|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Sept 24, 2007 15:29:34 GMT -5
Hey -dub or Rich, what time does the new Pablo go up on rk.com? Don't know when it goes up, but I'm guessing it will lead to some interesting discussion when it does. I'm going to stay out of that discussion, because I don't know the answer.
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on Sept 24, 2007 15:32:19 GMT -5
Ruffda, I agree with you on Dayton and Duke. Teams are being carried by having beaten teams overrated. Purdue and Hawaii launched alot of teams in weeks 1 and 2. Duke and Dayton can snag a few good wins and than hide in mediocre leagues. Mid major and mediocre sure seem to fit the ACC. How could schools be that attractive to recruits, and not be very good. As volleyball athletes are middle to upper middle class kids with good grades, UNC, Wake, Virginia etc... should be killin it!
|
|
|
Post by ugopher on Sept 24, 2007 15:36:43 GMT -5
Ruffda, I agree with you on Dayton and Duke. Teams are being carried by having beaten teams overrated. Purdue and Hawaii launched alot of teams in weeks 1 and 2. Duke and Dayton can snag a few good wins and than hide in mediocre leagues. Mid major and mediocre sure seem to fit the ACC. How could schools be that attractive to recruits, and not be very good. As volleyball athletes are middle to upper middle class kids with good grades, UNC, Wake, Virginia etc... should be killin it! The same argument you give on Dayton and Duke can be made for Florida and Hawai'i. Once they reach their conference schedule they are rarely tested which makes it difficult to determine exactly how good they are. Don't use only the mid-majors and ACC as examples.
|
|
|
Post by silversurfer on Sept 24, 2007 15:39:42 GMT -5
Ruffda, I agree with you on Dayton and Duke. Teams are being carried by having beaten teams overrated. Purdue and Hawaii launched alot of teams in weeks 1 and 2. Duke and Dayton can snag a few good wins and than hide in mediocre leagues. Mid major and mediocre sure seem to fit the ACC. How could schools be that attractive to recruits, and not be very good. As volleyball athletes are middle to upper middle class kids with good grades, UNC, Wake, Virginia etc... should be killin it! Yeah, how are UNC, Wake, and Virginia doing?
|
|
|
Post by bomber on Sept 24, 2007 15:43:05 GMT -5
Ruffda, I agree with you on Dayton and Duke. Teams are being carried by having beaten teams overrated. Purdue and Hawaii launched alot of teams in weeks 1 and 2. Duke and Dayton can snag a few good wins and than hide in mediocre leagues. Mid major and mediocre sure seem to fit the ACC. How could schools be that attractive to recruits, and not be very good. As volleyball athletes are middle to upper middle class kids with good grades, UNC, Wake, Virginia etc... should be killin it! You might as well put Ohio in there as well...they'll play no one for the rest of the year.
|
|
|
Post by silversurfer on Sept 24, 2007 15:45:26 GMT -5
Ruffda, I agree with you on Dayton and Duke. Teams are being carried by having beaten teams overrated. Purdue and Hawaii launched alot of teams in weeks 1 and 2. Duke and Dayton can snag a few good wins and than hide in mediocre leagues. Mid major and mediocre sure seem to fit the ACC. How could schools be that attractive to recruits, and not be very good. As volleyball athletes are middle to upper middle class kids with good grades, UNC, Wake, Virginia etc... should be killin it! You might as well put Ohio in there as well...they'll play no one for the rest of the year. At least the Bobcats have a history of being able to perform in the NCAA tournament.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2007 15:50:21 GMT -5
Gorfie, normally I'd agree with you. But for the last two years, the voters don't have much choice except to treat the Pac10 that way. When they win almost ALL of their non-conference matches, you have to assume it means something.
This is basically all the anti-Pac10 crowd has going for it:
Stanford taken to 5 by PSU (they won). Meanwhile, they beat LBSU, San Diego, Minnesota, Ohio, Cal Poly, BYU.
UCLA beaten by Nebraska, except they are the only team to take a game off the consensus #1 team. And they've beaten Louisville, Hawaii, UCI. San Diego took them to 5, however, in San Diego.
USC taken to 5 by Duke and Ohio State, but wins over LMU, St Johns, Pepperdine, Purdue.
Washington has a win over LBSU. That's it. (They really should be ashamed of that schedule.)
California lost to Colorado. Finally, a dent in the armor. But they've beaten Minnesota.
Oregon lost to the much-maligned Boilermakers, but swept Ohio State.
Arizona has a bad loss to St Marys, plus a not-so-good loss to Pepperdine. But they have beaten some decent teams, like Kentucky, Nevada, UCI and Georgia Tech.
Oregon State's losses to Pacific and LMU (both 13-15 in the 5th, btw) are nothing to brag about, but they have beaten Hawaii (3-0 no less), Colorado State (18-16 in the 5th), Sac State (again in 5). If they had beaten MTS, Oklahoma or Michigan -- or TWO of those teams -- there'd be NO case.
You can make your case with the Oregon-Washington match maybe, or Arizona's efforts against USC and UCLA. But it's going to be pretty thin. Fact is, the Pac10 has barely stumbled in non-conference play. No other conference can make that claim.
|
|
|
Post by GatorVball on Sept 24, 2007 15:52:05 GMT -5
But there is no consistency. Washington and Florida lose more points, winning matches against ranked teams on the road than USC, who went 5 at home against an unranked team. It's especially strange for Washington, considering Oregon's huge gain. LSU also gained points from last week after losing to Florida in 4. Penn State sweeps 2 matches and loses points. And UCLA goes 5 with an unranked team at home and actually gains points. All I can figure is that someone BELOW them is taking their points, like Wisconsin. But in fact, PSU and USC give up 6 points (4 + 2) and UCLA gains 4. Florida loses 6 and Texas gains 8 and you're back to zero net points. So it's Texas's win over Iowa State? Why that's worth more than a road win over LSU is beyond me. Well, Iowa State did beat LSU, so that actually makes sense. Holy crap, the coaches are paying attention. Or is that just a lucky coincidence?
|
|
|
Post by leadbrain on Sept 24, 2007 15:56:03 GMT -5
All I can figure is that someone BELOW them is taking their points, like Wisconsin. But in fact, PSU and USC give up 6 points (4 + 2) and UCLA gains 4. Florida loses 6 and Texas gains 8 and you're back to zero net points. So it's Texas's win over Iowa State? Why that's worth more than a road win over LSU is beyond me. coincidence. Well, Iowa State did beat LSU, so that actually makes sense. Holy crap, the coaches are paying attention. Or is that just a lucky coincidence?
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Sept 24, 2007 16:05:01 GMT -5
As rare as it may be, Ruffda says something worthwhile. Complain all you want about "Pac Ten bias" but when Pablo has the eighth place team in the Pac Ten ranked 38, you can't attribute that to silly voters. Oregon State may be lousy by Pac Ten standards, but they still beat the snotties out of Hawaii and pulled out the match against Sac St, so they aren't that bad. Yeah, they lost to a handful of ranked teams, but there's a long way from "not ranked" to "not very good."
|
|
|
Post by runninrebel44 on Sept 24, 2007 16:12:00 GMT -5
Duke at #14 is based solely on a home win over Purdue, unless they are getting credit for going 5 with USC. Dayton's at #16 based on Illinois and Purdue wins? Is Purdue this year's Hawaii? That is, everyone's being ranked relative to them? Sort of, except Hawaii is also this year's Hawaii. Ruffio, I've noticed the same thing. Purdue is not even recieving votes this week, not that actually shows how good they are, but Dayton and Duke are given credit for that win alone. (Unless, I'm missing another signature win) At the same token, Oregon was not punished by the loss to unranked Purdue. So for whatever reason, the voters are giving Purdue a great amount of respect in regards to their relativity with other teams, but not giving them respect with their votes. Confusing stuff. Shocking that these AVCA polls are confusing...
|
|
|
Post by liberi on Sept 24, 2007 16:16:31 GMT -5
"Washington has a win over LBSU. That's it. (They really should be ashamed of that schedule.)"
Washington has to play Stanford, USC, UCLA, and Cal a total of 8 times this season. That is more quality matches than Florida or Nebraska will play. And let's face it, there's a lot at stake this season for being a number 1 vs. number 2 seed in the regionals. Who wants to risk being sent to the same regional as Nebraska? I think Washington is smart to take it easy in the preseason, pad their record, and give their team a chance to develop chemistry before putting their season (and seeding) on the line. For example, Texas may end up as a tougher team than Penn State by season's end, but there's no way after dropping TWO matches to PSU so early that Texas will beat PSU out for a number one seed.
I wish volleyball were easier to find on tv than it is. It would be easier to rank teams if you've seen them play. I think that's why Penn State is still so high; despite losing twice to Nebraska and Stanford, they are impressive to watch play. I'm really enjoying all the streamed matches this year; gotta love the internets!
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Sept 24, 2007 16:19:19 GMT -5
As rare as it may be, Ruffda says something worthwhile. Complain all you want about "Pac Ten bias" but when Pablo has the eighth place team in the Pac Ten ranked 38, you can't attribute that to silly voters. Oregon State may be lousy by Pac Ten standards, but they still beat the snotties out of Hawaii and pulled out the match against Sac St, so they aren't that bad. Yeah, they lost to a handful of ranked teams, but there's a long way from "not ranked" to "not very good." I was talking about IN conference play. They appear to be treated differently than other conferences with similar outcomes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2007 16:19:37 GMT -5
There's no arguing that UW will have a tough schedule when all is said and done, but they should be in at least ONE tough pre-season tournament. I can't see how this schedule helps them. It sure won't help their RPI.
If they were to go 11-9 or 12-8 in the Pac10 -- not impossible -- they're not going to be seeded.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2007 16:21:57 GMT -5
As rare as it may be, Ruffda says something worthwhile. Complain all you want about "Pac Ten bias" but when Pablo has the eighth place team in the Pac Ten ranked 38, you can't attribute that to silly voters. Oregon State may be lousy by Pac Ten standards, but they still beat the snotties out of Hawaii and pulled out the match against Sac St, so they aren't that bad. Yeah, they lost to a handful of ranked teams, but there's a long way from "not ranked" to "not very good." I was talking about IN conference play. They appear to be treated differently than other conferences with similar outcomes. But that's what we're saying. If you've proven you're the strongest conference, Oregon is going to be rewarded for playing UW tough. Likewise, with Arizona. And when someone actually pulls off an upset, they'll really be rewarded and the losing team won't be punished too severely. They've earned it.
|
|