|
Post by joc on Nov 10, 2015 12:24:26 GMT -5
The NCAA is very money-conscious when it comes to D3. Often when deciding between two teams with similar resumes for one spot, they go with the cheaper option (typically based on distance; can they drive instead of fly, who has cheaper flights, etc). This doesn't appear to be the case with La Verne since the regional is at Cal Lu and there are teams from farther away that are at that region. However, if all of the others were AQ's (I do not know if they were or not) this would explain why they didn't get in. On a different note, in the ten years or so that I've been following D3, I never remember Wash U going to the west region. That was not true when I sat on the National Committee. The NCAA specifically told us we were to pick the teams first, then seed and organize the bracket once the field had been picked. Geography didn't come into play in the selection process in terms of cost.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2015 12:47:31 GMT -5
The NCAA is very money-conscious when it comes to D3. Often when deciding between two teams with similar resumes for one spot, they go with the cheaper option (typically based on distance; can they drive instead of fly, who has cheaper flights, etc). This doesn't appear to be the case with La Verne since the regional is at Cal Lu and there are teams from farther away that are at that region. However, if all of the others were AQ's (I do not know if they were or not) this would explain why they didn't get in. On a different note, in the ten years or so that I've been following D3, I never remember Wash U going to the west region. That was not true when I sat on the National Committee. The NCAA specifically told us we were to pick the teams first, then seed and organize the bracket once the field had been picked. Geography didn't come into play in the selection process in terms of cost. Why do you think La Verne did not make it?
|
|
|
Post by joc on Nov 10, 2015 13:02:57 GMT -5
That was not true when I sat on the National Committee. The NCAA specifically told us we were to pick the teams first, then seed and organize the bracket once the field had been picked. Geography didn't come into play in the selection process in terms of cost. Why do you think La Verne did not make it? The Claremont-MS (#4 Regionally) and Cal Lu (#5 Regionally) wins were significant, but that's about all they have to hang their hat on. Losing four of five down the stretch might have hurt them. Not just losing, but 3-0 in all four, with two to teams not even ranked regionally. East Texas Baptist looked better since they had beaten the #1 (Col. Coll.) and #3 (SW-TX) in the same region, although they also faltered down the stretch to unranked teams.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2015 13:39:15 GMT -5
Why do you think La Verne did not make it? The Claremont-MS (#4 Regionally) and Cal Lu (#5 Regionally) wins were significant, but that's about all they have to hang their hat on. Losing four of five down the stretch might have hurt them. Not just losing, but 3-0 in all four, with two to teams not even ranked regionally. East Texas Baptist looked better since they had beaten the #1 (Col. Coll.) and #3 (SW-TX) in the same region, although they also faltered down the stretch to unranked teams. Both did taper off some with significant losses at the end of the year. Still, many would argue that there are several teams in the tournament that aren't as good as either of them.
|
|
|
Post by d3follower on Nov 10, 2015 15:56:13 GMT -5
D3 national rankings have even less validity than the tournament choices. But Pablo does D3 very well. It has Ohio Wesleyan #18, La Verne #24, Osh Kosh 38 and CMU out at 40. Union is #125. Of course, you have to view these from regional perspectives, but in terms of at-larges, they usually find ways to get better teams in. If Union had gotten in, it would have been a sign of how big of a mess D3 is. Fortunately, smarter heads prevailed there, at least. It doesn't matter that they were a 2 in the region when the region doesn't compare to others. Could you please post the Pablo number for Mary Washington?
|
|
|
Post by awgriffey on Nov 10, 2015 16:05:01 GMT -5
Getting off my La Verne bandwagon, can you explain to me how UCSC got in? Nobody is even attempting to answer that one. This is very confusing because you yourself said that they got the automatic bid for winning the GSAC. True, but you must have missed my post about it. How does Santa Cruz get an automatic bid for winning a conference (Great South Athletic Conference) based in Atlanta, and having a total league record of 2-0? They don't even show up on the GSAC website under the volleyball standings. To top that off, why would a conference out of Atlanta get a team in the West region? Seems pretty odd to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2015 16:14:06 GMT -5
This is very confusing because you yourself said that they got the automatic bid for winning the GSAC. True, but you must have missed my post about it. How does Santa Cruz get an automatic bid for winning a conference (Great South Athletic Conference) based in Atlanta, and having a total league record of 2-0? They don't even show up on the GSAC website under the volleyball standings. To top that off, why would a conference out of Atlanta get a team in the West region? Seems pretty odd to me. Because they are the conference champion. Why are they in that conference? I don't know. They are also in the American Southwest Conference (Texas) for women's golf. www.goslugs.com/sports/wgolf/2013-14/releases/20130731oij3js
|
|
|
Post by d3follower on Nov 10, 2015 16:32:07 GMT -5
This is very confusing because you yourself said that they got the automatic bid for winning the GSAC. True, but you must have missed my post about it. How does Santa Cruz get an automatic bid for winning a conference (Great South Athletic Conference) based in Atlanta, and having a total league record of 2-0? They don't even show up on the GSAC website under the volleyball standings. To top that off, why would a conference out of Atlanta get a team in the West region? Seems pretty odd to me. It's within the rules. Conferences decide how to determine their automatic qualifiers. The GSAC is currently comprised of teams from California, Georgia, Massachusetts, Michigan, North Carolina and Wisconsin. As recently as last season, the GSAC also had teams from Maine and Washington D.C. "Fluid" is a good word to describe the league. This year's Pool A factory of a volleyball tournament did not include the team from Massachusetts. Teams have failed to travel to the championship tournament in other sports as well, although I do not know why Pine Manor was not at VB last weekend. It could have been a legitimate reason, but my sense is that it was, "It's going to cost us X to get our rear ends handed to us? Pass ..." You can't blame UCSC for the conference website not including them. Mount Mary isn't on the site either, and what I think are former members, Trinity and Presque Isle, are. The latter two were not among the GSAC's teams in this year's VB Pre-Championship Manual. All of that aside, can you blame an institution for doing what it can to gain access to championships for their student-athletes? It's a unique situation for sure, but I think if you have a certain perspective, the GSAC is fine. Just because it wasn't called a conference, those teams would still be battling for a bid as if it were. My perspective is that all of those former Pool B teams were, in effect, one big conference when it came to selection day anyway. The only difference is now those programs get together once a year and decide things on the court. The access ratio for a Pool B berth was coming perilously close to falling under the threshold, so the far-flung institutions were proactive in guaranteeing that championship access. It's weird all around, I agree, but it makes a heck of a lot of sense.
|
|
|
Post by awgriffey on Nov 10, 2015 17:08:45 GMT -5
The Claremont-MS (#4 Regionally) and Cal Lu (#5 Regionally) wins were significant, but that's about all they have to hang their hat on. Losing four of five down the stretch might have hurt them. Not just losing, but 3-0 in all four, with two to teams not even ranked regionally. East Texas Baptist looked better since they had beaten the #1 (Col. Coll.) and #3 (SW-TX) in the same region, although they also faltered down the stretch to unranked teams. Both did taper off some with significant losses at the end of the year. Still, many would argue that there are several teams in the tournament that aren't as good as either of them. To add insult to injury, the new NCAA rankings just came out today, and La Verne is still at #20.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Nov 10, 2015 17:24:13 GMT -5
But Pablo does D3 very well. It has Ohio Wesleyan #18, La Verne #24, Osh Kosh 38 and CMU out at 40. Union is #125. Of course, you have to view these from regional perspectives, but in terms of at-larges, they usually find ways to get better teams in. If Union had gotten in, it would have been a sign of how big of a mess D3 is. Fortunately, smarter heads prevailed there, at least. It doesn't matter that they were a 2 in the region when the region doesn't compare to others. Could you please post the Pablo number for Mary Washington? 46
|
|
diiifan
Freshman
https://d3vbwest.wordpress.com/
Posts: 95
|
Post by diiifan on Nov 10, 2015 18:29:13 GMT -5
A number of good questions and a number of good answers with regards to the West Region.
Yes, UCSC basically bought their way in for the honor of playing one of the best teams in the nation. One of the outstanding features of the West Region in the past is that they really don't have a weak conference AQ. This has changed and will be tough getting use to.
I believe the West RAC had La Verne ahead of ETBU in the final ranking. I assumed UCSC would remove ETBU but was surprised WUSTL was flown in at the expense of La Verne. Especially since keeping La Verne and busing WUSTL to a different region would follow the typical NCAA Division III MO (i.e., save money). Last year, the West Region had Southwestern passed over for Colorado College (despite a 3-0 head-to-head record). Both teams deserved bids but the NCAA refused to fly Southwestern to another region. Now, it appears the NCAA has gone a step further by flying a top team into the region at the expense of money and a worthy (local) team being bounced. At the surface, you could conclude that the NCAA powers to be think the West Region is overrated. All the while providing 12 spots to the New England Region that has MIT as their #1 seed. Frankly, put the MIT team in the west and they get beat by at least 6 if not 7 of the teams in the bracket.
As has been mentioned, both ETBU and La Verne spit the bit at the end of their seasons. They were bounced because of it where other teams in other regions were not impacted by the same set of events. I could understand it if they were replaced by a Trinity (for instance) that came on late in the year and even beat La Verne head-to-head but the NCAA went in a different direction.
Anyway, it does seem like a different set of standards were once again placed on the West Region. In the end, I would love to see La Verne (and others) head to the northeast one weekend next year. My guess is that not only would you have the West RAC pulling for you come selection time but the NE RAC, as well. After all, you know they are going to get their 4 at-large selections and that can't happen if a team has wins over them.
|
|
|
Post by awgriffey on Nov 10, 2015 20:09:58 GMT -5
A number of good questions and a number of good answers with regards to the West Region. Yes, UCSC basically bought their way in for the honor of playing one of the best teams in the nation. One of the outstanding features of the West Region in the past is that they really don't have a weak conference AQ. This has changed and will be tough getting use to. I believe the West RAC had La Verne ahead of ETBU in the final ranking. I assumed UCSC would remove ETBU but was surprised WUSTL was flown in at the expense of La Verne. Especially since keeping La Verne and busing WUSTL to a different region would follow the typical NCAA Division III MO (i.e., save money). Last year, the West Region had Southwestern passed over for Colorado College (despite a 3-0 head-to-head record). Both teams deserved bids but the NCAA refused to fly Southwestern to another region. Now, it appears the NCAA has gone a step further by flying a top team into the region at the expense of money and a worthy (local) team being bounced. At the surface, you could conclude that the NCAA powers to be think the West Region is overrated. All the while providing 12 spots to the New England Region that has MIT as their #1 seed. Frankly, put the MIT team in the west and they get beat by at least 6 if not 7 of the teams in the bracket. As has been mentioned, both ETBU and La Verne spit the bit at the end of their seasons. They were bounced because of it where other teams in other regions were not impacted by the same set of events. I could understand it if they were replaced by a Trinity (for instance) that came on late in the year and even beat La Verne head-to-head but the NCAA went in a different direction. Anyway, it does seem like a different set of standards were once again placed on the West Region. In the end, I would love to see La Verne (and others) head to the northeast one weekend next year. My guess is that not only would you have the West RAC pulling for you come selection time but the NE RAC, as well. After all, you know they are going to get their 4 at-large selections and that can't happen if a team has wins over them. This answers everything and more. Thanks for the detailed post!
|
|
|
Post by greenpier on Nov 10, 2015 21:43:50 GMT -5
I hope Emory gets dogged out and stomped.
|
|
|
Post by noreaster on Nov 10, 2015 22:06:42 GMT -5
The NCAA is very money-conscious when it comes to D3. Often when deciding between two teams with similar resumes for one spot, they go with the cheaper option (typically based on distance; can they drive instead of fly, who has cheaper flights, etc). This doesn't appear to be the case with La Verne since the regional is at Cal Lu and there are teams from farther away that are at that region. However, if all of the others were AQ's (I do not know if they were or not) this would explain why they didn't get in. On a different note, in the ten years or so that I've been following D3, I never remember Wash U going to the west region. This is categorically false. The at-large bids are picked. THEN they proceed to figuring out which possible hosting sites would be allow for the most economical tournament. You can blame site assignments on money but not team selection.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2015 22:09:52 GMT -5
The NCAA is very money-conscious when it comes to D3. Often when deciding between two teams with similar resumes for one spot, they go with the cheaper option (typically based on distance; can they drive instead of fly, who has cheaper flights, etc). This doesn't appear to be the case with La Verne since the regional is at Cal Lu and there are teams from farther away that are at that region. However, if all of the others were AQ's (I do not know if they were or not) this would explain why they didn't get in. On a different note, in the ten years or so that I've been following D3, I never remember Wash U going to the west region. This is categorically false. The at-large bids are picked. THEN they proceed to figuring out which possible hosting sites would be allow for the most economical tournament. You can blame site assignments on money but not team selection. So how does #19 La Verne not get an at-large bid?
|
|