View Full Version : USC/Texas

03-18-2007, 03:14 PM
Did any of you experts see this coming? I know I didn't, not that I'm an expert either. Not only is Texas getting thumped, it isn't even that close and hasn't been. My brackets are now officially TOAST!!


03-18-2007, 04:22 PM
I am not surprised by the result, but i am surprised that it wasn't close.

USC played phenomal defense in my opinion (like they have at times this season). Texas had few open looks and had trouble knocking them down when they did. No question Durant is the real deal - the other freshman looked like freshman today.

Pac-10 is looking solid - i wish WSU would have held up their end. I, for one, love seeing teams West of the Mississippi doing well in the Big Dance and getting recognition.

03-18-2007, 04:53 PM
I was there in person, Birddog, and USC is flat-out more athletic and "studly." I mean, every player was built like a linebacker or running back. They were a better team. Texas could not handle them. Even their frosh are brick houses. Pargo is the only guy GU has that comes close!

I know you've seen Durant a lot on TV, but you cannot BELIEVE how pencil thin this kid is. His calves, you could wrap your hand around them. It looks like he could "break" if hit too hard.

That said, he had a bad day and scored 30.

03-18-2007, 05:07 PM
USC just tore apart Texas' zone. The Horns inexperience really showed..way too impatient on offense. Tim Floyd also had an excellent game plan.

03-18-2007, 05:11 PM
Thanks for the report BZ.. I knew Durant was thin. He seems to be durable enough though, he survived a Big 12 season of banging. He just doesn't have a good enough supporting cast. After Augustine (who didn't play that well today) and James, they have a sharp drop off. USC is going to be formidable next year, Howland will be challeged for sure.


03-18-2007, 10:15 PM
Floyd needs to hope that Mayo doesn't go off the deep end in Los Angeles though....it's not a given.

03-19-2007, 07:00 AM
Didn't see it coming. Blinded by Durant hype. PAC-10 season didn't seem to go all that well for USC with Oregon and WSU and UCLA seemingly dominating the news.

Downside about USC advancing: Stories are already appearing about the TWINS Lod and Rod being in the same Sweet 16 for two different colleges.

Upside about USC advancing: Hmmmm. Personally, I can't really think of any. Not a fan of Floyd poaching from other coaches when he took that job. Other than vague "west is best" sentiments to counteract parochialism in places like Bristol, Connecticut -- a strong PAC-10 is not a valid rooting interest for me. I'd rather see a stronger WCC that can attract better players wanting to stay closer to home to play ball, by preaching how weak the PAC-10*** competition in the region really is.

*** Thank you, UW, for helping make that case as it applies to the Western half of the State of Washington. WSU and GU are grateful. :D

03-19-2007, 08:43 AM
Nobody should be writing about the significance of Roderick playing in the sweet 16 because it's likely that he won't play a single minute for Kansas this weekend. That was such a stupid move on his part to transfer there. Then again, it was probably Daddy's decision (as always). You couldn't ride the pine more than Roderick is at KU right now.

03-19-2007, 08:59 AM
Outside of Durant, Texas wasn't sweet 16 material.

That's why I picked USC.


john montana
03-19-2007, 09:04 AM
the biggest problem TX has is rick barnes. he's an idiot.

usc looked really good this weekend.