|
Post by Ye Olde Dawg on Oct 11, 2006 9:03:17 GMT -5
What I _really_ care about is 5 Pac10 teams ranked in the top 7. It's an insult. Would you be happy if only 4 were in the top 10? That's how Pablo has them, and it's probably more realistic.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Oct 11, 2006 9:15:47 GMT -5
What I _really_ care about is 5 Pac10 teams ranked in the top 7. It's an insult. Would you be happy if only 4 were in the top 10? That's how Pablo has them, and it's probably more realistic. Heck, that is only 4 in the top 15, for that matter. Of course, it is also 4 in the top 6.
|
|
|
Post by spikerthemovie on Oct 11, 2006 9:18:04 GMT -5
Now that I think about that, it's an interesting question. The AVCA voters do seem interested in having two Big Ten teams in the top ten, regardless of whether they're actually getting the teams right. That could make for some interesting decisions after this weekend. I won't even try to predict that one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2006 10:01:11 GMT -5
I'm not going to be happy, so forget about that.
4 in the Top 10 is unavoidable, unfortunately. And Cal is probably as good a choice as some others for Top 10, too. I object to 5 in the top 7.
It's an insult -- and not supported by the results.
|
|
|
Post by IdahoBoy on Oct 11, 2006 15:03:57 GMT -5
I'm not going to be happy, so forget about that. 4 in the Top 10 is unavoidable, unfortunately. And Cal is probably as good a choice as some others for Top 10, too. I object to 5 in the top 7. It's an insult -- and not supported by the results. What results support otherwise?
|
|
|
Post by SaltNPepper on Oct 11, 2006 15:37:05 GMT -5
If we forget for a minute the top 7 or top 8 and focus on the top 16 which IMO, is a more important number as far as hosting 1st and 2nd rounds are concerned. Obviously, with the travel rules, a top 16 seed for some schools won't mean that they get to host even though they had earned the right to - and the selection committee will use different criteria, etc. Still, looking at 16 schools is a better number I think.
Anyway, Here's how that breaks down by the top conferences:
AVCA = Pac-10 = 5; Big Ten = 4; Big 12 = 3; SEC = 2; others = 2 Pablo = Pac-10 = 4; Big Ten = 4; Big 12 = 4; SEC = 2; others = 2 Kern = Pac-10 =5; Big Ten = 4; Big 12 = 2; SEC = 3; others = 2
Looking at it this way, the AVCA has the same number of Pac-10 as Kern and only one more that Pablo. The Big 12 takes a hit in Kern versus the AVCA or especially in Kern versus Pablo. That's kind of interesting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2006 16:04:06 GMT -5
I'm not going to be happy, so forget about that. 4 in the Top 10 is unavoidable, unfortunately. And Cal is probably as good a choice as some others for Top 10, too. I object to 5 in the top 7. It's an insult -- and not supported by the results. What results support otherwise? Matches played. Now go away.
|
|