|
|
Post by vballin on May 1, 2009 11:31:04 GMT -5
USC shocking the world...Maybe Ferguson isn't as terrible of a coach as some people think!
I know lots is still up in the air, but lets run through a couple circumstances here:
1) Pepp beats USC in the MPSF Finals...The final four would look like?
1) Pepp
2) Penn State
3) MIVA Rep?
4) Irvine/USC
I don't know how this would work? Anyone have any input? Could the at-large team come in and snag the 2 seed, above PSU in the final four? I hope not...But wouldn't be surprised at all there
__________________________________________________
2) USC beats Pepp in Finals...
1) USC
2) Penn State
3) MIVA Rep?
4)Pepp/CSUN/Irvine?
__________________________________________________
I'm just laying out some thoughts! Here's what I've got: MPSF winner should obviously be NO. 1 seed in the final four, however, would anyone be shocked if Irvine miraculously got the NO.1 seed somehow??? Anyway,
1) MPSF Winner
2) Penn State
3) MIVA Winner
4) In my opinion it should be a rule that the at-large team comes in as the 4th seed. It is their second shot, they should not be seeded above teams that earned their berth via the automatic conference bids!
What does everyone think for the final four? Who and what seeds?
|
|
|
|
Post by encule on May 1, 2009 12:58:04 GMT -5
If the Waves beat USC.....Irvine is in.
If USC beats Pepp.....then it is between Pepp and Irvine.
I think Irvine and Pepp are the only 2 schools with a chance to get the at-large bid.
|
|
|
|
Post by baywatcher on May 2, 2009 16:50:53 GMT -5
I don't see at large as #4 seed in Final Four; probably #3 and playing Penn State. MIVA as #4.
|
|
|
|
Post by Word on May 2, 2009 18:11:26 GMT -5
The At Large will most likely be Irvine, and they will probably be the #1 seed as well. I don't see how you can put SC or Pepp over them because of that last off match they had. Based on the entire season, they deserve to be seeded 1.
|
|
|
|
Post by gouci on May 3, 2009 1:32:13 GMT -5
UCI
- (25-5) has 3 more wins
- MPSF regular season champs
- ranked #1 in the country
- defeated Pepperdine 3-0 at the Bren
Pepperdine
- (22-5)
- MPSF 2nd place
- ranked #2 in the country
- defeated UCI 3-1 at Malibu
They announce the Final Four pairings Sunday 5/3/09 at 10:30 A. M. on ESPN News.
Looking objectively UCI has the edge on all the categories above. Plus I don't think they will conduct a new national rankings poll before the Final Four announcements. So the conventional thinking should be to take the #1 ranked team in UCI.
What will be interesting is who will get the #1 seed in the Final Four, UCI or USC?
|
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on May 3, 2009 1:40:42 GMT -5
Since no doofus was willing to go research the actual criteria:
Selection
[Reference: Annual Forms in this handbook, and Bylaws 31.01.2, 31.01.3 and 31.3 in
the NCAA Manual.]
Automatic qualifiers will be determined by a method selected by each conference
office. The remaining at-large team will be selected using the following criteria (in no
priority order):
a. Won-lost results;
b. Head-to-head competition;
c. Home and away results;
d. Results against common opponents;
e. Results against teams already qualified and other teams under consideration; and
f. Eligibility and availability of student-athletes for NCAA championships.
All NCAA member institutions that sponsor intercollegiate men’s volleyball
under the auspices of the intercollegiate athletics department will be considered for
selection, provided that they are otherwise eligible in the division in which they hold
membership.
|
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on May 3, 2009 1:42:23 GMT -5
Strict application of the criteria indicates UCI is in. UCI has the edge in a.) and b.) above. Everything else is pretty much a wash. Both lost to USC in the MPSF tournament, both have quirky regular season losses, and similar W-L records against common opponents.
|
|
|
|
Post by justchecking on May 3, 2009 1:56:20 GMT -5
According to the NCAA volleyball guidebook:
The remaining at-large team will be selected using the following criteria (in no
priority order):
a. Won-lost results;
b. Head-to-head competition;
c. Home and away results;
d. Results against common opponents;
e. Results against teams already qualified and other teams under consideration; and
f. Eligibility and availability of student-athletes for NCAA championships
According to the stated criteria, either Pepperdine or Irvine could be chosen.
Pepperdine lost 19-21 in the 5th to a qualified team (USC), while UCI lost in 3.
Rank is not to be a consideration.
|
|
|
|
Post by goabroad on May 3, 2009 1:56:41 GMT -5
UCI for sure...
seeding is a more interesting issue to discuss
|
|
|
|
Post by justchecking on May 3, 2009 2:06:05 GMT -5
Guess I was looking up the criteria as Grandson was posting...the beginning statement does give the committee leeway. It does not say how the criteria should be weighted or in what priority order.
|
|
|
|
Post by gouci on May 3, 2009 2:15:34 GMT -5
Since no doofus was willing to go research the actual criteria: Selection [Reference: Annual Forms in this handbook, and Bylaws 31.01.2, 31.01.3 and 31.3 in the NCAA Manual.] Automatic qualifiers will be determined by a method selected by each conference office. The remaining at-large team will be selected using the following criteria (in no priority order): a. Won-lost results; b. Head-to-head competition; c. Home and away results; d. Results against common opponents; e. Results against teams already qualified and other teams under consideration; and f. Eligibility and availability of student-athletes for NCAA championships. All NCAA member institutions that sponsor intercollegiate men’s volleyball under the auspices of the intercollegiate athletics department will be considered for selection, provided that they are otherwise eligible in the division in which they hold membership. UCI (25-5) losses to USC, CSUN, BYU, Pepperdine, Long Beach St. Pep (22-5) losses to USC, CSUN, BYU, UCI, Stanford, b. edge UCIUCI vs Pep is tied 1-1. UCI won 4 of 7 sets in head to head. c. edge UCIUCI 13-2 at home, 12-3 away Pep 12-2 at home, 10-3 away d. edge UCIUCI MPSF regular season champion, vs Cal Baptist (1-0) Pep MPSF 2nd place regular season, vs Cal Baptist (1-0) e. evenUCI owns series over USC 2-1 Pep owns series over USC 2-1 |
|
|
|
Post by justchecking on May 3, 2009 2:26:55 GMT -5
a and c...actually tied when you consider number of loses, uci just played more matches
agree on b and d
e...actually pepp has the edge because of the latest competition
|
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on May 3, 2009 2:55:53 GMT -5
According to the NCAA volleyball guidebook: The remaining at-large team will be selected using the following criteria (in no priority order): a. Won-lost results; b. Head-to-head competition; c. Home and away results; d. Results against common opponents; e. Results against teams already qualified and other teams under consideration; and f. Eligibility and availability of student-athletes for NCAA championships According to the stated criteria, either Pepperdine or Irvine could be chosen. Pepperdine lost 19-21 in the 5th to a qualified team (USC), while UCI lost in 3. Rank is not to be a consideration. Oooh...a 16-minute echo....  |
|
|
|
Post by Reach on May 3, 2009 7:50:43 GMT -5
This is BS. The four best teams... heck the five best teams are from the MPSF this year. MIVA/EVIA champs don't even come close this year. I hate the way this is set-up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on May 3, 2009 9:54:06 GMT -5
"MIVA/EVIA champs don't even come close this year. I hate the way this is set-up."
You have just disqualified yourself from being viewed as credible.
|
|
