Can Penn State and Nebraska beat the PAC 10

[OverAndUnder]

Interesting how the Washingtons, Arizonas, and Oregons are the toughest travel schedules but the easiest opponents.

[GatorVball]

rus said:

Why is Florida NOT included in the topic?

I bet Florida will beat some of these Pac 10 teams.

That UCLA-Florida match was eons ago...and it was one of Cusack's first games. And Florida gave UCLA a match. And they were tired, having traveled the farthest.

Shhh, don't let out the secret.

[blastingsand]

sankyu said:

It seems that Nebraska and PSU have shown the same sort of inconsistency that we're seeing in the top Pac-10 teams. PSU has two losses to show for it, and Nebraska one -- but they'd probably have had more if they had top 10 opponents every other week.

You got an even better point than Ruffda there. Nebraska and PSU have losses as well.

[Keystonekid]

One of the teams leading the Pac 10 lost to the team that is going to finish 3rd in the Big 12.

[GatorVball]

keystonekid said:

One of the teams leading the Pac 10 lost to the team that is going to finish 3rd in the Big 12.

Early season losses only count against you if you are outside the Pac-10. Don't you know how the polls work?

[Wolfgang]

Can Penn State and Nebraska beat the Pac-10?

Yes...I mean, no...wait...yes...doh!

[Pirate VB Fan]

keystonekid said:

One of the teams leading the Pac 10 lost to the team that is going to finish 3rd in the Big 12.

No, they did not. Neither Washington nor Stanford, the PAC-10 leaders, lost to (or played for that matter) anyone in the Big 12.

[GatorVball]

huskyvbfan said:

keystonekid said:

One of the teams leading the Pac 10 lost to the team that is going to finish 3rd in the Big 12.

No, they did not. Neither Washington nor Stanford, the PAC-10 leaders, lost to (or played for that matter) anyone in the Big 12.

So, Texas left the Big 12?

[Pirate VB Fan]

gatorvball said:

huskyvbfan said:

No, they did not. Neither Washington nor Stanford, the PAC-10 leaders, lost to (or played for that matter) anyone in the Big 12.

So, Texas left the Big 12?

Shoot. I plumb put that one out of my mind. You are right.

My dumb comment for the day. Actually, my quota is 1.2 for the day, so I may be able to squeeze in another one before the day is over.

[GatorVball]

huskyvbfan said:

gatorvball said:

So, Texas left the Big 12?

Shoot. I plumb put that one out of my mind. You are right.

My dumb comment for the day. Actually, my quota is 1.2 for the day, so I may be able to squeeze in another one before the day is over.

I wonder if the voters forgot about it as well?

[blastingsand]

keystonekid said:

One of the teams leading the Pac 10 lost to the team that is going to finish 3rd in the Big 12.

Those matches were "eons" ago. I think Washington found their stride since then.

[Keystonekid]

Lets not forget the topic of the thread. Yes, Nebraska and PSU can beat the top teams in the PAC10, and the PAC 10 teams can defeat them as well. I don't think any of these top teams would have gone undefeated in PAC 10, BIG 10 or BIG 12. None of these teams are invincible, there are good teams out there, and it is a long season.

I agree that the Pac 10 is the best conference. I do think however, the PAC 10 teams fail to understand that although the BIG 10 and 12 might not quite have the same talent across the board (not far from it) the arenas and atmospheres of road matches overall is much tougher. An example is Missouri might not be as strong as Cal, but it may be a tougher match, due to crowd and tougher conditions. I think the venues and crowds make the the Big 10 and Big 12 a better conference for volleyball, maybe not best teams, but the PAC 10 doesn't compare in regards to great college sports environment.

[hammer]

blastingsand said:

keystonekid said:

One of the teams leading the Pac 10 lost to the team that is going to finish 3rd in the Big 12.

Those matches were "eons" ago. I think Washington found their stride since then.

#7 ranked Penn St. beat Stanford in Palo Alto early in the 2004 season 3-2. The result of that match was used to justify Penn State's much higher seeding in the 2004 NCAA tournament. Problem was, if you were at that match, it was clear that Stanford was a much more athletic team. They were also much younger. Conclusion: They had a much bigger upside than PSU.
That's where polls and relative rankings (especially based upon early season meetings) fall flat on their faces.

[beachman]

At the beginning of the season I thought that Nebraska might be that "super team", but I don't think that this is the case.....their schedule was relatively easy and their conference is overrated. The best thing that they have going for them is the fact that they have the tournament at home, and how long has it been since a team had the FF at a "home" type site? I could see 3 PAC-10 teams in the FF, but more likely we will see two there......I think that we will all be able to see the picture much more clearly by 1 pm this Sunday after the selection show is over!

[hammer]

beachman said:

At the beginning of the season I thought that Nebraska might be that "super team", but I don't think that this is the case.....their schedule was relatively easy and their conference is overrated. The best thing that they have going for them is the fact that they have the tournament at home, and how long has it been since a team had the FF at a "home" type site? I could see 3 PAC-10 teams in the FF, but more likely we will see two there......I think that we will all be able to see the picture much more clearly by 1 pm this Sunday after the selection show is over!

I would tend to agree that it is tough to prognosticate when perhaps the best data point is Texas' 3-2 win over Washington at a neutral site in early Sept. Nebraska does have the very lethal 6-5 Pavan who, as I recall, put up some pretty good numbers in the FF last year. With her, a #1 seed, and a home court advantage, they would appear to be the safest choice to take it all.