|
|
Post by tomclen on Nov 30, 2015 13:44:04 GMT -5
Seed - Team - 1st Round Opponent's RPI
1. USC 69
2. Minnesota 310
3. Texas 165
4. Nebraska 145
5. Washington 83
6. Wisconsin 53
7. Penn State 230
8. Stanford 64
Why are the three Pac-12 schools in the top 8 seeds all given double-digit RPI opponents when most of the B1G teams get triple-digit RPI opposition?
Of course, you can point to Wisconsin getting the shaft by playing a 53 RPI team in round 1, but why are the other B1G schools given such favorable RPI opposition?
Why does 7 seed Penn State have a worse RPI opponent than every team above them except for Minnesota?
What, exactly, is the point of seeding and using RPI if this is the result?
|
|
|
|
Post by WahineFan44 on Nov 30, 2015 13:47:35 GMT -5
Russ rose secretly controls the world that's why. He used his power to make it this way.
|
|
|
|
Post by tomclen on Nov 30, 2015 13:51:57 GMT -5
Russ rose secretly controls the world that's why. He used his power to make it this way. Thanks for confirming this.  |
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Nov 30, 2015 13:57:59 GMT -5
Seed - Team - 1st Round Opponent's RPI 1. USC 69 2. Minnesota 310 3. Texas 165 4. Nebraska 145 5. Washington 83 6. Wisconsin 53 7. Penn State 230 8. Stanford 64 Why are the three Pac-12 schools in the top 8 seeds all given double-digit RPI opponents when most of the B1G teams get triple-digit RPI opposition? Of course, you can point to Wisconsin getting the shaft by playing a 53 RPI team in round 1, but why are the other B1G schools given such favorable RPI opposition? Why does 7 seed Penn State have a worse RPI opponent than every team above them except for Minnesota? What, exactly, is the point of seeding and using RPI if this is the result? I think it is pretty much luck of the draw. Oregon was going to fly somewhere - Wisconsin was as close as any. Oregon ended the season playing much better than their RPI - Wisconsin just won't have a sleeper to start (like PSU, year-in year-out) |
|
|
|
Post by isaacspaceman on Nov 30, 2015 16:03:40 GMT -5
I can't muster any outrage up over this, even as a fan of a Pac-12 team. All of the top 8 seeds should be able to beat any of those first-round opponents, and only Oregon and maybe NM State (about which I don't know enough to say) would have a fair chance of taking a set off of any of the top seeds. Only Wisconsin really has any complaint to make about the first round, since their match stands to require more hard work than likely to be required of lower seeds in their own quarter of the bracket. If any of the other top 8 seeds don't get out of the first round in straight sets, that's on them.
|
|
|
|
Post by nowhereman on Nov 30, 2015 16:13:41 GMT -5
Yes the bracket is what it is. Let's just get the tourney started already!
|
|
|
|
Post by tomclen on Nov 30, 2015 16:17:23 GMT -5
Yes the bracket is what it is. Let's just get the tourney started already! "Yes, the security is what it is, let's just get the play started already!" -Abraham Lincoln; Ford's Theater; April 15, 1865 |
|
|
|
Post by bayarea on Nov 30, 2015 16:17:27 GMT -5
I'm not sure it really helps a team prepare against their second round matchup when they totally dominate their first round match, anyway. Sometimes it could be better to get a bit tested by your opponent and tweak a few things for future matches instead of being complacent.
|
|
|
|
Post by nakedcrayon on Nov 30, 2015 17:14:49 GMT -5
I can't muster any outrage up over this, even as a fan of a Pac-12 team. All of the top 8 seeds should be able to beat any of those first-round opponents, and only Oregon and maybe NM State (about which I don't know enough to say) would have a fair chance of taking a set off of any of the top seeds. Only Wisconsin really has any complaint to make about the first round, since their match stands to require more hard work than likely to be required of lower seeds in their own quarter of the bracket. If any of the other top 8 seeds don't get out of the first round in straight sets, that's on them. Solid serve receive/defense team in NMSU. A power outside but as a whole the team is undersized. Best word to describe NMSU...scrappy |
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Nov 30, 2015 17:35:49 GMT -5
With Oregon, they're playing a different system, having switched to a 6-2 fairly late in the season, and being much more effective offensively because of it.
How many B1G teams are running a 6-2? It has become rather common in the Pac-12.
|
|
|
|
Post by vbnerd on Nov 30, 2015 22:24:03 GMT -5
Seed - Team - 1st Round Opponent's RPI 1. USC 69 2. Minnesota 310 3. Texas 165 4. Nebraska 145 5. Washington 83 6. Wisconsin 53 7. Penn State 230 8. Stanford 64 Why are the three Pac-12 schools in the top 8 seeds all given double-digit RPI opponents when most of the B1G teams get triple-digit RPI opposition? Of course, you can point to Wisconsin getting the shaft by playing a 53 RPI team in round 1, but why are the other B1G schools given such favorable RPI opposition? Why does 7 seed Penn State have a worse RPI opponent than every team above them except for Minnesota? What, exactly, is the point of seeding and using RPI if this is the result? So you think the committee should have sent 310 Jackson State to #1 USC 230 Howard to Minnesota and 69 Cleveland State to Penn State That seems surprisingly rational for you this time of year!  It would stink for Cleveland State to have to go to Penn State again but they've done worse to better teams. You are probably on to something here. |
|
|
|
Post by tomclen on Nov 30, 2015 22:36:04 GMT -5
Seed - Team - 1st Round Opponent's RPI 1. USC 69 2. Minnesota 310 3. Texas 165 4. Nebraska 145 5. Washington 83 6. Wisconsin 53 7. Penn State 230 8. Stanford 64 Why are the three Pac-12 schools in the top 8 seeds all given double-digit RPI opponents when most of the B1G teams get triple-digit RPI opposition? Of course, you can point to Wisconsin getting the shaft by playing a 53 RPI team in round 1, but why are the other B1G schools given such favorable RPI opposition? Why does 7 seed Penn State have a worse RPI opponent than every team above them except for Minnesota? What, exactly, is the point of seeding and using RPI if this is the result? So you think the committee should have sent 310 Jackson State to #1 USC 230 Howard to Minnesota and 69 Cleveland State to Penn State That seems surprisingly rational for you this time of year! It would stink for Cleveland State to have to go to Penn State again but they've done worse to better teams. You are probably on to something here. I'm seldom rational. |
|
|
|
Post by bball on Nov 30, 2015 22:39:53 GMT -5
Wisconsin will beat oregon easily. Too much complaining
|
|
|
|
Post by dd2000 on Nov 30, 2015 22:41:57 GMT -5
I'm not sure it really helps a team prepare against their second round matchup when they totally dominate their first round match, anyway. Sometimes it could be better to get a bit tested by your opponent and tweak a few things for future matches instead of being complacent. I see your point, but I disagree. Its better to have a cupcake in the first round. Heck if you can get one on night number two as well thats even better. That formula has worked well in prior years.  |
|
|
|
Post by tomclen on Nov 30, 2015 22:42:21 GMT -5
Do I have this right, there are 7 Pac12 schools in the tournament. And one regional doesn't have any of them?
Is it just me, or does that seem f****** stupid?
|
|
