Cal-Arizona Postgame Thread + Pac-10 First Half Review
by Avinash Kunnath on Jan 31, 2010 2:45 PM PST
in California Golden Bears Men's Basketball
Email
PrintWe'll have a big-time recap of the game up for tomorrow morning. For now we've reached the halfway point of Pac-10 play, and it's time to take a look back at the conference. Along with discussing the Arizona game, ponder these questions in the comments.
1) Which team impressed you the most in the Pac-10? Which team surprised you the most?
2) Who are the teams that can give Cal trouble in their rematches and why?
3) Which players are you terrified of playing again?
4) What will be the key to the Bears in the second half of conference matchups?
5) Who's going to win the conference?
64 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Answers
1. UCLA, they were supposed to be bad but beat the two favorites to win the conference CAl and Washington.
2. Arizona, Arizona State, UCLA, and Washington. Easy because each one of those teams can make plays either from beyond the arc or down low. Bears have lost to UCLA, Arizona, and Washington already.
3. Thomas, Wise, Poindexer, Dragovic, and Kuksics
4. The key for the Bears is not allowing easy three point attempts by opposing team’s best three point shooters, getting clutch rebounds, and making plays at the end of the game.
5. It’s either going to be Washington or UCLA
lol at 5.
All aboard the Jerome Randle Smart Car!
by rollonubears on Jan 31, 2010 2:54 PM PST up reply actions
Lol at 1
UCLA is so, so terrible.
Winning 1-point games is not a sign of clutchness, it’s a sign of not being good enough to win by more. Their point differential is abominably bad.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Yeah, when you’re two games out of first place and two of your wins have come on buzzer beaters you’re probably not going to win the conference.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
They're actually only 1 game out of first place
but, they beat ASU by all of 2 points.
They have a winning record despite having been outscored by 28 points over 594 possessions (an efficiency margin of -0.04).
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
dang, could have sworn they were 4-5. If we lose to them again I’m going to hit the bottle hard.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
It'll probably involve some retarded-ass refereeing decisions again
Honestly, I feel like refs who walk into Pauley Pavilion check their retinas at the door. It’s just unreal how many games they win there through horrible homer officiating.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
The depressing reality is that the regular season Pac-10 title no longer matters – the winner isn’t going to get a NCAA berth. No matter what, we have to win the Pac-10 tournament and get the auto-berth.
Disagree—Cal’s RPI is too high. If we play very well (6-3, 7-2 down the stretch) we can still pick up an at-large without winning the conference. Won’t be a great at-large, but we should be ok.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jan 31, 2010 2:58 PM PST up reply actions
Agreed.
All aboard the Jerome Randle Smart Car!
by rollonubears on Jan 31, 2010 2:58 PM PST up reply actions
You are probably right. Obviously it depends a lot on what we do the second half. I keep forgetting how much higher we are in RPI than everyone else in the conference.
On the other hand, if anyone other than us ends up winning the regular season title (say Arizona), I am pretty confident that they would still need to win the Pac-10 tourney. Currently they are around 60 in RPI. That would be shocking for the regular season champ not to make it but totally possible.
by Tedfordisgod on Jan 31, 2010 3:03 PM PST up reply actions
Cal is pretty much the only possible Pac-10 at-large. Maybe ASU too. That’s it though. Everyone else needs to win in LA.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jan 31, 2010 3:07 PM PST up reply actions
ASU isn't really viable
Their RPI is in the 80s.
I mean things could change if a team goes on an 8-1 run or something, but right now, not so much.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
I wouldn't assume that yet
The conference is horrible. But I would still be quite surprised if the regular season champ of a major conference doesn’t make the NCAA tournament.
That would be a shocking development.
You kidding me, there’s no way the ncaa won’t give the pac 10 conference winner a bid. I’m sure it’s an exaggeration but the tournament committee has way too much respect for the pac10 as a conference historically to insult the winner and not give a bid.
The tournament committee does not have "respect" for any conference
They do not care about conference affiliation in the slightest. All they care about is resumes. Cal is really the only team in the league with anything approaching a viable resume.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
... and your source for that is?
They’ve talked about their methodology over and over again. Media members have done mock bracketing exercises using their methodology.
Which is more likely: that they’ve orchestrated an elaborate cover-up to shield their deep-seated desire to award bids based on conference regular-season titles (which is somehow preferable, through some strange mental alchemy, to simply coming out and saying they’ll give extra credit for winning a conference regular season)?
Or, that they actually do what they say they do and show people they do?
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Maybe you and I are talking about the same thing. Resumes are based on what, non-conference schedule? Surely that counts. But most teams play a majority of their “important” games in their conference. The bracketologists and ncaa committee base MUCH of the weight on how well each team does within their conference.
Then they compare how tough the conference is each year based on the wins and losses the conference teams had against other big teams (or bad teams) in other conferences to see how well they do in comparison. That’s a good indicator of how strong a conference is.
How do people know the pac-10 sucks this year? It’s b/c of their terrible losses in their non-conference games. How do you measure their resumes? By how well a team does in their conference, and how well the conference measures up against other conferences.
A team could very well ride off of wins in their conference and end up with a bid even if they have terrible losses (which would be their resume) in the non-conference games. Look at how many bids the pac-10 has received over the past years. A lot of the teams that made it inside the bubble wasn’t on their performance in the non-conference, “resume” building portion of their season, but their upsets within the conference.
Conference affliation is huge and very well plays a big part in the selection process. But like I said, maybe you and I are talking about the same thing so we’re not really talking about anything.
What I am saying
is that they look at a team’s wins in a list, and in various graphic formats (like “record vs. RPI top-50,” “road/neutral record,” etc etc.).
A team’s ordinal ranking in its conference is not one of those formats. Conference games are treated like other games. The entire package is a team’s resume.
Now, the committee might give more weight to late-season games if they think they can get a better read on a team’s true talent level that way, and in that sense conference record might get extra weight. But a. that would apply to late-season nonconference games too, and more importantly b. it doesn’t help you if you aren’t playing anyone who’s any good in February.
Lots of mid-majors have winning streaks down the stretch, lose in their conference tourneys, and still don’t get a bid, because the streak was compiled against subpar opposition. The Pac-10 this year is a mid-major conference… and it’s going to be treated like one by the committee, who don’t give 2/10s of a crap about what a league (or a team) has done in prior seasons.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
It's a hypothetical at this point
The Pac-10 deserves to be treated as a mid-major this season, but I would be very surprised if that’s what actually happens.
The major conferences are going to protect their own, because it could be their conference that has a down year in 2014-15. They’re not going to want to set that kind of a precedent.
Do you really think Arizona or Washington is going to be nixed from the tournament if they win the conference but lose in the tournament? Do you think (chuckle) that this would happen to UCLA?
The tournament committee definitely emphasizes its formula. But the committee only rejects the Pac-10 conference champion in a field of 65 teams if there’s a four-way tie for first or something (which, admittedly, could happen). Otherwise, the regular-season champ is in, as they should be.
What "precedent"?
This isn’t a court case. The committee can make what rules it feels are appropriate.
They’ve stated, very clearly and explicitly, what they feel are appropriate determining factors. Conference affiliation is expressly not one of them.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
I'll believe it when I see it
Maybe you’re right. Maybe a Pac-10 conference champion doesn’t make it, because the committee has decided to treat the Pac-10 as a mid-major.
But there’s a reason the BCS favors the major conferences. It’s the same reason I think the commitee, when push comes to shove, would pick a regular season major conference champion over some other team.
Our dueling theories may never be tested. Maybe Cal wins the conference, solving the committee’s problem. Maybe some other team goes 8-1 down the stretch. Maybe the regular season champ wins the conference tournament too.
But I have a lot of trouble believing that the committee would tell the champion of a major conference to go home. That’s inconsistent with everything I’ve seen about how the majors operate.
A team’s ordinal ranking in its conference is not one of those formats. Conference games are treated like other games. The entire package is a team’s resume.
I don’t get what you mean by resume. Guess what. Pac-10 teams play around 20 games each in the conference. Don’t tell me that the conference doesn’t matter when 20 of the games these teams are playing and the W/L’s they’re looking at are within the conference. The resume IS in a big part how they did in the conference since most of the games are in the conference.
The committee doesn’t pick teams with a bcs-like formula (made up of record vs RPI, RPI, etc.). Those are indicators, but there’s a LOT of things that you can’t measure that go into the selection process (even the regions the teams are playing).
The committee has been very, very generous to the pac-10 over the past decade and put in teams that were less than deserving (on paper, your resume) into the tourney. And the pac-10 has returned the favor by being very successful lately. You seem to be saying that b/c there’s no conference ranking that goes into this formula (that doesn’t exist), but that wins and losses matter. But W’s and L’s are exactly what makes up a conference ranking, so I don’t get what you’re saying.
If conferences didn’t matter, why does the Big East, Pac 10, ACC, and lately the Big 12 get so many teams in? That’s just the way it is, conferences DO indeed matter. Now, whether or not that is fair is another question. That’s why there’s so much interest in giving these mid-majors a chance and a reason why people love cinderella teams so much. [But nike taught me there are no cinderellas]
I think you have it distinguish between saying the conference won’t get better/worse treatment based in prior seasons with the notion that conference a team plays in doesn’t matter. No, you don’t get rewarded for how well you did the previous season(s), but a conference a team plays in is VERY important for the selection committee b/c every team’s body of work is made up of mostly conference games.
Lots of mid-majors have winning streaks down the stretch, lose in their conference tourneys, and still don’t get a bid, because the streak was compiled against subpar opposition.
Exactly the reason why mid-majors don’t get bids. Their CONFERENCE is made up with these subpar teams. That’s the essence of a mid-major concference, a conference with teams that aren’t that strong. I’m not saying the pac-10 should get 5 bids this year or anything crazy like that. I just have it hard to believe that you explicitly said:
The committee
“do(es) not care about conference affiliation in the slightest. All they care about is resumes. Cal is really the only team in the league with anything approaching a viable resume.”
…even though the resume is in a big part determined by the conference a team plays in.
Nickle, I think you're misunderstanding what Paul is saying
I don’t get what you mean by resume. Guess what. Pac-10 teams play around 20 games each in the conference. Don’t tell me that the conference doesn’t matter when 20 of the games these teams are playing and the W/L’s they’re looking at are within the conference. The resume IS in a big part how they did in the conference since most of the games are in the conference.
You’re correct that how teams do in the Pac-10 are essential for a team’s NCAA resume. But the fact that they’re Pac-10 games vs. any other conference doesn’t matter. The reason that Pac-10 wins are usually valuable is because Pac-10 teams usually all have excellent non-conference resumes – the same solid non-conference resumes that teams from the Atlantic Sun or the West Coast Conference don’t usually have.
If conferences didn’t matter, why does the Big East, Pac 10, ACC, and lately the Big 12 get so many teams in? That’s just the way it is, conferences DO indeed matter
These conferences aren’t given tourney spots just because they’re part of the BCS and everybody thinks the teams are good. These conferences get the majority of at-large bids because that’s how the teams perform OOC.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
This basically says what I was going to say, so I won't repeat it
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Exactly. That’s exactly why conferences matter. Major conferences are major conferences because they do exactly that, compete at the highest level they can (that makes sense regionally with some other factors). That’s exactly why they’re major conferences as opposed to mid-majors, because the best teams always come out of the major conferences.
I have no disagreement there. Like I said earlier, I think we’re all saying the same thing but looking at it in different angles.
What you’re stating is backing up the legitimacy of a conference as a whole rather than a team-by-team basis, which I explained is the reason why some conferences consistently get more bids than others (major conferences vs. mid majors).
What I’m focusing is with that all said, looking at a TEAM within a conference now, the conference they’re in matters when the selection committee looks at choosing teams for the tournament. If the said team has a horrible non-conference record and a good conference record, like you said, they’ll be looked upon more favorably if the other teams in the conference had a good OOC record. It’s essentially the same thing. The team itself rides on the respect the other teams in the same conference earned OOC, independently of their own success. You can argue that the teams they beat are good because they beat good OOC teams and so on, and now we’re just going in circles again.
It’s clear the pac-10 this year isn’t what it normally is, but if they committee had to choose between two comparable teams from the pac-10 or another major conference team versus a random no name team, do you really think the committee won’t give the benefit of doubt to the major conference team? It’s a major issue in college basketball, the idea of how many bids to which conferences is fair, but the committee has historically given the benefit of doubt to teams from the big conferences.
[This is going to by my last comment since this is getting long, thanks for the discussion.]
but if they committee had to choose between two comparable teams from the pac-10 or another major conference team versus a random no name team, do you really think the committee won’t give the benefit of doubt to the major conference team?
I think they would take the team that has the more impressive resume, irrespective of their conference affiliation. It’s what they did a couple times a few years ago with George Mason and Missouri Valley teams as some of the last teams in the tourney, and what they did last year when they picked Arizona over St. Marys. There are examples of mid-majors getting spots over ‘BCS’ teams and vice versa. It’s about what individual teams accomplish.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
The thing is the teams in the major conferences get much more opportunities to build their resume by the sheer fact that they’re playing in a conference that has a good reputation. A team from a mid-major only has a few OOC games where they can “prove” they belong, but these opportunities are slim. The rest of their schedule they’re spending in their own conferences. No one respects teams who completely dominate their small conferences.
The chance to build their resume, which you’re saying is done independently to their conference affiliation, is heavily drawn from their schedule, which is significantly made up of in-conference games. They go hand in hand. Mid-majors only get a few games at most to prove their worth. Teams from big conferences have the entire regular season to do so.
The perception is, until these teams play a tough schedule throughout the season, no one’s going to give them any credit. That’s the bias against mid-majors and the burden is on them to prove they belong in the tournament.
(really, my last comment now).
But the conference tournament winner is the conference winner and gets the bid. I see no reason why they would feel obligated for the regular season winner to go over any other team. Now, on the other hand, its not like they will feel obligated to not pick two Pac-10 teams either. But the way it is shaking out, Cal is the only reasonable at large team.
by Tedfordisgod on Jan 31, 2010 3:41 PM PST up reply actions
Conference winner and conference tournament winner are two different things.
Now, it’d be great if Cal can be both this year. But I just don’t see Cal not making the tournament at this point. I strongly feel we’re playing for seed at this point (which won’t be high no matter how well we play the rest of the season out).
Answers
- Arizona impressed me the most and Washington surprised me the most.
- Teams that can give Cal trouble in their rematches are everyone except for Stanford and Oregon. Well, maybe we can throw Washington State in there. I don’t know.
- I’m going to go with those guys from Oregon State, Arizona, Washington and Nikola Dragovic of UCLA.
- Close out a damn game.
- California.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jan 31, 2010 2:59 PM PST reply actions
Close out a damn game.
RECOMMENDED TIMES 20.
All aboard the Jerome Randle Smart Car!
by rollonubears on Jan 31, 2010 3:01 PM PST up reply actions
up and down
cal has had an up and down season, partly due to injuries
az is most surprising. with such a young team, I didn’t think they would show this year
ucla has scratched their way back. people say they don’t have talent, but that’s not true. they have plenty of players that everyone wanted. they have just under performed. but howland’s switch to zone has righted the ship, and now they are a contender.
asu has also been better than expected
washington is under achieving. with a player like pondexter, they should be doing better.
1) Which team impressed you the most in the Pac-10? Which team surprised you the most?
USC’s defense really impressed me, but their offense is bad, they don’t have any depth, and they may have given up on their season. Arizona and ASU both surprised me because I really thought they would be down, but they clearly aren’t
2) Who are the teams that can give Cal trouble in their rematches and why?
The USC road trip scares me, but the good news is that Cal has already played the best teams on their schedule on the road – now the best teams have to come to Haas. I think Arizona scares me the most in terms of threatening Cal’s run for the conference title.
3) Which players are you terrified of playing again?
ASU’s guards getting hot from 3 scare me, and Williams + Wise scare me. And the above mentioned USC defense.
4) What will be the key to the Bears in the second half of conference matchups?
Good shooting, frankly. When Cal shoots well from the field and from 3, they don’t lose. If they’re off every game is a battle (See today’s game, the UCLA game.)
5) Who’s going to win the conference?
Cal. Like I said above – the best teams in the conference after Cal are the Arizona schools, Washington, and USC – and they only have to play one of those teams on the road. If Cal doesn’t fall flat in winnable road games against the Oregon schools and Stanford they should be able to take the conference.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
Arizona’s on a HOT streak right now. Every team has streaks, W’s and L’s, it’s just that the elite ones make winning a habit.
I don’t expect Arizona to keep this up much longer.
Yeah, to be fair I haven’t seen AZ much this year so it’s entirely possible I’m overrating them based on what I saw today.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
They also lost to Oregon State and Wazzu. Let’s not crown them King Kong.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jan 31, 2010 3:17 PM PST up reply actions
We got swept by OSU last year and we were a tourney team.
by atomsareenough on Feb 1, 2010 8:53 AM PST up reply actions
I’d venture to guess it’s going to end in Washington on Thursday. They’ve played well, but they aren’t exceptionally better than any team in the conference.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jan 31, 2010 3:15 PM PST up reply actions
No Arizona is actually a solid team
They and Cal are basically tied in in-conference efficiency (although ratings like kenpom.com still dock them for their bad nonconference run).
They’re clearly the major challenger at this point. They also have the significant advantage of getting an extra home game on the back half.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
I’m guessing the improved performance is mostly a factor of the team gelling with their new coach.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
... well they're not going to suddenly un-gel
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
They are extremely young though. Young teams can go up and down surprisingly quick. I’d like to see what they do on the road this weekend before declaring them the biggest challenger.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jan 31, 2010 3:40 PM PST up reply actions
What Cal really needs to win the Conference
Is a post player. Unfortunately I don’t think they’ll be able to find him over night.
Anyone else find it interesting how we seem to match up well against teams that are bigger than us but have problems playing teams that aren’t as big?
Re: the conference
I think Arizona is going to win 6 games down the stretch. I think they’ll split the Washington trip, beat the Oregons at home, lose 2 of 3 from ASU, @ Cal, @ Stanford, and beat the LA schools at home.
None of the 4-5 teams is going 8-1 down the back half, so that eliminates them immediately. UCLA sucks and will not be the beneficiaries of insane luck in the second half. ASU has the potential to go 7-2 but I see them basically matching Arizona’s record down the stretch and thus finishing a game behind their travel partner.
Now, as for Cal, the team should win 4 of the 5 remaining road games but winning on the road is tough so I’ll scale it back to 3 wins. That means 3 home wins to share the title or a sweep to take it outright. Clearly a sweep is possible but 3 wins might be more likely.
I think Cal is more likely than any other team to win the title outright, but a split title (probably with Arizona) would not surprise me at all.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
As long as we don’t lose to Zona at home (and lose the split title), this is a fairly acceptable outcome.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jan 31, 2010 3:49 PM PST up reply actions
There's no head-to-head tiebreaker for breaking end-of-season ties
(Nor should there be, since the teams play a fully balanced schedule.)
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Think you’re giving Arizona too much credit but it’s not unreasonable to see Cal ended up 6-3 down the stretch (and ending up sharing the title).
It’s a very fluid conference, especially in the #2 spot. In the beginning everyone was hyped up on Washington. Then USC had their short turn. Last week everyone was talking about how ASU was going to be our stiffest competition. Now it’s Arizona.
The conference is wide open and now we really can’t afford to lose these close ones. Today’s loss made things very interesting for us now that even the games we should win become games we MUST win.
GO BEARS
Guess what
If you want to win a conference, the games you should win are games you must win. ’s the way it works.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
I don't like "interesting."
I want Cal to win the Pac-10 title, without drama or any nonsense. Instead, we get “interesting.” Meh.
who knows
They could well be the beneficiaries of extreme luck in the 2nd half. I mean, it happened in the 1st half of the season, so who knows…
by atomsareenough on Feb 1, 2010 8:55 AM PST up reply actions
What's aggravating
is that the conference really should be ours to take this year, and this opportunity won’t come along again for years to come.
I’ve waited a long time for Cal to win the Pac-10 title. I don’t care about the stupid tournament, other than for its importance to the NCAA. So we had a chance to take control of the conference today, and didn’t take it. Now it’s a crapshoot.
I don’t like crapshoots, even though we should have the advantage, because I’m a Cal alum – and I know how these things usually work out.
answers
1) Which team impressed you the most in the Pac-10? Which team surprised you the most?
Surprises: Tossup between Washington and UCLA. I can’t believe how bad UCLA has played in many of its games, and I can’t believe the disparity between Washington’s home and road performances. As for impressed, there isn’t a single team in the conference that impresses me, quite frankly.
2) Who are the teams that can give Cal trouble in their rematches and why?
Washington. There will come a point where they will force themselves to play on the road as well as they can at home. Undoubtedly that game will be against us. Oregon State also, can’t give you a reason why. Maybe Shaftenar will finally hit his threes.
3) Which players are you terrified of playing again?
Roll. That little fker is always there at the end putting in a clutch shot or making a great play. And of course Pondexter seems to thrive on our defensive play.
4) What will be the key to the Bears in the second half of conference matchups?
More defensive effort, and figuring out a way to create open threes as opponents concentrate on that particular aspect of our offense more.
5) Who’s going to win the conference?
Cal
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
GoldenBlogs' FAQ and Community Guidelines
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
I recorded the entire last out as Cal clinches the first ever PAC12 Softball Title! It was also a...
Pac-12 On SBN
Pacific Takes (Pac-12) NORTH AddictedToQuack: (Oregon)
UW Dawg Pound: (Washington)
CougCenter: (Washington State)
BuildingTheDam: (Oregon State)
Rule Of Tree: (Stanford)
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: (Cal)
SOUTH
BruinsNation: (UCLA)
ConquestChronicles: (USC)
HouseOfSparky: (ASU)
Arizona Desert Swarm: (Arizona)
TheRalphieReport: (Colorado)
Block U: (Utah)
Golden Bears Football Schedule
| Fresno St. | Sat 09/03 | W 36 - 21 |
@
Colorado
|
Sat 09/10 | W 36 - 33 |
| Presbyterian | Sat 09/17 | W 63 - 12 |
|
@
Washington
|
Sat 09/24 | L 23 - 31 |
|
@
Oregon
|
Thu 10/06 | L 15 - 43 |
|
USC
|
Thu 10/13 | L 9 - 30 |
|
Utah
|
Sat 10/22 | W 34 - 10 |
|
@
UCLA
|
Sat 10/29 | L 14 - 31 |
|
Washington St.
|
Sat 11/05 | W 30 - 7 |
|
Oregon St.
|
Sat 11/12 | W 23 - 6 |
|
@
Stanford
|
Sat 11/19 | L 28 - 31 |
|
@
Arizona St.
|
Fri 11/25 | W 47 - 38 |
|
@
Texas
|
Wed 12/28 | L 10 - 21 |
