Tim Floyd/O.J. Mayo

[Wander]

to be clear, they were missing hackett (because mayo punched him out) and diarra (who hasn't played all season and whom i hardly would call one of their "best players"). new mexico state made the ncaat last year (and was projected by many to make it this year) so i am not sure how you are comparing nmst to a truly terrible mercer team (they are 3-5 and have been blown out by harvard). duke could have benched its entire starting line-up and the B team wouldn't lose to mercer at cis.

usc, missing just 1 player (who was punched out by mayo), losing at home to mercer is nothing short of a train wreck. in the 20+ years i have followed duke basketball closely, i can't think of a single loss that even remotely approaches the utterly shocking and inexplicable nature of the mercer loss. so, yes, the fact that usc, despite all of its hyped players, could lose to mercer at home, in and of itself is reason for me to believe that this team doesn't have what it takes to make it to the final four.

First of all, I didn't even realize they were missing Diarra. To be honest I have no idea who the heck that is. I was talking about Hackett and Jefferson, who are in fact two of their best players.

New Mexico State looks pretty bad. But that's not the point. I'm not making excuses for USC losing to Mercer at home because that's pathetic. However, it's one game, it was without two of their best players, it's obvious they've improved, and it was in November. It's ridiculous to jump to conclusions about how far they'll go in March based on that one game. And who mentioned anything about a Final Four, anyway?

[slower]

just to be clear, the guy told me to "get a clue" and then what you quoted above was my response. so I'll stick with the old "he started it" and retire.

Okay, I see it now in your quote of his original post (#15 in this thread). I saw his post after it had already been edited by a mod. Sorry, bro.

[dukie8]

First of all, I didn't even realize they were missing Diarra. To be honest I have no idea who the heck that is. I was talking about Hackett and Jefferson, who are in fact two of their best players.

New Mexico State looks pretty bad. But that's not the point. I'm not making excuses for USC losing to Mercer at home because that's pathetic. However, it's one game, it was without two of their best players, it's obvious they've improved, and it was in November. It's ridiculous to jump to conclusions about how far they'll go in March based on that one game. And who mentioned anything about a Final Four, anyway?

you and at least one other poster prognosticated that usc will be "dangerous" come march. for a team that went to the sweet 16 last year and who brought in the #1 player out of high school, it doesn't take a quantum leap to conclude that you were implying a run to the final 4. if you just meant that they will be a 2 or 3 seed, win their first round game and then lose their 2nd round game, then that is an odd way of characterizing a team.

yes, losing to mercer at home is just one game, but the general consensus here is that if you have a ball hog on your team who is auditioning for the nba, the sum is equal to less than the parts and the team will underperform. usc certainly has not shied away from scheduling tough teams and tough teams on the road. however, i think that they are going to be all over the place in terms of performance and, contrary to yourself and several other people, will be an early out in the tournament.

[Wander]

you and at least one other poster prognosticated that usc will be "dangerous" come march. for a team that went to the sweet 16 last year and who brought in the #1 player out of high school, it doesn't take a quantum leap to conclude that you were implying a run to the final 4. if you just meant that they will be a 2 or 3 seed, win their first round game and then lose their 2nd round game, then that is an odd way of characterizing a team.

The only thing I and Classof06 have said is that we think they're a Top 15 team if Gibson gets his act together. Nobody said anything about a Final Four.

yes, losing to mercer at home is just one game, but the general consensus here is that if you have a ball hog on your team who is auditioning for the nba, the sum is equal to less than the parts and the team will underperform. usc certainly has not shied away from scheduling tough teams and tough teams on the road. however, i think that they are going to be all over the place in terms of performance and, contrary to yourself and several other people, will be an early out in the tournament.

Did you watch them play Southern Illinois, Memphis, or Kansas? Those are the games I saw and they sure as hell didn't look like an underachieving team in any of those games. Maybe you've seen other games where they've looked bad - I didn't see any of the others. They do have some issues to work out, but their starters are all underclassmen, so that's not surprising.

[dukie8]

The only thing I and Classof06 have said is that we think they're a Top 15 team if Gibson gets his act together. Nobody said anything about a Final Four.

is it really necessary to completely deny what has been posted just a few posts up in this thread? from you:

If he can get back to his previous form and stop fouling though then I agree USC is a top 15 team. Even with him being less than great, they played Kansas and Memphis really tough and that's impressive. I suspect this problem will improve by the end of the year and they'll be really dangerous in March.

from the other guy:

I'm telling you, once they get their late game execution together (which is what pre-conference play is for), this team will be dangerous. And the Pac-10 will have them battle-tested by the time March rolls around. Wait and see...

as i said earlier, it would be quite bizarre to be prognosticating how "dangerous" a team will be in march if you aren't implying anything about the final 4 when the same team just made the sweet 16 and has several very highly rated freshman, including the #1 rated freshman. "dangerous" to me doesn't mean a 2nd round exit but apparently something along those lines does to you.

[shadowfax336]

C'mon there are results possible between a 2nd round loss and a final 4...
Reading potential final 4 team into "dangerous team" doesn't make sense because I can say that Davidson is a "dangerous team" if I think they're capable of knocking off a team like Kansas or UCLA, getting to the sweet 16 and then losing.
I know you're saying that the standards should be higher for USC since they made the sweet 16 last year, but they lost 2 NBA first rounders, and have only recently come out of a basketball slump.
I think its quite fair to say that being a say, #4 seed going into the tournament that is capable of knocking off or at least giving a game to a #1 and making it to the elite 8 would qualify them as a dangerous team

[dukie8]

C'mon there are results possible between a 2nd round loss and a final 4...
Reading potential final 4 team into "dangerous team" doesn't make sense because I can say that Davidson is a "dangerous team" if I think they're capable of knocking off a team like Kansas or UCLA, getting to the sweet 16 and then losing.
I know you're saying that the standards should be higher for USC since they made the sweet 16 last year, but they lost 2 NBA first rounders, and have only recently come out of a basketball slump.
I think its quite fair to say that being a say, #4 seed going into the tournament that is capable of knocking off or at least giving a game to a #1 and making it to the elite 8 would qualify them as a dangerous team

i disagree. referring to a mid-major as a "dangerous" team in the ncaat usually means that they have the potential to upset a higher seeded team in the first round. many people have characterized davidson as "dangerous" for just that reason and i highly doubt anyone means that they are a threat for the final 4. when you are talking about a pac-10 team that just came off a sweet 16 season and added the #1 rated freshman as well as several other very highly rated freshman, "dangerous" takes on an entirely different meaning. final 4 bound? elite 8 bound? i don't know but the fact of the matter is that both of the posters who are drooling over mayo and what an upstanding individual he is have referred to usc as a dangerous team come the ncaat and that doesn't imply a 1 and done.

[shadowfax336]

I KNOW it doesn't imply a 1 and done. It implies that the team is capable of beating some very good teams. Not saying they will, just that they're capable of it. Do you really think that this team is incapable of knocking off a top team in the tourney? In case you missed it they took Memphis to OT the other night. SO yes they could go 1 and done, but they could also get hot and win 3-4 games. Dangerous team isn't a prediction of how far they will go, its a description of the team themselves and their potential to knock off favored teams. Last year everybody was calling Texas a dangerous team even though nobody considered them a real final 4 threat. Why? Because no team really wanted to play them because they knew Durant was capable of going off at any time. USC doesn't have a player as dynamic as Durant (sorry Mayo fans, he's just not that good), but when its players are playing well its fully capable of giving anyone all they can handle. So they therefore definitely qualify as a dangerous team

[dukie8]

I KNOW it doesn't imply a 1 and done. It implies that the team is capable of beating some very good teams. Not saying they will, just that they're capable of it. Do you really think that this team is incapable of knocking off a top team in the tourney? In case you missed it they took Memphis to OT the other night. SO yes they could go 1 and done, but they could also get hot and win 3-4 games. Dangerous team isn't a prediction of how far they will go, its a description of the team themselves and their potential to knock off favored teams. Last year everybody was calling Texas a dangerous team even though nobody considered them a real final 4 threat. Why? Because no team really wanted to play them because they knew Durant was capable of going off at any time. USC doesn't have a player as dynamic as Durant (sorry Mayo fans, he's just not that good), but when its players are playing well its fully capable of giving anyone all they can handle. So they therefore definitely qualify as a dangerous team

we are kind of hijacking this thread but i think that we just have different definitions of "dangerous." everybody was calling texas dangerous because they should not have been a 4 seed and, contrary to what you may believe, MANY people did consider them a final 4 threat (which would have required to upsets). usc is probably going to get a protected seed so any upset that they produce will have them going to at least the elite 8.

i'm not sure what we are arguing about because i do think that, on any given night, they can beat any team in the country. however, for reasons discussed above (eg, a ballhog star who is perfectly fine going 6-20 and 6-21 in their 2 biggest games of the year), they just as easily can lose at home to some nobody team. for those reasons, despite being forewarned by several posters on here about their expected excellence come march, i wholly expect them to get bounced prematurely from the ncaat.