|
Post by Rocky on Apr 5, 2004 10:27:13 GMT -5
Remember this thread? I just thought of who should ge the bid. It has to be UCLA! Since Al Scates guarantees every player a ring they have to go to the tournament. So, if they don't win the MPSF tournament they have to be placed in the at large spot. What do you think? By the way . . . I am not a UCLA fan. Just trying to rekindle an old thread.
|
|
|
Post by midwestfan on Apr 5, 2004 10:40:56 GMT -5
Wouldn't be my pick!!!
|
|
|
Post by Rocky on Apr 5, 2004 10:59:08 GMT -5
But don't you think the NCAA will try to help Al? Wouldn't he be the sentimental favorite?
UCLA would not be my pick either . . . Just trying to guess what NCAA might be looking at as they choose a team.
|
|
|
Post by midwestfan on Apr 5, 2004 11:19:11 GMT -5
Who votes? If it is other coaches, I doubt that they will be sentimental towards Al.
If it is a committee, I would hope that they have criteria in place to make that judgement and wouldn't rely on sentimental feelings.
However, if it comes down to sentimentality, you could be right about UCLA but they would have to be in the top three natioally or finish second in the MPSF, which may not/probably won't be a problem.
|
|
|
Post by Rocky on Apr 5, 2004 11:26:04 GMT -5
My hope is that whomever takes first and second in the tournament goes. This has been such an interesting season with everybody beating each other. Clearly the only favorite right now is BYU (oh no, they got onto this thread without a fan speaking about them!). It looks like the semi-finals and finals will be played in Provo. They should beat the #8 seed. They will have home court advantage. It's pretty hard to go there and win (CSUN is the only team to do that this year).
We will see . . .
|
|
|
Post by banthony2 on Apr 5, 2004 12:28:27 GMT -5
I don't quite think it will just be the first and second teams from the MPSF tourney. The last two years, the best two teams from the conference went. Last year it was Pepperdine above all, and then a semi final showdown between BYU and Hawaii (who had split matches earlier in the year) decided who would go regardless of the final match outcome (which BYU pulled off). The year before it was Pepperdine and Hawaii. They were also both the 1 and 2 seeds in the conference. It just worked out. I think when looking at the tourney and at large situation there has to be considerations. Say BYU loses to the 8 seed, let's say that 8 seed is Stanford. Then on the other side of the bracket, #3 UCLA beats #2 LBSU in the semis. Then UCLA beats #8 Stanford in the finals. Would they take a team like Stanford who didn;t win the tourney and doesn't have a winning record over a team like LBSU? I personally would think it to be Bruin/Beach representation. Though I haven't seen much of the past selections, so I don't know.
|
|
|
Post by roy on Apr 5, 2004 13:01:45 GMT -5
I don't quite think it will just be the first and second teams from the MPSF tourney. The last two years, the best two teams from the conference went. Last year it was Pepperdine above all, and then a semi final showdown between BYU and Hawaii (who had split matches earlier in the year) decided who would go regardless of the final match outcome (which BYU pulled off). The year before it was Pepperdine and Hawaii. They were also both the 1 and 2 seeds in the conference. It just worked out. I think when looking at the tourney and at large situation there has to be considerations. Say BYU loses to the 8 seed, let's say that 8 seed is Stanford. Then on the other side of the bracket, #3 UCLA beats #2 LBSU in the semis. Then UCLA beats #8 Stanford in the finals. Would they take a team like Stanford who didn;t win the tourney and doesn't have a winning record over a team like LBSU? I personally would think it to be Bruin/Beach representation. Though I haven't seen much of the past selections, so I don't know. More than likely not. I would think that BYU is almost a lock at the at-large bid. Like 1999, BYU was the most dominant team in the nation and Long Beach was a close second. Even though the Beach got knocked out of the tournament in the first round, they still got the at-large bid. Likewise, USC got hot and even though they didn't have a great season, they knocked off Long Beach at Long Beach and then knocked off Stanford or Pepperdine in the semis to meet BYU in the finals. Even though they made it to the finals, they didn't get the at large because their regular season record wasn't that great. Right now, I would suspect that Long Beach or UCLA are the only teams being considered for the at large. It will all depend on who ends up as the number 2 and 3 seed in the tournament. Whichever team advances farther will likely get the bid.
|
|
|
Post by Rocky on Apr 5, 2004 13:05:20 GMT -5
I know I should not assume, but my assumption is that the #8 seed (still up in the air) will probably not beat BYU. Between LB, UCLA, CSUN, Hawaii, & Pepperdine - it is all pretty equal. Everybody is beating everybody. Even UCSB with a 9-9 record have beaten people (remember the sweep of LB that caught everyone by surprise). IMO as of today - BYU should get a bid. The second one should come from MPSF. It is up in the air who that should be. The five teams mentioned above are very close in records. Some things to think about: CSUN is the only team to beat BYU in conference. BYU and CSUN took both from Hawaii. Long Beach and UCLA split with Hawaii. Pepperdine still has to play Hawaii. Long Beach beat UCLA both times. Long Beach beat Pepperdine. UCLA beat Pepperdine both times. CSUN lost to Long Beach, but they still play again. CSUN lost to UCLA, but they still play again. Pepperdine and CSUN split. Conclusion regarding BYU: If they do not win the conference tournament, they should be given the at large bid. I think there are a few teams that can beat BYU in the conference tournament (even if it is on their home court!). Conclusion regarding Hawaii: Since Hawaii has lost to four of the teams at least once, maybe they should not be considered for the at large bid. Conclusion regarding Pepperdine: Since Pepperdine lost both to Long Beach and UCLA as well as splitting with CSUN, they should not be considered for the at large bid. Conclusion regarding UCLA: NONE at this time. Wait to see what they do against BYU. If they beat BYU that strengthens their case. They still have to play CSUN as well. Conclusion regarding CSUN: NONE at this time. They should be in consideration since they beat BYU once and Hawaii twice. If they beat Long Beach and UCLA in these second matches of the season that will strenghten their case. They have the potential to continue to catch people off guard (no one seems to take them seriously as a bid contender). Conclusion regarding LB: NONE at this time. Wait to see what they do against CSUN and for that matter UCSB. With their two losses to BYU and split with Hawaii they have not convinced me that they should get the bid. Please realize that the conclusions above are only my opinions at this time, but based on some good facts. I welcome any one else to give their opinion (that does not mean to bash me for mine though) Remember we are all entitled to our opinion. Feel the love!!!
|
|
|
Post by banthony2 on Apr 5, 2004 23:15:00 GMT -5
I know my frustration with how the Final Four is handled is nothing new. Everybody feels the same way. Why not make it an 8 team field. Have the same 3 automatic births, but the next 5 teams in the polls get at larges. Think of a field including BYU, LBSU, Ball State/IPFW/Lewis, Penn State, UCLA, Hawaii, CSUN and Pepperdine. The top 6 teams in the nation would be assured a spot. That way the #11 team doesn't get a shot while the #3 team has to watch on tape delay from home on ESPN 2. The Final Four might turn into the MPSF semifinals, but there would be some good ball. If #9 Penn State gets to the Final Four, they will have beaten the No 2 seed, (UCLA, LBSU or BYU), instead of just the other EIVA finalist who isn't ranked. The first round games can be the Monday or Tuesday before, either at the 1-4 seeds home, or even 2 matches at 4 regional sites. There probably are reasons it can't work but it could produce some sweet volleyball.
|
|
|
Post by vb on Apr 5, 2004 23:33:19 GMT -5
Sure...and if PSU or Lewis should beat a MPSF team in the first round...play the match again---again---and again till the MPSF team wins.
As silly....how about a 64 selection Sunday. Bet 65 and 66 complain!
|
|
|
Post by My2Sense on Apr 5, 2004 23:41:46 GMT -5
Sure...and if PSU or Lewis should beat a MPSF team in the first round...play the match again---again---and again till the MPSF team wins. As silly....how about a 64 selection Sunday. Bet 65 and 66 complain! There are legitimate reasons why people complain. This year will be especialy ripe when so many MPSF teams are ranked way above the nearest East of the Rockies team. Automatic bids for the Eastern teams when they aren't in the top 8 are ludicrous when only 4 teams go to the FF. Any lame brain can get that. The only way to get a bona fide national champion is to abandon this current rediculous format and have an 8 team tournament. That would give the Eastern teams all the respect they think they deserve, legitimate chances to prove they deserve what they get, and far more interest in this sport. As far as costs go, what school wouldn't love to have their team in the elite eight? This pandering to the East to "spread the popularity of the sport" is a sham and a legal consipiracy. IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Rocky on Apr 5, 2004 23:50:22 GMT -5
I absolutely agree that there needs to be additional teams, not just four. It is really unfair that the top eight teams in the country (according to the poll) do not get a fair chance to be in the final four. Lewis has played four of the top teams from MPSF and lost all of them. IPFW has played 3 of the top teams from MPSF and also lost all of them. Yet, these are two teams being talked about as having a chance to go into the final four. It really is sad.
Let me also say, I also realize the control is with NCAA. We have talked about it on these boards many times. The tournament is set up to be a four team tournament and I accept the tournament the way it is set up. It just seems like it would truly be a "final" four if you took more teams and had them play it out. If a team from the East beats a MPSF team so be it. You gotta bring your "A" game every match (any team can beat any team on any given day).
|
|
|
Post by vb on Apr 5, 2004 23:56:48 GMT -5
How about coming East then? Have Hawaii play Lewis in the dead of winter...let see who wins. Biggest ranking scam there is....tremendous home court advantage against MIVA and EIVA teams traveling to UCI, UCSD. Hawaii etc etc. BYU and the elevation is another...the courts seem 2 feet shorter.
This is an age-old discussion that has no answer until more VB teams exist. How many are being added next year....3?
|
|
|
Post by lalalaluuuke on Apr 6, 2004 0:15:29 GMT -5
Maybe they should get the BCS to sponser the selection committee. HA! It's the same gripe. There's just not the millions of dollars to complain about with the chance to play. The thing about it is it will not change cause the powers that be are satisfied with the way it is. Theoretically everyone has the same chance. You win your way into the Conference tourney, win it, and go to the Final Four. I would love to have 8 teams in it too, but the chances of that are little to none. Maybe half of the teams should break off and form another conference. The Northern CA schools and BYU or UH. There's an idea. Then there would be no at-large bid and this thread would not be an issue. Any other ideas?
|
|
|
Post by vb on Apr 6, 2004 0:58:27 GMT -5
Lets see.... Juniata would be a Gonzaga type...stay away from them in the first two rounds. Springfield would be the team that always upset the first round. BYU would be the Duke type....I hate them already/lol Ball State the fan favorite underdog. UCLA would be UCLA Penn State would be a Kentucky type...always a good record/never quite enough Hawaii would be a Notre Dame....travels well/loved by TV Lewis....Texas T/ touble just seems to follow them
I need help with the others
|
|