Bear Down Wildcats

ByJoveByJingle wrote:

Bangkok Wildcat wrote:

dmjcat wrote:Called it last night...........if we had lost we would be a 5 seed. The Committee was never going to do any favors for University 4.

My next fear is that the NCAA is going to ship 3 zebras from the Ed Rush school of officiating for our game with Buffalo.

BTW, BankokWildCat I am 34,000 feet over the pacific on my way to Shanghai........have you figured out how to stream the
ncaa tourney outside the US??

Nope, think I had issues last year and missed the first and second round games but I did see the Xavier game....it varies year to year with the changing tech and geo blocking....the CBS app was so unreliable last year. Who knows this year but keep in touch via PM for strategies if you wish.

Have a good flight and be careful of all the Air pollution over there and here

FirstRowSports always worked for me. Their pop up nonsense that you have to get through is very intricate and frustrating . . . but once you figure it out it’s not a big problem.

Thanks ByJove! ....but I’ve had my iOS butt kicked every time (>30 Times) I’ve tried it. So far Grandma Streams has been a godsend for me and he’s plugging that he will find a way to stream via YouTube, his site and some backups as well. Best case I get to watch on my Big tv...worst case on the iPad....or other avenues...always a crapshoot over here.

All the teams on the fbi hit list got screwed. It’s likr the NCAA doesn’t want to wait 2-3 year before getting its chance to fuck over some programs.

CalStateTempe wrote:All the teams on the fbi hit list got screwed. It’s likr the NCAA doesn’t want to wait 2-3 year before getting its chance to fuck over some programs.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaabk ... li=BBnb7Kz" target="_blank

dovecanyoncat wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:All the teams on the fbi hit list got screwed. It’s likr the NCAA doesn’t want to wait 2-3 year before getting its chance to fuck over some programs.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaabk ... li=BBnb7Kz" target="_blank

Sure, this day you’re guilty until proven innocent....’trial by social media witch hunt’ as well as ‘click bait journalism’.....At the end, we may have some liability for Book’s alleged actions but it’s sad to see due process thrown out the window in this age of ADD Society and Media. Smh.

BBQ wildcat wrote:They were just looking for a way to screw Arizona and Miller.

#fuckthenCAA
#fuck BSPN
#fuckBilas
#fuck PAC-12
#fucklarryscott
#fuckgreghansen

Did I miss anyone?

BTFD, Wildcats and show those east coast-biased motherfuckers!

OK, I'm done.

Don't forget to congratulate ASU!

I am convinced that five random people from any local sports bar could have come up with a better tournament bracket than the overpaid idiots employed by the NCAA.

I don''t have a lot of sympathy for USC. Yes, they had injuries and suspensions during the non conference. But they had two swipes at UCLA and two swipes at us. And couldn't beat ASU in Tempe. The most impressive thing they did was sweep the Oregon schools and Mountain schools on the road. Plus, their coach is an ass and gives us no respect. So.....the hell with them.

zonagrad wrote:I am convinced that five random people from any local sports bar could have come up with a better tournament bracket than the overpaid idiots employed by the NCAA.

I agree, but it's sort of like:

"What's the difference between a cheap haircut and an expensive haircut? About 3 days."

And as for a bad tourney bracket v. a good tourney bracket, not even 3 days. It will be pure insanity regardless.

My biggest regret is that I always like the bracket to reveal what an idiot Joe Lunardi is, yet again. But this time, Joe Lunardi looks smarter than the committee. And that, my friends, is worse than dinner at Arby's.

Longhorned wrote:

zonagrad wrote:I am convinced that five random people from any local sports bar could have come up with a better tournament bracket than the overpaid idiots employed by the NCAA.

I agree, but it's sort of like:

"What's the difference between a cheap haircut and an expensive haircut? About 3 days."

And as for a bad tourney bracket v. a good tourney bracket, not even 3 days. It will be pure insanity regardless.

My biggest regret is that I always like the bracket to reveal what an idiot Joe Lunardi is, yet again. But this time, Joe Lunardi looks smarter than the committee. And that, my friends, is worse than dinner at Arby's.

Don't you dare talk bad about a beef n cheddar/curly fries/jamocha shake dinner.

Longhorned wrote:

zonagrad wrote:I am convinced that five random people from any local sports bar could have come up with a better tournament bracket than the overpaid idiots employed by the NCAA.

I agree, but it's sort of like:

"What's the difference between a cheap haircut and an expensive haircut? About 3 days."

And as for a bad tourney bracket v. a good tourney bracket, not even 3 days. It will be pure insanity regardless.

My biggest regret is that I always like the bracket to reveal what an idiot Joe Lunardi is, yet again. But this time, Joe Lunardi looks smarter than the committee. And that, my friends, is worse than dinner at Arby's.

Longhorned wrote:

zonagrad wrote:I am convinced that five random people from any local sports bar could have come up with a better tournament bracket than the overpaid idiots employed by the NCAA.

I agree, but it's sort of like:

"What's the difference between a cheap haircut and an expensive haircut? About 3 days."

And as for a bad tourney bracket v. a good tourney bracket, not even 3 days. It will be pure insanity regardless.

My biggest regret is that I always like the bracket to reveal what an idiot Joe Lunardi is, yet again. But this time, Joe Lunardi looks smarter than the committee. And that, my friends, is worse than dinner at Arby's.

No - Lunardi is the problem. He has the inside with the committee and won't admit it. He already knows what they are going to do and then passes it off as his science. The guy couldn't put a bike together for his kid's birthday party without asking for help. He does have kids doesn't he?

azgreg wrote:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/20 ... edictions/" target="_blank

So Nate gives us a 1% chance of cutting down the nets? 6% for getting to a ff. Can't wait to make some noise and prove these guys wrong

84Cat wrote:

azgreg wrote:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/20 ... edictions/" target="_blank

So Nate gives us a 1% chance of cutting down the nets? 6% for getting to a ff. Can't wait to make some noise and prove these guys wrong

So you're telling me there's a chance?

Given how 529 and Nate had it in the bag for Hillary; I’ll take his 1 and 6%.

It’s like the anti-SI jinx. We’re all good guys!

CalStateTempe wrote:Given how 529 and Nate had it in the bag for Hillary; I’ll take his 1 and 6%.

It’s like the anti-SI jinx. We’re all good guys!

Was gonna make the exact same comment. Pretty sure he gave baby king a minuscule chance at winning, and here we are.

Sorry, no more politics.

We're getting to the FF.

84Cat wrote:

azgreg wrote:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/20 ... edictions/" target="_blank

So Nate gives us a 1% chance of cutting down the nets? 6% for getting to a ff. Can't wait to make some noise and prove these guys wrong

It's math. You know what math can't help with? NCAA tourney projections. Because math is rational.

One year I used Nate Silver's projections for an experimental bracket. Just horrible.

Everyone is grading Arizona over the course of the year...defense, offense, etc...

This is a mistake...

It is a mistake to do this for ANY TEAM...

Look at the last 4-6 games and especially conference tournaments because THOSE are the teams playing in the NCAA championship...

It's this way every year...people want to cling to some out-dated record or expectation...

Based on this...Rawle and Trier have stepped back a little...PJC and Dusan have stepped FORWARD HUGE amounts...

So basically our offense is slipping a bit but our defense has taken a HUGE leap forward...they figured it out.

Most dangerous Miller team ever.

CatFanOneMil wrote:Most dangerous Miller team ever.

It's funny: I've been saying the same thing since November, even after the Bahamas. Even when the sub patterns felt off and our offense struggled, you could see that once we got some things figured out, it would be scary.

We start two 7 footers. One is as good of a low-post player as anyone in the country. The other is the #1 pick in the 2018 NBA Draft.

We've got one wing who can get into the lane and draw a foul almost whenever he wants, and another who is scrappier and gets lots of points on second shots and athletic moves in the paint.

And we've got a senior PG who's playing the best ball of his life.

The pieces are there, guys. We just need a little luck. Need to get that '11 mojo going.

The results are in.

http://www.bracketmatrix.com/" target="_blank

That’s about rigth, reviewing the brackets I figured we should have been playing Clemson.

It just hit me. All the oddities of the selection committee's bracket point to one explanation: All of their decisions are to ju$tify getting Trae Young into the tourney.

azgreg wrote:The results are in.

http://www.bracketmatrix.com/" target="_blank

Yeah looks like the general consensus was:

Arizona - low 3 or high 4
UCLA - 10 (no play in)
USC - 10 (no play in)
ASU - 11 (play in)

Pac got sandbagged.

YoDeFoe wrote:

azgreg wrote:The results are in.

http://www.bracketmatrix.com/" target="_blank

Yeah looks like the general consensus was:

Arizona - low 3 or high 4
UCLA - 10 (no play in)
USC - 10 (no play in)
ASU - 11 (play in)

Pac got sandbagged.

The saying "screwed with our pants on" comes to mind.

Greenberg is still on TV jammering on about Arizona having to vacate the NC if they win it.

Greenberg still makes people call him coach. Fuck him.

Longhorned wrote:Greenberg is still on TV jammering on about Arizona having to vacate the NC if they win it.

Sounds good to me. Let's do it.

Longhorned wrote:Greenberg is still on TV jammering on about Arizona having to vacate the NC if they win it.

What a fucking loser. I'll never entirely understand the "smear Miller!" campaign.

It's fine to admit you were wrong, Seth. Others have dialed down their confidence in Schlabach's piece, considering that it's entirely baseless and mainly speculative.

HAVE THEY FOUND MARK??

IS ANYONE LOOKING FOR MARK

YoDeFoe wrote:HAVE THEY FOUND MARK??

IS ANYONE LOOKING FOR MARK

I am not a twitter person, however, I have thought more seriously about it just to find schlabotch. It is one of the most intriguing aspects of this whole debacle. Are we sure there is even a real person? Was this account activated, used for years, credibility established just to be discarded after slandering public enemy no. 1? I mean it's been weeks now. You'd think we would have heard something. Right?

U.P. Zona Fan wrote:

YoDeFoe wrote:HAVE THEY FOUND MARK??

IS ANYONE LOOKING FOR MARK

I am not a twitter person, however, I have thought more seriously about it just to find schlabotch. It is one of the most intriguing aspects of this whole debacle. Are we sure there is even a real person? Was this account activated, used for years, credibility established just to be discarded after slandering public enemy no. 1? I mean it's been weeks now. You'd think we would have heard something. Right?

This is a very important metric no one is talking about...(well maybe me and sheer and few others on twitter, I bring it up every other day because FUCK Mark Schlabach and espn he rode in on)...

Mark WAS very active on twitter, he's a known journalist and has gone dead quiet...the story has gone dead quiet as well...my best guess is one fo two things happened...

1. ESPN told him almost immediately, "You've left us exposed, confirm this or find another job" and then gave him a set amount of time to work in...

THAT COULD BE 2 weeks...and being the dickmouth he is he MIGHT be waiting to drop his new infor/source right before we play again...he's a bit of an attention whore like that...IF espn agreed to his reporting...there might be something new this week...or weekend right before we play Kentucky.

2. He was quietly told to find another job, and make no scene...

I am leaning into theory #2 because the damage has been done and they would keep hammering it home if they had any evidence or reputable sources that had been vetted by higher ups...

He's gone.

UAEebs86 wrote:

Lol fuck schlabach.

Being super active on twitter and then straight ghosting is the most obvious tell in history that something is amiss.

For those if you that listen to podcasts, check out the latest from "The Sports Reporters". The old crew that was let go from that network we don't talk about.

Lupica went off on how the committee doesn't want to see Sean Miller or Deandre Ayton anywhere near the Final Four and stuck it to us.

Lupica and Ryan both think Ayton is the best player, although they and Albom think Bagley is right there.

They also went off on how horrible the selection show was.
Good stuff.

We are looking in for 2018-19, http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... acketology" target="_blank

Irish27 wrote:We are looking in for 2018-19, http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... acketology" target="_blank

We're making the tourney next year.

Beachcat97 wrote:

Irish27 wrote:We are looking in for 2018-19, http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... acketology" target="_blank

We're making the tourney next year.

ASU as a 10 seed lol!!!

We're in! 10 seed lol. 5 P12 schools

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... acketology" target="_blank

At least One Pac 12 team will be higher than a 5 and it won't be ucla. We should finish higher than a 10. Asu needed a miracle noncon to be a play in, not sure they will be better than that. It surprises me that Oregon isn't higher. Usc, they are usually a tougher out than expected, but didn't get much respect last year. It'll be interesting.

And we're out. 0 seed

https://www.cbssports.com/college-baske ... e-in-2019/" target="_blank

Jefe wrote:And we're out. 0 seed

https://www.cbssports.com/college-baske ... e-in-2019/" target="_blank

Well... no "Miller underperforms" articles this season.

Jefe wrote:And we're out. 0 seed

https://www.cbssports.com/college-baske ... e-in-2019/" target="_blank

Kinda surprising since most preseason polls have us in the #20-30 range.

Norlander has always been working with half a deck

ASUHATER! wrote:

Jefe wrote:And we're out. 0 seed

https://www.cbssports.com/college-baske ... e-in-2019/" target="_blank

Kinda surprising since most preseason polls have us in the #20-30 range.

Most polls have us unranked and outside of the "others considered" range. I've seen one, maybe two, that include Arizona.

YoDeFoe wrote:

ASUHATER! wrote:

Jefe wrote:And we're out. 0 seed

https://www.cbssports.com/college-baske ... e-in-2019/" target="_blank

Kinda surprising since most preseason polls have us in the #20-30 range.

Most polls have us unranked and outside of the "others considered" range. I've seen one, maybe two, that include Arizona.

Exactly. Definitely not in the out of the tournament category. Most have us solidly in the top 50 teams in the country.

YoDeFoe wrote:

Jefe wrote:And we're out. 0 seed

https://www.cbssports.com/college-baske ... e-in-2019/" target="_blank

Well... no "Miller underperforms" articles this season.

ESPN: Hold my beer.

Lunardi’s First bracket has us out. UCLA and Washington as 5 seeds and Oregon as a 7 seed

IndianaZonaFan wrote:Lunardi’s First bracket has us out. UCLA and Washington as 5 seeds and Oregon as a 7 seed

Lunardi needs to watch some exhibition games...both Washington and Oregon barely got things going against pretty shallow Div.II teams...I haven't seen any UCLA stuff yet, but what I watch for early is teams that can defend, any team that does not defend against mediocre lower division teams are not going to go very far period...and in that vein the Beavs are actually going to be one of the better teams in the pac this year.

Katz also did a bracket. UW and UCLA 5, Oregon 7, USC playing 1st week to get in. Also has Grand Canyon as a 14 seed

AZ nowhere to found. I love it