|
|
Post by rainbowbadger on Dec 6, 2019 11:17:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by BuckysHeat on Dec 6, 2019 11:46:52 GMT -5
Wisconsin has a 9-14 record all time vs Illinois St.
1970-1979: ISU was 8-2
1980-1989: ISU was 6-3
1990-1999: Wis was 2-0
2000-2009: Wis was 1-0
2010-present: Wis is 2-0
Last tourney meeting was in Madison in the second round in 2014, Wis won 3-0. Last overall meeting was in 2018 at the Marquette Challenge, Wis won 3-1
|
|
|
|
Post by Wiswell on Dec 6, 2019 12:12:09 GMT -5
And yet here they are, again after winning the Big Ten Championship, meeting them in the first round instead.
Instead of, you know, Howard or Fairfield (both playing lower seeds).
|
|
|
|
Post by bigfan on Dec 6, 2019 12:12:47 GMT -5
Wisconsin should win 3-1
|
|
|
|
Post by vbprisoner on Dec 6, 2019 12:25:27 GMT -5
Illinois St is by far the hardest 1st round match up for any of the top 4 seeds. Hell, they should be a second round match up really. IMO Stef Jankiewicz is a top 10-15 setter in D1 and she can make the match a lot closer than it should be.
Wisconsin needs to come out strong and not let their foot off the gas!
|
|
|
|
Post by SportyBucky on Dec 6, 2019 12:27:08 GMT -5
Do all matches have replays following the match? I'm trying to figure out whether I can attend the Texas UCSB match and watch WI after, assuming I can stay offline that long.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kingsley on Dec 6, 2019 12:28:57 GMT -5
Do all matches have replays following the match? I'm trying to figure out whether I can attend the Texas UCSB match and watch WI after, assuming I can stay offline that long.
The BTN+ matches will have replays that are immediately available. Same with the ESPN ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by rainbowbadger on Dec 6, 2019 14:29:29 GMT -5
And yet here they are, again after winning the Big Ten Championship, meeting them in the first round instead. Instead of, you know, Howard or Fairfield (both playing lower seeds). The 400 mile rule is for the birds. |
|
|
|
Post by Wiswell on Dec 6, 2019 14:34:01 GMT -5
And yet here they are, again after winning the Big Ten Championship, meeting them in the first round instead. Instead of, you know, Howard or Fairfield (both playing lower seeds). The 400 mile rule is for the birds. Here's what the #4 seed deserves, whoever it may be: Alabama St. Howard Sacred Heart Albany Fairfield or some variation therein. Or, for example, meet the 400 mile rule by Notre Dame vs. Ill St. and WI vs. Fairfield. Still one fly in. |
|
|
|
Post by Kingsley on Dec 6, 2019 14:37:15 GMT -5
The ultimate goal of the NCAA is to stuff Mark Emmert’s pockets. This is clearly a case of drive-in over fly-in. Hence why you see the worst team in the tournament get sent to play the 10 seed.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,355 
|
Post by trojansc on Dec 6, 2019 15:00:48 GMT -5
There’s not *that* many worse RPI teams than Illinois State in the tournament.
|
|
|
|
Post by rainbowbadger on Dec 6, 2019 15:32:10 GMT -5
There’s not *that* many worse RPI teams than Illinois State in the tournament. Right, but RPI isn't as much a measure of strength as other mechanisms. Pablo, for example. I wouldn't complain as much if the committee had seeded every single team, 1-64, and Illinois State came to Madison because it shook out that they were the 61 seed. But we all know they wouldn't be the 61 seed. If "strength of conference" was a good enough reason for the committee to drop Pitt to 6th place and bump Nebraska and Wisconsin higher despite their RPI because the ACC is weaker than the Big Ten, then you can't also say that Illinois State is deserving of what is essentially a 61 seed matchup based solely on their RPI. Missouri Valley actually has some serious competition, unlike the Northeast Conference (Sacred Heart), the MEAC (Howard), or the MAAC (Fairfield). The committee shouldn't get to have it both ways. |
|
|
|
Post by eazy on Dec 6, 2019 15:44:29 GMT -5
There’s not *that* many worse RPI teams than Illinois State in the tournament. Right, but RPI isn't as much a measure of strength as other mechanisms. Pablo, for example. I wouldn't complain as much if the committee had seeded every single team, 1-64, and Illinois State came to Madison because it shook out that they were the 61 seed. But we all know they wouldn't be the 61 seed. If "strength of conference" was a good enough reason for the committee to drop Pitt to 6th place and bump Nebraska and Wisconsin higher despite their RPI because the ACC is weaker than the Big Ten, then you can't also say that Illinois State is deserving of what is essentially a 61 seed matchup based solely on their RPI. Missouri Valley actually has some serious competition, unlike the Northeast Conference (Sacred Heart), the MEAC (Howard), or the MAAC (Fairfield). The committee shouldn't get to have it both ways. Illinois St seems to be a very unique team that would be hard to seed imo. They beat UCF (RPI 24), UNI x2 (40), and Illinois (50). They also went 5 with Marquette (13). However, they also lost to Southern Illinois (231) and Evansville (206). Both those teams are significantly worse in terms of RPI than Sacred Heart, Howard, or Fairfield. |
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,355
|
Post by trojansc on Dec 6, 2019 15:47:03 GMT -5
There’s not *that* many worse RPI teams than Illinois State in the tournament. Right, but RPI isn't as much a measure of strength as other mechanisms. Pablo, for example. I wouldn't complain as much if the committee had seeded every single team, 1-64, and Illinois State came to Madison because it shook out that they were the 61 seed. But we all know they wouldn't be the 61 seed. If "strength of conference" was a good enough reason for the committee to drop Pitt to 6th place and bump Nebraska and Wisconsin higher despite their RPI because the ACC is weaker than the Big Ten, then you can't also say that Illinois State is deserving of what is essentially a 61 seed matchup based solely on their RPI. Missouri Valley actually has some serious competition, unlike the Northeast Conference (Sacred Heart), the MEAC (Howard), or the MAAC (Fairfield). The committee shouldn't get to have it both ways. I actually agree with most of your position. But we have to remember that RPI is pretty much THE measure for the committee. Pablo is irrelevant. Where I don't agree with you is your stance on the Valley. I think it'd being clouded by past success in that conference. The Valley was simply, not good this year. Bradley, Evansville, Southern Illinois, and Missouri State are matches that Top 50 teams should not be losing. Illinois State lost to all of those teams. The Valley has been way way stronger in the past. Illinois State is dangerous because they beat some good teams -- but they also lost a ton of matches to some bad teams. Pablo actually thinks that Northern Iowa is worse than its RPI and if we went by Pablo-cut off, Northern Iowa would not have even made the tournament. Pablo thinks San Diego vs. Washington State is way too tough for a first round matchup. That's much worse than Wisconsin vs. Illinois State in the first round. Pablo also thinks that Wright State (Purdue's 1st round match) is on the same level as Illinois State. So, I do see your gripe here. Another thing that happened was there aren't as many AQ's that have RPI's >100. The tournament field was overall deeper this year than most. If the committee seeded 1-64, it would solve a lot more injustices than this match alone. I'm hoping for baby steps though -- seeding 1-32 would do wonders! |
|
|
|
Post by Wiswell on Dec 6, 2019 16:10:30 GMT -5
This is a great analysis, particularly because I thought Wright St vs. Purdue and USD vs. Wash. St. were also great matchups (as a neutral observer of those matches of course).
|
|
