Could UCLA have won a national title in 2008?
Who knows, but it's a valid question now that there are reports Memphis will be stripped of its 2008 Final Four appearance and all 38 of its victories. UCLA lost to Memphis 78-63 in the semifinals ot the 2008 Final Four. Memphis went on to lose to Kansas in the title game.
UPDATE: The NCAA will probably ``vacate'' these games for Memphis as if they were never played, not forfeit them. Vacating games changes the record of the penalized team as if the games were never played. The wins and losses of the penalized team are dropped from their overall record. For the opposing teams, theirs records do not change at all. So it appears UCLA's record will remain unchanged.
I think it appropriate for Memphis to be stripped of its victories for 2008. Whether UCLA would have won? Would-a, Could-a, Should-a. (Play on words...I know its "of") Bottom line -- Memphis was a better team than UCLA in 2008. They were long, athletic and very quick.
What I find interesting is that the NCAA moves quickly with respect to Memphis, but can't seem to get closure on the Reggie Bush matter. Why, you may ask? IMHO because College Football is a "Cash Cow" and SUC is the fatted heifer which has recently dominated the pasture. (Including its Song Girls, but they can keep that "honor.")
Is it Saturday at 5 yet? Can't wait to see some of the new players up close.
This plays into one of my favorite themes, 'Sports Win-Lose Illusion.'
So many pivotal games in history have come down to a play or two being the difference between being a champion and being a "loser." This represents overly exalted credit and overly unfair, unrealistic criticism.
Examples are ucla forfeits a football national championship in 1967 because its All-American field goal kicker can't buy one that day; and a possible 1998 national football championship slips through bruin fingers in the final minutes.
In these instances there should be two winners and no losers. But that higher state of mind will have to wait for another day in the faraway future.
Too esoteric for me, BE REAL.
I want to know what will happen to Calipari. God I hate that guy...
UCLA will not be credited with a win in this case, just as we weren't in '97 when we lost to Minnesota, and like Arizona wasn't credited with a win in softball in 1995 in the Harding embarrassment.
UCLA will not be credited with a win in this case, just as we weren't in '97 when we lost to Minnesota, and like Arizona wasn't credited with a win in softball in 1995 in the Harding embarrassment.
UCLA will not be credited with a win in this case, just as we weren't in '97 when we lost to Minnesota, and like Arizona wasn't credited with a win in softball in 1995 in the Harding embarrassment.
UCLA will not be credited with a win, just as we were not in '97 after losing to Minnesota, and as Arizona softball was not after the UCLA- Harding fiasco in '95. The only case in which we were credited with a win in a similar situation was the Bozeman-Cal dust up in '95.
Whoops, sorry for the multiple postings; don't know what happened...
At least you take a consistent position, Coronado!
bruinbiochem06...i actually met CALIPARI while i was a concierge at a hotel in Century City...this was after the year we beat MEMPHIS to get into the final four...he was a very nice and friendly man..i kidded about him not being able to get into the Final Four because of UCLA, and he was very honest in saying UCLA deserved to win that game...
The only reason we lost to Memphis was because they made their free throws by some miracle. The only reason they lost to Kansas was because they missed them.
UCLA could have won if CBH would have put Westbrook on Rose!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think it appropriate for Memphis to be stripped of its victories for 2008. Whether UCLA would have won? Would-a, Could-a, Should-a. (Play on words...I know its "of") Bottom line -- Memphis was a better team than UCLA in 2008. They were long, athletic and very quick.
UB,
It is not "of", it is "'ve", as in "have"...short memories lack the remembrance that UCLA should have lost to Texas A & M at the pond in the round of 32.
so putting Westbrook on Rose becomes a moot point...However, I won my bracketology experiment that year...Go Jayhawks!
Westbrook on Rose and M'bah a Moute on CDR would have made for a much different game. Of course, if Rose isn't there, then neither is Memphis.
Cheatthesystem: You missed the sarcasm, I guess.
"he was a very nice and friendly man"
Yeah, I bet he was. Who else here thinks Calamari was trying to "recruit" bruincheerleader? (assuming I'm not reading too much into the moniker).
sorry...sarcasm sometimes fails to translate/be seen on message boards. My fault.