PDA

View Full Version : WCC in at 12(conference rankings)



RRZagFan
05-08-2012, 08:43 PM
Don't know if this has been posted yet.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaab--ranking-college-basketball-conferences.html;_ylt=AvbwEXuOZhMeqJktGphy1b3evbYF

willandi
05-08-2012, 09:00 PM
Don't buy the PAC-12 being that much better, and can't see the Colonial being better. Think the WCC should be 9 or 10.
At least we're getting some props!

Once and Future Zag
05-08-2012, 09:19 PM
It would be nice if they knew how many schools were in the conference...

Coug Tracks
05-08-2012, 09:43 PM
Don't buy the PAC-12 being that much better, and can't see the Colonial being better. Think the WCC should be 9 or 10.
At least we're getting some props!The top 3 teams in the WCC were easily better than the top 3 teams in the Pac 12. It's the bottom (and really the rest) of the WCC that weighs down the conference.

willandi
05-08-2012, 09:48 PM
The top 3 teams in the WCC were easily better than the top 3 teams in the Pac 12. It's the bottom (and really the rest) of the WCC that weighs down the conference.

Much like the Cougs! (Sorry, I really do root for them when they aren't playing the Zags).

Just don't see Stanford as having a better backcourt than the Zags, one of the points of emphasis in the article, don't see UCLA being resurgent until they prove it, and the same wth Arizona. I just don't think the top 5 teams in the Pac-12 match up to the top 5 WCC teams, and don't think the bottom 5 WCC teams are that much worse than the bottom of the Pac.
Just my personal opinion of course, but don't see how they are that much above the WCC, if not for 'Rose' colored glasses.

Coug Tracks
05-08-2012, 11:05 PM
Much like the Cougs! (Sorry, I really do root for them when they aren't playing the Zags).

Just don't see Stanford as having a better backcourt than the Zags, one of the points of emphasis in the article, don't see UCLA being resurgent until they prove it, and the same wth Arizona. I just don't think the top 5 teams in the Pac-12 match up to the top 5 WCC teams, and don't think the bottom 5 WCC teams are that much worse than the bottom of the Pac.
Just my personal opinion of course, but don't see how they are that much above the WCC, if not for 'Rose' colored glasses.Well at least we (and probably everyone else in the country) can agree the top of the WCC was better than anything in the Pac 12 last year. I watched a poor WSU team without 2 or 3 starters pretty much take apart Santa Clara and Portland. At the end of the day though, Wazzu was awful, the Pac 12 was as bad as it has ever been so I can understand why you would have a problem with the WCC being 6 spots below the Pac 12.

Martin Centre Mad Man
05-09-2012, 06:01 AM
The six-twelve spots are all pretty evenly matched. Those are all leagues with some good teams at the top of the league, some average teams in the middle, and some dead weight dragging them down. I would have rated the WCC ahead of the CAA, MVC, and Conference USA, but I'm a bit of a homer for the WCC. You have to admit that the bottom of the WCC is pretty bad.

titopoet
05-09-2012, 07:35 AM
It would be nice if they knew how many schools were in the conference...


They are right. Pacific does not join this season but at the start of the 2013 season. July 1, 2013 is the official join date.

I take back my non-caffeinated comment, due to sheer quick posting before thinking.

sittingon50
05-09-2012, 08:26 AM
I was a history major.......

75Zag
05-09-2012, 08:36 AM
I do not know if they will be able to single-handedly lift the reputation of the entire conference, but UCLA is poised for a "Kentucky Like" year in Men's BB if things fall their way and if Josh Smith can stay away from twinkies and beer between now and November 1st. Not saying the other Pac teams will be anything, but I see UCLA as a very good team going into the season.