|
Post by donneyp on Nov 10, 2009 23:31:00 GMT -5
Same with the SUs: #9 Stanford #90 Syracuse #138 Samford #214 Siena #254 Seattle #301 Stetson #322 Southern U.My predictions are as reliable as ... microsoft security (" Windows - We Will See You Through"). ;D Siena College is actually SC, but I'm sure they appreciate being mentioned in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by qc on Nov 11, 2009 0:42:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by baywatcher on Nov 11, 2009 1:06:53 GMT -5
Re just two teams within 400 miles, I think the committee simply has to and still keep the tournament somewhat balanced, or avoid conference teams in the same tournament; Last year, the Cal sub regional had Siena and New Mexico State; Washington had Kansas State and Santa Clara; UCLA had Duke and LSU, while Nebraska had Liberty and UAB, which I think is more than 400 miles away (Alabama A & M is not within 400 miles according to Rich Kern). The USC regional had Hawaii and Belmont. That's five sub regionals with only two teams within the "limit". Just really hard/impossible to do, especially with few western teams spread out.
|
|
|
Post by gobruins on Nov 11, 2009 5:10:57 GMT -5
Why would you have Long Beach State host 1st/2nd round, when there is a seeded team, UCLA just 25 miles up the road. You could easily put Long Beach State, San Diego, and another random team from outside the area, at UCLA. Then, send Hawaii to Dayton.
It seems that since you believe that Hawaii "deserves" to host 1st/2nd rounds, but won't, you have to put them somewhere on the west coast. If they are going to travel, does it really matter whether they go to California or Ohio? Both are over the 400 miles stipulation.
|
|
|
Post by stand on Nov 11, 2009 10:51:16 GMT -5
In 2006, Cal Poly hosted Cal, Michigan, and LSU. That 2006 Cal Poly subregional was notorious because it seemed like it was the one that matched 3-4 participants that were extremely close to each other in quality, plus they threw out the regional participant guidelines to boot to arrive at it. I think Cal Poly, Cal, and LSU were ranked maybe #13/14/15 in the AVCA top 25 at the end of the regular season. Last year had two tough subregionals: St. Louis (#21), Kentucky (#20), and Michigan (#19). MI had to beat both to make it to the Seattle regional. Hawaii (#6), San Diego (#15), and USC (#12). Hawaii only had to beat USC to get to the Fort Collins regional, where they took care of Purdue (#17) before facing Stanford (#2). Tough road. The Ft. Collins bracket had 5 top-15 teams and 9 top-30 teams. The University Park bracket had 3 top-15 teams and 6 top-30 teams. PSU's first ranked opponent was Cal (#8) in the regional final. All of the other top 8 seeds faced a ranked opponent in the Second Round (except for Minnesota, who lost in the second round to unranked Iowa St.). I know small schools have limited travel budgets, but I would rather see more balance in the brackets. The average RPI in the Ft. Collins bracket was *10* points lower than any other (41.2, 51.2, 53.2, 57.6). The average ranking per bracket varied from 14.4 to 21.5. Would a school actually turn down a bid based on travel distance?
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Nov 11, 2009 11:03:08 GMT -5
Why would you have Long Beach State host 1st/2nd round, when there is a seeded team, UCLA just 25 miles up the road. You could easily put Long Beach State, San Diego, and another random team from outside the area, at UCLA. Then, send Hawaii to Dayton. It seems that since you believe that Hawaii "deserves" to host 1st/2nd rounds, but won't, you have to put them somewhere on the west coast. If they are going to travel, does it really matter whether they go to California or Ohio? Both are over the 400 miles stipulation. Yes, it does matter. California is a lot closer to Hawai'i than Ohio.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Nov 11, 2009 11:27:11 GMT -5
Why would you have Long Beach State host 1st/2nd round, when there is a seeded team, UCLA just 25 miles up the road. You could easily put Long Beach State, San Diego, and another random team from outside the area, at UCLA. Then, send Hawaii to Dayton. It seems that since you believe that Hawaii "deserves" to host 1st/2nd rounds, but won't, you have to put them somewhere on the west coast. If they are going to travel, does it really matter whether they go to California or Ohio? Both are over the 400 miles stipulation. Yes, it does matter. California is a lot closer to Hawai'i than Ohio. Has the committee acted as if there was a difference? Have they tried to keep Hawaii on the west coast for the opening rounds? Last year they were in SoCal, but has that been a pattern? Again, since we are trying to figure out what the committee is going to do, it matters what the committee thinks, which may or may not agree with reality.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Nov 11, 2009 12:14:08 GMT -5
Yes, it does matter. California is a lot closer to Hawai'i than Ohio. Has the committee acted as if there was a difference? Have they tried to keep Hawaii on the west coast for the opening rounds? Last year they were in SoCal, but has that been a pattern? Again, since we are trying to figure out what the committee is going to do, it matters what the committee thinks, which may or may not agree with reality. I don't think the Committee has ever acted as if there is a difference. Let's take a look at where the Committee has placed Hawai'i over the last 5 tournaments: 2008- California (LA), 2007- Kentucky (Louisville), 2006-California (Long Beach), 2005-Texas (Austin), 2004-Colorado (Fort Collins.) There's no real trend here so where they end up this year is anyone's guess. To be honest, I don't really care what the Committee thinks. I think it is safe for us (Hawai'i fans) to assume that the Wahine will not get the easiest road to the final four. We have seen the Committee make what we perceive to be ridiculous decisions in setting up past tournaments so I don't have a lot of faith in their decisions. Having said that, I do have a lot of faith in this Wahine team. I see them making the final four, regardless of the obstacles that the Committee will place before them.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Nov 11, 2009 12:20:41 GMT -5
Has the committee acted as if there was a difference? Have they tried to keep Hawaii on the west coast for the opening rounds? Last year they were in SoCal, but has that been a pattern? Again, since we are trying to figure out what the committee is going to do, it matters what the committee thinks, which may or may not agree with reality. I don't think the Committee has ever acted as if there is a difference. Let's take a look at where the Committee has placed Hawai'i over the last 5 tournaments: 2008- California (LA), 2007- Kentucky (Louisville), 2006-California (Long Beach), 2005-Texas (Austin), 2004-Colorado (Fort Collins.) There's no real trend here so where they end up this year is anyone's guess. At best, we can say that they don't appear to put Hawaii on the east coast (Kentucky is in the central time zone). Then you are in the wrong thread. This thread is about predicting what the brackets will be, which means predicting what the committee will do. That is a separate topic from what you think they SHOULD do.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Nov 11, 2009 12:26:16 GMT -5
I don't think the Committee has ever acted as if there is a difference. Let's take a look at where the Committee has placed Hawai'i over the last 5 tournaments: 2008- California (LA), 2007- Kentucky (Louisville), 2006-California (Long Beach), 2005-Texas (Austin), 2004-Colorado (Fort Collins.) There's no real trend here so where they end up this year is anyone's guess. At best, we can say that they don't appear to put Hawaii on the east coast (Kentucky is in the central time zone). Then you are in the wrong thread. This thread is about predicting what the brackets will be, which means predicting what the committee will do. That is a separate topic from what you think they SHOULD do. I'll make the time to predict the brackets as soon as I see bracket predictions from you.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Nov 11, 2009 12:39:19 GMT -5
At best, we can say that they don't appear to put Hawaii on the east coast (Kentucky is in the central time zone). Then you are in the wrong thread. This thread is about predicting what the brackets will be, which means predicting what the committee will do. That is a separate topic from what you think they SHOULD do. I'll make the time to predict the brackets as soon as I see bracket predictions from you. Who cares what I think?
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Nov 11, 2009 12:58:21 GMT -5
I'll make the time to predict the brackets as soon as I see bracket predictions from you. Who cares what I think? Well, I for one.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Nov 11, 2009 13:09:16 GMT -5
You know, sometimes volleyball people ask me what I think about tournament hopes and stuff like that. My response is, "I don't have a clue." I usually don't bother trying to predict what the committee will do, except in obvious cases. I will comment on things that I know the committee has or hasn't done, but even then, that doesn't mean much in the future.
|
|
|
Post by vballpac on Nov 11, 2009 14:14:16 GMT -5
Just clarifying...Kentucky is not in the central time zone, they are in the eastern. Tennessee is in the central.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Nov 11, 2009 14:49:53 GMT -5
Just clarifying...Kentucky is not in the central time zone, they are in the eastern. Tennessee is in the central. The heck. So then, they will send Hawaii to the eastern time zone, too. Therefore, there are no restrictions on where Hawaii can be sent.
|
|