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: 28,360
|
Post by trojansc on Apr 15, 2024 13:11:44 GMT -5
If the goal post is whether or not they make the NCAA tournament, ok, THAT, I will agree with. But I'm not sure that's a very high standard. I think the conference could get 12 teams in the tournament next year. I’ll have to start doing RPI math. It would be a lot easier to do if volleyball had a higher % of non-conference games. It’s wild to see the SEC get their like entire conference in the NCAA Softball tournament every year, but, that’s possible when you play more non conference games
|
|
|
Post by lionsfan on Apr 15, 2024 13:15:14 GMT -5
The conference winner will start with a P. I’ve seen it in the flames. You’ve heard it here first. Pohio State? Phe Pohio State University
|
|
|
Post by badgerbyproxy on Apr 15, 2024 13:37:32 GMT -5
Phe Pohio State University PU-CLA
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Apr 15, 2024 13:54:52 GMT -5
If the goal post is whether or not they make the NCAA tournament, ok, THAT, I will agree with. But I'm not sure that's a very high standard. I think the conference could get 12 teams in the tournament next year. I’ll have to start doing RPI math. It would be a lot easier to do if volleyball had a higher % of non-conference games. It’s wild to see the SEC get their like entire conference in the NCAA Softball tournament every year, but, that’s possible when you play more non conference games 12 definitely feels high, though I guess those 5+ bids that the extinct Pac-12 would normally get have to go somewhere. Edit: so, thinking about where the schools are going, I'd guess the ACC gets an additional bid pretty much every season due to the addition of Stanford. The Big Ten gets 2-3 extra bids on average from the incoming Pac-12 schools, and the Big 12 gets 1-2 extra bids on average from the Pac-12 schools it's adding. Obviously, this will fluctuate a bit depending on the year, and those teams may end up getting bids at the expense of other teams in their new conference (e.g. if Arizona State makes it, maybe TCU doesn't or something), but I'm guessing the bids will be roughly distributed that way.
|
|
|
Post by volleysota on Apr 15, 2024 13:54:59 GMT -5
Phe Pohio State University Maybe they meant Putgers?
|
|
|
Post by knapplc on Apr 15, 2024 13:56:17 GMT -5
Phe Pohio State University Maybe they meant Putgers? Pnebraska. The P is silent, like pneumonia.
|
|
|
Post by badgerbyproxy on Apr 15, 2024 14:01:38 GMT -5
I’ll have to start doing RPI math. It would be a lot easier to do if volleyball had a higher % of non-conference games. It’s wild to see the SEC get their like entire conference in the NCAA Softball tournament every year, but, that’s possible when you play more non conference games 12 definitely feels high, though I guess those 5+ bids that the extinct Pac-12 would normally get have to go somewhere. Agreed. I think around 10 would be the norm, with 12 being a good year high and 7-8 being an off year.
|
|
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: 28,360
|
Post by trojansc on Apr 15, 2024 14:27:31 GMT -5
12 definitely feels high, though I guess those 5+ bids that the extinct Pac-12 would normally get have to go somewhere. Edit: so, thinking about where the schools are going, I'd guess the ACC gets an additional bid pretty much every season due to the addition of Stanford. The Big Ten gets 2-3 extra bids on average from the incoming Pac-12 schools, and the Big 12 gets 1-2 extra bids on average from the Pac-12 schools it's adding. Obviously, this will fluctuate a bit depending on the year, and those teams may end up getting bids at the expense of other teams in their new conference (e.g. if Arizona State makes it, maybe TCU doesn't or something), but I'm guessing the bids will be roughly distributed that way. Another dumb thing is that when we're talking about at-large bids, the difference can actually come down to which conference's bottom cellar dwellers schedule the MOST cupcakes, not the actual quality of the at-large caliber teams.... So, do Rutgers/Northwestern/Maryland/Iowa rack up a bunch of wins in non-conference and help the conference? Or do Syracuse, Virginia, and Virginia Tech take a bunch of losses in a tougher non-conference and hurt their conference? And so forth with Alabama, West Virginia, etc. It's dumb how much that matters.
|
|
|
Post by vergyltantor on Apr 15, 2024 14:35:20 GMT -5
12 definitely feels high, though I guess those 5+ bids that the extinct Pac-12 would normally get have to go somewhere. Edit: so, thinking about where the schools are going, I'd guess the ACC gets an additional bid pretty much every season due to the addition of Stanford. The Big Ten gets 2-3 extra bids on average from the incoming Pac-12 schools, and the Big 12 gets 1-2 extra bids on average from the Pac-12 schools it's adding. Obviously, this will fluctuate a bit depending on the year, and those teams may end up getting bids at the expense of other teams in their new conference (e.g. if Arizona State makes it, maybe TCU doesn't or something), but I'm guessing the bids will be roughly distributed that way. Another dumb thing is that when we're talking about at-large bids, the difference can actually come down to which conference's bottom cellar dwellers schedule the MOST cupcakes, not the actual quality of the at-large caliber teams.... So, do Rutgers/Northwestern/Maryland/Iowa rack up a bunch of wins in non-conference and help the conference? Or do Syracuse, Virginia, and Virginia Tech take a bunch of losses in a tougher non-conference and hurt their conference? And so forth with Alabama, West Virginia, etc. It's dumb how much that matters. The B1G could have used some help from the middle group last season as well. IIRC Minnesota, Ohio State and Illinois didn't do the conference RPI any favors either.
|
|
|
Post by jwvolley on Apr 15, 2024 14:36:04 GMT -5
Another dumb thing is that when we're talking about at-large bids, the difference can actually come down to which conference's bottom cellar dwellers schedule the MOST cupcakes, not the actual quality of the at-large caliber teams.... So, do Rutgers/Northwestern/Maryland/Iowa rack up a bunch of wins in non-conference and help the conference? Or do Syracuse, Virginia, and Virginia Tech take a bunch of losses in a tougher non-conference and hurt their conference? And so forth with Alabama, West Virginia, etc. It's dumb how much that matters. The B1G could have used some help from the middle group lest season as well. IIRC Minnesota, Ohio State and Illinois didn't do the conference RPI any favors either. Indiana too. Lost the entire chunk of meaningful non con matchups.
|
|
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: 28,360
|
Post by trojansc on Apr 15, 2024 14:47:46 GMT -5
The B1G could have used some help from the middle group lest season as well. IIRC Minnesota, Ohio State and Illinois didn't do the conference RPI any favors either. Indiana too. Lost the entire chunk of meaningful non con matchups. Yeah, the bubble teams hurt each other and themselves by not winning enough. The biggest thing is Penn State gets a seed if the conference did better RPI wise, a long with an at large bid or two if everyone's RPI raised so the mid teams got T50 wins versus each other
|
|
|
Post by photos1 on Apr 15, 2024 14:54:27 GMT -5
19-13 with Fields…yes…but without Tyler Hildebrand, he’s gonna make a huge difference. How much? Enough? But a difference. I would expect a huge jump in the second half of the season. Setting and shot selection will show drastic jumps. Roster is upper middle of the B1G. My guess is they make the tournament…. 🏐 If the goal post is whether or not they make the NCAA tournament, ok, THAT, I will agree with. But I'm not sure that's a very high standard. I think the conference could get 12 teams in the tournament next year. I doubt the B1G gets any more than eight. They got six last fall and they add four newcomers from out west-so what I see is seven or eight. Last fall the committee signaled a willingness to give the previous one selection conferences additional qualifiers; I see that continuing. The widespread availability of match replays on YouTube and other streaming gives eyeballs to more teams and reveals the increasing level of talent in the so-called smaller conferences. Early non-conference matches have never weighed more on a teams resume in front of the committee. I believe SC will be a top seven B1G team, and from my view after diving in on the rosters and somewhat limited viewing of the spring matches, I do believe that being selected for the tournament equates to a much higher standard than you believe. The other glaring question I have is why is Penn State, by adding a freshman setter, who couldn’t make the U19 team last summer, and two B side practice players from Nebraska, universally picked ahead of Purdue in the B1G? A Purdue team who was not only extremely young a year ago and brings back all of their talented offensive pieces, but also soundly beat Penn State twice during 2023? Purdue won both of those matches rather decisively because they were better. If they can get consistent play from either of the OPs, they will be a team that could challenge Wisconsin and Nebraska. Penn State has nothing but questions, questions not answered in the match with Pitt last Saturday. This is no longer Russ Rose’s team-they have good players but I am not sure many are elite. 🏐
|
|
|
Post by badgerbyproxy on Apr 15, 2024 14:59:50 GMT -5
Another dumb thing is that when we're talking about at-large bids, the difference can actually come down to which conference's bottom cellar dwellers schedule the MOST cupcakes, not the actual quality of the at-large caliber teams.... So, do Rutgers/Northwestern/Maryland/Iowa rack up a bunch of wins in non-conference and help the conference? Or do Syracuse, Virginia, and Virginia Tech take a bunch of losses in a tougher non-conference and hurt their conference? And so forth with Alabama, West Virginia, etc. It's dumb how much that matters. The B1G could have used some help from the middle group lest season as well. IIRC Minnesota, Ohio State and Illinois didn't do the conference RPI any favors either. Minnesota at least had the win over Oregon, but was definitely a rough year for the mid-conference.
|
|
|
Post by hanmertime on Apr 15, 2024 14:59:57 GMT -5
If the goal post is whether or not they make the NCAA tournament, ok, THAT, I will agree with. But I'm not sure that's a very high standard. I think the conference could get 12 teams in the tournament next year. I doubt the B1G gets any more than eight. They got six last fall and they add four newcomers from out west-so what I see is seven or eight. Last fall the committee signaled a willingness to give the previous one selection conferences additional qualifiers; I see that continuing. The widespread availability of match replays on YouTube and other streaming gives eyeballs to more teams and reveals the increasing level of talent in the so-called smaller conferences. Early non-conference matches have never weighed more on a teams resume in front of the committee. I believe SC will be a top seven B1G team, and from my view after diving in on the rosters and somewhat limited viewing of the spring matches, I do believe that being selected for the tournament equates to a much higher standard than you believe. The other glaring question I have is why is Penn State, by adding a freshman setter, who couldn’t make the U19 team last summer, and two B side practice players from Nebraska, universally picked ahead of Purdue in the B1G? A Purdue team who were not only extremely young a year ago and bring back all of their talented offensive pieces, but also soundly beat Penn State twice during 2023? Purdue won both of those matches rather decisively because they were better. If they can get consistent play from either of the OPs, they will be a team that could challenge Wisconsin and Nebraska. Penn State has nothing but questions, questions not answered in the match with Pitt last Saturday. This is no longer Russ Rose’s team-they have good players but I am not sure many are elite. 🏐 Dude. 10 will be the average that get in. 6 was probably the lowest ever and all 4 of these newcomers can get in. So 10-12 each year.
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Apr 15, 2024 15:01:38 GMT -5
12 definitely feels high, though I guess those 5+ bids that the extinct Pac-12 would normally get have to go somewhere. Edit: so, thinking about where the schools are going, I'd guess the ACC gets an additional bid pretty much every season due to the addition of Stanford. The Big Ten gets 2-3 extra bids on average from the incoming Pac-12 schools, and the Big 12 gets 1-2 extra bids on average from the Pac-12 schools it's adding. Obviously, this will fluctuate a bit depending on the year, and those teams may end up getting bids at the expense of other teams in their new conference (e.g. if Arizona State makes it, maybe TCU doesn't or something), but I'm guessing the bids will be roughly distributed that way. Another dumb thing is that when we're talking about at-large bids, the difference can actually come down to which conference's bottom cellar dwellers schedule the MOST cupcakes, not the actual quality of the at-large caliber teams.... So, do Rutgers/Northwestern/Maryland/Iowa rack up a bunch of wins in non-conference and help the conference? Or do Syracuse, Virginia, and Virginia Tech take a bunch of losses in a tougher non-conference and hurt their conference? And so forth with Alabama, West Virginia, etc. It's dumb how much that matters. True. RPI is dumb in general.
|
|