Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="DefenseBB, post: 2560066, member: 7492"] From an outside observer who doesn't get to see the PAC12 dynamics and only the box scores and very occasional game that's shown on ESPN, what's the sense on new pecking order and coaching/program outlook for the various programs not named Stanford? I mean, to me, and all others feel free to opine as well: [B][U]Cal [/U][/B]was a darling when Gotlieb took over from Boyle and then has underwhelmed since. Nice story but think she's average at best and underachieved with alot of the resources she has. Seems ok with recruiting, light on the x's and o's. [B][U]OSU[/U][/B]-Rueck has proved he can coach, but seems light on the recruiting. You can't compete for National Championships by losing your backyard talent and not bringing in top talent elsewhere. Great that he got Slocum as a transfer but he needs more if he truly wants to build a program. [B][U]Oregon[/U][/B]-Graves did well at Gonzaga and seems to have brought the mojo with him to the NY Yankees of College Athletic Administrations. Talk about money and resources..wow, the Univ. of Nike should be a force in WCBB. Graves has brought in good recruits, has Boley as transfer for next year and seems to know the x's and o's. This could be then next superpower. [B][U]UCLA[/U][/B] seems to recruit well but then seems to underachieve. I think it was you, nwhoop who relayed she's a tad light on execution and her mediocre record since taking over for Fargas seems in line with this assessment. Lots of resources, tradition and yet meh...She's underachieved with Canada and Billings. [B][U]ASU[/U][/B] with Charlie Turner Thorne has been there 20+ years with ok results so she's not going anywhere. The school seems content with the result which aren't bad and just being on the periphery of with top 16 periodically. Who am I to argue. Not really grabbing top recruits so she's done well. [B][U]USC Trojans[/U][/B]- Trakh is back after a bizarro search. This program's administration is a mess. This is exactly what happens when you let sentiment run an athletic department-Lynn Swann as AD??? Sorry, no! Trakh seems like a nice enough guy and USC will need to either walk the walk or stop talking. They say they want to be taken seriously but then blow off the process. Leave Trakh alone, let him try to replicate what Charlie Turner Thorne is doing at ASU and be happy. You're a football school who can't even pretend to be interested in anything else convincingly...and oh, by the way, you're not taken seriously in football anymore. [B][U]Arizona[/U][/B]-the administration puts a title IX product out there because they have to and it shows. Softball, swimming are their priority women's sports...nuf sed... [B][U]Utah[/U][/B]-nwhoop has some good insight here and this may be a program on the rise. They did have a bad loss to Colorado but this AD seems to actually do a good job with women's sports. [B][U]Colorado[/U][/B]-see Arizona comments. [B][U]Washington[/U][/B]-Neighbors absolutely hung this program out to dry and frankly I question his success with what he had-wasn't it McGuff's? Then again, this is another football school whose women's sport is softball. [B][U]WSU[/U][/B]-at least Arizona has MCBB and WCSB as well as MBB, what does WSU have? Certainly not a commitment to any women's sports... This conference seems pretty bifurcated-really good top teams, maybe a potential great team in Oregon (Stanford, UCLA, Ore St, ASU and I guess Cal), two tweeners in Utah and then USC and yuk-Az, Colorado, Wash, WSU. What am I missing? [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach