[net.sport.hoops] Pac-10 weakest conference?

srt@ucla-cs.UUCP (03/15/85)

Montana was the Big Sky conference runner-up this year, finishing for the
second year with over 20 wins.  Unfortunately, the NCAA past them up, so they
found themselves playing UCLA, 5th in the PAC-10 with a 16-12 record.

UCLA demolished Montana 78-47.

					-- Scott Turner

kovalsky@spp2.UUCP (Bruce Kovalsky) (03/19/85)

> Montana was the Big Sky conference runner-up this year, finishing for the
> second year with over 20 wins.  Unfortunately, the NCAA past them up, so they
> found themselves playing UCLA, 5th in the PAC-10 with a 16-12 record.
> 
> UCLA demolished Montana 78-47.
> 
> 					-- Scott Turner

Scott, although UCLA did kill Montana, a mediocre team at best, you did neglect
to mention that ALL 4 teams that finished above UCLA in the Pac-10 (USC, 
Washington, Oregon St. & Arizona) LOST in the first round of the NCAA tourney,
where the REAL teams play. The NIT is more or less a consolation tourney.

And you can't call me a West Coast hater since I went to school at UCLA and
Cal. Face it, the Pac-10 just didn't have it this year. As far as the strongest
conferences this year, after Round 2 of the NCAA's you don't have to look very
far to see that both the ACC and Big East still have 4 teams remaining in the
tournament. I'd say it is a toss up between those 2 conferences.
-----
Bruce Kovalsky
..!trwrb!trwspp!spp2!kovalsky

"How do you make a small fortune in the stock market?"
"Start with a large fortune."

srt@ucla-cs.UUCP (03/21/85)

In article <479@spp2.UUCP> kovalsky@spp2.UUCP (Bruce Kovalsky) writes:
>
>Scott, although UCLA did kill Montana, a mediocre team at best, you did neglect
>to mention that ALL 4 teams that finished above UCLA in the Pac-10 (USC, 
>Washington, Oregon St. & Arizona) LOST in the first round of the NCAA tourney,
>where the REAL teams play.

Right you are.  Allow me to mention it:  USC, Washington, Oregon St. and
Arizona all lost early in the NCAAs.

>And you can't call me a West Coast hater since I went to school at UCLA and
>Cal.

Oh yes I can.  You West Coast hater!

>Face it, the Pac-10 just didn't have it this year. As far as the strongest
>conferences this year, after Round 2 of the NCAA's you don't have to look very
>far to see that both the ACC and Big East still have 4 teams remaining in the
>tournament. I'd say it is a toss up between those 2 conferences.
>

Right you are.  I was just pointing out, that, weak as the Pac-10 is, the
Big Sky Conference is weaker.  And, as a side-light, I don't think UCLA
is as weak (now) as the NCAA committee thought it was.  They improved a lot
toward the end of the season and played one of the toughest non-conference
schedules west of the Mississipi (DePaul, St. Johns, etc., etc.), which
contributed to their poor record.

					-- Scott