|
Post by skullars on Nov 17, 2014 22:54:16 GMT -5
Miami needs to be OUT. It would just be a travesty if they made it in. I don't care if their Pablo is high; they have no wins over tourney teams (plus no wins over year-end Top 50s) and losses to non-tourney teams. They have not done anything to show they deserve to be in. Wow. Obviously an anti-Miami bias!
|
|
|
Post by baywatcher on Nov 17, 2014 23:00:48 GMT -5
What has Miami accomplished, other than arrange for a high RPI (and beat Pitt, another done squat team that beats up on RPI 170 teams...)
By the way, I'm a Pac 12 homer who has to realize that the middle of the PAC pack, which is like 8 of the teams, does little but beat up on each other, and should start showing some OOC success before squealing.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,391
|
Post by bluepenquin on Nov 17, 2014 23:06:02 GMT -5
I strongly, but respectfully disagree.
Great job trojansc.
I would be curious to know why you disagree that a team ranked 250th in the nation should go to a tournament because they play in some defined conference and they are better than the 320th ranked teams in that "group of teams". 32 conferences? I understand that travel budgets are low but many of them need to have ONE rep for three or four of these minor conferences. Or, now that we have good channels being pulled onto cable networks the sport might gain more viewership if there were less teams in div I that traveled more and played other great teams. As a graduate of UMKC - I think it would be very cool to see them in the tournament. The pictures of Harvard and Yale winning yesterday and playing for a chance to win the conference and make the tournament. Does American make the tournament last year if they didn't get the auto?
Another by-product; these autos are the biggest advantage seeded teams have in the sub-regional - more important than HCA. There would be less seeded teams going to the regionals if we went with the 'best' 64. Anyway, others will disagree - but I like the idea of these teams in the tournament, and I think it is good for broadening the sport.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Nov 17, 2014 23:09:55 GMT -5
What has Miami accomplished, other than arrange for a high RPI (and beat Pitt, another done squat team that beats up on RPI 170 teams...) By the way, I'm a Pac 12 homer who has to realize that the middle of the PAC pack, which is like 8 of the teams, does little but beat up on each other, and should start showing some OOC success before squealing. Except mid-level PAC-12 teams did quite a bit out of conference....
|
|
|
Post by pogoball on Nov 17, 2014 23:39:54 GMT -5
Last year, 2013, 8 teams from the B1G went to the tourney. Michigan lost in 5 to LSU in the first round, the other 7 teams made it to the sweet 16. A team that finished only 1 game ahead of 6th made it to the championship.
In 2012, 7 teams went to the tourney and 6 teams also made it to the sweet 16 with only Ohio State losing in the second round. The team that finished tied for 6th made it to the final four and could arguably be called the second best team that year.
Since the tournament's main goal is to determine the NCAA champion, it seems like it would be a mistake to not invite a 6th team from the B1G this year since recent history implies that team has a legit shot at being the champion.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Nov 17, 2014 23:48:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by baywatcher on Nov 17, 2014 23:49:52 GMT -5
OK, let's relate what Pac 12 did: ARIZONA; beat K State, UCF (another team you wonder how RPI is so low on) and Northridge, a real bubble team.
ARIZONA STATE beat Hawaii and Ohio the first week of the season, do we count Iowa as a big win?
OREGON STATE UOP at 55 RPI, Long Beach, and Michigan at a time the Wolverines were reeling.
UCLA beat Hawaii and Illinois
USC beat UOP, Arkansas Little Rock, Creighton, and the despised Kentucky Wildcats of the despised SEC
UTAH signature OOC win is Lipscomb.
COLORADO'S signature OOC win is Pittsburgh, or Butler, both teams any self respecting Pac 12er looks down their nose on.
OREGON did beat both Michigans, tOSU, Hawaii and Illinois State, very respectable.
But I submit that the remainder of the MIDPAC resume is a bit skimpy to allow every team in. Cal and Washington State don't add alot, either.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Nov 18, 2014 0:19:51 GMT -5
OK, let's relate what Pac 12 did: ARIZONA; beat K State, UCF (another team you wonder how RPI is so low on) and Northridge, a real bubble team. ARIZONA STATE beat Hawaii and Ohio the first week of the season, do we count Iowa as a big win? OREGON STATE UOP at 55 RPI, Long Beach, and Michigan at a time the Wolverines were reeling. UCLA beat Hawaii and Illinois USC beat UOP, Arkansas Little Rock, Creighton, and the despised Kentucky Wildcats of the despised SEC UTAH signature OOC win is Lipscomb. COLORADO'S signature OOC win is Pittsburgh, or Butler, both teams any self respecting Pac 12er looks down their nose on. OREGON did beat both Michigans, tOSU, Hawaii and Illinois State, very respectable. But I submit that the remainder of the MIDPAC resume is a bit skimpy to allow every team in. Cal and Washington State don't add alot, either. Compare that to Miami or Pittsburg's FULL SEASON resumes, or the OOC resumes of the midlevel teams in other conferences. I mean, you can rag on Washington St., but even they swept Virginia Tech (midlevel ACC) on a neutral court.....
|
|
|
Post by 2playsref on Nov 18, 2014 0:48:41 GMT -5
Pittsburg's FULL season resume? lost all credibility right there.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,107
|
Post by trojansc on Nov 18, 2014 1:04:06 GMT -5
For everyone that is supporting Miami and Pitt I'm not exactly sure why. I would have made a case for Pitt had they beaten Miami.
I don't see how you can make a case, if Miami ends up with no top-50 wins. But then there is a team going to be left out Like Pacific, who hasn't lost to anyone below Top 50 RPI and has three top 50 wins. Shame.
|
|
|
Post by 2playsref on Nov 18, 2014 1:31:50 GMT -5
For everyone that is supporting Miami and Pitt I'm not exactly sure why. I would have made a case for Pitt had they beaten Miami. I don't see how you can make a case, if Miami ends up with no top-50 wins. But then there is a team going to be left out Like Pacific, who hasn't lost to anyone below Top 50 RPI and has three top 50 wins. Shame. Trojansc, a couple weeks ago, was it you that guaranteed Miami had no shot at tourney? and after a predictable win against a pitt squad that played nobody out of conference you suddenly change your mind...
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,107
|
Post by trojansc on Nov 18, 2014 1:42:44 GMT -5
For everyone that is supporting Miami and Pitt I'm not exactly sure why. I would have made a case for Pitt had they beaten Miami. I don't see how you can make a case, if Miami ends up with no top-50 wins. But then there is a team going to be left out Like Pacific, who hasn't lost to anyone below Top 50 RPI and has three top 50 wins. Shame. Trojansc, a couple weeks ago, was it you that guaranteed Miami had no shot at tourney? and after a predictable win against a pitt squad that played nobody out of conference you suddenly change your mind... No, I never said they had no chance. You must be mistaken. IAnd the win against Pitt was anything but predictable.. Pitt just beat Duke, how well are you following the ACC? Pitt has a top-25 victory where Miami barely has one top-50. I also would never have said Miami has no chance because they still have a match remaining at Florida State, which could buy them an NCAA ticket with their RPI. If they win that, put them in. If not, and finish with no top 50 wins, they DESERVE to be in. I put Miami in for now but they are one of the last if not the last in. I'm also suspect on Hawaii despite the RPI. I change my mind because there aren't many other good bubble candidates, but let One of the 5 potential AQ's (western ky, lipscomb, ualr, illinois st, ohio) and they could steal the spot. Miami is in for right now. They have an awesome RPI and for this week have a top-50 win. Compared to their competition for a bid, as of this very second, I think the committee squeezes in. Are you a Miami homer? I'm confused here. The win over Pitt adds another top-70 RPI win which the NcAA deems significant. I'm trying to break this down and see what's impressive about Miami. I see OOC losses to missouri state, TCU, a near-loss to Ball State, and beating really nobody besides Seton Hall who probably needs to win the Big East to make the NCAAs. Miami also lost to UALR. I've seen Miami play and they are not bad. Their senior Leaf is a great player. The eye test says however, Pacific is a better team.
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Nov 18, 2014 1:44:54 GMT -5
OK, let's relate what Pac 12 did: ARIZONA; beat K State, UCF (another team you wonder how RPI is so low on) and Northridge, a real bubble team. ARIZONA STATE beat Hawaii and Ohio the first week of the season, do we count Iowa as a big win? OREGON STATE UOP at 55 RPI, Long Beach, and Michigan at a time the Wolverines were reeling. UCLA beat Hawaii and Illinois USC beat UOP, Arkansas Little Rock, Creighton, and the despised Kentucky Wildcats of the despised SEC UTAH signature OOC win is Lipscomb. COLORADO'S signature OOC win is Pittsburgh, or Butler, both teams any self respecting Pac 12er looks down their nose on. OREGON did beat both Michigans, tOSU, Hawaii and Illinois State, very respectable. But I submit that the remainder of the MIDPAC resume is a bit skimpy to allow every team in. Cal and Washington State don't add alot, either. good points all, now who exactly did Alabama, Texas A&M, & LSU beat out of conference??
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Nov 18, 2014 1:56:34 GMT -5
Last year, 2013, 8 teams from the B1G went to the tourney. Michigan lost in 5 to LSU in the first round, the other 7 teams made it to the sweet 16. A team that finished only 1 game ahead of 6th made it to the championship. In 2012, 7 teams went to the tourney and 6 teams also made it to the sweet 16 with only Ohio State losing in the second round. The team that finished tied for 6th made it to the final four and could arguably be called the second best team that year. Since the tournament's main goal is to determine the NCAA champion, it seems like it would be a mistake to not invite a 6th team from the B1G this year since recent history implies that team has a legit shot at being the champion. While I generally agree with you, the bigger problem with that it is too subjective. When do you draw the line? How many players from those teams are still around? Was the middle of the Big 10 losing to teams like Virgina Tech, Arkansas, LIU Brooklyn, Louisville, Western Kentucky, St. Louis, Illinois State, and Ohio last year? Well they are this year. Look, I think many teams in the Big 10 are regional contenders, but this is how the game is played. They got the big bonus last year with great seeding and brackets, they didn't play the game very well this year, sorry.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Nov 18, 2014 1:59:17 GMT -5
Look, I think many teams in the Big 10 are regional contenders, but this is how the game is played. They got the big bonus last year with great seeding and brackets, they didn't play the game very well this year, sorry. Exactly. When RPI favors one conference, the fans of that conference are very happy to accept their many bids into the tournament. When it doesn't, though, then you hear the complaints about the unfairness of the system.
|
|