I never felt any loyalty to Arizona, ASU, Colorado, or Utah. And as you mention Arizona has a high annoyance factor. Dunno about the ACC schools, at least a few of them have laudable academics. I'll probably root more for local schools regardless of conference.

I like the Jesuits so I will root for the Zags…even though the local fans of that team that I know are tw@ts.

"Purdue vs. Gonzaga is a matchup of the two teams with the most tournament wins without a title (46). Illinois is right behind them (44).

Arizona can become the West Coast's first national champion since… Arizona in 1997. Purdue and Illinois can become the Big Ten's first champion since Michigan State in 2000.

UConn vs. San Diego State is a rematch of last year's title game, and Marquette vs. NC State is a rematch of the 1974 title game, which took place 50 years ago this week.

Clemson, Tennessee, Alabama and Creighton are the only Sweet 16 teams that have never made the Final Four.

Duke hasn't beaten a higher seed since 1994 (0-5 in that time), and Gonzaga is 0-9 all-time against No. 1 seeds. Can they pull off upsets against top-seeded Houston and Purdue?

Illinois vs. Iowa State is a matchup between KenPom's No. 1 offense (Illinois) and No. 1 defense (Iowa State).

UNC is making its 31st Sweet 16 appearance since the tourney expanded to 32 teams in 1975, the most of any school. Duke is second with 28.

Marquette, Gonzaga and Creighton are the only Sweet 16 schools without football, though all three had successful programs in the early 20th century.

NC State's surprise run marks the 15th straight tournament that a "Power Six" team seeded 8th or worse has reached the Sweet 16.

San Diego State has more wins in the past two tournaments (seven) than all previous tournaments combined (six).

Plus, my personal favorite: 95% of national champions over the last 21 years have met two criteria: 21st or better in adjusted offensive efficiency and 37th or better in adjusted defensive efficiency. Eight teams met both criteria this year (Arizona, Auburn, Creighton, Duke, Houston, Marquette, Purdue, UConn) and seven made the Sweet 16 (everyone but Auburn)."
YahooSportsAM

bearister said:

---

Arizona can become the West Coast's first national champion since… Arizona in 1997. Purdue and Illinois can become the Big Ten's first champion since Michigan State in 2000.

---

Though Arizona is not on the coast.

sycasey said:

---

bearister said:

---

Arizona can become the West Coast's first national champion since… Arizona in 1997. Purdue and Illinois can become the Big Ten's first champion since Michigan State in 2000.

---

Though Arizona is not on the coast.

---

Though by that criterion Vermont wouldn't be the East Coast.

Watching Clemson-Arizona… should I root for the team that helped bring about the end of our old conference, or the team trying to bring about the end of our new conference?

Root for the one that you think has the better loving mascot (or cheerleaders).

BearSD said:

---

Watching Clemson-Arizona… should I root for the team that helped bring about the end of our old conference, or the team trying to bring about the end of our new conference?

---

Would have rooted for Washington State, Arizona is just annoying.

ACC now 9-1 in the tourney. Clemson was 11-9 in the ACC.

ACC POWER

<spoilers>
.
.
.
.
arizona lost by 5
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/game/_/gameId/401638631/clemson-arizona

Cal88 said:

---

BearSD said:

---

Watching Clemson-Arizona… should I root for the team that helped bring about the end of our old conference, or the team trying to bring about the end of our new conference?

---

Would have rooted for Washington State, Arizona is just annoying.

ACC now 9-1 in the tourney.

---

Yeah, Arizona basketball fans are as awful as USC football fans.

As for WSU/OSU, I'm sympathetic about their homelessness, but between their ridiculous internet fans and the sportswriters who go overboard for them, I've had enough of the Pac-2 teams.

How much is Arizona really to blame for breaking up the Pac-12? I'd put them well behind USC, UCLA, Colorado, Oregon, and Washington.

I'm not sure I'd include Colorado. They didn't take away much football value.

Arizona ruined my bracket. I thought they were good. I guess it was just we, who weren't that good.

stu said:

---

I'm not sure I'd include Colorado. They didn't take away much football value.

---

They were the third school to jump ship.

sycasey said:

---

stu said:

---

I'm not sure I'd include Colorado. They didn't take away much football value.

---

They were the third school to jump ship.

---

I didn't process that with the shock of six schools leaving in one day.

FWIW I wasn't that happy with adding any schools to the Pac-8 and it seems natural for them to play in their own region. But I was furious with UCLA and USC, almost as much with Washington and Oregon. If the latter two had stayed the Pac would still be viable.

UCONN looks like a World Beater.

That is all.

calumnus said:

---

stu said:

---

sycasey said:

---

stu said:

---

---

---

---

ESPN and Fox gave the B-12 four slots for Pac-10 schools that paid more than they offered the Pac-10.

---

There are many things I don't like about ESPN, but we have to acknowledge that ESPN would have kept the Pac intact on the same financial level as the ACC and Big 12.

The Big 12 got essentially what ESPN offered the LA-less Pac. ESPN's position was that the Pac without LA was worth about as much as the ACC and Big 12, and ESPN probably would have given the Pac the same "add four more power teams if you can get them" clause that the Big 12 got. Our clown commissioner told the presidents he could get every team $50 million/year, and the presidents (whose biggest mistake was hiring the clown) didn't realize until too late that he was utterly incapable of delivering what he promised. A competent commissioner who understood the landscape and was capable of leading and persuading the membership would have done much better.

On top of that, most of the Pac schools were talking to the Big Ten or Big 12 or both and were not going to sign any Pac-X GOR, regardless of the fact that Kliavkoff's minions drafted one. So, ESPN walked.

BearSD said:

---

calumnus said:

---

stu said:

---

sycasey said:

---

stu said:

---

---

---

---

ESPN and Fox gave the B-12 four slots for Pac-10 schools that paid more than they offered the Pac-10.

---

There are many things I don't like about ESPN, but we have to acknowledge that ESPN would have kept the Pac intact on the same financial level as the ACC and Big 12.

The Big 12 got essentially what ESPN offered the LA-less Pac. ESPN's position was that the Pac without LA was worth about as much as the ACC and Big 12, and ESPN probably would have given the Pac the same "add four more power teams if you can get them" clause that the Big 12 got. Our clown commissioner told the presidents he could get every team $50 million/year, and the presidents (whose biggest mistake was hiring the clown) didn't realize until too late that he was utterly incapable of delivering what he promised. A competent commissioner who understood the landscape and was capable of leading and persuading the membership would have done much better.

On top of that, most of the Pac schools were talking to the Big Ten or Big 12 or both and were not going to sign any Pac-X GOR, regardless of the fact that Kliavkoff's minions drafted one. So, ESPN walked.

---

A deal equal to the ACC or Big-12 wasn't going to keep UW and Oregon in the fold. They had already negotiated better offers from the B1G (and Fox) in their pocket.

Edi remind me of Richard Chang in appearance

UCONN ON A 30 - 0 RUN vs #3 seed Illinois.

That is all.

Yeah, I saw it also. It was total domination and destruction by UCONN

I don't see either Alabama or Clemson beating UCONN.

sonofabear51 said:

---

Yeah, I saw it also. It was total domination and destruction by UCONN

I don't see either Alabama or Clemson beating UCONN.

---

3 for 17 from Three and they still won by 25 !!!

Not just Domination.
Decimation!

not sure I've ever seen a 30 point run, and certainly not in the Sweet Sixteen

bearister said:

---

---

"Moderators…."

UConn-Purdue will be the championship game, an old-school big man clash of Edey vs. Clingan, can't wait!

At the NC State-Duke game one of the center line banners next to the NCAA logo reads: "Celebrating Student-Athletes"
Eye-roll emoji here
Even for the NCAA this level of hypocrisy seems beyond the pale. I know NIL wasn't their fault, blame the courts. But they fumbled the ball out of bounds on controlling it and preserving the college game in some form that isn't professional or even semi-pro sports.
The NCAA guys have done nothing to celebrate student athletes in the major sports. Now all we have to look forward to every off-season is a complete roster shuffle based only on the highest bidders. Even worse, we have to listen to the boosters tell us here in the forums that to be a real Cal fan you should stuff the NIL fund with fat donations. No thanks, I want Cal players who also want to be Cal students.
I'm not saying I have a solution, but I know that there's a better system than paying student athletes big money to play.

sonofabear51 said:

---

Yeah, I saw it also. It was total domination and destruction by UCONN

I don't see either Alabama or Clemson beating UCONN.

---

When Maryland left for the Big Ten, the ACC added Louisville. They should have chosen UConn instead.

BearSD said:

---

sonofabear51 said:

---

Yeah, I saw it also. It was total domination and destruction by UCONN

I don't see either Alabama or Clemson beating UCONN.

---

When Maryland left for the Big Ten, the ACC added Louisville. They should have chosen UConn instead.

---

Would have been a natural with Syracuse and Boston College. Before Calfordsmu were added Louisville was an outlier. Why didn't they add UConn?

calumnus said:

---

BearSD said:

---

sonofabear51 said:

---

Yeah, I saw it also. It was total domination and destruction by UCONN

I don't see either Alabama or Clemson beating UCONN.

---

When Maryland left for the Big Ten, the ACC added Louisville. They should have chosen UConn instead.

---

Would have been a natural with Syracuse and Boston College. Before Calfordsmu were added Louisville was an outlier. Why didn't they add UConn?

---

Football.

Just took a look at the UConn roster, only 4 seniors and grads. Dynasty? I have a feeling they won't have a problem with losing their entire roster to the portal or the NBA.