't make it

ugh.

Skkorpion · March 16th, 2008, 07:36 PM

Look, I don't think we (ASU) deserved to get in. UA was more deserving but nationally overrated, as was the whole PAC-10, in my opinion.

UA got a terrible draw. Probably one and done or blown out by Duke if they eke by WVU.

Oregon getting in was a joke. When the results are in, I'll be very surprised if any PAC teams other than UCLA make the round of 16, although USC may surprise because they got a good draw.

TJ · March 16th, 2008, 09:47 PM

IMO, after looking at stats and schedules, ASU would have had to wait for Ohio State and Virginia Tech to get bids before even being considered for the tourney. Face it, Sun Devils, you werent as close as you thought you were

Gaddabout · March 16th, 2008, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TJ UofA2004

And im sure there are members of the ASU camp that say that you don't deserve to be in.

Yes, me. I don't think you can sit on a bubble like that, reflect on missed opportunities, and complain about having to rely on someone else's opinion of you. I thought ASU would get in, but I didn't think they should have got in based on the mixed merit of their performance this season. In fact very early in conference play I made point that 9-9 would not get ASU into the tournament.

DarenG · March 17th, 2008, 12:04 AM

I keep reading alot of coulda woulda shoulda. Look ASU should have won more games down the stretch so they wouldn't have been on the bubble. However, I don't want to hear UofA fans say well if we woulda had this player then we woulda done that. That's crap. You didn't.

Bottom line is that both teams could have done better. However, based on what happen this year (not what should have happened), there is no way UofA should have gotten in and not ASU. Period. ASU was more deserving then U of A.

Evil Ash · March 17th, 2008, 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TJ UofA2004

IMO, after looking at stats and schedules, ASU would have had to wait for Ohio State and Virginia Tech to get bids before even being considered for the tourney. Face it, Sun Devils, you werent as close as you thought you were

You do know its not the best idea to keep insulting the team that SWEPT your team, right?

I thought both teams should be in or out. Not having ASU and having U of A in based mostly on reputation (and a 10 seat at that) is what gets most of us going. U of A was not a top 40 team PERIOD

Russ Smith · March 17th, 2008, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Jesus

Some responses...

First off, Yes Collison was injured a few games, although very early in the season, but it allowed Westbrook to emerge as a star. U of As injury turned into a Laval Lucas-Perry transfer.

Roll is not the 6th man of UCLA by any means. With Collison, Westbrook, and Shipp, Roll wasn't going to get much playing time. To me that would be the equivalent(since we are a worse team) of the wildcats losing Daniel Dillon-NON ISSUE.

Back Spasms don't mean anything, to me at least. Budinger had them for a good portion of the season and Carmelo Anthony had back spasms going into the National Championship and dropped 20 and 10. If you want to bring it up nagging injuries, Bayless has a knee that will probably require offseason surgery that is worse than any back spasms.

I will admit though that Luc missing so many games is a big issue for UCLA, but Luc isn't the same player he was as a freshman. He and McClellan are in the same boat as far as fading out due to injuries. I don't see Luc being more valuable to UCLA with all their frontcourt depth (Love, Aboya, Mata-Real-Ugly) than Brett Breilmaier is to U of A.

Lastly, I can say that U of A would have that record becasue I don't think that U of A loses to any of the cake teams that ASU played at the beginning of the season, and they wouldn't lose to Nebraska and didn't lose to Illinois. I kept the Pac-10 records the same in that estimation.

I agree though, ASU got snubbed, but the only reason they are being compared is because they both have ARIZONA in their title. It shouldn't be a case of one or the other, as I said other schools like Kentucky or Villanova should be compared with ASU.

Love could barely walk in the first half until the back loosened up so yeah in that one game his back was a large factor. He couldn't even stand up to shoot FT's in the first half.

Injuries happen, how good would Cal be if Theo Robertson and Amoke don't miss the whole season? They're not back of course but teams play through injuries. You can't argue UA has their players back and deserve a bonus for that and then point out that Bayless needs offseason surgery, is he back or not?

I have a bigger problem with say UK than UA. UK got in IMHO for 2 reasons, better RPI(which I'm not a big fan of) and because Georgia won the SEC tourney. Georgia beat UK in the tourney, if Georgia loses their next game, UK is out IMHO, but because Georgia won the whole thing the committee said hey maybe that UK loss isn't so bad? Throw in the UK tradition and they get in. They're missing one of their best players in Patterson, they had ugly early season losses, and they played in a clearly down conference.

MaoTosiFanClub · March 17th, 2008, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil Ash

You do know its not the best idea to keep insulting the team that SWEPT your team, right?

Why? You're in the NIT, we're in the dance. We have the last laugh this year no matter what happened earlier in the season.

Quote:

I thought both teams should be in or out. Not having ASU and having U of A in based mostly on reputation (and a 10 seat at that) is what gets most of us going. U of A was not a top 40 team PERIOD

Arizona didn't get in on reputation, they got in because the committee has ALWAYS rewarded teams that play difficult OOC schedules. Just as the committee always penalizes teams for playing weak schedules. This isn't some big secret, every AD and coach in the country knows how they pick and choose teams on Selection Sunday. It's really not difficult a concept to grasp that the selection had absolutely nothing to do with ASU vs. UA. UA got in with a fair amount of breathing room, ASU's biggest speed bumps in the selection process were teams like 'Nova and Kentucky who might or might not have better overall resumes than ASU.

I know you ASU fans are new at this whole college basketball thing, but it's probably time you brush up on the NCAA Selection process and how the Tournament works. Almost every ASU fan on this board is coming off as very uninformed.

ajcardfan · March 17th, 2008, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaoTosiFanClub

It's really not difficult a concept to grasp that the selection had absolutely nothing to do with ASU vs. UA. UA got in with a fair amount of breathing room, ASU's biggest speed bumps in the selection process were teams like 'Nova and Kentucky who might or might not have better overall resumes than ASU.

I know you ASU fans are new at this whole college basketball thing, but it's probably time you brush up on the NCAA Selection process and how the Tournament works. Almost every ASU fan on this board is coming off as very uninformed.

In our defense, we're not the only ones comparing the two schools and talking about the head-to-head games. Several in the media have, with Dick Vitale squawking about it the loudest.

But, whatever... I don't begrudge UofA it's slot. Sendek still has ASU ahead of schedule. Next year, not making the tournament would be a bigger disappointment.

ASUCHRIS · March 17th, 2008, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaoTosiFanClub

Almost every ASU fan on this board is coming off as very uninformed.

Cute jab, but that is your MO. Most ASU fans realize that seeds in the tourney aren't based on who is the best team, but based on abstracts such as accounting for injury and tradition. That is what happens when you have a system run by 6 of the 10 members never playing basketball, or a rating system (RPI) that rewards a team like Kentucky for getting blown out by a much better ranking. Once again, congrats on putting together such a stacked non-conference schedule, nice to see you couldn't beat one of those teams.

Bragging rights are based on head to head matchups, and we have the season sweep. After the Cats lose again in the 1st or 2nd round we can start talking football again, I am sure Stoops will have the boys fired up for spring practice!

nashman · March 17th, 2008, 01:30 PM

Stupid selection committee, so if you schedule a hard OOC and lose all the games thats better than winning more games? Ridiculous ASU should be in over UofA they got the shaft, UofA will get bounced quick!

Arizona's Finest · March 17th, 2008, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ASUCHRIS

Cute jab, but that is your MO. Most ASU fans realize that seeds in the tourney aren't based on who is the best team, but based on abstracts such as accounting for injury and tradition. That is what happens when you have a system run by 6 of the 10 members never playing basketball, or a rating system (RPI) that rewards a team like Kentucky for getting blown out by a much better ranking. Once again, congrats on putting together such a stacked non-conference schedule, nice to see you couldn't beat one of those teams.

Bragging rights are based on head to head matchups, and we have the season sweep. After the Cats lose again in the 1st or 2nd round we can start talking football again, I am sure Stoops will have the boys fired up for spring practice!

ARIZONA STATE!!!

ALABAMA STATE!!!!

WEDNESDAY NIGHT!

HEART PUMPING NIT ACTION IN TEMPE!!!!

NIT: ITS FANNNNN-TASTIC!!