|
Post by pedro el leon on Sept 24, 2007 23:01:52 GMT -5
919 fans in august... one of them during a business day... and school isn't in. That number will rise significantly.
What is your beef with Washington anyways gorf? You bring them up when they aren't even in the conversation (like with rubyredslippers.)
And I think Nebraska also played PSU at Qwest. They've played 9 home matches and 1 away match. There is no way you can spin that.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Sept 24, 2007 23:33:43 GMT -5
919? how paltry! Why anyone would want to go to Washington to play in front of only 900 fans is beyond me.
|
|
|
Post by Mix Breed-TEXAS,HI,LBSU on Sept 24, 2007 23:36:47 GMT -5
919? how paltry! Why anyone would want to go to Washington to play in front of only 900 fans is beyond me. Now BiK, that's not true......Washington brings in more than 3 thousand fans each game ever since they're first final four apperance. I should now I go to every game.......Probably even more. The Bank Of American arena is always packed!
|
|
|
Post by Mix Breed-TEXAS,HI,LBSU on Sept 24, 2007 23:38:19 GMT -5
I'm not sure about pre-season games when not so good teams come and play Washington, but when the pac 10 starts, that's when the arena starts to pack up.....
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Sept 24, 2007 23:53:58 GMT -5
919? how paltry! Why anyone would want to go to Washington to play in front of only 900 fans is beyond me. Yeah well Washinton hasn't hosted any big names yet and school hasn't even started.... wait until the California schools come to town and those numbers will triple
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Sept 24, 2007 23:58:10 GMT -5
919? how paltry! Why anyone would want to go to Washington to play in front of only 900 fans is beyond me. Yeah well Washinton hasn't hosted any big names yet and school hasn't even started.... wait until the California schools come to town and those numbers will triple No excuses. How can any program consider itself elite with paltry attendance numbers like that? it's embarrassing to say the very least.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Sept 25, 2007 0:50:41 GMT -5
Yeah well Washinton hasn't hosted any big names yet and school hasn't even started.... wait until the California schools come to town and those numbers will triple No excuses. How can any program consider itself elite with paltry attendance numbers like that? it's embarrassing to say the very least. whoa... just because people in Seattle can't lay out on the beach on a thursday afternoon and then go watch some volleyball doesn't mean they aren't supportive . Anways I understand what you are saying but the numbers will improve (not that washington has anything to prove to hawaii)...and over the past few seasons Washington games have had higher attendance than Stanford, UCLA, and USC...and I think you can call all of those Pac-10 schools elite considering that they've dominated final four apperances and outside of nebraska, have won the past 6 national titles Perhaps Hawaii should stop focusing on cramming their gym full of fans and instead fill their roster with quality players so they can get back to elite level playing (don't take that too seriously it was only a joke because you're poking fun at UW
|
|
|
Post by pedro el leon on Sept 25, 2007 0:55:43 GMT -5
I'm not worried, Washington will finish in the top 5 in attendance again. Like we do every year.
|
|
|
Post by Mix Breed-TEXAS,HI,LBSU on Sept 25, 2007 1:01:38 GMT -5
Washinton probably beats out any pac 10 school in vball attendance.....If I'm correct....
|
|
|
Post by bomber on Sept 25, 2007 7:23:32 GMT -5
You might as well put Ohio in there as well...they'll play no one for the rest of the year. Last time I checked (two minutes ago), Minnesota is ranked #12 and San Diego is ranked #15, both with losses to Ohio. BIG difference, my friend! Yeah, Ohio may not play Big Ten-caliber teams for a while, but they do schedule tough in the pre-conference and they will play Louisville following the conference tournament. If they play lesser opponents, they just need to take care of business, as they did this past weekend. We certainly have a number of examples lately where teams did not perform as well as they should. Nice wins no doubt.....but Ohio also claims losses to unranked Long Beach State and Alabama, and Louisville doesn't cut it this year as a "tough opponent". Griffin get's Player of the Week against two ridiculously bad opponents with glossy stats against people who can't play. No doubt she can play, but no doubt also her stats are decidedly less glossy in a competitive conference.
|
|
|
Post by chipNdink on Sept 25, 2007 7:29:53 GMT -5
... No excuses. How can any program consider itself elite with paltry attendance numbers like that? it's embarrassing to say the very least. You must be talking about USC.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Sept 25, 2007 9:21:26 GMT -5
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. You may be right with respect to Florida, but your statement doesn't hold water when looking at the quality of Nebraska's schedule. They played non conference matches against UCLA and Penn State. In the conference season they have two matches with Texas, Kansas State and Oklahoma, all of which are ranked higher than California in this week's Pablo rankings. That's a total of eight "quality matches" using your definition of that term. And everyone has a different view of the balance between quality and quantity. In my opinion, when you're at the top, wins over other top teams are more important than any number of wins over lower teams even if those teams are ranked. To wit, the fact that Nebraska has 2 not-even-close wins against the #3 team and the #5 team is worth more to me than if USC were to go to a week long tournament and beat Cal Poly, Oregon, LSU, BYU, New Mexico State, and Oklahoma.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Sept 25, 2007 9:29:46 GMT -5
And the polls need to be changed...period. I think it should resemble a system more like the BCS standings. I understand that Texas lost to teams ranked above them, but 3 losses out of 9 matches and they are still ranked #6!?!.... Texas should be praised for playing such big names in the preseason, but they should also be punished for losing. Why not put one of those Big 10 teams with a better record ahead of Texas, for now? Talk about being fair to conferences.... when the #2 team in the Big 12 goes 6-3 gets a higher rank than the #1 team in the Big 10 with a 10-1/13-1 record that seems like more biased than placing 5 pac-10 teams in the 10 with total of 2 losses on the entire season.... Because two of those Texas losses were to your Big10 PSU at #3, and the other was to #1 NU. As I stated in another post, I personally weight Strength of Schedule progressively with regards to opponents' rankings. Other than PSU, which Big10 teams have played teams in the top 10 this year? How many of those matches were wins for the Big10?
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Sept 25, 2007 9:49:14 GMT -5
And for the record, since I often bring up Nebraska as an example of scheduling tough opponents, I do think it's squirrely when some of their backers (and some of their official press releases) try to count the Qwest center as an "away" or "neutral" site.
|
|
|
Post by ugopher on Sept 25, 2007 9:57:33 GMT -5
Other than PSU, which Big10 teams have played teams in the top 10 this year? How many of those matches were wins for the Big10? MN has played both Stanford and Cal. Lost both which should have moved them up in the polls.
|
|