|
Post by Wolfgang on Jun 9, 2019 15:13:30 GMT -5
SCI as in Science, and AK as in hack ... thought it was obvious. I know still strike two, but what the 'ell, you don't learn without taking a shot. Sky - AcK ? S- Kayak? Winner! Sky—Akk So, now, all you doofs don’t have to spell out SCIAC in your head, as I’m sure y’all have been doing all this time. Like, no one ever spells out the WAC in their head as the W-A-C. (Dubbya-ayy-see)
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Jun 9, 2019 15:37:17 GMT -5
What the ... what genius turned SCI into SKY. Devils Brew or Canny-Bus in play?
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Jun 9, 2019 15:39:13 GMT -5
What the ... what genius turned SCI into SKY. Devils Brew or Canny-Bus in play? LOL! Well, it is "Southern California...blah blah" and not "Southern Salifornia...blah blah blah." You need the "S" and "C" sounds in there. You get an "A" for effort. But you're a pianist so effort is not an issue with you types.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2019 17:26:05 GMT -5
Ok, how about SCI - YUCK ... looking for that third strike and you're out! This back-and-forth is(?) fascinating(?) -- even though the score currently reads: hammer 1, wolfie 0 -- uhhh, volleyball? I played at a D3 (now D1/ FCS). The travel logistics were solely accommodated via bus, in a league that stretched from the Bay Area up to Chico/Humboldt. The money was NOT there for a varsity club-team. And yes, the Far Western Conference had some pretty good teams: CSU Chico has won a number of D2 championships; Humboldt St the same in D3. UCDavis, also!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2019 18:32:10 GMT -5
Ok, how about SCI - YUCK ... looking for that third strike and you're out! This back-and-forth is(?) fascinating(?) -- even though the score currently reads: hammer 1, wolfie 0 -- uhhh, volleyball? I played at a D3 (now D1/ FCS). The travel logistics were solely accommodated via bus, in a league that stretched from the Bay area to Chico/Humboldt. The money was NOT there for a varsity club-team. And yes, the Far West Conference Did have some pretty good teams: CSU Chico has won a number of D2 championships; Humboldt St. the same in D3. Davis, also! Anyway, the ol' Far Western Conference was weird, in that they incorporated both D2 and D3 schools (partly because of a scarcity of universities north of UC Davis/ Sac State). As athletes we never paid much attention to whatever D3 region we were in: we just played wherever we went or at Hickey Gymnasium. Simpler times!
|
|
|
Post by tmb on Jun 10, 2019 9:05:37 GMT -5
How many schools are there who fund air travel I wonder? I'd think a HUGE majority are fundraised by the team and/or parent donations with a small portion by the school. I would guess you are right. The few times I have asked AD types about this the best you can get is a non answer since they don't want to directly talk about money unless you are handing them a check as you bring it up. Obviously geography means some schools have to budget for it; The UAA, Colorado College, the various islands that make up the West region(if they want to play anyone good outside of there league). Williams flies regularly, and Amherst NEVER flies(or even leaves shouting distance of the campus), and they have the same amount of money so why is that? Philosophy? Does Williams have a vball sugar daddy? In the Northeast, volleyball is hurt by no technical need to fly to make a schedule, with other sports like baseball/softball that have to if they want to get in a full season. I think the majority of New England teams trying to improve themselves and the region are travelling with some regularity. Tufts, Bowdoin, Williams, Babson, JWU, Endicott, Roger Williams, Wesleyan and others are either on planes or driving down the East coast with regularity to face other regions. Ultimately, I think the field has really leveled and there are numerous regions/pockets of excellent volleyball for club development and the college talent keeps improving. It wouldn't surprise me if 1/2 of the next 10 d3 champs are first time winners.
|
|
|
Post by ned3vball on Jun 10, 2019 9:30:29 GMT -5
I would guess you are right. The few times I have asked AD types about this the best you can get is a non answer since they don't want to directly talk about money unless you are handing them a check as you bring it up. Obviously geography means some schools have to budget for it; The UAA, Colorado College, the various islands that make up the West region(if they want to play anyone good outside of there league). Williams flies regularly, and Amherst NEVER flies(or even leaves shouting distance of the campus), and they have the same amount of money so why is that? Philosophy? Does Williams have a vball sugar daddy? In the Northeast, volleyball is hurt by no technical need to fly to make a schedule, with other sports like baseball/softball that have to if they want to get in a full season. I think the majority of New England teams trying to improve themselves and the region are travelling with some regularity. Tufts, Bowdoin, Williams, Babson, JWU, Endicott, Roger Williams, Wesleyan and others are either on planes or driving down the East coast with regularity to face other regions. Ultimately, I think the field has really leveled and there are numerous regions/pockets of excellent volleyball for club development and the college talent keeps improving. It wouldn't surprise me if 1/2 of the next 10 d3 champs are first time winners. Agreed. You bring up an important idea in this. You should have to "try" to get a pool C bid. The schools you list are doing that. If you play a parochial pure region schedule you are saying you are trying to get your leagues A bid and that is it.
|
|
|
Post by coahc21 on Jun 11, 2019 9:18:44 GMT -5
The budget thing is not being addressed. While SoCal is more appealing than upstate NY, the costs will possibly be higher by coming West. Hosting tournaments cost money as well as for schools. Basically you are saying that SCIAC teams have to spend money to have a stronger position at the table come tournament time. No doubt...that is exactly my point....either they have to host teams from the east (which teams from east don't have a competitive reason to come west, other than give their athletes a cool trip) Far from a perfect system....I think the way to provide the most competitive balanced tournament is to make the regions larger, not smaller, drop the AQ's (but put a high premium on conference success in the rankings and overall conference competitiveness)....divide the country into 4 regions and take 16 teams from each Will never happen because they won't ever get rid of the AQ's and the way it is now, more teams have a shot year to year to get into regional rankings and build upon that in recruiting......macro divisions would cause a bigger competitive divide between the have's and have not's, also dropping AQ's gives advantage to conferences who only eat up 4-5 dates in conference vs ones that eat up 12-13... In men's basketball for example, the smaller AQ's make for good TV with some upsets, but that doesn't come into play in division 1 volleyball, let alone division 3...let's get the BEST 64 teams into the field I'm rambling...apologies, not sure if I landed anywhere of value
|
|
|
Post by coahc21 on Jun 11, 2019 9:20:53 GMT -5
Most D3 kids, maybe. But if you look at the top teams, especially in the northeast, I'd guesstimate that most of the top teams are 50% or more from out of state or more than 2-3 hours away. Wesleyan has 4 kids from the eastern time zone and 9 from California. Tufts has 1 from the eastern time zone, 8 from California. Ithaca has 7 from the eastern time zone and 9 from elsewhere. In the NESCAC it is completely dominated by California kids. On the 2018 rosters there were 166 players. 65(39%) of the players from CA. Top 6 states: CA 65, MA 17, NY 11, IL 10, CT 9, FL 8 If you focus on just the top 6 teams the effect is even stronger. 47 of 96(49%) players from CA. Top 6 states for the better teams: CA 47, IL 9, FL 6, MA 5, NY 4, TX 3 Great research *golf claps with respect*
|
|
|
Post by bigfan on Jun 11, 2019 11:08:53 GMT -5
..............let's get the BEST 64 teams into the field SCIAC likes your thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Not Me on Jun 11, 2019 11:28:30 GMT -5
..............let's get the BEST 64 teams into the field SCIAC likes your thinking. But that’s not the NCAA or the schools’ goal.
|
|
|
Post by noreaster on Jun 12, 2019 1:25:16 GMT -5
It wouldn't surprise me if 1/2 of the next 10 d3 champs are first time winners. This is interesting. There are only 13 schools in D3 that have won a championship, and 9 of them were still ranked at the end of the season, including 4 of the top 5. So from 2019-2028, do we expect more national titles from programs like Berry, Carthage, Chicago, CNU, Colorado, Ithaca, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern, Pomona, Southwestern, and Trinity break through more times than we expect to see programs like Calvin, CMS, Cal Lu, Emory, Hope, Juniata, Wash U, Whitewater, Wittenberg (sans Paco) and a newly independent St Thomas. And if a new program did break through, say Colorado wins 3 in a row, only the first counts for the upstarts. I have to say no way to this. I agree things have leveled out but not that much.
|
|
|
Post by ned3vball on Jun 12, 2019 5:57:44 GMT -5
SCIAC likes your thinking. But that’s not the NCAA or the schools’ goal. True, for the NCAA. The D3 Philosophy statement in the Pre-championship manual flat out states(admits) they know they are leaving out championship caliber teams. Are they ever leaving out a team that has a serious chance to win the whole thing, no. That is also a common argument for going along with the current method. I hope a reasonable quorum of schools do not feel that way. The tournament the NCAA is putting on for volleyball is really missing the mark. It is not their fault that the current regions are so out of balance, but it should be their job to figure out a better plan. If you look at the matchups in the 2018 first round, by Pablo rankings, it looks ridiculous, here are a few examples on both ends: 4 v 28, 8 v 34, 13 v 20, 10 v 16, and then 1 v 184, 6 v 230, 7 v 318, and 2 v 221. I am not a fan of participation trophies for 43 automatic qualifier conferences. 25% of the current leagues do not have a team that has won a single NCAA match in the last 10 years. OK, yes, I am picking on the small leagues. I understand how they want to use the NCAA tournament entry to help validate and market their athletic programs to prospective students, but there is a point of diminishing return. Does getting annihilated in the first round of the NCAAs by a team that would not normally give you the time of day help market your school. I realize the Quixotic quest it is to get the NCAA to care about this. The region redesign project, when it gets rolling again, might be an opening to try and make things better.
|
|
|
Post by tmb on Jun 12, 2019 14:09:26 GMT -5
It wouldn't surprise me if 1/2 of the next 10 d3 champs are first time winners. This is interesting. There are only 13 schools in D3 that have won a championship, and 9 of them were still ranked at the end of the season, including 4 of the top 5. So from 2019-2028, do we expect more national titles from programs like Berry, Carthage, Chicago, CNU, Colorado, Ithaca, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern, Pomona, Southwestern, and Trinity break through more times than we expect to see programs like Calvin, CMS, Cal Lu, Emory, Hope, Juniata, Wash U, Whitewater, Wittenberg (sans Paco) and a newly independent St Thomas. And if a new program did break through, say Colorado wins 3 in a row, only the first counts for the upstarts. I have to say no way to this. I agree things have leveled out but not that much. Who knows how many will be 1st timers there will be but I'm sure there will be a few. Maybe 1/2 of the final four participants will be 1st timers... I'd say over the past 5 years, the talent pool has definitely gotten deeper and spread out, it's not like they're all clamoring to go to the same top 10 schools now. I wonder if convention center tournaments and ua apps have made it easier for many of the top 1/2 d3 teams to really widen their recruiting net in a single weekend and that's part of it? Or even club teams travelling to a variety of regions and their players being exposed to those areas and hitting some colleges on either days of those weekends... Also, I think the coaching has continued to improve. There are many who go d2 or d1 assistant to d3 head for a few years and then start climbing back to d2 or d1 if so inclined. FYI...I'd give Colorado college 1 in your scenario and then no longer a 1st timer.
|
|
|
Post by noreaster on Jun 12, 2019 14:43:39 GMT -5
But that’s not the NCAA or the schools’ goal. The tournament the NCAA is putting on for volleyball is really missing the mark. It is not their fault that the current regions are so out of balance, but it should be their job to figure out a better plan. If you look at the matchups in the 2018 first round, by Pablo rankings, it looks ridiculous, here are a few examples on both ends: 4 v 28, 8 v 34, 13 v 20, 10 v 16, and then 1 v 184, 6 v 230, 7 v 318, and 2 v 221. I am not a fan of participation trophies for 43 automatic qualifier conferences. 25% of the current leagues do not have a team that has won a single NCAA match in the last 10 years. OK, yes, I am picking on the small leagues. I understand how they want to use the NCAA tournament entry to help validate and market their athletic programs to prospective students, but there is a point of diminishing return. Does getting annihilated in the first round of the NCAAs by a team that would not normally give you the time of day help market your school. Part of the rationale behind Pool A (AQ's) is that schools get to compete against similar schools. The Massachusetts public colleges have a league (MASCAC). The Wisconsin public schools have a league (WIAC). The hoity toity rich kid schools have a couple of leagues, the UAA and the NESCAC. Would it make sense for NYU with 60,000 students and all the money in the world to play in the CUNYAC or the Skyline for a regular season championship? No, and they don't. If you don't give AQ's and just pick the top 8 teams in each region that 25% of conferences you mentioned would have nothing to play for and may as well stop sponsoring the sport. You just took away the college volleyball career of 1000 kids this year. How does that help the sport? BTW, Minnesota Morris had a new coach who inherited their schedule with a .507 SOS. They started the season 3-6, but they won the conference and went on to defeat #1 Gustavus Adolphus on their own floor, the biggest upset of the tournament this season. They were then up 2-0 in the next round before losing in 5. Should we have taken a 3rd or 4th place team from a better league? Why? Those teams had their chance to play their way in and didn't. The NACC was one of those conferences that hadn't won a match in the previous 10 years. This year Aurora won the league and went to the Elite 8. Most are going to lose, but if you let in a middle of the pack team from another conference, they are probably going to lose too because if they were consistently better than the top seeds, they'd have been a top seed.
|
|