The fact you think Indiana is similar to Arizona says a lot. You cannot even decide what fits and what does not.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Pac-12 in the NIT & CBI (Congrats to Stanford)
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
The fact you think Indiana is similar to Arizona says a lot. You cannot even decide what fits and what does not.
Hoosiers have multiple championships but since Knight left haven't been a real threat to win another one, they do have the support and tradition to get back into that group. Arizona has won a lot of games but they have a grand total of one NC. Their big point of pride is 25 straight tourney appearances but many of those came by qualifying against fairly weak conference competition.
Arizona has a good program and has won a lot of games but to call them great means you have a low bar for greatness.
UK in BB and Bama in football are different beasts than Arizona to BB. Let's make no doubt about it, but losers can be made of their programs as evidenced by the scores of bad hiring decisions they've made. To be great you need a great HC. Certain places have had their great HC and have established themselves as a force and others have only had a glimpse of time into the limelight. However, once you've had the spotlight it's easier to return than to get it in the first place; or at least that's what I tell myself with regard to CU FB. So many factors go into who becomes dominant (location, admin, boosters, cheating, etc..) and college athletics have changed over the years.
Arizona gives BB a name in Pac12 country and across the nation because they've been there. Same goes for UCLA. It's similar to how CU entering the Pac12 gives it more credibility for CFB than Utah. Recent success matters, and that's where we've sucked, but our name carries more weight among the big boy table than Utah. CU can be among the top with or without Arizona, but you can't expect CU to be a consistent NCAA team without being picked over similar teams if UCLA and UA or some other team picks up the Pac12 banner as well. In that regard, with a down UCLA and UA it's helping to build our program, but like Washington this year we can be on the outside looking in if our conference members don't pull their weight as well and we don't get the auto-bid.
Look at how the Pac10 was regarded in football with USC and the 9 little dwarfs. If you are a USC alum or student then it's awesome because you are competing for MNCs and they didn't really have to go through anyone. If that happened to us and we dominated Pac12 BB then that'd be awesome. If we had a "down" year and say finished top 3 in the regular season and did respectably in the conference tourney I'd want us to still go to the dance and not be on the bubble. If we become the best team in an awesome conference even better. Why do SEC fans chant "S! E! C!" in football games?
UCLA and Arizona are all the Pac12 have on the national scale right now. No one is talking about CU as a real contender. Arizona fans are thinking of contenders next year, but fanbases are always delusional. CU made a statement this year and needs to follow it up next year going forward. Arizona may or may not be back. We can't worry about them. CU can only worry about itself, but if we don't win the Pac12 tourney then our OOC and conference games matter. Let's not pretend as if Arizona is an also-ran in men's hoops though. Even 1 NCAA championship and a ton of great showings are noteworthy. So they aren't top 3? A top 15 program over the past 30 years is still wonderful. Let's show that we aren't an also-ran.
And Boyle definitely should have higher expectations than the fans. He's the coach and I wouldn't want a guy who doesn't think he'll go undefeated. I just think the fan's expectations should match in line where we are at right now. Think big, but if we only go .500 next year I'm sure there will be people calling for Boyle's head. I don't want to see it happen and Boyle will need to explain himself, but it might happen too.
Your anti-Pac snobbery is coming out on that one.
I used to be the same way before I spent the last 15 or so years living in the west. When I lived on the east coast, it always surprised me when a bunch of Pac teams busted my brackets by ending up in the Elite 8 or Final 4. That conference puts more talent in the NBA than anyone.
Not so much snobbery but reality. The PAC has had some outstanding individual teams over the years but it has also had a lot of very weak teams at the bottom of the conference to roll up wins against.
Don't get me wrong. I think the PAC was underrated this year and probably hasn't gotten the credit it deserves over the years. I also want PAC schools to do well because that helps CU. I just don't like the idea of calling everybody great who has some success. Greatness is a higher standard. Maybe the greatest program of all time in any major college sport was UCLA basketball under Wooden. Had they continued to maintain a program that had a legitimate shot at winning it all on a regular basis and done it once or twice they would deserve that title of great. Unfortunately they have struggled, sometimes looking like they were on their way back up to gaining a title as recently as the early years of Ben Howland playing for the NC in 2005-06 and final fours in 06-07 and 07-08.
If any PAC team has the potential to win a title in the near future UCLA would be a more likely choice than Arizona. LA and the S. Cal area turns out a lot of high quality players and UCLA has the ability to recruit them.
No question that Arizona could be very good, I will call them great when they take the final step and win with it. The UCLA class just backs up what I have said. It would not surprise me at all to see UCLA string together a number of very highly ranked classes and win some titles (multiple.) They have that potential. We have seen what USC has done in recruiting with a winner in LA in football, UCLA could do the same in BB and that could get ugly for everyone else.
That all said, CU has the best opportunity to establish itself near the top of the conference that has been available in the conference for a number of years. This moment the conference doesn't have a dominant program. In the past and very likely in the future the conference will have at least one and likely more contenders to dominate in conference and go deep in the tourney. As a fan, I hope that Tad can take advantage of the situation and put CU in position to at least compete with the top of the conference.
So UA is tied for 17 in terms of championships and #8 in terms of championships (both tied). There are 345 schools in 32 D1 BB. That means they are in the top 5% (yes I know that # has been inflating over the years). If that isn't a great program I don't know what is. Again, not by UK's with their number of total appearances, UCLA with their number of championships, UNC with its number of Final 4s, but pretty freaking great. They have room for improvement, but the way college BB is going these past few years the number of truly dominant teams is dwindling (much like CFB).
Edit: for comparison, if we took the top 5% in CFB that make up 6 teams: OU, Bama, Ohio State, Michigan, USC, Florida, Miami(??)
The debate would be endless on ESPN on who the top 6 teams are since you still have ND (history, I know), Florida St, Auburn, Tennessee, Texas, Nebraska and I'm sure people could come up with even a few others. It's not like the second group is much lower than the first by measure of MNCs or conference championships.
Edit: for comparison, if we took the top 5% in CFB that make up 6 teams: OU, Bama, Ohio State, Michigan, USC, Florida, Miami(??)
The debate would be endless on ESPN on who the top 6 teams are since you still have ND (history, I know), Florida St, Auburn, Tennessee, Texas, Nebraska and I'm sure people could come up with even a few others. It's not like the second group is much lower than the first by measure of MNCs or conference championships.
Last edited:
you really need to look at what they did the past 25 years and that makes the numbers even better.
How about the last 12? Coming into 2011, they had made the Sweet 16 in 6 of 12 years, including 2 of the last three. And the #1 class this year is on top of a top-10 class last year. The coaching change hurt the 2010 class, and they lost some talent to transfers (which we're seeing now), but this is a top-notch program.
CVilleBuff
Well-Known Member
Yup. Ridiculous that anyone would even be suggesting otherwise. Arizona is up there with the best of them. This isn't 1970, and what Arizona has managed to do over the past 25 years puts them with the elite. People love to hate on relative newcomers, but the reality is "what have you done for me lately?" carries far more weight than "What did you do for me 40 years ago?".
To this point, I respect the hell out of what San Francisco accomplished back in the days of Bill Russell. But it doesn't mean a whole lot in terms of what that program is today - a middle of the pack WCC program.
CVilleBuff
Well-Known Member
Congrats to Stanford. Could serve as a springboard to a big upcoming season for them, time will tell.
Washington State plays at Pittsburgh tomorrow for the CBI title (game 3).
Washington State plays at Pittsburgh tomorrow for the CBI title (game 3).
I'm cheering for the Pac.
When our conference mates win, our wins and losses both look better.
liverflukes
Resident Bear
Troll a rival's board out of boredom and to see how they respond all year to being in a new conference. Look at naughty pictures here and contribute equally inappropriate pictures. Post other nonsense. View site for outdated recruiting info. Watch my team's recruiting go to hell a week before LOI day. See new recruiting info changes and correctness here. Get drunk and go to chat during games. Talk sh*t and watch my my team lose. Waste daily time and productivity all year and pay $15.00 for the privilege. Watch furd destroy CU in football and basketball all year. See Nebraska and Baylor hate. Find lots and lots of Stanford love. Priceless!
Last edited:
I still like Cal more. Don't get jealous. We all know what Bears do to trees. :lol:
Deleted member 807
Guest
Stanford envy IS the ugly side of Allbuffs. (yeah I'm lookin' at Sacky's sister and Absinthe's aristocratic BS classmates here)
**** Stanford and the petrodollars they rode in on.
L Buff
Commissar of the Albuffs Collective Left
fify
Deleted member 807
Guest
It's this combination of admiration and respect for those jokers that leads to bad losses on the court and between the goal posts.
It's not enough that you hate getting our asses kicked.
The only path CU has to follow to the rose bowl involves each of us learning to hate and disrespect Stanford like they were the evil spawn of a longhorns and husker gang bang on Baylor.
Too much money, private school entitlement, all wrapped up in a hideous shade of red.
Although not as hideous as fusker.
Deleted member 807
Guest
Other than that over posted internet picture of the Stanford girl with backpack staps covering her bare breasts, have you ever seen an attractive Stanford coed?
Darian3Hagan
'89 Player of the Year
don't ruin this for him.