|
Post by redbeard2008 on Jun 29, 2015 10:58:45 GMT -5
The difference is that other schools and conferences are investing in women's sports programs and facilities, with networks (BTN, SECNet, and LHN, besides P12Net) hungry for live events. When women's sports were largely an after-thought in other parts of the country, the Pac-12 had an advantage, in that they had emphasized women's sports earlier and were sitting on top of the richest recruiting grounds, especially for volleyball and softball. If anything, the Pac-12 had rested on its laurels and had been slow to upgrade now aging facilities, leaving it now playing catch-up.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jun 29, 2015 11:19:15 GMT -5
Your argument seems to invalidate your premise. Since double elimination and 2 of 3 series are used I agree the better teams are likely to advance. In recent years the better teams have been from the SEC. What is still yet to be seen is if the increased coverage of women's athletics and of SEC sports like volleyball and softball through the SEC Network will have an impact on recruiting in the SEC. I think we may be seeing hints of that in softball where a single phenom recruit can have a greater impact than in sports like volleyball. Nobody would disagree that the SEC was the better conference the last few years, my issue was with future predictions of this "lull", I don't think its dire. Also, in terms of the WCWS as a whole, I'd argue that the SEC was only distinctly better the last two years which could easily be chalked up to a superior recruiting class for a year or two rather than a permanent shift. I don't think softball is a "lull." Quality and salaries of coaches and facilities are just way better in the SEC than the PAC. Arizona and UCLA are just treading water at this point and graduate most of their production, ASU free-falling after their coach defected to Auburn, Stanford is done for years, UW has the best potential to bounce back to elite because they have the best coach of the bunch but they desperately need pitching... just not a lot to think the conference will rebound. Volleyball has a waaaaay better outlook. 2015 will be a down year, but the LA schools will be back with a vengeance in 2016, Stanford is still Stanford and Oregon is starting to stockpile talent. Facilities are pretty nice overall; a lot of good coaching still left. That'll be 4 programs in better shape than pretty much any softball school, and if UW can hold on and one of the 4 desert/mountain schools play to their potential, that'll stack up with any conference around. Even the bottom-schools (WSU/OSU) are quietly brining in more talent than they have before.
|
|
|
Post by trianglevolleyball on Jun 29, 2015 11:55:54 GMT -5
At least there's optimism for Cal to be improved this year. And despite their sizable losses USC and Stanford should both stay steady. But even if the California schools take a step forward it seems that the rest off the teams in conference are having rebuilding years other than Oregon and ASU. Maybe ASU will surprise people returning all of its starters and having the Pickrell sisters to possibly upgrade at setter and one of the pin spots. However, I don't think the conference's lull is as dramatic or permanent as the softball comparison, as Stanford, USC and Oregon are bringing in great talent the next few years and there are world class coaches throughout the conference. 1- I don't think that the softball "lull" is dramatic 2- I don't think the softball "lull" is permanent If anything I think the comparison needs to be taken with a grain of salt because while the Pac-12 has gone 4 straight years without a softball championship, it's in comparison to TRUE dominance. Even excluding the UCLA/Arizona hegemony of the pre 2000's, the Pac-12, prior to 2012 had won 10 of the last 12 championships comprising an astounding 5 different schools (half the conference during that time). No conference in any sport comes anywhere close to that level of depth and dominance for that long. So when the Pac-12 goes 4 straight without contending, it SEEMS like a big drop, because it is, but it's really only because the bar was set so high. Also, the most stark difference is that, if going off of tournament performance, softball usually progresses the better team because of the many layers of repetitiveness such as the round robin format in the early rounds, best of 3 for the next level, 2 and out for the world series, and best of 3 to determine the championship. The volleyball tournament is 1 and done which makes the bracket a heavy influence on how far any given teams advance. IMO a Pac-12 softball teams that is perceived to be "better" than everyone else has a much better chance of advancing to the last stages of the tournament than a similarly situated Pac-12 volleyball team. I think your point exactly proves why the softball drop-off has appeared to be so dramatic. The PAC-12 had such a high level of success that 4 years without a championship seems like a dramatic lull in my opinion. Just like if Penn State lost in the Elite 8 of the volleyball tournament the next three straight years it would be seen as a lull because of lofty standards. However, it was unfair of me to use the term "permanent" because I have little knowledge of softball recruiting and was just going based off the fact that LSU, Auburn, Bama and Florida all had young teams this past year and trusted commentary I heard during the WCWS.
|
|
|
Post by southie on Jun 29, 2015 12:38:57 GMT -5
The difference is that other schools and conferences are investing in women's sports programs and facilities, with networks (BTN, SECNet, and LHN, besides P12Net) hungry for live events. When women's sports were largely an after-thought in other parts of the country, the Pac-12 had an advantage, in that they had emphasized women's sports earlier and were sitting on top of the richest recruiting grounds, especially for volleyball and softball. If anything, the Pac-12 had rested on its laurels and had been slow to upgrade now aging facilities, leaving it now playing catch-up. You hit the nail on the head. I remember being shocked many years ago when I read that Cal had to be "shipped out" to a different regional because their own ballpark prevented them from hosting due to not meeting minimum media requirements. Or, was it not having any outdoor lights? Regardless, I just couldn't believe that. SEC turned it up in women's softball, even before conference re-alignment started generating huge TV contracts with increased revenue for member schools. Strangely, they haven't really had the same success in volleyball and soccer, but I guess different conferences are still kingpins in different sports.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Jun 29, 2015 14:04:53 GMT -5
I remember being shocked many years ago when I read that Cal had to be "shipped out" to a different regional because their own ballpark prevented them from hosting due to not meeting minimum media requirements. Or, was it not having any outdoor lights? Regardless, I just couldn't believe that. Likely lights. Same thing happened with UW's softball team in 2009, when lack of lights required shipping them off to the UMass regional (barely advancing in a 15-inning nailbiter). Didn't stop them from upsetting Florida and winning the championship.
|
|
|
Post by bigfanofbigfan on Jun 29, 2015 17:11:19 GMT -5
As bad as it was for the Pac12 women volleyball last year, they helped Pac12 teams to finish 1-2-3 in the 2014-15 Director's Cup Standing. Yay for Pac12!!!
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Jun 29, 2015 20:35:23 GMT -5
As bad as it was for the Pac12 women volleyball last year, they helped Pac12 teams to finish 1-2-3 in the 2014-15 Director's Cup Standing. Yay for Pac12!!! They might as well rename it as the Stanford Cup...
|
|