PonyFans.com

Is that correct in the 16?

Yes

'Dogs by a bunch..

I expect Gonzaga to kill them. Gonzaga has the size to neutralize their interior game and they have much better shooters than we had.

Pony_Law wrote:I expect Gonzaga to kill them. Gonzaga has the size to neutralize their interior game and they have much better shooters than we had.

You do know that they've already played each other once this year, and UCLA gave Gonzaga a closer game than we did? UCLA is a better team now than they were in December, I'm not going to make a prediction because funny things can happen in the tourney, but there is no reason to assume that Gonzaga kills them.

Zags will drop these fools HARD

I hope UCLA ends up in the final 4. Makes us look better

Zags will do terrible, terrible things to the Bruins.

zags by 15.

Balatro Diabolus Ex wrote:

Pony_Law wrote:I expect Gonzaga to kill them. Gonzaga has the size to neutralize their interior game and they have much better shooters than we had.

You do know that they've already played each other once this year, and UCLA gave Gonzaga a closer game than we did? UCLA is a better team now than they were in December, I'm not going to make a prediction because funny things can happen in the tourney, but there is no reason to assume that Gonzaga kills them.

Fact is Gonzaga beat us by 16 in Spokane and they beat UCLA by 13 in Pauley. Our game was played w/o MK and the comment on this board IIRC, and which I agreed with, was that Nic was not effective against the taller Bulldogs he was going against. I did not see the Gonzaga - UCLA game and can't comment, but comparative scores make me think the Bruins were not very competitive either. Three points difference in the margin of the final score doesn't seem much closer.

As I write this UCLA is an 8.5 point dog although they have covered the spread more often in the last ten games. I don't need to say that the refs helped on on one of them.

I expect Gonzaga to advance.

No Quarter wrote:Fact is Gonzaga beat us by 16 in Spokane and they beat UCLA by 13 in Pauley. Our game was played w/o MK and the comment on this board IIRC, and which I agreed with, was that Nic was not effective against the taller Dons he was going against.

Dons? We didn't play the U of San Fran. Do you mean Bulldogs?

Sorry. Will fix it in the second edit.

No Quarter wrote:

Balatro Diabolus Ex wrote:

Pony_Law wrote:I expect Gonzaga to kill them. Gonzaga has the size to neutralize their interior game and they have much better shooters than we had.

You do know that they've already played each other once this year, and UCLA gave Gonzaga a closer game than we did? UCLA is a better team now than they were in December, I'm not going to make a prediction because funny things can happen in the tourney, but there is no reason to assume that Gonzaga kills them.

Fact is Gonzaga beat us by 16 in Spokane and they beat UCLA by 13 in Pauley. Our game was played w/o MK and the comment on this board IIRC, and which I agreed with, was that Nic was not effective against the taller Bulldogs he was going against. I did not see the Gonzaga - UCLA game and can't comment, but comparative scores make me think the Bruins were not very competitive either. Three points difference in the margin of the final score doesn't seem much closer.

As I write this UCLA is an 8.5 point dog although they have covered the spread more often in the last ten games. I don't need to say that the refs helped on on one of them.

I expect Gonzaga to advance.

Yes, I expect Gonzaga to advance, too.

Yes, the final scores weren't that big a spread, 16 vs 13, but Gonzaga had a 25 point lead against SMU midway through the 2nd half, and then cleared their bench, allowing SMU to make the final score a little more respectable. Against UCLA they lead by 11 at half time, but UCLA cut it to 6 early in the 2nd, and stayed around single digits until the last 3 minutes (74-64, with 2:52 to play). Gonzaga stuck with their usual 8 man rotation, never cleared the bench, and the starters were still on the floor at the end. Gonzaga's last 7 points were free throws from Pangos, Bell and Wesley, they never came out. A game where you have to keep your starters in until the end is a more competitive game than one where you clear the bench with 7 minutes left to play.

Gonzaga is still the better team, and i expect they will win and advance to the Elite Eight. If you go back to the beginning of the season, you might find I said the same thing in November. The point I was trying to make was to all the people saying UCLA would get smashed, they already played Gonzaga and gave them a more competitive game than SMU did. I wasn't trying to get into a fight over this, but whether we like it or not, that's what happened. UCLA was a very young and inexperienced team at the start of the year, they had lost 4 starters from last years Sweet Sixteen team, 3 of them early entrants to the draft. Their 8 man rotation has 6 freshman and sophomores. When they played Gonzaga the first time the starters barely knew each other. As I pointed out last week, that young UCLA team appeared to be playing much better to finish the season, in their last game before the tourney they played Arizona (the team that beat Gonzaga) all the way down to the wire. So, this is a better UCLA team than the one that gave Gonzaga a respectable game in Mid-December. The tournament can be unpredictable, as lots of teams have already seen, but I wont be surprised if UCLA gives Gonzaga a close race.

Except ucla got gonzaga at home. I have a feeling thwt if we played gonzaga at full strength at moody the result might have been different or at least the game would have been much closer. I expect a Houston crowd to be pro gonzaga.

Pony_Law wrote:Except ucla got gonzaga at home. I have a feeling thwt if we played gonzaga at full strength at moody the result might have been different or at least the game would have been much closer. I expect a Houston crowd to be pro gonzaga.

Of course it would. If we did this and if we did that, things would have turned out differently. But we didn't do this or that. I was talking about what UCLA did, and to a lesser degree, what we did. Gonzaga, SMU and UCLA were all good home teams, move the game somewhere else, anywhere else, and the score changes at least a little. But we don't know what that Else would actually be, so all I can go with is what we and they (multiple theys) actually did. Gonzaga blew us out of their gym, UCLA managed to hang around and kept it close. Why is it so hard to believe, so wrong to suggest that UCLA could do again what they've already done?

Why exactly is the Houston crowd pro-Gonzaga? I expect both teams travel well, and wouldn't UCLA be a little bit closer? Some casual fans root for the underdog, that happens alot in the tournament, neutral crowds rooting for the underdog. What about the Houston crowd would make them pro-Gonzaga, am I missing something there?