When was the last time neither UCLA nor Arizona made the NCAA Tournament? In a nutshell, there's the explanation for the decline of the conference. Simultaneous bad years by our two flagship basketball schools (if it's possible for a fleet to have two flagships, that is... you get the idea).

When was the last time none of the four California Pac-12 teams made the NCAAs?

Go Bears!

When was the last time the PAC12 was considered a major conference?

The conference had too many young teams in rebuilding mode. Teams improved over the course of the season, but it was too late.

The non-conference record was terrible, so no matter how things went in the conference season, the average NET scores were going to be bad. We were all just fighting over scraps.

Luckily we're in a power conference, so the committee found excuses to include 3 Pac-12 teams. All 12 schools will get paid handsomely over the next 6 years for each game the 3 teams play. (Guess we'll have to root for them so we can afford a new coach, right?)

Washington wouldn't have gotten in with their lack of quality wins and #45 NET if they were in the WAC.
ASU was even worse at #63 NET, but they beat Kansas and Mississippi State, at least.

Furman didn't get in with a #41 NET ranking.

R90 said:

---

The conference had too many young teams in rebuilding mode. Teams improved over the course of the season, but it was too late.

The non-conference record was terrible, so no matter how things went in the conference season, the average NET scores were going to be bad. We were all just fighting over scraps.

Luckily we're in a power conference, so the committee found excuses to include 3 Pac-12 teams. All 12 schools will get paid handsomely over the next 6 years for each game the 3 teams play. (Guess we'll have to root for them so we can afford a new coach, right?)

Washington wouldn't have gotten in with their lack of quality wins and #45 NET if they were in the WAC.
ASU was even worse at #63 NET, but they beat Kansas and Mississippi State, at least.

Furman didn't get in with a #41 NET ranking.

---

This is the fallacy with pointing out Cal's youth in going 3-15 in conference. Yes we were young, but so was the competition. Yes we will get better, but so will the competition.

Big C said:

---

When was the last time neither UCLA nor Arizona made the NCAA Tournament? In a nutshell, there's the explanation for the decline of the conference. Simultaneous bad years by our two flagship basketball schools (if it's possible for a fleet to have two flagships, that is... you get the idea).

---

Google is your friend.

mbBear said:

---

Big C said:

---

When was the last time neither UCLA nor Arizona made the NCAA Tournament? In a nutshell, there's the explanation for the decline of the conference. Simultaneous bad years by our two flagship basketball schools (if it's possible for a fleet to have two flagships, that is... you get the idea).

---

Google is your friend.

---

Your friend that would shtup your wife if given the chance.

Not all will get better; some will have talent leave. However, I doubt that any other team comes close to the improvement trajectory of the bears over the last 10 games. The Bears' improvement rate will slow as they get better, but they will improve faster for a while.

mbBear said:

---

Big C said:

---

When was the last time neither UCLA nor Arizona made the NCAA Tournament? In a nutshell, there's the explanation for the decline of the conference. Simultaneous bad years by our two flagship basketball schools (if it's possible for a fleet to have two flagships, that is... you get the idea).

---

Google is your friend.

---

Elizabeth Warren is my friend, actually.

Thanks for shaming me into doing my homework. It wasn't hard, but harder than one entry into google. Looks like 2012 and 2010 before that. I would've thought it'd be longer.

I appreciate questions like this because they often branch into interesting debates. Yes, it can be googled. But the purpose of the board is discussion. This question can start that discussion.

https://lmgtfy.com/

calumnus said:

---

R90 said:

---

The conference had too many young teams in rebuilding mode. Teams improved over the course of the season, but it was too late.

The non-conference record was terrible, so no matter how things went in the conference season, the average NET scores were going to be bad. We were all just fighting over scraps.

---

This is the fallacy with pointing out Cal's youth in going 3-15 in conference. Yes we were young, but so was the competition. Yes we will get better, but so will the competition.

---

Yours is the fallacy of posting the thought that makes you feel smart, rather than doing research to find objective truth.

Top 7 mpg.
Was: 4 Sr. 0. Jr. 3 So. 0 Fr.
WSU: 2 Sr. 3 Jr. 1 So. 1 Fr.
USC: 2 Sr. 3 Jr. 0 So. 2 Fr.
OSU: 2 Sr. 2 Jr. 3 So. 0 Fr.
Zona: 2 Sr. 2 Jr. 2 So. 1 Fr.
Duck: 2 Sr. 1 Jr. 1 So. 3 Fr.
Utah: 2 Sr. 1. Jr. 1 So. 3 Fr.
ASU: 1 Sr. 2 Jr. 2 So. 2 Fr.
Furd: 1 Sr. 1 Jr. 3 So. 2 Fr.
Buffs: 0 Sr. 3 Jr. 3 So. 1 Fr.
Cal: 0 Sr. 1 Jr. 3 So. 3 Fr.
ucla: 0 Sr. 1 Jr. 2 So. 4 Fr.

Washington mostly played 4 seniors and no freshmen. They raced out to a 10-0 start in conference, in dominant fashion, but then the younger teams started catching up to them, and they limped home with narrow victories and humbling losses.

UCLA and Cal are likely to show the most improvement next year, losing no seniors and expecting significant improvement from freshmen.

Washington loses the most. WSU, USC and OSU should be about the same. The rest should make good leaps forward, just based on the experience factor.

Really hard to know until we see who comes out early/transfers. Good news is that I think all the bears are back. Bad news? All these 3 conference wins bears are back. We are in desperate need of help in the front court.

Big C said:

---

mbBear said:

---

Big C said:

---

When was the last time neither UCLA nor Arizona made the NCAA Tournament? In a nutshell, there's the explanation for the decline of the conference. Simultaneous bad years by our two flagship basketball schools (if it's possible for a fleet to have two flagships, that is... you get the idea).

---

Google is your friend.

---

Elizabeth Warren is my friend, actually.

Thanks for shaming me into doing my homework. It wasn't hard, but harder than one entry into google. Looks like 2012 and 2010 before that. I would've thought it'd be longer.

---

Good stat. Twice in a decade that has seen the conference fall off in hoop, except for a glimmer here and there...

Big C said:

---

mbBear said:

---

Big C said:

---

When was the last time neither UCLA nor Arizona made the NCAA Tournament? In a nutshell, there's the explanation for the decline of the conference. Simultaneous bad years by our two flagship basketball schools (if it's possible for a fleet to have two flagships, that is... you get the idea).

---

Google is your friend.

---

Elizabeth Warren is my friend, actually.

Thanks for shaming me into doing my homework. It wasn't hard, but harder than one entry into google. Looks like 2012 and 2010 before that. I would've thought it'd be longer.

---

What is even more surprising to me is we only have to go back to 2010 to find a year when neither UCLA nor Arizona played in ANY post-season tourney. No NIT for UCLA or Arizona in 2010. I would have guessed we'd need to go back to the 80's in order to find a year when neither was in any post-season tourney, but I would have been wrong.

Yes, that's exactly what I was thinking would be the case when I started this thread. UCLA used to be a superpower, then declined a bit, then had a Renaissance for a few years, but still usually makes the Tournament. After the UCLA Era, Arizona was almost always strong under Lute... and has been again with Miller (up to now, heh heh).

You'd think it'd be very rare to have a season where neither made the Tournament.

Fucla. Bear down. Way down. Arrogant bstards