Quote:
Originally Posted by Upton
I understand that, but the Pac 10 put 6 teams in the tournament, equal to the SEC, while the ACC only placed 4. The Big East had more, but I'll put this year's PAC 10 up against the Big East anytime. The Pac 10 also has 2 teams (UCLA,Stanford) in the AP top ten compared to only Georgetown for the Big East.
As for bias, I detect a distinct bias in your reviewing of the chances of the Memphis Tigers. They may have lost only 1 game, but the CUSA is hardly the Pac 10 or Big East. They may make the final four, but until then, in my mind, they have yet to prove themselves.
|
Yeah, the PAC 10 put six teams in and only three are left after the first round.
Seven of the eight Big East teams won in the first round.
Although I think UCLA is the best team and they are my pick in my brackets (in one of them, in the other I had to go with the Irish), the Big East top to bottom is better then the PAC 10 this year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by George O Well
>>>I don't know about that, but if Arizona made it into the tournament, the PAC-10 can't be all that hot. Arizona is undersized, has no forwards and no bench to speak of, and is relying on a freshman point guard.
|
Agreed. Arizona didn't belong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Upton
I don't think Arizona belonged either, ASU should have gone instead. ASU finished 5th in the conference, Arizona 7th. ASU also had a slightly better overall record. More than anything, I think past reputation worked in the Wildcat's favor. Still I don't see how that reflects negatively on the strength of the conference.
|
Arizona State didn't belong either. They think they got screwed by Arizona getting in, but they didn't. Neither one should have been there.