Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2005 15:18:02 GMT -5
As Gorf's chart (again) illustrates, you lose within your conference and you drop -- unless you play in the Pac-10. I really hate this double standard.
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on Nov 21, 2005 15:26:00 GMT -5
I wouldn't quite say absurd, but in terms of who is #1 it isn't much of a debate. I am sure PSU played better vs Minnesota than Nebraska did, obviously. I do think that one of this years biggest head scratchers for me has been, the fact that Minnesota has absolutely laid down for PSU this year. Minnesota is good and has the athletes to play with PSU, but was totally non-competitve. I would of guessed after Friday OSU would have beaten MN, but Minnesota was just better than OSU. My point is Minnesota played absolutley non competitively vs PSU so it is a tough comparison. PSU has played beautifully and I have no problem with saying they may be playing as well or better than anyone, but they have two losses. One of them is to the team we are comparing them to, and the other is to Stanford, who Nebraska also beat 3-0. It is almost alway hard to say who is #1, in my opinion this isn't one of those times.
|
|
|
Post by IdahoBoy on Nov 21, 2005 15:27:02 GMT -5
Minnesota also took Nebraska to 5-games... if PSU made them look non-competitive, that is a great argument for them being #1.
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Nov 21, 2005 15:27:55 GMT -5
All Pac 10 teams gained points, despite:
UCLA getting swept by Arizona USC getting beaten by Arizona
(I guess those two getting such "huge" wins over Arizona State makes the difference.)
California losing to Stanford.
|
|
|
Post by GatorVball on Nov 21, 2005 15:28:51 GMT -5
Why don't they just put all 6 Pac-10 teams in the top 10 and get it over with? You want to talk about the REAL joke in this poll! And, gator, don't see how you can say what you're saying and have UW over PSU... and Notre Dame lost to LSU and Pittsburgh! Seems to me you're falling into the head-to-head trap. Possibly. I know who they lost to, but they also beat Florida, USC, Texas and UL twice. You could always drop them to 6 and put Arizona at 4 and STanford at 5. That would be fine as well. Either way, I think Zona should be ahead of Stanford and Notre Dame ahead of Florida. The voters regard to the Pac-10 is just crazy. USC, UCLA and Cal all lost, they all gained points, Cal and USC moved up in the polls, UCLA stayed the same. Texas loses to Missouri on the road and they get penalized and dropped.
|
|
|
Post by IdahoBoy on Nov 21, 2005 15:29:46 GMT -5
But... the Pac-10 continually beats up all the non-conference competition they face. It's hard to rank them below a team they swept...
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on Nov 21, 2005 15:32:46 GMT -5
I think even Ruffda would agree that Minnesota "no - showed" against PSU. Give PSU the credit they deserve, but this was more about Minn than PSU me thinks.
|
|
|
Post by GatorVball on Nov 21, 2005 15:34:04 GMT -5
But... the Pac-10 continually beats up all the non-conference competition they face. It's hard to rank them below a team they swept... Really? USC lost to Notre Dame, Hawaii and Florida Cal lost to San Diego and Nevada UCLA lost to Hawaii and Wisconsin Arizona lost to Santa Clara The Pac-10 is good, no one denies that. But they get more credit than I feel they deserve.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Nov 21, 2005 15:39:11 GMT -5
Penn State has been playing the best volleyball in the country the last few weeks. FWIW, I concur. Must be another down year in the Pac Ten. Only six teams in the top 16. Average rank in the top 16: Pac-10 = 9.16 Big 10 = 8 Big 12 = 4.6 Interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Nov 21, 2005 15:49:04 GMT -5
I think even Ruffda would agree that Minnesota "no - showed" against PSU. Give PSU the credit they deserve, but this was more about Minn than PSU me thinks. You have to agree as well though that Nebraska has struggled a bit more of late than Penn State. Penn State has lost 1 game in their past 10 matches with 6 of those matches being against ranked conference opponents. One of those ranked opponents (Northwestern) is "simply" getting votes and not in the top 25, however, the Wildcats are playing very well lately. Nebraska has lost only 3 games in their last 10 matches, however, 1 of those games was to "getting votes" Kansas State in their most recent match and they started out very poorly in the first 2 games against Missouri. Their only other ranked conference opponent in that 10 match stretch was against Texas in a sweep.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2005 15:51:53 GMT -5
I'd rank -- and did -- Nebraska #1. I'm just saying there's different ways to look at the poll. I can see the argument for UW #2, too.
But 4 on down is a crapshoot.
|
|
|
Post by Pirate VB Fan on Nov 21, 2005 15:59:35 GMT -5
Average rank in the top 16: Pac-10 = 9.16 Big 10 = 8 Big 12 = 4.6 Interesting. Actually, not in the least interesting because I have no idea what you are trying to say. Please explain.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2005 16:05:46 GMT -5
As Gorf's chart (again) illustrates, you lose within your conference and you drop -- unless you play in the Pac-10. I really hate this double standard. Excuse me, but is Minnesota no longer in the Big 10? They were badly swept (30-14, 30-24, 30-21 and hit -.043) by Penn State. Therefore, by "(R)uffda's Rule," since Minnesota loses within its conference, it will drop in the poll. But Minnesota actually moved up from #19 to #17, replacing Ohio State, the team it beat the same week. Clearly, the Minnesota loss to PSU hurt them in no way in the polls.
|
|
|
Post by IdahoBoy on Nov 21, 2005 16:08:05 GMT -5
FWIW, I concur. Must be another down year in the Pac Ten. Only six teams in the top 16. Average rank in the top 16: Pac-10 = 9.16 Big 10 = 8 Big 12 = 4.6 Interesting. Ok... I see what you're trying to do, but it's logically inconsistent. In order for this to be somewhat accurate, you have to divide the total by the largest denominator (6, right?). Most teams don't have 6, so let's just give them a generic score of 17 for each team not ranked in the top 16 to get a better indicator for "rank" of conferences.
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on Nov 21, 2005 16:12:59 GMT -5
Your losses to teams ranked ahead of you shouldn't drop you.
|
|