Six teams made the NCAA Tournament but what about those other three that made postseason Sunday. Utah and Cal made the NIT but Oregon State made the CBI, which is even below the NIT. And the Beavers made it for the fourth time! Oregon State won the CBI title in 2009.
But who am I making fun of? USC should be so lucky to make the CBI.
wolfman, one year ago (April ’13) you asked “who make the better hire? Southern Cal or UCLA???
care to weigh in NOW wolfman???
Enfield got NOTHING out of this team!!!
did anyone besides the Cadre expect UCLA to beat AZ in the PAC12 Tourney???
Is a conference tournament title now the ultimate goal in Bruin basketball?
a trOXan has the nerve to even BRING UP basketball??
HAWR-HAWR!!!
we don’t hang Pac12 Champeenship banners, Jezro….
when you have 11 Nattys, you don’t have to.
Talk about missing the point!
Now is your chance to step up and guarantee a NC.
Anything less would mean the season is a failure, no?
True, anything less than a national championship for us in football means the season is a failure.
i wont be trapped into answering your leading questions, suffice it to say i have the Bruins as the CHAMPEENS in my $$$Billion Dollar Bracket$$$
i base this on the fact the odds of a perfect bracket are something like one in a trillion, but the odds on Bruins winning are more like 25-1….as Napoleon Dynamite said: “listen to your heart, Pedro, that’s what i do”…
Winning the Pac 12 Tournament is now the only way to win the Pac 12 Conf. BB Championship. Winning the regular season conf. is strictly a tournament seeding opportunity – the higher a teams’ conf. finish, nets a first day game bye and better bracket seeding.
Not even considering winning it all, are you?
JG, UCLA can win the NCAA BB NC under the right circumstances, just like 10 – 12 other teams. It’s impossible for SUCC to win the 2014 BB NC, because SUCC wasn’t even good enough for a 16 seeded NCAA invitation.
Not even considering UCLA at all. He just trolls USC. My friends who are real UCLA fans are too busy talking the tournament to spend their time on the site of a team who didn’t make it.
Seinfeld’s first year as coach at SC ended like the Seinfeld episode with the mail truck.
I was thinking it was more like “The Summer of George.” It was so bad, unless there is serious improvement next year (better be knocking the door for 20 wins and a tourney bid) then USC needs to shop for another coach. I was ready to give him 3-4 years to turnaround O’Neill’s nightmare. But that was truly pathetic. My patience is damned thin now.
USC W’s Basketball got a proven winner in their new coach; USC Men’s – they got a guy who won 2 games in the NCAA tourney last year, and that was enough to get hired at USC and get a 600% pay raise. Geezuz.
Plus, the football team got Seven-Win Sarkiffen, who also got a huge pay raise!
Better coaches in Seinfeld and Sarkiffian….better academic institution, and better Location (South Central). With everything “BETTER” Why the Long Face, TRAVELER? Basketball continues with that RICH TRADITION of finishing LAST. Football is on it’s FOURTH or FIFTH Coach (after 4-5 Guys approached, were not interested) in the last Year and projected to finish somewhere in the middle of the pack. Forbes, U.S. News and every other reputable publication that ranks the Worlds Great Universities…continue to LEAVE YOU GUY’S OUT of the TOP 50, though the Satellite Campus over at Trade Tech has great upside (No Wino’s, hence, no ODOR!). Now that the Baseball team is showing what its really made of (LONG Losing streaks)…I smell a TRIFECTA!
What’s with U Sleazy Condoms????? Baseball had Kreuter (the CREEP), Basketball had Floyd and O’Neil (both CREEPS), and who could forget the BIGGEST CREEP (not you J.S…..but you are close) of them all….Goat Boy.
Funny how all the RAH RAH’s have gone away…..We’ll be here waiting when you finally put together a winning program (Water Polo!)
fit Un LIMBO U!
I keep a-ramblin’ baby/ Ah, ah, yeah
I keep a-ramblin’, baby/I keep, keep, keep, keep, keep
Babe, babe, babe, babe/
I keep a-ramblin’, baby, baby, baby, baby, baby, baby, baby
My, my babe
Have an opinion, but don’t confuse opinions with factual statements. Seriously, I hope you’re not a UCLA grad–do they let you guys just make stuff up over there? The US News (the only one anyone really cares about) ranks USC and UCLA tied at #23. You just lie and think no one will catch it?
The “Forbes” ranking you reference is not a forbes ranking, a story about a London Magazine ranking appeared in Forbes magazine.
If you want to know which school has the “better” students, just look at the SAT scores and ACT scores. ACT middle 50%: USC (29-33); UCLA (25-31). SAT middle 50%: USC (1910-2220); UCLA (1750-2150). So yep, the BETTER students choose USC. Gee, I wonder why?
Football and Basketball have certainly been hurt by the sanctions, but they’ll be back. Have some patience.
SUCC is still the 67th most reputable Univ. in the world for 2014 as delineated by London Magazine in a recent Forbes Magazine article. B-rad, the majority of SUCC’s FB recruits could not be admitted to UCLA under its academic protocols. SUCC is notoriously defiencent If I was a 1.38 GPA HS student whose Tata was a major contributor to SUCC’s endowment, I’m admitted to SUCC.
Funny how you use stats. 67th in the world sounds pretty un impressive…until you point out that the rankings only bother listing the top 400 universities. There are nearly 9000 universities worldwide and USC is #67. That’s a point to Troll on?
Now before you try to make this a USC v UCLA ranking, you have never cited UCLA’s ranking. It has always been a point you use to try to troll USC–that 67th is somehow something about which to be embarrassed. As a point of reference, USC’s fellow institutions ranked near them are Leiden University in the Netherlands, Ecole Polytechnique in France, the University of Sydney, and The University of Basel in Switzerland. I don’t imagine you know anything about those fabulous international institutions. Dare I say it is because you saw a number and thought “well, I can troll that” without any understanding of the ranking.
To continue–UCLA is a great school.when the rankings include the sheer number of programs, UCLA outperforms USC. They just do more than USC. It’s a huge school with massive resources. But when the rankings control for size, USC holds up extremely well (this is why the US News rankings shows USC doing better–,they are controlled for size. That is, they consider what each school does and if they do it well,rather than simply how much they do).
You prove one of my favorite sayings–statistics don’t lie. People just lie using them. Or in your case, they troll without understanding what the statistics actually measure.
I’d love to reply, but I’m unsure what is appropriate to say in my reply.
Trojan family, I made no other comment about SUCC: the 67th most reputable Univ. in the world in 2014 , other than the fact that is where SUCC slotted in London Magazine’s reputable Univ. list. I am not nor have I ever been an employee of London Magazine. The janitor’s there have to have earned a third at Oxbridge.
Gotta love the facts vs opinions line….Fact is….your Basketball Team stinks and it had nothing to do with sanctions…..As a matter of “fact”…IT STINKS ALMOST EVERY YEAR…..Look it up, research boy. “They’ll be back” all right….back at the bottom of the conference.
fit Un!
You’re hilarious. You flat out lie about the US News Ranking, but no explanation. I show you factual information (AT USC, “Research boy” is not unflattering), but rather than address it, you ignore it. So what you felt compelled to respond to was the line about the basketball team? LOL, ok, you got me, it was my opinion that the rumors of impropriety, Tim Floyd leaving, and the self imposed sanctions may have hurt recruiting and therefore led them to play less well than they otherwise would have. You might recall that some of the USC commits chose to either go pro in Europe or go to Arizona instead of USC because of the mess. Arizona pretty well with those USC commits, no? Just an opinion.
Wolf, Why are you making fun of anyone? This is why so many are disgusted that you are our beat reporter.
B-rad I tried to put up or shut up but I seemed to have crossed the bad boy line.
Try again with logic.
SUCC logic: Arnie S. has been dubbed a SUCC Professor for 20 million $$$. Explain in your own pedantic way the logic of that transaction.
A former Governor with an academic position? Wow what university does THAT? He doesn’t teach a class. He sponsors a speakers list and fundraiser. This makes USC like all top institutions. Are MIT or Harvard somehow discredited because they’ve employed Michael Dukakis? Or UCLA for employing Al Gore? A former governor has a lot to teach public policy students. Having former chief executives of a state is a sign of strength, not weakness.
You were on firmer ground when you had no idea what to say…..
So it’s ok if SUCC decides to make a Drug Cartel leader a professor of pharmacology/Business for a small 20million $$$ gratuity.
The analogy is foolish. One is a former Governor. To compare him to a leader of a drug cartel just because you didn’t care for his politics is more a reflection on you than him or on USC.
Arnie was a failure as Governor and a failure as a husband, and lastly he is untrustworthy and untruthful. You know TF, It’s truly amazing, but I can’t find one person who voted for the Terminator.
I didn’t vote for arnold and he was a huge disappointment as governor (faux conservative). But, he’s no worse than Professor Al Gore (did he have a PhD?). I guess if you invent the internet, you get to be a professor. All things being equal, I’d rather not have the terminator associated with USC, but yes, he is the former Governor of the largest state, so he does bring a close up view of the political process and yes he brought some cash to the University. If the failed President wants a job at USC in 2016, we’ll take him too. We’ll probably even lower the price tag for a former president.
Succ, be sure to pay attention. As I stated in the earlier post above. My initial information came from collegeprofiles.com as they provide information on most colleges, but I went a step further to get the information from UCLA and USC directly and the collegeprofiles.com numbers are consistent with the University numbers. Seriously, this isn’t private information; you can get this information quite easily. Try it! You don’t have to trust me. It’s perfectly verifiable. There’s nothing dubious about the SAT score information. It”s simple: USC enrollees have higher SAT scores than UCLA enrollees. The better students choose USC. Sorry to be so “pedantic”. “Methinks” you want to hide your head in the sand and pretend it’s not true. If you don’t believe the information directly from UCLA, what information will you believe? I’m a “bean counter” because I don’t mind data? LOL, boy you guys really are afraid of numbers–no wonder those SAT scores aren’t too shiny.