diiifan
Freshman
https://d3vbwest.wordpress.com/
Posts: 95
|
Post by diiifan on Nov 17, 2015 22:41:58 GMT -5
What could be more likely is that Colorado College had a better overall resume in terms of garnering an At-Large since they had wins over Clarkson and Tufts. While Southwestern had beaten CC three times, did they have other regionally ranked wins to anchor their resume to. In cases like this, the RAC can re-rank prior to selection. It happened once in my region. One team had beaten another 3-0, but went out of region and lost to a bunch of teams. We moved them up in the last week and got them a bid because their resume otherwise was solid. Exactly. My experience also saw members of the committee start asking "who will have the best chance of getting the national at large bids". Basically who can they make the best case for given the criteria. As the season goes on, that question was asked more frequently. And don't forget the final regional ranking I believe is never published. I've never heard a member of the committee make any reference of the process taking into account travel. Maybe for who hosts, or where they play, but never with regards to who is selected. Interesting. I've never sat in a RAC committee, but I would probably have an eye out for the "who has the best chance to get a bid" and use that to break a close selection (regardless of how the criteria played out). Having said that, unless I've been lied to, in this case the West RAC kept the order the same as they had in the past. As I stated previously, I also believe the RACs never talk about travel or costs when ranking. (For that matter, please understand that I believe CC was 100% deserving of a bid.) The point I'm trying to make is that if the order stayed the same then the selection committee would have had to select both Southwestern and CC, requiring an additional team from the West Region to travel. No way CC didn't make that tournament (rightfully so). By switching, it opened the door that allowed them to drop a team that required travel. I would remind you that Southwestern should have drawn whatever benefit CC received when comparing against other regions via common opponent. One easy example was Tufts - a bubble team that did not require travel that was selected. They were swept by CC. CC was beaten by Southwestern 3 times. Common opponent is one of the criteria used and outside of head-to-head, is an excellent way to determine the worth of teams. I do appreciate the viewpoint from past RAC members! I think any sun that can be shone into the process is good. In the end, I'll stick to my beliefs that the West Region is held to an impossible standard (due to budgets) of having to travel inside their vast region and outside the region to be fairly compared against other regions, and when coming down to the end of selection a team that does not require travel to a region will get the benefit over a team that does.
|
|
|
Post by awgriffey on Nov 18, 2015 10:00:53 GMT -5
All-American teams just announced. www.avca.org/awards/all-america/division-three/No dog in the D3 fight as I am not involved with it in any way outside of being a fan, but how does the assists leader in the nation whose team was 31-3 only get an honorable mention? Ha, how about the west coast not existing. MIT has 4 all americans?
|
|
|
Post by tmb on Nov 19, 2015 5:14:36 GMT -5
All-American teams just announced. www.avca.org/awards/all-america/division-three/No dog in the D3 fight as I am not involved with it in any way outside of being a fan, but how does the assists leader in the nation whose team was 31-3 only get an honorable mention? Ha, how about the west coast not existing. MIT has 4 all americans? I bet if you do the math every region has 14 AAs! West has several/6 on 1st, 2nd and 3rd teams which seems like the most team-ers of the regions...
|
|
|
Post by tmb on Nov 19, 2015 5:17:37 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2015 10:16:47 GMT -5
I'll take Hendrix, Wittenburg, Cal Lu, and Randolph-Macon.
|
|
diiifan
Freshman
https://d3vbwest.wordpress.com/
Posts: 95
|
Post by diiifan on Nov 19, 2015 11:58:22 GMT -5
I'll take Hendrix, Wittenburg, Cal Lu, and Randolph-Macon. Congrats to these teams and their girls. Really interesting year with the upsets in the regionals. Bethel has really impressed me in the games I watched. Wittenburg was a team I liked at the beginning of the year. Cal Lu looked dominate in their regional and Carthage blew through the west earlier this year so I've adopted them. I'll take Bethel, Witt, Cal Lu and Carthage. Best of luck to all.
|
|
|
Post by volleycoach75 on Nov 19, 2015 13:01:47 GMT -5
All-American teams just announced. www.avca.org/awards/all-america/division-three/No dog in the D3 fight as I am not involved with it in any way outside of being a fan, but how does the assists leader in the nation whose team was 31-3 only get an honorable mention? Ha, how about the west coast not existing. MIT has 4 all americans? Not sure I understand your issue with the West's AA's. They have 3 1st team kids - more than any other region except Middle Atlantic. Every region has 14 total. MIT has a 2nd team and 3 HM. A lot of teams had more than 2 kids and all were multiple HM - which pretty much means 1 team all region. Colorado College had 2 1st team and 1 HM. There is no Eastern bias and in fact between the 3 eastern regions there were only 4 1st team AA's (3 came from Juniata, Eastern and CNU). I will say I am not sure how statistically Jordan from UTD was not 1st team. She certainly has the numbers compared to the other 1st & 2nd team setters. I am picking Hendrix, Wittenberg, CLU, and Carthage... then Witt over Hendrix and Carthage over CLU.
|
|
|
Post by charlesmorton on Nov 19, 2015 14:13:18 GMT -5
Halfway through the fourth set of Hendrix-Bethel and there have been 17 BHEs called. Dunno about you but I'd rather see people hit, block, and dig.
|
|
|
Post by joc on Nov 19, 2015 14:19:17 GMT -5
Halfway through the fourth set of Hendrix-Bethel and there have been 17 BHEs called. Dunno about you but I'd rather see people hit, block, and dig. Yeah, tons of doubles. Whoever is doing the scoreboard for the online broadcast needs to fired. Lots of Hoppeing too. Good match, Hendrix 15-13 in the fifth.
|
|
|
Post by joc on Nov 19, 2015 22:59:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by tmb on Nov 20, 2015 17:10:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by awgriffey on Nov 22, 2015 17:33:39 GMT -5
Congrats to Cal Lu, they definitely earned the title this year, and the final 4 was a solid group of teams. I'm still not sure how the West region ended up so stacked (Why was Washington-St Louis sent there?). There has been a lot of commentary from people with a lot more background in D3 volleyball than me attempting to explain it, but it still doesn't make sense. I understand the AQ factor (i don't understand how a conference actually gets an AQ with a team that goes 2-0 in conference, a la Santa Cruz) accounting for 44 of the 64 teams, but it shouldn't be so tough to pick the remaining 20 at large teams based on who they've played, and how they've performed. I'm even more shocked now that La Verne who went 5 with Cal Lu twice, and beat them once did not get in. Somebody mentioned earlier in this thread that "it's not like a team that could win the tournament would get left out". It can now legitimately be said that a team with the potential to win the entire tournament was left out. I don not believe that La Verne would have won the tournament, but they are one of a group of Claremont 2X, Emory, and Carthage, that beat Cal Lu this year. I don't think the rest of the country gave the SCIAC conference credit for being as tough as it was.
This has been a fun thread, and once again i want to thank everyone for all the info.
|
|