End of Scheduling Debate
At the beginning of the season, there was quite a bit of debate and criticism around other message boards regarding scheduling. I noticed a blurb at the end of an LA times article Saturday (link: http://www.latimes.com/sports/college/ucla/la-sp-uclahoops24mar24,1,6559632.story) that mentioned UCLA has a record of 7-1 against other regional semifinalists (including 5-0 PAC-10, 2-1 nonconference). I think that, along with Texas' wins over UCLA and Tennessee, is one of the more impressive resumes left in the field. Also, the other 3 number one seeds combined have a whopping record of 2-2 against remaining regional semifinalists.
I believe that Coach Howland has earned our trust regarding nonconference scheduling.
Here are the records of the remaining 15 teams against the other current regional semifinalists:
EAST
North Carolina, 1-0, Davidson
Washington State 0-5 (Stanford 3, UCLA 2)
Louisville 2-0 (WV, 'Nova)
Tennessee 4-1 (W: Memphis, WK, WV, Xavier L: Texas)
MIDWEST
Kansas: 1-1 (Split w/Texas)
Villanova 1-1 (W: West Virginia, L: Louisville)
Wisconsin 3-0 (MSU twice, Texas)
Davidson 0-2 (UCLA, UNC)
SOUTH
Memphis 0-1 (Tennessee)
Mich State 1-3 (W: Texas, L: UCLA, Wisconsin x 2)
Stanford 3-3 (Washington State 3, UCLA 3-interestingly, it would have been 2-4 had Siena pulled it out over 'Nova)
Texas 3-3 (W: Kansas, UCLA, Tennessee, L: Kansas,
Mich State, Wisconsin)
WEST
Western Kentucky 0-1 (Tennessee)
Xavier 0-1, Tennessee
West Virginia 0-3 (Tennessee, Louisville, 'Nova)
Here are the number of nonconference games that each team had scheduled against the current regional semifinalists:
Tennessee 5
Texas 4
UCLA 3
Davidson 2
Mich State 2
Western Kentucky 1
Xavier 1
Wisconsin 1
Memphis 1
North Carolina 1
West Virginia 1
Washington State 0
Louisville 0
Kansas 0
Villanova 0
Stanford 0
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
16 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Next season
My one concern about this season's schedule was that we didn't play a tough road game before conference play began. We were at Michigan, but that was on their winter break with a very small student section. I'd still like to see us play a tough road game before conference play ever year and next season it won't be an issue as we travel to Austin.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Mar 24, 2008 7:24 AM PDT reply actions
Scheduling and Texas
On another note, our road game versus Texas next year may not be our next road game versus Texas. We just may be meeting them in San Antonio in 12 days.
Good numbers
Otherwise your point is well made, there was a lot made of how soft our non-conference schedule was this year. Although some of our competition was weak, two teams are in the sweet 16 and I expect Texas to go even further.
Thanks
by zoo752 on Mar 24, 2008 8:52 AM PDT up reply actions
Stanford
Bit Misleading?
Wins mainly coming from intra-conf. teams notwithstanding, I'd have to agree w/ your premise. The PAC10 was one of the best, if not the best, conf. this year. And, by definition of what it means to advance in sudden death playoffs, the reg.semis finalist teams are the best 16 teams in the country. Having said this, then UCLA's record is by far the most impressive.
Still, it'd be just that much more impressive had the 7 wins been spread out more evenly over non-conference finalists; or if the two non-conf. wins came from the likes of KS, NC, TX; or not over the lessor (if you will) remaining non-conf. teams. MSU and Davidson.
This is why TX record is the most impressive in my opinion.
by Rich1996UCLA on Mar 24, 2008 3:30 PM PDT reply actions
Why misleading?
What I was Trying to Say...
Misleading? Well, only in the sense that 5 out of the 7 wins come from a limited statistical sample of 2 teams (albeit very good teams in the furd and WSU.) Which is what I was trying to say but admittedly not altogether terribly succinctly.
by Rich1996UCLA on Mar 24, 2008 10:07 PM PDT up reply actions
I still agree with swc
On the other hand, I could be missing your point, which I have been known to do.
Timing of Tough Games
Another item which might be relevant is that by playing the toughest league schedule, UCLA was playing tough games in February and March. We had much angst about the Pac-10 tourney, risking (and incurring) injuries when the Bruins already had the regular season championship wrapped up. However, the tourney did give the Bruins a chance to play pressure games with little turnaround time. This could come in handy in the coming weeks.
The fact that UNC beat Davidson on its home court on November 14 is basically irrelevant in terms of strength of schedule. If we went on the road and played tougher teams in December, that would also not count as much in my book as tough road games against true rivals in February and March.
Yeah, but ...
No HORSE
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Mar 25, 2008 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions

by zoo752 on 




















