VBSH 2
Banned
banned
Posts: 890
|
Post by VBSH 2 on Apr 21, 2019 14:18:53 GMT -5
for once the NCAA actually sets things up decently Irvine lost to Concordia Irvine, UCLA, Santa Barbara all had their opportunties Santa Barbara beats Irvine, they might be in UCLA beats USC this week, they'd be in Irvine beats maybe Concordia, or another win vs. Northridge, they'd be in SB/Irvine had 5 shots at LB/Haw already, the regular season is part of the play-offs - really they need 6 chances to beat those two? anybody that argues with this set-up is on crack Let's all get realistic for a second. USC is in so that men's volleyball will grow within the P5. Once it starts being a moneymaker, the Big West will no longer be a factor nationally, just like what happened in the women's game. about 25 years from now?
|
|
|
Post by kahusancali on Apr 21, 2019 14:22:36 GMT -5
USC was in the similar situation as Hawai’i last year yet Hawai’i got snubbed. - They both beat the ranked 1 at the time. - They both had great home records but had some bad losses in the road. - They were conference runner-ups and both got swept by the conference champs. Congrats to USC they deserve it. Hawai’i should’ve got in last year too and not UCI. What was Hawaii’s SOS and RPI last year? USC’s RPI and SOS now?
|
|
|
Post by WahineFan44 on Apr 21, 2019 15:01:07 GMT -5
UCSB, Had they beat UCI even once, would have been in. But they did not and that is their fault
|
|
|
Post by raian13 on Apr 21, 2019 15:11:53 GMT -5
USC was in the similar situation as Hawai’i last year yet Hawai’i got snubbed. - They both beat the ranked 1 at the time. - They both had great home records but had some bad losses in the road. - They were conference runner-ups and both got swept by the conference champs. Congrats to USC they deserve it. Hawai’i should’ve got in last year too and not UCI. What was Hawaii’s SOS and RPI last year? USC’s RPI and SOS now? Wasn’t it that Hawai’i had the top RPI last year heading towards Selection show?
|
|
|
Post by WahineFan44 on Apr 21, 2019 15:12:53 GMT -5
What was Hawaii’s SOS and RPI last year? USC’s RPI and SOS now? Wasn’t it that Hawai’i had the top RPI last year heading towards Selection show? They had the top SOS. I don't know about RPI though.
|
|
|
Post by raian13 on Apr 21, 2019 15:17:49 GMT -5
Wasn’t it that Hawai’i had the top RPI last year heading towards Selection show? They had the top SOS. I don't know about RPI though.
I’m just pointing out that NCAA is saying that there is no geographical restriction when choosing the at-large teams but it seemed very apparent that was what happened to the Hawaii snub last year. Not that I’m dwelling about last year though. I’m happy that Hawaii got credited (for getting the top seed) when it’s due.
|
|
|
Post by kahusancali on Apr 21, 2019 15:40:29 GMT -5
Wasn’t it that Hawai’i had the top RPI last year heading towards Selection show? They had the top SOS. I don't know about RPI though.
Just dug a year old article. UH RPI was 4, Irvine 6
|
|
|
Post by kahusancali on Apr 21, 2019 15:49:59 GMT -5
Wasn’t it that Hawai’i had the top RPI last year heading towards Selection show? They had the top SOS. I don't know about RPI though.
Yep UH was number 1 in SOS, Irvine # 10
|
|
|
Post by backinthesaddle on Apr 21, 2019 16:19:59 GMT -5
I need some clarification- was Hawaii in contention for a spot to the NCAA’s last year?
|
|
|
Post by WahineFan44 on Apr 21, 2019 16:30:29 GMT -5
I need some clarification- was Hawaii in contention for a spot to the NCAA’s last year? Contention? They should have made it 10000 percent. They were robbed and almost everyone agreed.
|
|
|
Post by 405LAX on Apr 21, 2019 16:35:44 GMT -5
I need some clarification- was Hawaii in contention for a spot to the NCAA’s last year? Contention? They should have made it 10000 percent. They were robbed and almost everyone agreed. That is objectively true, HI shoulda been in, UCI out last season. Gift that thankfully wasn't replicated this season too.
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Apr 21, 2019 16:52:39 GMT -5
Contention? They should have made it 10000 percent. They were robbed and almost everyone agreed. That is objectively true, HI shoulda been in, UCI out last season. Gift that thankfully wasn't replicated this season too. totally agree, again, UCI wasn't a 'bad' choice last year, just that Hawaii would have been the better choice just like UCI or UCLA would not have been a 'bad' choice this year, but USC was the better choice it's great adding the 2nd at-large, the result of the Big West sponsoring. it just means that 2nd at-large selection is gonna be a little more in the 'weeds' last year, with teh 2nd at-large, it resulted in a great UCI-Ohio State match-up (could have been Haw-Ohio State). this year, we get USC-Lewis, which I think is really intriguing. to me it shows the 2nd at-large is a good thing for MVB. the nit-picking over the 2nd at-large is fun, but not something to get in some huge twist about. Hawaii shot themselves in teh foot vs. North last year, Irvine did the same this year vs. a couple of teams. In all the NCAA tournaments, that last at-large is a nit-picking choice among teams that failed to do a few things that really stand out. at least MVB gets that extra slot now, so that's the way to look at it.
|
|
|
Post by raian13 on Apr 21, 2019 17:11:31 GMT -5
That is objectively true, HI shoulda been in, UCI out last season. Gift that thankfully wasn't replicated this season too. totally agree, again, UCI wasn't a 'bad' choice last year, just that Hawaii would have been the better choice just like UCI or UCLA would not have been a 'bad' choice this year, but USC was the better choice it's great adding the 2nd at-large, the result of the Big West sponsoring. it just means that 2nd at-large selection is gonna be a little more in the 'weeds' last year, with teh 2nd at-large, it resulted in a great UCI-Ohio State match-up (could have been Haw-Ohio State). this year, we get USC-Lewis, which I think is really intriguing. to me it shows the 2nd at-large is a good thing for MVB. the nit-picking over the 2nd at-large is fun, but not something to get in some huge twist about. Hawaii shot themselves in teh foot vs. North last year, Irvine did the same this year vs. a couple of teams. In all the NCAA tournaments, that last at-large is a nit-picking choice among teams that failed to do a few things that really stand out. at least MVB gets that extra slot now, so that's the way to look at it. Yes, UCI wasn’t a bad choice. But because of NCAA’s funds/financial issues it was looked upon as a very bad one. Hawai’i could’ve flown in to the closest >400 miles area that was in that tournament. I’m glad that UCI didn’t have another free ticket to the NCAAs this year.
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Apr 21, 2019 17:30:47 GMT -5
totally agree, again, UCI wasn't a 'bad' choice last year, just that Hawaii would have been the better choice just like UCI or UCLA would not have been a 'bad' choice this year, but USC was the better choice it's great adding the 2nd at-large, the result of the Big West sponsoring. it just means that 2nd at-large selection is gonna be a little more in the 'weeds' last year, with teh 2nd at-large, it resulted in a great UCI-Ohio State match-up (could have been Haw-Ohio State). this year, we get USC-Lewis, which I think is really intriguing. to me it shows the 2nd at-large is a good thing for MVB. the nit-picking over the 2nd at-large is fun, but not something to get in some huge twist about. Hawaii shot themselves in teh foot vs. North last year, Irvine did the same this year vs. a couple of teams. In all the NCAA tournaments, that last at-large is a nit-picking choice among teams that failed to do a few things that really stand out. at least MVB gets that extra slot now, so that's the way to look at it. Yes, UCI wasn’t a bad choice. But because of NCAA’s funds/financial issues it was looked upon as a very bad one. Hawai’i could’ve flown in to the closest >400 miles area that was in that tournament. I’m glad that UCI didn’t have another free ticket to the NCAAs this year. lol, I have no idea why people bring up travel as a reason Hawaii was exluded last year - that's bunk Hawaii had a poor road record, and a heavy home schedule - that was the main reason. Hawaii beats Northrige just even ONCE last year, and that flips their road record criteria a bunch, and I bet they would have got in. Was it the wrong decision IMO, yes. but some fo the 'persecution' perception is laughable. IRvine this year and last, have shown they schedule very favorably (and tough), which helps them in selection criteria, plus both last and this year they WIN on the road. The NCAA could have made a case to put Irvine in this year, thank god they used some common sense and didn't that's it, nothing more
|
|
|
Post by fromtheoutsidein on Apr 21, 2019 17:51:26 GMT -5
Playing (2) D3 teams last year did not have help their cause. It effects two different areas in the criteria. Committee was splitting hairs last year. I don't think we will see Hawaii playing these teams in the near future. USC is well deserved of their opportunity.
|
|