Bear Down Wildcats

I'm not sure USC fans even know who Lute Olson is, but hey, it's your superbowl, so have at it!

ASUHATER! wrote:

MrBug708 wrote:Ucla pretty much has no offensive flow and the defense is worse. You have a bunch of local kids who Alford ignored and they are abusing ucla. It's pretty sad

Oh well super bowl for SC.

No USC won it's super bowl on Saturday. This is mostly UCLA not wanting to play since they won theirs on Thursday. Remember, Arizona is always everyone's Superbowl in this league.

Very weird... LA has 2 super bowl rings in the past week, and they don't even have an NFL team (yet).

ASUHATER! wrote:I fully anticipate UCLA to lose pathetically and Alford to stink it up.

Just when I'm starting to feel real shitty about how this Arizona season is unfolding......

Thanks Bruins!

What a f'n weird Bruin team this year. They are a decent analogy for the entire Div 1. You have no idea what you're going to get each night. None. Last night is you had no idea what you were going to get in each half. Strange.

Chicat wrote:Just when I'm starting to feel real shitty about how this Arizona season is unfolding......

Thanks Bruins!

Just wait until ASu beats Oregon Saturday.

UCLA looks horrible. First sold out crowd in Galen since 2011

This is Bryce and Isaac time. Pad those stats

Definitely not UCLA's super bowl. Embarrassing we let ourselves lose that game

UCLA might not win until the last weekend of the year

Tell me again about how UCLA is an elite men's basketball program.

Lonzo, TJ...are you sure?

UCLA is gonna be good next year.

Zero wrote:UCLA is gonna be good next year.

It could also be a trainwreck with Iham, Holiday, Bryce, and Ball. Someone isn't going to start. Holiday, your best defender, Iham/Bryce, seniors, or Ball, the NBA prospect.

Zero wrote:UCLA is gonna be good next year.

They've been saying that for a while.

They probably will be a top 10-15 team next year

ASUHATER! wrote:They probably will be a top 10-15 team next year

And UCLA might do well by hanging banners for being ranked between 10-15. Best they can hope for these days.

Hard to believe that team with that talent is 13-10 right now. Good chance they are 16-15 entering the conference tournament. Just shows how completely shitty of a coach Alford is. 2nd place in conference his first year, 4th last year, and 9th (and trending down) this year. His next two classes have the university handcuffed? How many more years does this last before he is shown the door?

rgdeuce wrote:Hard to believe that team with that talent is 13-10 right now. Good chance they are 16-15 entering the conference tournament. Just shows how completely shitty of a coach Alford is. 2nd place in conference his first year, 4th last year, and 9th (and trending down) this year. His next two classes have the university handcuffed? How many more years does this last before he is shown the door?

rg, what you're seeing epitomizes UCLA basketball in the modern era. There's always a bump of progress when the new coach arrives, and a significant bump if the coach is halfway decent (Harrick, Howland), but when that regression to the mean sets in, it's always trending downward. Compare UCLA's coaching trajectories with those at programs they like to consider their peers, and it's pretty obvious that UCLA just lacks the infrastructure and support needed to thrive in the modern era. And the fact that no elite coach wants to go there only makes it worse.

rgdeuce wrote:Hard to believe that team with that talent is 13-10 right now. Good chance they are 16-15 entering the conference tournament. Just shows how completely shitty of a coach Alford is. 2nd place in conference his first year, 4th last year, and 9th (and trending down) this year. His next two classes have the university handcuffed? How many more years does this last before he is shown the door?

Don't worry, they'll win the Pac12 Tourney, get an 11 seed, and then slide their way into a Sweet 16.

Alford lifetime contract please....

Zero wrote:UCLA is gonna be good next year.

Used to think so, now I don't see it at all even with how good Lonzo is.

As bad as UCLA is, and as mediocre as that program tends to be, you know they're going to play like the hottest team in America at McKale next week.

rgdeuce wrote:Hard to believe that team with that talent is 13-10 right now. Good chance they are 16-15 entering the conference tournament. Just shows how completely shitty of a coach Alford is. 2nd place in conference his first year, 4th last year, and 9th (and trending down) this year. His next two classes have the university handcuffed? How many more years does this last before he is shown the door?

The recruiting class isn't hampering ucla, DG giving a 10 million dollar buyout is.

rgdeuce wrote:Hard to believe that team with that talent is 13-10 right now. Good chance they are 16-15 entering the conference tournament. Just shows how completely shitty of a coach Alford is. 2nd place in conference his first year, 4th last year, and 9th (and trending down) this year. His next two classes have the university handcuffed? How many more years does this last before he is shown the door?

Not disagreeing in the least but somehow he has found a way to over 500 games.

Beachcat97 wrote:As bad as UCLA is, and as mediocre as that program tends to be, you know they're going to play like the hottest team in America at McKale next week.

100% chance that Nepotism boy goes 6-9 from 3 against us unlike the 3-9 he throws up against everyone else.

Biggest question is if ucla loses, is Arizona no longer a super bowl matchup?

MrBug708 wrote:Biggest question is if ucla loses, is Arizona no longer a super bowl matchup?

The Vikings and Bills have lost the Super Bowl four times...

It would be nice if UCLA could be ranked for our Feb/Mar games with them. I mean, just once. Pretty sure playing UCLA weakens our RPI.

Chicat wrote:

MrBug708 wrote:Biggest question is if ucla loses, is Arizona no longer a super bowl matchup?

The Vikings and Bills have lost the Super Bowl four times...

I know this

Beachcat97 wrote:It would be nice if UCLA could be ranked for our Feb/Mar games with them. I mean, just once. Pretty sure playing UCLA weakens our RPI.

Their RPI is 68th, so not much to worry about there

legallykenny wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:As bad as UCLA is, and as mediocre as that program tends to be, you know they're going to play like the hottest team in America at McKale next week.

100% chance that Nepotism boy goes 6-9 from 3 against us unlike the 3-9 he throws up against everyone else.

Don't you think we should step out and actually guard him like other teams do?

Maybe then he would actually go 3-9 against us

rgdeuce wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:It would be nice if UCLA could be ranked for our Feb/Mar games with them. I mean, just once. Pretty sure playing UCLA weakens our RPI.

Their RPI is 68th, so not much to worry about there

#68 in RPI is not exactly quality competition. I was just saying that it would be nice if beating them in Feb/Mar actually meant something from time to time. UCLA is not looking like they'll get into the tourney.

Can't even hate Alford for this game

MrBug708 wrote:Can't even hate Alford for this game

Haha which one

Surprised Aflord did not work the refs more.

azcat49 wrote:

MrBug708 wrote:Can't even hate Alford for this game

Haha which one

Both. Even though ucla lost, this games wasn't on Steve.

Zero wrote:Surprised Aflord did not work the refs more.

I've never seen him really do it. Too bad for UCLA. Slowly crashing to the end of the Alford era. 13 months to go and he isn't even trying.

Sorry, Bug-vadge, but you gave Stevie the nation's sweetest contract. He's your guy. Learn to love him.

Heh.

Ahh bug blaming the refs this time.

Currently 88th place in real time rpi and an iron clad contract that would seem to pay Alford around $10M if he were fired today.

Guerrero has really fucked the pooch on this one but honestly, it might be worth doing the leg work and seeing if you can get together the $10M.

The issue probably isn't the money, it's the lack of raising the money so DG can make another hire. Luckily we rid ourselves of Harlan, the guy that made the call on Alford

MrBug708 wrote:

Zero wrote:Surprised Aflord did not work the refs more.

I've never seen him really do it. Too bad for UCLA. Slowly crashing to the end of the Alford era. 13 months to go and he isn't even trying.

I'm seriously rooting for the Bruins to win the Pac tourney and somehow slide into the Sweet Sixteen so they can never fire Alford.

Can UCLA make the tourney with 11 losses? ( assuming they don't win the PAC tourney, so 12 losses)

azcat49 wrote:Can UCLA make the tourney with 11 losses? ( assuming they don't win the PAC tourney, so 12 oosses)

Yes, but of course they'd have to go 7-0 to finish conference play and then win a quality game or two in the conference tourney.

MrBug708 wrote:The issue probably isn't the money, it's the lack of raising the money so DG can make another hire. Luckily we rid ourselves of Harlan, the guy that made the call on Alford

I don't mean to get too technical on you, but money is fungible. So if you're saying 'We have the $10M to fire Alford but not the next $10M to hire the next guy' that can also be read to say 'We have the $10M to hire the next guy, but not the $10M to fire Alford.'

If that is the case then the issue is the money.

Poor UCLA being cash poor and all.

Just watched the second half and there were some terrible calls against UCLA in that half. Parkers last 3 fouls and Welsh last 2 were not fouls IMO.

We were very fortunate last night to win. Not a team I want to see in Vegas unless it's in the final

SCCats wrote:

MrBug708 wrote:The issue probably isn't the money, it's the lack of raising the money so DG can make another hire. Luckily we rid ourselves of Harlan, the guy that made the call on Alford

I don't mean to get too technical on you, but money is fungible. So if you're saying 'We have the $10M to fire Alford but not the next $10M to hire the next guy' that can also be read to say 'We have the $10M to hire the next guy, but not the $10M to fire Alford.'

If that is the case then the issue is the money.

Or what I said where they have the time money to fire Alford buy that money doesn't want to give DG another hire. Ithe was his bad contract he signed off on, I doubt he makes a good one this time either. Next year he'll have 25 years in the UC system and be 66. Time to go

MrBug708 wrote:Or what I said where they have the time money to fire Alford buy that money doesn't want to give DG another hire. Ithe was his bad contract he signed off on, I doubt he makes a good one this time either. Next year he'll have 25 years in the UC system and be 66. Time to go

Now that makes more sense.

So why not fire Guerrero tomorrow?

two words, bug: conference tourney.

agree with @azcat49, too. tons of garbage calls on both sides, but it is admittedly hard to argue with 16 FTAs (ucla) vs. 45 (UA) and 31 PFs (ucla) vs. 19 (UA)... although it seemed that big alf didn't really notice it until he saw the statsheet after the game.

by the looks of ucla's remaining schedule though, i could easily see the bruins going 5-2 (finishing 9-9 / 18-13 overall) from here on out; and a 3-3 record against the top 25 not including a possible win at home vs. oregon on senior weekend isn't so bad.

... or is it? you don't really ever see ucla finish at or below .500 in the conference. yikes.

SCCats wrote:

MrBug708 wrote:The issue probably isn't the money, it's the lack of raising the money so DG can make another hire. Luckily we rid ourselves of Harlan, the guy that made the call on Alford

I don't mean to get too technical on you, but money is fungible. So if you're saying 'We have the $10M to fire Alford but not the next $10M to hire the next guy' that can also be read to say 'We have the $10M to hire the next guy, but not the $10M to fire Alford.'

If that is the case then the issue is the money.

He's got an incredibly talented recruiting class coming into next year. Even if (when?) they miss the tournament, I doubt Alford is fired.