|
Post by redbeard2008 on Sept 30, 2014 13:04:35 GMT -5
I would guess you are too young to remember it, but ask Russ what happened the last time PSU came to play Washington on their home court, Hec Ed Pavillion (as opposed to Key Arena). This is all idle speculation, but I do think most teams would prefer to avoid having to go through Seattle if they could avoid it. That was the last time (2006) that UW won a regional in Seattle (I was there). BYU (2007), Nebraska (2008), and Cal (2010) have done it since. UW has won two (2004 and 2006) out of five Seattle regionals. Of the three losses, only BYU was an upset. Generally, being a top four seed is more important than hosting your own regional, although it certainly doesn't hurt (helping to upset #3 seed PSU in 2006, for instance). Of course, if you're a top four seed and hosting your own regional...
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Sept 30, 2014 21:45:49 GMT -5
The question isn't if a 2 loss PSU team would be seeded above a 6 loss Oregon team, the question is whether a 2 loss PSU team would be seeded above a 2 loss Stanford and Washington team. It's clear to me that unless the sky falls, Texas and FSU will be top seeds. The Big 12 and ACC isn't strong enough to give those teams enough losses to get out of top 4 seed range (though stranger things have happened). So then it comes Down to whether the PAC-12 gets a second seed or it goes to the Big 10. If both Washington and Stanford, or hell even Oregon, finish with 2 losses too (not saying they are, but if they do), I'm not sure PSU will have the case. All those teams would have higher RPI's and more matches (and presumably wins) over RPI top 25. In terms of seeds, however it may not be much of a difference, especially if we are just arguing 4 versus 5, considering they'd be in the same regional anyway. Come seasons end, the real winner is whomever will be the seed opposite FSU. While they played a tough preseason schedule, and escaped some potential losses, I'd have a hard time not seeing them as the weakest of the top seeds. I decided to take this hypothetical out. If Penn State, Washington, and Florida State all ended with just 2 losses - and using the RPI future's, then: Penn State would be 4-2 against the RPI top 25 and 9-2 against the RPI top 50 Washington would be 9-2 against the RPI top 25 and 15-2 against the RPI top 50 Florida State would be 6-2 against the RPI top 25 and 11-2 against the RPI top 50 I could see Penn State being a top 4 seed and Florida State being pushed to a #5 - despite having a better RPI than either Washington or Penn State. Also, the RPI future has Minnesota at #26 and Iowa State at #25. Switch those 2 and you add 2 wins to Penn State's top 25 and subtract 1 win from Florida State's top 25. In this scenario, I don't see how PSU is justified in getting a seed over FSU or Washington. All three teams would have the same number of losses, yet Washington and FSU have stronger SOS, a higher actual RPI, and more wins against top 25 and top 50 rpi. I just think it would be hypocritical for the committee to ignore all of that. Or, rather, it wouldn't be fair, especially for FSU. Especially when you compare it to last year with Illinois getting a seed despite barely having a .500 record....
|
|
|
Post by beb12345 on Oct 1, 2014 14:45:11 GMT -5
RPI does not equate to seedlings. If Penn State loses only one more match they will not be seeded behind a 6 loss Oregon team, RPI be damned. Somebody will.
|
|
|
Post by beb12345 on Oct 1, 2014 14:48:27 GMT -5
When do u think 1st RPI for 2014 will be out?
|
|
|
Post by alpacaone on Oct 1, 2014 15:06:49 GMT -5
I saw somewhere the 6th, but who knows.
|
|