Pac-12?????

[nbadotcom]

Originally Posted by Bigmike23


zodog is right it would work for football to throw any 2 teams in there but it would kill it for bball. it would never get done tho, you see how long it took for schools to agree for the pac-10 tourny to start again. if they did it tho it would be 2 teams out of the WAC or Mountain West.

The reason there was not a conference tourny for so long was because Lute and Mike Montgomery didn't want one...and they had a lot of influence...not because the conference couldn't get it done.
I agree with Lute's reasoning...as one of the teams that historically is among the leaders in the PAC, and virtually assured an NCAA bid most years withouthaving to play a conference tourny...it doesn't do anything but hurt Arizona.
1) If they win the conf. tourny they'd have to win 6 NCAA games + 3 PAC-10 games in a row...so that's a 9 game win streak to win a championship. 9 gamewinning streaks are difficult enough during the regular season...they're tough as hell to get in the postseason.
2) as a team that is a potential high seed in the NCAA's a conference tourny can do nothing but hurt the team. Generally the PAC-10 winner will get a #1or#2 seed...but if Arizona, UCLA, or whoever else would win the PAC-10 loses in the opener of the conference tourny to a crappy team like the Scummies orBeavers, the only thing it will do is hurt their seed.
On the flipside, if they win the conf. tourny, it won't help much because that's what they were supposed to do.
3) Conference tournys are for one thing. Money. That's it. It doesn't help the players...missing 3-4 days of classes to play games before the NCAAtourny. It doesn't help the teams for the reason above...all it helps is the coffers.

In The Line For wrote:

3. We don't want to compromise our academic standards... The academic leaders at USC, Stanford, Cal and UCLA see themselves as a coterie of Ivy League schools, West Coast division, and as long as they live, the Pac-10 will not be taking on lowbrow academic entities

So how the hell is ASU in the PAC-10?

 

[offbad]

can someone please explain to me why stanford would be placed in the "pac-12 south".......

 

[bigmike23]

1) If they win the conf. tourny they'd have to win 6 NCAA games + 3 PAC-10 games in a row...so that's a 9 game win streak to win a championship. 9 game winning streaks are difficult enough during the regular season...they're tough as hell to get in the postseason.

teams have done it for years from other conferences so i dont really see whats the big deal with that and UCLA has had a final 4 run the past 2years with winning the pac10 tourny.

3. We don't want to compromise our academic standards... The academic leaders at USC, Stanford, Cal and UCLA see themselves as a coterie of Ivy League schools, West Coast division, and as long as they live, the Pac-10 will not be taking on lowbrow academic entities
thats down right funny seen how for sports most of them schools well find a way to get anyone in with COUGH*CAL AND SC COUGH leading theway

. if its going to make the schools more money they could care less who is comingin

 

[throwmonkey]

I'm opposed to it since I like the true round robin schedule for football and the home and home with everyone else in the conference for basketball. Thatbeing said, Utah and BYU is the only logical pair to preserve the Pac-10 being sets of geographical rivals.