UNC.........

[slotdirt]

Kyrie Irving was injured and had played two games in four months at that point. Obviously even the thickest skulled among us understood that was my point.

Moreover, Arizona didn't prove a thing during the regular season. Obviously, people can be wrong, but did you have a team that lost twice to Washington State going to the Elite Eight? Let's see your brackets, killer.

So easy to point out the flaws of others when one can't see their own. And with that, I'm going to use the ignore button for the first time in my five years at dt.com.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Kyrie Irving was injured and had played two games in four months at that point. Obviously even the thickest skulled among us understood that was my point.

Moreover, Arizona didn't prove a thing during the regular season. Obviously, people can be wrong, but did you have a team that lost twice to Washington State going to the Elite Eight? Let's see your brackets, killer.

So easy to point out the flaws of others when one can't see their own. And with that, I'm going to use the ignore button for the first time in my five years at dt.com.

Ignore away slowdirt. I would probably be ignoring the whole thread if I got owned by Rockhardtenfan.

By the way, Irving scored 28 in that game. Him being in the game kept them from losing by 30. Duke was dominated in the middle. In no way were they the best team with or without Irving you fool.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Moreover, Arizona didn't prove a thing during the regular season. Obviously, people can be wrong, but did you have a team that lost twice to Washington State going to the Elite Eight? .

WSU is 22-12 and in the semi's of the NIT. They did beat Gonzaga by 22, Miss st by 26 and Washington twice. They however didn't beat AZ in either game they played.

Personally I would have taken most offense at being called slotbilas

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Kyrie Irving was injured and had played two games in four months at that point. Obviously even the thickest skulled among us understood that was my point.

Moreover, Arizona didn't prove a thing during the regular season. Obviously, people can be wrong, but did you have a team that lost twice to Washington State going to the Elite Eight? Let's see your brackets, killer.

So easy to point out the flaws of others when one can't see their own. And with that, I'm going to use the ignore button for the first time in my five years at dt.com.

Arizona had a very good regular season and has the best player in College basketball (in my opinion). stars can take teams far in the tourney.

[slotdirt]

Sorry, had the wrong Pac-10 fodder. Meant to say Oregon STate, and it was only one loss, not two.

Still, Arizona's best non-con win was what, NC State? Oklahoma? It's pretty slim pickins'. I take issue with someone saying they had a "very good" regular season when they basically beat up on the worst major conference in America and didn't beat a soul worth mentioning in their non-conference schedule.

[Antitrust32]

any time you win 25 games in a regular season you had a very good regular season.

and the pac 10 didnt suck as much as the east coast bias made it out to be.

Washington was a tough team with some real good players. UCLA could play and had some NBA talent. USC was decent. Washington State, as Chuck pointed out,was a good team.

the Pac 10 proved its worthy by showing up to play ball in the tourney.

Arizona's run was no fluke. They were one of the country's top teams and they only got better as the year went on (except for two losses late in the season). They were an entirely different team at the end of the season then when they played Kansas in the beginning of the season. They only had one senior on the whole team.

Its okay if you didnt watch them or follow them all season, but they certainly did not suck at any point.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

any time you win 25 games in a regular season you had a very good regular season.

and the pac 10 didnt suck as much as the east coast bias made it out to be.

Washington was a tough team with some real good players. UCLA could play and had some NBA talent. USC was decent. Washington State, as Chuck pointed out,was a good team.

the Pac 10 proved its worthy by showing up to play ball in the tourney.

Arizona's run was no fluke. They were one of the country's top teams and they only got better as the year went on (except for two losses late in the season). They were an entirely different team at the end of the season then when they played Kansas in the beginning of the season. They only had one senior on the whole team.

Its okay if you didnt watch them or follow them all season, but they certainly did not suck at any point.

This year's tourney has proven one point...good teams can come from anywhere!

[slotdirt]

Right, well someone else is missing my point. Based on Arizona's regular season, there's no way anybody could have predicted they would go to the Elite Eight. Hell, if it wasn't for some really good fortune, they could have - and probably should have - lost to both Memphis and Texas. Their best win out of conference was against the worst team in either the ACC or the Big 12, take your pick.

Hindsight is just so easy for you guys. Seriously, how many teams win 25 games in the Pac 10 and get a five seed? if you think the Pac 10 was anything better than the sixth best league this season, I don't know what to tell you. Only the SEC East sucked any worse than did the Pac 10. It's easy to say "so and so was decent" when you're completely neglecting to mention the fact that 50 percent of that league was pure, unadulterated dog crap this year.

So yeah, I wasn't a believer in Arizona for this year's tournament, and I know I wasn't the only one.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Right, well someone else is missing my point. Based on Arizona's regular season, there's no way anybody could have predicted they would go to the Elite Eight. Hell, if it wasn't for some really good fortune, they could have - and probably should have - lost to both Memphis and Texas. Their best win out of conference was against the worst team in either the ACC or the Big 12, take your pick.

Hindsight is just so easy for you guys. Seriously, how many teams win 25 games in the Pac 10 and get a five seed? if you think the Pac 10 was anything better than the sixth best league this season, I don't know what to tell you. Only the SEC East sucked any worse than did the Pac 10. It's easy to say "so and so was decent" when you're completely neglecting to mention the fact that 50 percent of that league was pure, unadulterated dog crap this year.

So yeah, I wasn't a believer in Arizona for this year's tournament, and I know I wasn't the only one.

Regardless of how their schedule looked and what their conference did, If you had seen them play at any point, you would know that they have some talent. In no way do they "stink" nor did they at any point leading up to the tournament.

There is a huge chasm between a team stinking and a team making the elite 8. Even if you didn't have them going deep, to proclaim them as a bad team is just a bad opinion born out of a lack of understanding of the game or never having actually seen them play. Either way, you look bad trying to defend your awful position.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Right, well someone else is missing my point. Based on Arizona's regular season, there's no way anybody could have predicted they would go to the Elite Eight. Hell, if it wasn't for some really good fortune, they could have - and probably should have - lost to both Memphis and Texas. Their best win out of conference was against the worst team in either the ACC or the Big 12, take your pick.

Hindsight is just so easy for you guys. Seriously, how many teams win 25 games in the Pac 10 and get a five seed? if you think the Pac 10 was anything better than the sixth best league this season, I don't know what to tell you. Only the SEC East sucked any worse than did the Pac 10. It's easy to say "so and so was decent" when you're completely neglecting to mention the fact that 50 percent of that league was pure, unadulterated dog crap this year.

So yeah, I wasn't a believer in Arizona for this year's tournament, and I know I wasn't the only one.

and you were completely wrong with your pre tournament opinion.

I happened to actually watch and follow Arizona this season, and knew they had some incredibly talented players, along with the most talented player in the nation, and thought they'd make a run. Though I did figure they'd lose to Duke.

There are also people like you out there that think Derrick Williams just started playing good in March, not realizing he had as good of a season as anyone is basketball. He averaged 1.95 points per shot attempt. that is downright incredible.