# GOW: #8 Texas vs. #1 UCLA



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

vs.








8:00pm, Dec 2​
Anyone know what channel this will be on?


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

The UCLA website is listing it as a FSN game, which usually means its a regional thing. Isnt listed here in Seattle, at least as of yet. My choice would be UCLA all the way in this one.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

Hmm... I generally get Pac 10 Sunday night hoops, but I think I saw that there was an ACC Sunday Night hoops game that night. Very unfortunate.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

Hard to pick against UCLA when they're playing at home. But if anyone can beat them it's a red hot Texas team against UCLA minus Collison.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

UCLA gets my vote


----------



## kansasalumn (Jun 9, 2002)

Big 12/Pac 10 Hard-court Series has to be split between ESPN and FSN as Big 12 is ESPN and Pac 10 is FSN.


All home Pac 10 games on FSN and all home big 12 games on ESPN.

KU/USC is not part of the series this season. Kind of funny that KU/Arizona is part of the series and the Jayhawk Invitational which Kansas came in 1st place (it is a round robin thing)


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

Damn, I'm the only person who voted for Texas so far.
I can't wait for this game. We have exceeded what I expected this season and a W here would be huge early season win.


----------



## DaBruins (Jul 30, 2003)

I voted for Texas as well. Sure we're home, but we started off that MSU game terribly without Collison. He'll still be out for this game at the very least, as will Roll and Keefe. Aboya just broke a bone and will be playing with a facemask on, not sure how that will effect him. I'm gonna vote for Texas with all our injuries but it should be a good matchup. Hopefully Love can carry us to victory again against a not so great frontcourt.


----------



## DaBruins (Jul 30, 2003)

Ohh and the game should be televised nationally on FSN.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

One thing that I'm interested in seeing is the Abrams-Shipp mnatchup. I'm assuming they'll be matched up, correct? Abrams was huge in that win over Tennessee. Everyone understands that even though he hasn't been playing the greatest of competition, he's putting up All-Conference, maybe even All-American type numbers, right? I don't think he has the same luck against Shipp and UCLA.


----------



## DaBruins (Jul 30, 2003)

Can I change my vote now that Collison is back and Aboya played about the same with his broken eye?


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

I like UCLA in this one as well. With Collison back it changes the whole dynamic of that team. Now Love's great outlet passing abilities are going to be able to be utilized.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

done, dabruins


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

now my vote is lonely again


----------



## Fac1 (Jun 13, 2007)

Voted for UCLA, now that Collison is back, but this will be a damn good game.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

My prediction: 71-68 UCLA


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

Noooo!!!! I have to listen to Marques Johnson again?!?! These two goofs just did the Kansas-USC game this afternoon.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

Texas is looking a lot better than i expected at this point. You'd think UCLA has never seen a zone


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

Upset brewing!


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Didnt know Texas was this good, on the other hand UCLA should never have been number 1 over UNC


----------



## TiMVP2 (Jun 19, 2003)

WHAT ARE YOU SAYIN YOU DIDNT KNOW WE WERE THIS GOOD

We werent just all about Durant, we got augistin and abrahms and countless others, we are seriously...good.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

HB said:


> Didnt know Texas was this good, on the other hand UCLA should never have been number 1 over UNC


WHAT

please tell me your joking


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Wow, that was a GREAT pass by Kevin Love.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

Nimreitz said:


> Wow, that was a GREAT pass by Kevin Love.


His outlet passing in inhuman.

Texas' offense is painful to watch sometimes.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

Not a bad choice for the game of the week


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

TM said:


> WHAT
> 
> please tell me your joking


No I am not. Is UCLA better than UNC?


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

absolutely. have you been watchin UNC play this season? Lawson not being healthy is huge, but UNC's not the #1 team in the nation right now. Unfortunately, the polls will say they are tomorrow.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Which is more impressive considering the Heels have played some pretty good competition. If Lawson was healthy, we would have destroyed those teams. UNC is simply the more talented team


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

"if..." "if..." 

but he ISN'T healthy therefore you're team isn't the best team in the nation right now


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Lol what are you talking about? IF would apply when the team has lost. Have the Heels lost without Lawson?

Its even weird that you used that statement especially after the Bruins just lost with their overrated point guard in the lineup lol


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

I'm not even sure UNC is the best team in the ACC with the way Duke's playing.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

coolpohle said:


> I'm not even sure UNC is the best team in the ACC with the way Duke's playing.


Well all I will say is this, when was the last time UNC played at Chapel Hill? They have been winning on the road WITHOUT their point guard. Has Duke played any teams of OSU and UK caliber


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

so how high does texas move up in the polls after this one?


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

overrated point guard? :laugh: that's confirms it. you've either lost it or you've been hanging around UNC fans too long.

UNC > Memphis??? NO

Btw, Texas is 2x-3x better than anyone the Heels have seen this season.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

rocketeer said:


> so how high does texas move up in the polls after this one?


1 spot, thanks to Washington State's loss.

1. UNC
2. Memphis
3. Kansas
4. Georgetown
5. Duke
6. Texas
7. UCLA


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

TM said:


> overrated point guard? :laugh: that's confirms it. you've either lost it or you've been hanging around UNC fans too long.
> 
> UNC > Memphis??? NO
> 
> *Btw, Texas is 2x-3x better than anyone the Heels have seen this season.*


:lol: Thats why so many people had Texas so high in their polls right. Was Texas even rated higher than UK in any of the media polls. 

And yes Collison is overrated. I really dont see anything he does exceptionally well.

Not sure about UNC being better than Memphis, that team is just as talented if not more talented. Unfortunately as usual they will falter when it really matters.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

HB said:


> :lol: Thats why so many people had Texas so high in their polls right. Was Texas even rated higher than UK in any of the media polls.


Like #9? Or in the top 8 in both the AP and Coaches? Besides, what the heck does that have to do with how they're playing right now? Be honest. Texas isn't 2x better than OSU, UK, and BYU?



HB said:


> And yes Collison is overrated. I really dont see anything he does exceptionally well.


Be honest (again). Have you watched more than 3 UCLA games in the last 12 months.

Someone has kidnapped the real HB. Whoever hijacked your computer, HB, is talking crazy talk.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

TM said:


> Like #9? Or in the top 7 in both the AP and Coaches? Besides, what the heck does that have to do with how they're playing right now?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Regarding the first post, am I surprised with the way Texas is playing? YES. Do I think they are that much better than OSU and UK? Heck no. It might just be that UCLA was never that good to begin with. 

In the last 12 months I have watched quite a few UCLA games actually, they are one of FSN's favorite teams. Everytime I hear people say Collison is a lottery pick, I just wonder if they know anything about the NBA


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

HB said:


> Regarding the first post, am I surprised with the way Texas is playing? YES. Do I think they are that much better than OSU and UK? Heck no. It might just be that UCLA was never that good to begin with.


WHAT?!?!?! Ok, we'll agree to disagree on that one. I'd like to hear someone, anyone, else chime in on that one.

And no, UNC isn't the best team in teh nation right now cause their All-American PG is watching, not playing.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

So who is better than UNC


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

Right now? Memphis. Followed by UNC.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Well thats fair. I can live with that


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

HB said:


> :lol: Thats why so many people had Texas so high in their polls right. Was Texas even rated higher than UK in any of the media polls.


texas started the polls at the 15-16 range. now they've moved up. was kentucky higher than that?


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

If there's an upset tomorrow night, I'll most definitely have the Heels back on top though.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

rocketeer said:


> texas started the polls at the 15-16 range. now they've moved up. was kentucky higher than that?


I think they were around that point too


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

TM said:


> 1 spot, thanks to Washington State's loss.
> 
> 1. UNC
> 2. Memphis
> ...


just one spot? you don't think they'd jump anyone else after beating tennessee and now ucla? does anyone else in the country have two wins as good as the ones texas has?


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Set your Kentucky homerism aside, the Wildcats are a pretty mediocre team this year. Ohio State isn't very good either.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Lol I despise the Wildcats, and with a passion too. Even TM can attest to that


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Why did I think you were a UK fan? Weird.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

HB? A cat? :lol:

I just realzied I had UNC ranked above Memphis, therefore UNC becomes my new #1. :|

Texas has *1* good win. Everyone in the country (including me!) overestimated Tennessee. Tonight's win was nice, but I want to see Texas play UCLA again in 2 weeks. You're gonna have them jump Duke after they just beat Davidson and Wisconsin?


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

TM said:


> HB? A cat? :lol:
> 
> I just realzied I had UNC ranked above Memphis, therefore UNC becomes my new #1. :|
> 
> Texas has *1* good win. Everyone in the country (including me!) overestimated Tennessee. Tonight's win was nice, but I want to see Texas play UCLA again in 2 weeks. You're gonna have them jump Duke after they just beat Davidson and Wisconsin?


who is better tennessee or davidson? ucla or wisconsin. so yeah i'd say to go ahead and rank texas ahead of duke. they can always drop later when they lose or duke wins some more games against good teams, but for now why not have texas ahead?


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

Is Illinois better than Texas Southern? Is Marquette better than UC Davis? Is Princeton better than Ark Monticello? Both of them beat New Mexico State by 25.

Look at the entire schedule, not two games.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

TM said:


> Is Illinois better than Texas Southern? Is Marquette better than UC Davis? Is Princeton better than Ark Monticello? Both of them beat New Mexico State by 25.
> 
> Look at the entire schedule, not two games.


right. but texas's 2nd best win is still better than duke's best. and texas just beat the #1 or 2 team in the country. i'm not even saying texas will end up the better team, just that they should be ranked higher right now. they just beat ucla on the road. that deserves a jump in the rankings.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

no


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Very impressive wins, but Duke is damn good. Also, I'm sort of offended that Davidson is considered Duke's second best win and not Marquette. Plus, Duke DOMINATED Wisconsin. There were factors like nerves and a bit of luck in their outside shooting, but that was the best performance by any team to this point in the season. I'm probably going to shake up the top of my rankings a little bit, which will probably unjustly harm Georgetown, but just remember at this point none of it really matters.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

TM said:


> no


i guess we'll see.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

TM said:


> 1 spot, thanks to Washington State's loss.
> 
> 1. UNC
> 2. Memphis
> ...


Washington St. hasn't lost a game yet. They're 7-0. 

However, expect them to lose this Wednesday against my Zags at the Kennel.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> Washington St. hasn't lost a game yet. They're 7-0.
> 
> However, expect them to lose this Wednesday against my Zags at the Kennel.


a last minute win over Baylor has me less than impressed. they'll be somewhere between 8-10 in my next poll.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

HB said:


> Well all I will say is this, when was the last time UNC played at Chapel Hill? They have been winning on the road WITHOUT their point guard. Has Duke played any teams of OSU and UK caliber


Neither of those teams are even top 25 teams. In fact, a lot of people would probably argue that those teams aren't even in the top 50 right now. Duke's played a top 10 team (Marquette), and Wisconsin. Their schedule's been tougher.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

TM said:


> a last minute win over Baylor has me less than impressed. they'll be somewhere between 8-10 in my next poll.


Baylor's got a very solid team this year. They returned 4 starters and honestly, they'll probably make the big dance when it's all said and done. Remember, Washington St. was only a 1 point favorite in that game. They shouldn't be punished for how they played.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

coolpohle said:


> Neither of those teams are even top 25 teams. In fact, a lot of people would probably argue that those teams aren't even in the top 50 right now. Duke's played a top 10 team (Marquette), and Wisconsin. Their schedule's been tougher.


As much as I dont like UK, that team is pretty good and thats without Jasper and Meeks. The talent Gillespie has put together is going to surprise a lot of people come tourney time. They have length at every position and as you saw on Saturday where holding their own against UNC before things got dicey in the 2nd.

We could go through the top 25 list right now, and I bet I could come up with 5 teams that are not as talented or better than UK. As for OSU, thats a weird team to me. They have the talent, but cant seem to find the wins.

I dont know about Marquette being a top 10 team, what notable teams have they beat to guarantee such a distinction. How about Wisconsin, the only legit team they faced blew them out. I dont even think either of those teams are better than the Wildcats.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

rocketeer said:


> just one spot? you don't think they'd jump anyone else after beating tennessee and now ucla? does anyone else in the country have two wins as good as the ones texas has?


i hate quoting myself but here's what andy katz had to say on espn.com.

"I was a believer when I saw Texas beat Tennessee in New Jersey on Nov. 25. Sunday, I wasn't totally shocked that the Longhorns did it again by taking out UCLA, a team deemed more of a favorite for the Final Four than the Longhorns. Texas' win at top-ranked UCLA on Sunday, coupled with the Longhorns' win over Tennessee a week ago, may be the two best wins by any team so far."


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

HB said:


> As much as I dont like UK, that team is pretty good and thats without Jasper and Meeks. The talent Gillespie has put together is going to surprise a lot of people come tourney time. They have length at every position and as you saw on Saturday where holding their own against UNC before things got dicey in the 2nd.
> 
> We could go through the top 25 list right now, and I bet I could come up with 5 teams that are not as talented or better than UK. As for OSU, thats a weird team to me. They have the talent, but cant seem to find the wins.
> 
> I dont know about Marquette being a top 10 team, what notable teams have they beat to guarantee such a distinction. How about Wisconsin, the only legit team they faced blew them out. I dont even think either of those teams are better than the Wildcats.


Wisconsin just didn't match up well against Duke. They're going to give a lot of teams fits, though.

Marquette's taken down Oklahoma St. and UWM each by 30+. They also played Duke awfully tough in the Maui final, losing by 4. With all the upsets that have happened, I don't see why they're not a top 10 team.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

coolpohle said:


> Wisconsin just didn't match up well against Duke. They're going to give a lot of teams fits, though.
> 
> Marquette's taken down Oklahoma St. and UWM each by 30+. They also played Duke awfully tough in the Maui final, losing by 4. With all the upsets that have happened, I don't see why they're not a top 10 team.


Marquette's guard play is extremely shoddy, especially when their best player thinks he is an And 1 star. I must admit, havent seen too much of Wisconsin, all I know was they were blown out by Duke. UK held their own with the best team in the country.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

Held their own? Weren't they down 20 like most of the 2nd half?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

coolpohle said:


> Held their own? Weren't they down 20 like most of the 2nd half?


Nope that was in the 2nd half. Even the commentators said the final score was not indicative of how tough the game was in the first half.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

HB said:


> Nope that was in the 2nd half. Even the commentators said the final score was not indicative of how tough the game was in the first half.


half a game is meaningless. the full game is what matters. plenty of teams can hang around for half a game.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

True but that doesnt mean that Marquette and Wisconsin are better. Could any of those teams beat UNC


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

HB said:


> True but that doesnt mean that Marquette and Wisconsin are better. Could any of those teams beat UNC


yeah both teams probably could beat unc. they aren't better than unc, but they could beat them.

if kentucky is so good, why didn't the receive a single vote in either poll?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Loss to an unranked team and loosing two of their best players to injuries. Also they havent beaten any good teams as of yet. If they had made the NIT conference in New York they probably would have been ranked


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

TM said:


> no


texas 4th in the AP with 2 first place votes and 5th in the coaches poll. duke 6th in the AP, 7th in the coaches.

but you're right. no chance texas jumps duke in the polls.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

rocketeer said:


> texas 4th in the AP with 2 first place votes and 5th in the coaches poll. duke 6th in the AP, 7th in the coaches.
> 
> but you're right. no chance texas jumps duke in the polls.


Won't be seeing that in my poll. Tennessee still isn't better than Marquette *or* Davidson, giving them ONE impressive 2 point win. You honestly think that is the number 1 team in the nation? No need for the sarcasm either.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

coolpohle said:


> Baylor's got a very solid team this year. They returned 4 starters and honestly, they'll probably make the big dance when it's all said and done. Remember, Washington St. was only a 1 point favorite in that game. They shouldn't be punished for how they played.


A one point favorite??? Then Washington State has no business being in the Top 7. By the way, I personally don't think they have any business in there anyway.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

TM said:


> a last minute win over Baylor has me less than impressed. they'll be somewhere between 8-10 in my next poll.



On the road and yet its still not a loss.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

The point is being missed. Teams get ranked at the start of the season based on talk. The first 3-4 weeks is where I like watch a lot of basketball and establish were teams _really_ should be ranked. I don't think they should be ranked in the Top 7. Am I going about that wrong, zags? Or are you chiming in just to argue like usual?


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

TM said:


> A one point favorite??? Then Washington State has no business being in the Top 7. By the way, I personally don't think they have any business in there anyway.


How many times have you seen them play this year?


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

TM said:


> 1 spot, thanks to Washington State's loss.


My apologies. I talked about their win over Baylor then neglected to include "near-" before my "loss."


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> How many times have you seen them play this year?


Zero. Zip. Zilch. But with no real impressive wins, I have to rank Teams like Texas and Duke above them.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

I'd like to get people's opinion on this Top 50 by CHN.net. Look where Marquette is ranked.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

TM said:


> I'd like to get people's opinion on this Top 50 by CHN.net. Look where Marquette is ranked.


and look where tennessee is ranked. but somehow blowing them out on a neutral floor still isn't a good win.


----------

