|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Oct 7, 2004 12:05:26 GMT -5
Of course, its not just who you play, but what you do with them. Hawaii has played a tougher schedule, but has not dominated it by any means. Texas has played overall weaker teams but has stomped them into the ground. How do you compare those two aspects? Simple, bettter teams offer stiffer resistance. What good is stomping the likes of Liberty, Houston, Northern Arizona, Or Baylor into the ground? Tough victories (a sign of team character) against top 25 competition the likes of UCLA, Arizona, and Santa Clara is a far better indication of team strength than beating up cupcakes. You will focus on Hawaii's tougher schedule, with the caveat, "Hey, they won." On the other side, some will focus on the fact that Hawaii played all their non-conference at home, and has played 4 and 5 game matches with a lot of unimpressive (from a top 30 perspective at least) teams, and that Texas may not have played as many good teams as Hawaii, but when they have played teams comparable to the ones Hawaii has, they have beat them a lot worse. This is just silly. Btw, no mention of Texas squeaking by a Colorado team in 5. I'd take a 5 game win over UCLA or Arizona every day of the week. Unfortunately, the problem people perceive about your opinion is that if the situation were reversed, you would be pounding the poundings, so to speak, and dismissing the other as "not winning impressively." Of course you are going to favor the evidence that makes Hawaii look better. You can only speculate on what you "think" I would do. I'm astute enough to realize that victories over top 25 opponents are far more vaulable than easy victories over cupcake teams. the likes of which Texas has been playing for the most part. Personally, I would think Hawaii fans, if anyone, would have concerns about this team (and of course, many do). Compare it to teams of the past, who would dominate so many teams, especially in the SSC and on the road (quick question: when was the last time Hawaii had a WAC weekend of 9 games in two matches?) They have what, 3 3-game sweeps this year? That is not the dominant Hawaii that anyone was used to seeing in the era of Kim Willoughby. This isn't the Kim Willoughby era. Most Hawai'i fans have had far less expectations for the Wahine this season. So far, Hawai'i has exceeded even the best of expectations. This is still a team that starts 4 underclassmen. BTW, BIK, I didn't see your predictions in the pick the winners contest. I thought maybe you'd want to get involved to show how inaccurate Pablo is? I'll keep giving the Pablo results, why not get involved and show him what you can do when you add how you "feel"? I will, starting with the next week of predictions. I'll wipe the floor with the Pablo system and you can quote me on that one. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Curious on Oct 7, 2004 12:21:59 GMT -5
Well, then lets use the Sept 13th AVCA poll where Pepperdine and San Diego are ranked in the top 25 ..... Voila! Hawai'i is 7-0 against top 25 competition. Still far more impressive than Texas. 7-0 vs 3-0, you do the math. ;D Of course looking at a match between the two teams from an objective perspective, I'd have to say that Hawai'i would wipe the court with Texas. Remember, this is my view from a logical perspective. Regards Now wait a sec. If they beat a top-25 team in the week the teams were rated top-25, and the team(s) subsequently drop out of the top-25, then they don't count as a "quality" win? That's the gist of what you seem to be saying. If those 7 wins against top-25 teams by Hawaii were against those teams in the weeks they were so rated, then you have a point; however, Kansas 3-0 (dominated in Kansas), Florida 3-1 (dominated in Florida), Colorado 3-2 (after losing the first two games, at Texas, character and poise), all top-25 THE WEEK THEY PLAYED THEM, Florida top-10. Texas - games played 45 (14 matches), games lost 3, matches lost none. Hawaii - games played 49 (12 matches), games lost 13, matches lost none. Of course looking at a match between the two teams from an objective perspective, I'd have to say that Texas would wipe the court with Hawaii, to somewhat alter a quote by a renowned poster on this board. You do the math.;D Regards
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Oct 7, 2004 12:59:24 GMT -5
Now wait a sec. If they beat a top-25 team in the week the teams were rated top-25, and the team(s) subsequently drop out of the top-25, then they don't count as a "quality" win? That's the gist of what you seem to be saying. If those 7 wins against top-25 teams by Hawaii were against those teams in the weeks they were so rated, then you have a point; however, Kansas 3-0 (dominated in Kansas), Florida 3-1 (dominated in Florida), Colorado 3-2 (after losing the first two games, at Texas, character and poise), all top-25 THE WEEK THEY PLAYED THEM, Florida top-10. Colorado and Kansas were both barely in the top 25. poll. San Diego wasn't ranked in the preason AVCA top 25 poll but neither was Texas ;D. However, the Toreros jumped INTO the top 25 (20th spot) after they lost to Hawai'i. Both Colorado and Kansas dropped out of the top 25 after losing to Texas. Hmm, wonder who the voters think the better team is? Btw, UCLA was playing for the top spot in the country when they were defeated by Hawai'i. Texas - games played 45 (14 matches), games lost 3, matches lost none. Hawaii - games played 49 (12 matches), games lost 13, matches lost none. Consider the competition Curious, consider the competition. Texas= cupcakes (aside from Florida) vs Hawai'i= top notch, top rated, top talent competition. Of course looking at a match between the two teams from an objective perspective, I'd have to say that Texas would wipe the court with Hawaii, to somewhat alter a quote by a renowned poster on this board. You do the math.;D Regards It's your prerogative to post your opinion. Btw, Texas is the "where's Waldo?" of the NCAA. People are always trying to spot them in the rankings. It's very hard to do.
|
|
|
Post by TDome on Oct 7, 2004 13:33:00 GMT -5
In response to the Why do you Come here thread...
I come here for BiK, you are killing me... Your logic will only make sense to a UH fan. Most of the people defending Texas on this thread aren't even Texas fans... and I don't see any of your own UH fans rushing to get in on this thread with you.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Oct 7, 2004 13:41:14 GMT -5
In response to the Why do you Come here thread... I come here for BiK, you are killing me... Your logic will only make sense to a UH fan. Most of the people defending Texas on this thread aren't even Texas fans... and I don't see any of your own UH fans rushing to get in on this thread with you. Would you label Spock illogical? Gorf isn't really defending Texas. He is just my counter balance. He always has to employ an opposing viewpoint, no matter how ridiculous. ;D AgentBuchwald, isn't really defending Texas as much as he is defending his system's ranking of them. Too high if you ask me. Curious is trying to defend Texas but hasn't done a good job. I consider myself the winner of the "BiK/Curious" debate on the rankings. Curious is still trying to find that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. I send him my regards. UH fans don't feel a need to chime in. They know I have the situation well under control. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Oct 7, 2004 13:55:02 GMT -5
BIK used to be rational, and then when the News/Politics board opened up, his true colors were exposed when he went "George W" on us. But I love the dude for sending me vb tapes. Of course, without the tapes, I'd be on his arse, in a non-gay way.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Oct 7, 2004 13:56:26 GMT -5
BIK used to be rational, and then when the News/Politics board opened up, his true colors were exposed when he went "George W" on us. But I love the dude for sending me vb tapes. Of course, without the tapes, I'd be on his arse, in a non-gay way. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Oct 7, 2004 14:00:49 GMT -5
I also tell BIK secrets via IM. Stuff I would never post here for public consumption. Stuff he would be interested to know. Juicy stuff because I got a lot of juicy info. But BIK never tells me stuff, because he has an alliance with, how shall I say?, other interested parties.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Oct 7, 2004 14:02:53 GMT -5
Simple, bettter teams offer stiffer resistance. What good is stomping the likes of Liberty, Houston, Northern Arizona, Or Baylor into the ground? Tough victories (a sign of team character) against top 25 competition the likes of UCLA, Arizona, and Santa Clara is a far better indication of team strength than beating up cupcakes. A) Says who? You? B) Let's see, where's my statement...oh yes, "Texas may not have played as many good teams as Hawaii, but when they have played teams comparable to the ones Hawaii has, they have beat them a lot worse" You provided the counter of Colorado for Texas compared to UCLA and San Diego. In fact, Colorado may be a little worse than San Diego, but Florida is better than UCLA, despite how much you want it to not be so. So that is all about a wash. As for Arizona, this is 2004, not 2001, so you can't just decree that they are tougher and leave it at that. And yeah, Hawaii has a decent win over Cal and Santa Clara, but it also has unimpressive wins over marginal teams like Pepperdine, Irvine, Southwest Missouri State, , Fresno State, and Nevada. Teams all in the 50 - 70 range that Hawaii slept walk with. Texas has played teams like SMU, LSU, Baylor, and Kansas that are about the same level, and blown them out of the water. So we summarize: against the top teams, Texas and Hawaii are about a wash. Against marginal teams, Hawaii has been underwhelming, whereas Texas blows them out of the water. Just because a team is in the pac 10 doesn't make them automatically strong, just as teams in the midwest aren't necessarily weak. Go for it.
|
|
|
Post by Curious on Oct 7, 2004 14:04:27 GMT -5
Would you label Spock illogical? Gorf isn't really defending Texas. He is just my counter balance. He always has to employ an opposing viewpoint, no matter how ridiculous. ;D AgentBuchwald, isn't really defending Texas as much as he is defending his system's ranking of them. Too high if you ask me. Curious is trying to defend Texas but hasn't done a good job. I consider myself the winner of the "BiK/Curious" debate on the rankings. Curious is still trying to find that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. I send him my regards. UH fans don't feel a need to chime in. They know I have the situation well under control. ;D I think he has Island Fever, a malady often found on Pacific islands (my experience on Guam and Okinawa comes to mind), and should try to get out to the Mainland more often. Symptoms include the megalomania he is exhibiting now. Regards
|
|
|
Post by GatorVball on Oct 7, 2004 15:25:09 GMT -5
I haven't seen Hawaii this year, but Texas is a top 5 team, no doubt in my mind. Looking at the results across the country, they are right there with anyone else. They have the key ingredients: they serve and pass extremely well, they have several offensive weapons, they play defense very well and they have a setter who is very good at getting the ball to those weapons. If there are 5 better teams than Texas, I'd be very surprised. Of course, it's only one match that I've seen Texas, but they were impressive. Mira Topic is a 1st team AA, no doubt, and Howden will be an AA as well.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Oct 7, 2004 15:36:50 GMT -5
I haven't seen Hawaii this year, but Texas is a top 5 team, no doubt in my mind. Looking at the results across the country, they are right there with anyone else. They have the key ingredients: they serve and pass extremely well, they have several offensive weapons, they play defense very well and they have a setter who is very good at getting the ball to those weapons. If there are 5 better teams than Texas, I'd be very surprised. Of course, it's only one match that I've seen Texas, but they were impressive. Mira Topic is a 1st team AA, no doubt, and Howden will be an AA as well. Can't be. See, Hawaii fans (ok, one in particular) doesn't know anything about Texas so therefore, they can't be very good. Now Arizona and Pepperdine, those are tough teams, they just haven't shown it in their non-Hawaii matches. When they played Hawaii, however, they were at the top of their game, because not only does Hawaii not have a home court advantage, they actually have a home court _disadvantage_, because other teams thrive so much playing in the SSC in front of a crowd that is extremely hostile (to Hawaii, that is, because of their expectations). You just have to understand BiK think.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Oct 7, 2004 16:40:55 GMT -5
What's tricky about Texas is that "when they play cohesively, they are a true Final Four contender" can be said about 20-30 of the top teams.
Building up to this year since 2001 [and they had better push this year hard, because next year they'll have a bunch of kids struggling to fill the big shoes of Topic and Howden] they simply have been unable to keep their isht together. I'm tempted to blame the coaching, because I think Elliott's intensity is sometimes destructive, but a huge chunk of last year's NCAA snub may have been solved by this season's setter upgrade.
In any case, I think everyone is always reluctant to jump on the Texas bandwagon because they so often have a string of great moments in weeks 2-6 and then fizzle out by season's end. You can practically set your Thanksgiving feast to coincide with their disappearance from the AVCA rankings. If they bobble this year's chance, we'll have to add Topic to the list of Great Players Slaving Away on Mediocre Teams.
|
|
|
Post by vbfan4life on Oct 7, 2004 18:51:37 GMT -5
Hey BIK...I am actually a HI fan and I was the one who postulated that they might lose to Texas. Can I also get tapes?
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Oct 7, 2004 20:23:50 GMT -5
It's funny you have the audacity to ask me this directly after you quoted me. That's right I said it, and I stand by it. You provided the counter of Colorado for Texas compared to UCLA and San Diego. In fact, Colorado may be a little worse than San Diego, but Florida is better than UCLA, despite how much you want it to not be so. Says who? you? Florida has a better record than UCLA but deciding who's better is purely subjective, according to the pollsters, Florida is only a tad better than UCLA. Your own system has UCLA ranked ahead of Florida. Back up your argument with facts and perhaps I'll take another look at it. So that is all about a wash. As for Arizona, this is 2004, not 2001, so you can't just decree that they are tougher and leave it at that. Why not? What's to discuss? Arizona is in the top 25 and Kansas and Colorado are not. What's to discuss? And yeah, Hawaii has a decent win over Cal and Santa Clara, but it also has unimpressive wins over marginal teams like Pepperdine, Irvine, Southwest Missouri State, , Fresno State, and Nevada. Teams all in the 50 - 70 range that Hawaii slept walk with. Texas has played teams like SMU, LSU, Baylor, and Kansas that are about the same level, and blown them out of the water. So we summarize: against the top teams, Texas and Hawaii are about a wash. I don't think so. A Wash is indeed a stretch. I repeat, Texas has only beaten one team in the top 25, Hawai'i has beaten 4 of them. That is hardly equal. And its silly to think SMU, LSU, Baylor, and Kansas are at the same level of Pepperdine, UCI, SWMS, Fresno and Nevada. Against marginal teams, Hawaii has been underwhelming, whereas Texas blows them out of the water. Yeah real impressive. Just because a team is in the pac 10 doesn't make them automatically strong, just as teams in the midwest aren't necessarily weak. Well the poll speaks for itself. All the PAC 10 teams Hawai'i has defeated are RANKED. I will, and the best part is, I don't even need to crunch numbers to do so effectively.
|
|