Well, that was about as expected. Alcorn State wasn't supposed to be much of a challenge. And, they weren't. The 'Hawks started slowly (for a minute and a half) and from there on out, it was all the men in crimson.
What We Learned
- Xavier Henry can jump. Over a man.
- Cole Aldrich is still a bigger badass than Markieff Morris, no matter how much he has improved. See: pushing Markieff out of the way for a rebound at the 13:45 mark in the first half.
- Tyshawn Taylor and Elijah Johnson look too much alike. Throw in the fact that I'm still getting used to the number switch, and I can't tell them apart for nothing!
- Xavier is very smooth. Reminds me of a better, more skilled Keith Langford, with the lefty shot and what not.
- It's hard to lose when you go on a 36-0 run. On that note, this is undoubtedly the Comment of the Night
Anyways, about that B12-P10 Challenge Primer...
Sunday should be really fun against UCLA. I mean, when you get a chance to beat up on another "national power" or "blue-blood," you should savor it - which we will.
The Big 12 - Pac 10 Challenge is something that hasn't been discussed, I think, at all here on RCT, so I thought a little informative primer and history of said series would be beneficial to at least someone. Also, as we are part of Jayhawk Nation, college basketball is kind of what we do (not saying we don't care about football, but it just doesn't hold a candle to the basketball team), so it would be cool if we got some open threads up for the next few nights when these games will be taking place.
This is also something that would be nice to see continued into the Big 12 portion of schedules. Again, college basketball is what we do. It is our job to be the best, most educated and informed fans in the conference with the broadest knowledge of every other team in the conference. At least for some of the bigger games.
History of Challenge
2007 (inaugural season): Pac 10 (7-5)
2008 : Tied 6-6
All-time: Pac 10 (13-11)
Kansas History: 2007 - @USC, W 59-55 (this game - MARIO!!!) 2008 - @Arizona, L 84-57
Interestingly, the Jayhawks have never hosted a game in the B12-P10 Challenge. Perhaps the organizers want to keep it fair? Obviously, there are more teams in the Big 12 than the Pac 10, so the scheduling includes ten games in the next four days (Thursday through Sunday), and two more games, for whatever reason, two weeks and three weeks from now, respectively. So, basically, that means we won't know who actually won this history-filled, monumental, nation captivating challenge until basically Christmas. The Big 12 actually is already leading this season, 1-0, thanks to a Nebraska victory in Los Angeles last Sunday.
The remaining matchups are as follows:
Thursday, December 3
Washington @ Texas Tech
USC @ Texas
Baylor @ Arizona State
Friday, December 4
Colorado @ Oregon State
Saturday, December 5
Oregon @ Missouri
Iowa State @ California
Washington State @ Kansas State
Sunday, Decemeber 6
Kansas @ UCLA
Arizona @ Oklahoma
Wednesday, Decemeber 16
Oklahoma State @ Stanford
Tuesday, December 22
Texas A&M @ Washington
So, USC and Washington are the two Pac 10 teams that get to represent the conference twice by playing two games. It's a good thing they decided to keep it fair and not let (probably) the two best teams in the conference play twice. I say the Big 12 goes 7-5 this year, evening up the all-time series.
Nebraska already won. So, that's 1-0. Texas will beat USC, Baylor should beat Arizona State but I give Washington the win over Texas Tech. 3-1, Big 12. Oregon State, as the rest of post-1650 A.D. basketball teams should, will beat Colorado. 3-2, Big 12. Missouri is sketchy (they lost to Richmond for Quin Snyder's sake), Cal is good and Frank Martin hates his team right now. 5-3, Pac 10. Oklahoma is hit or miss, but still better than Arizona. KU wins, obviously. Tied, 5-5. Oklahoma State will beat Stanford and Texas A&M will shock the entire sports world and beat world-power Washington. Bada bing bada boom, 7-5, Big 12. You heard it here first.
Thoughts? Am I wrong about any of these games? (Surely not.)