10

Basketball: Bears in Lunardi’s first 2011 bracket

Yes, it’s more than a little early for this kind of thing, but why not?

ESPN.com bracketologist Joe Lunardi has projected Cal as a No. 9 seed in the 2011 NCAA tournament. Lunardi has the Bears facing Clemson in a first-round game at Pittsburgh.

Of course, the official bracket won’t be announced for more than 10 months, so you might want to delay purchasing your airline tickets.

The Pac-12 will earn five NCAA berths next season, according to Lunardi’s vision. He also has Arizona (without Derrick Williams) as a No. 3 seed, UCLA (without Tyler Honeycutt and Malcolm Lee) at No. 7, Washington (without Isaiah Thomas) as a No. 10, and USC (without Nikola Vucevic) as a No. 12.

Here’s the full bracket.

Jeff Faraudo

  • MD in San Ramon

    If it’s 2011, then I’ll take UConn…I think you mean 2012….

  • milo

    Lunardi either has OCD or protects his turf with extreme vengeance.

  • Kevin

    This bracket projection obviously means nothing, and for the record, I expect the Bears to be higher than a 9 seed, but it would be nice for once to have a first round game in the western half of the country.

  • Calfan

    How so? We don’t have a center or a bench. We need more players. Monty should be scouting Australia and picking off the jucos.

  • Kevin

    We don’t have a Center? I think Richard Soloman is pretty solid. The bench is a question mark but we should have some decent depth with Brandon Smith or Justin Cobbs coming off the bench, Ricci being healthy, Bak Bak with some experience and a couple of incoming freshman on the front line. It’s certainly not a deep bench to start the season but servicable. Would be nice to find a spring recruit that could help.

  • SteveNTexas

    Kevin while there are many decent recruits available we will pick the ones no one else wants. We have the worst recruiting class in the Pac 12 ( its not close) and we already picked an unranked even in state, unranked by position and un offered by other schools Power Forward for 2012 even though there were several in state higher ranked PFs available.

  • takeoffthatredshirt

    Steve-

    Surprise, surprise. Another negative post with no response to people calling you out on the other article. You should seriously go away you add nothing to the discussions here.

    I know you fancy yourself for ‘telling it like it is’ but you are twisting fact and repeat the same posts.

    I truly don’t believe you are a Cal fan.

    Can we get a SteveNtexas greasemonkey?

  • SteveNTexas

    Response to which post. How about your response to the thread that showed we were ranked LAST in this year’s recruiting ? Did you respond to that? Can you spin having the worst recruiting?

    As for not being a fan – I post all sorts of stuff on NATIONAL Threads plugging call. ON City.data com I’ve plugged Cal for its academic integrity and even put in thread about our gymnastics program needing funds.

    What have you written about Cal?

    Of course you think you have the right to censor those who disagree with you. You’re not claiming you actually learned that at Cal are you?

    1. So show us some evidence that refutes my claim about our incoming class.

    2. Give us some facts to explain why the newest recruits are worthy for a major college program.

  • takeoffthatredshirt

    ok steve. you’re a huge fan.

    i don’t want to censor you, i want the option of ignoring your re-posting of the same angry and empty BS. and i will after this, i promise.

    let’s try one last time:

    you post negative crap about 17 year old high school kids that you have never seen play on a fan website. congrats on that. i’m excited that Cal offered a scholarship to a 6’9″ high school junior for 2012 regardless of his stats while you post stuff trashing him.

    in a year Cal only loses one player (MSF), Monty is willing to settle for a small class that is mostly ranked at the bottom due to its small size. kravish could be a solid pac 10 player.

    you question how many positive posts i’ve written on Cal? well how many basketball programs have you run? Monty knows what the hell he’s doing and it’s clear you don’t. Cal has rarely gotten blue chip recruits (except when paying them) and last year we were 21 overall in recruiting by the all-powerful ranking sites. in years where Cal needs a solid class the program has always come through.

    you ignore the fact that Allen Crabbe was not a blue chip recruit but was a top 10 freshmen natioanlly and pac 10 FOY. jorge was also overlooked but schools and is all conference.

    that leads me to believe you are not a fan, you are 13 years old, or you are 73 and bitter.

    i don’t expect a response except another re-post. keep mocking 17 year old kids that will be the next stars at Cal. i’ll be cheering them on while you go on with your angry life.

    Go Bears.

  • SteveNTexas

    There are 1,000,000 17 yr old kids who would love to play basketball and get a college scholarship, Cal should get the best ones it can. Don’t twist this so that I blame the kids who get the offers.

    More important than my opinion was a Rivals Rating the Rivalries. Cal was ranked below two other Pac 10 schools and I believe St Marys for instate recruiting.

    the Summary for Cal and I paraphrase “Cal and Montgomery would be dangerous IF THEY GOT SOME TOP RECRUITS.