|
Post by volleyballfann on Nov 30, 2015 17:11:58 GMT -5
Where are the Buffs and Liz?! That team should've been in, regardless! I feel so bad for Alexis Austin Man, did the Pac-12 get robbed or what? lol
|
|
|
Post by gators12 on Nov 30, 2015 17:31:37 GMT -5
Colorado should of been in and asu out due to the Gardner injury .
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Nov 30, 2015 17:34:14 GMT -5
Colorado should of been in and asu out due to the Gardner injury . According to the interview with the committee chair, Colorado wasn't even one of the first four "out" teams.
|
|
|
Post by 5280volleyball on Nov 30, 2015 17:36:57 GMT -5
I think the Buffs and Liz might be in trouble in a couple years. Taylor Simpson deciding to play her last two seasons at CU (and bringing her sisters along) has been huge for this program.
CU has no middle attack, but they do have a very good opposite, a solid libero, a good setter, and a solid OH in Austin. They need to find a setter (or let Gabby set and find an OPP), 2 OH and a middle for next year. Abu has some potential as a defensive minded MB2.
As for ASU, that's an interesting case. They had some really good wins with Gardner, and some bad losses without her. The committee obviously took the body of work as a whole, and that's why they got in.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Nov 30, 2015 17:39:19 GMT -5
Colorado should of been in and asu out due to the Gardner injury . According to the interview with the committee chair, Colorado wasn't even one of the first four "out" teams. Colorado did about the worst thing you can do schedule-wise, which is play teams who are too good for you to beat and a bunch of teams who are so bad beating them hurts your RPI. They needed to commit to one strategy or the other and go for the non-con SOS (which really helps on the bubble, as we can see) or the glittering W-L total. As is, they ended up with a poor record on top of a weak SOS despite, "off paper", having a solid non-con slate with a couple of nice wins.
|
|
|
COLORADO
Nov 30, 2015 17:49:38 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by volleyfan24 on Nov 30, 2015 17:49:38 GMT -5
They did themselves no favors losing to Rice and Utah. They needed to pick up maybe two other wins in conference. Unfortunately their RPI wasn't good enough and didn't pick up enough good wins OOC to justify them being in. Colorado had their chances they could have knocked off USC or Oregon who they lost to in 5.
Do I think Colorado is tournament quality sure, but ultimately they needed to be better and weren't?
|
|
|
Post by speegs13 on Nov 30, 2015 18:03:40 GMT -5
CU has no middle attack, but they do have a very good opposite, a solid libero, a good setter, and a solid OH in Austin. They need to find a setter (or let Gabby set and find an OPP), 2 OH and a middle for next year. Abu has some potential as a defensive minded MB2. People are thinking (me included) that CU is gonna run a 6-2, with Gabby and Taylor Joachim (6-4 lefty S/OPP). If they can find another OH to replace Austin, and get a RPI friendly schedule, I think they can sneak back into the tournament next year
|
|
|
Post by brunie on Nov 30, 2015 19:24:55 GMT -5
They did themselves no favors losing to Rice and Utah. They needed to pick up maybe two other wins in conference. Unfortunately their RPI wasn't good enough and didn't pick up enough good wins OOC to justify them being in. Colorado had their chances they could have knocked off USC or Oregon who they lost to in 5. Do I think Colorado is tournament quality sure, but ultimately they needed to be better and weren't? I agree with this 100%. Colorado was inconsistent in their play this season. Sometimes from game to game within a match and sometimes from match to match. I think there were 3 conference losses that could have / should have been wins. At Utah to start the conference season; at an ASU team without Gardner; in Boulder against Oregon. If those were wins there would have been no question about Colorado being in.
|
|
|
Post by 5280volleyball on Nov 30, 2015 19:47:10 GMT -5
I see the Buffs being in this same situation and maybe worse off next year. Let's say the 6-2 works with Gabby Simpson and Joachim. Abu is ok as the MB2, and Cierra Simpson holds down the libero spot. They still need to find 2 OH from somewhere (I don't think Jade Hayes is the answer there) and another middle.
Looks like 7-11 or 8-10 in conference. They could easily beef up their SOS by playing Colorado State, Wyoming, Denver, and then a couple good teams on the road.
|
|
|
Post by zenyada on Nov 30, 2015 21:50:39 GMT -5
At some point isn't it the responsibility of the committee to get the best 64 teams in the tournament? Say it out loud, "Villanova is better than Colorado". It doesn't make sense. The committee missed an opportunity for another infinitely more interesting match-up in the first round (vs Dayton), and possibly second round (Penn St), by not putting Colorado in the Villanova slot. Colorado is a fun team to watch, fifth in the PAC 12, that's gotta hurt.
|
|
|
COLORADO
Nov 30, 2015 22:18:14 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by volleyball303 on Nov 30, 2015 22:18:14 GMT -5
It's not right at all. Colorado got better as the year went on. They also had injuries early and became a much stronger team when they switched to the 5-1. I watched them play Stanford this year and have also watched CSU and Denver play this year and CU would handle both teams in 3. They are a team that could beat any team in the field on the right night. It was a really bad move. I also don't think a team that finishes below a team in conference should get in over that team. CU went 4 and 2 vs Oregon Arizona and ASU but they are the only team left out.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Nov 30, 2015 22:21:44 GMT -5
At some point isn't it the responsibility of the committee to get the best 64 teams in the tournament? Definitely not. About 30 teams are not even selected by the Committee at all.
|
|
|
Post by gnu2vball on Nov 30, 2015 22:22:38 GMT -5
You think Colorado will host the B1G-PAC 12 challenge next year? - The one with Stanford, Illinois, and PSU.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Nov 30, 2015 22:25:32 GMT -5
I also don't think a team that finishes below a team in conference should get in over that team. I wouldn't go that far. There are times when I can see teams getting jumped over by other teams in their conference. But usually not three of them! And not when the team getting left behind actually has a winning record against the teams that jumped over them. And not when the team has a win over a seeded team! It's just purely RPI.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Nov 30, 2015 22:33:03 GMT -5
At some point isn't it the responsibility of the committee to get the best 64 teams in the tournament? No. Otherwise there would be no .500-or-better rule. It is the committee's responsibility to select the 32 teams with the best resumes as defined by the criteria listed in the championship manual.
|
|