|
Post by Keystonekid on Sept 10, 2007 11:59:47 GMT -5
um, Stanford and Nebraska ain't losing to teams in the teens, or maybe outside of 3-4. I of course realize anything can happen, but the gap is large between the best and the rest.
|
|
|
Post by bomber on Sept 10, 2007 12:00:19 GMT -5
If you took teams 8-20 and held a tournament, anything could happen. I think the same would be true if you took teams 1 through 25, no matter how dominant a team appears to be on paper. I was at the SSC in 1995 when the top ranked and undefeated Rainbow Wahine Blew Michigan State away in the first two games of the regional final only to lose in 5. In 1999 an overwhelmingly favorite Hawai'i team lost at home in the regional semis to Texas A&M, who played the match of their lives. Nothing is guaranteed in sports. Except extreme Wahine homerism...............
|
|
|
Post by runninrebel44 on Sept 10, 2007 12:04:55 GMT -5
Middle Tennessee's starting setter missed the match with a concussion suffered Sat evening. The true redshirt frreshman (red shirt no longer) set for the team. Still played Missouri State tough, but the chemistry wasn't there with the middles. Made a difference for sure... It is still a loss, and last I checked, the polls don't give sympathy for injuries. The selection committee may, but the polls don't, so expect them to drop out.
|
|
|
Post by BoilerUp! on Sept 10, 2007 12:06:33 GMT -5
Middle Tennessee's starting setter missed the match with a concussion suffered Sat evening. The true redshirt frreshman (red shirt no longer) set for the team. Still played Missouri State tough, but the chemistry wasn't there with the middles. Made a difference for sure... Purdue's sophomore setter has had 2 concussions. Is this going to be the year of the concussions?
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Sept 10, 2007 13:42:02 GMT -5
um, Stanford and Nebraska ain't losing to teams in the teens, or maybe outside of 3-4. I of course realize anything can happen, but the gap is large between the best and the rest. As I said before, NOTHING is guaranteed in sports.
|
|
|
Post by Ye Olde Dawg on Sept 10, 2007 13:42:19 GMT -5
From AVCA's weekly results summary ( www.avca.org/collegiate/DIresults/divisioniresults9-9-07.pdf): CSTV/AVCA Top 25 Matchups#1 Nebraska def. #17 Cal Poly 3-0 #1 Nebraska def. #11 Duke 3-0 #2 Stanford def. #17 Cal Poly 3-0 #2 Stanford def. #9 BYU 3-1 #3 Penn State def. #24 St. John's 3-0 #5 UCLA def. #16 Hawai'i 3-0 #9 BYU lost to #17 Cal Poly 1-3#9 BYU lost to #2 Stanford 1-3 #11 Duke lost to #1 Nebraska 0-3 #12 Minnesota lost to #15 California 0-3#15 California def. #12 Minnesota 3-0#16 Hawai'i def. #19 Santa Clara 3-1 #16 Hawai'i lost to #5 UCLA 0-3 #17 Cal Poly lost to #1 Nebraska 0-3 #17 Cal Poly def. #9 BYU 3-1#17 Cal Poly lost to #2 Stanford 0-3 #19 Santa Clara lost to #16 Hawai'i 1-3 #24 St. John's lost to #3 Penn State 0-3 CSTV/AVCA Top 25 Unranked Losses#11 Duke lost to Louisville 2-3 #13 Ohio lost to Alabama 2-3 #19 Santa Clara lost to Wichita State 0-3 #21 LSU lost to Iowa State 1-3 #25 Middle Tennessee lost to Missouri State 1-3Hawaii just might move up three, but probably only two. They beat teams they were supposed to, while BYU, Duke, Minnesota, and Ohio above them did not.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Sept 10, 2007 13:43:00 GMT -5
I think the same would be true if you took teams 1 through 25, no matter how dominant a team appears to be on paper. I was at the SSC in 1995 when the top ranked and undefeated Rainbow Wahine Blew Michigan State away in the first two games of the regional final only to lose in 5. In 1999 an overwhelmingly favorite Hawai'i team lost at home in the regional semis to Texas A&M, who played the match of their lives. Nothing is guaranteed in sports. Except extreme Wahine homerism............... That's no guarantee either, dumb goof!
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Sept 10, 2007 16:50:58 GMT -5
If you took teams 8-20 and held a tournament, anything could happen. I think the same would be true if you took teams 1 through 25, no matter how dominant a team appears to be on paper. I was at the SSC in 1995 when the top ranked and undefeated Rainbow Wahine Blew Michigan State away in the first two games of the regional final only to lose in 5. In 1999 an overwhelmingly favorite Hawai'i team lost at home in the regional semis to Texas A&M, who played the match of their lives. Nothing is guaranteed in sports. As I recall, TAMU didn't get lucky or play "the match of their lives". That year, they were actually the better team. I remember it well, because that was the year I got to see how phenomenal a setter Jenna Moscovic had become in only her sophomore year. In 2001 she was a senior and they had a good chance at making the Final Four, but in the regional final they ran into that year's edition of the Stanford buzzsaw.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Sept 10, 2007 17:24:48 GMT -5
I think the same would be true if you took teams 1 through 25, no matter how dominant a team appears to be on paper. I was at the SSC in 1995 when the top ranked and undefeated Rainbow Wahine Blew Michigan State away in the first two games of the regional final only to lose in 5. In 1999 an overwhelmingly favorite Hawai'i team lost at home in the regional semis to Texas A&M, who played the match of their lives. Nothing is guaranteed in sports. As I recall, TAMU didn't get lucky or play "the match of their lives". That year, they were actually the better team. I remember it well, because that was the year I got to see how phenomenal a setter Jenna Moscovic had become in only her sophomore year. In 2001 she was a senior and they had a good chance at making the Final Four, but in the regional final they ran into that year's edition of the Stanford buzzsaw. A&M was the better team that night but not the better team that year. Hawaii's only loss prior to the match against the Aggies was to Stanford. A&M played the match of their lives that night, I was at the match, I remember. They were a good team but not as good Hawai'i that year, they just played a phenomenal match that night.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Sept 10, 2007 21:20:12 GMT -5
An amazing coincidence, no?
The same thing could be said about the fact that "Hawaii's only other loss was to Stanford". Their early season match against the Beach was a very close match where the Wahine were the better team - that night. But we all know that the 49ers were undeniably the better team that year. Which is why when TAMU earned their spot above Hawai'i by beating them in the regional, LBSU turned around and handed it to TAMU in three easy games to advance to the Final Four.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Sept 10, 2007 21:59:51 GMT -5
An amazing coincidence, no? The same thing could be said about the fact that "Hawaii's only other loss was to Stanford". Their early season match against the Beach was a very close match where the Wahine were the better team - that night. But we all know that the 49ers were undeniably the better team that year. Which is why when TAMU earned their spot above Hawai'i by beating them in the regional, LBSU turned around and handed it to TAMU in three easy games to advance to the Final Four. Uh no. Hawai'i beat the Beach in four games earlier in 99, and it wasn't that close. Hawai'i was the 3rd ranked team in the Country and the top seed going into the Mountain regional. I don't know where you are getting your information but if you think LBSU was undeniably the better team, then you are mistaken. TAMU got swept by the Beach the next night because they couldn't replicate their high level of play from the night before.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Sept 10, 2007 22:20:47 GMT -5
An amazing coincidence, no? The same thing could be said about the fact that "Hawaii's only other loss was to Stanford". Their early season match against the Beach was a very close match where the Wahine were the better team - that night. But we all know that the 49ers were undeniably the better team that year. Which is why when TAMU earned their spot above Hawai'i by beating them in the regional, LBSU turned around and handed it to TAMU in three easy games to advance to the Final Four. Uh no. Hawai'i beat the Beach in four games earlier in 99, and it wasn't that close. Hawai'i was the 3rd ranked team in the Country and the top seed going into the Mountain regional. I don't know where you are getting your information but if you think LBSU was undeniably the better team, then you are mistaken. TAMU got swept by the Beach the next night because they couldn't replicate their high level of play of the night before. Uh no. 15-13, 15-10, 10-15, 15-10 is pretty close for side-out scoring. And I'll take Haneef, Weaver, Barratt and Nishimoto plus supporting cast over Kahumoku and Lima and Bown and Carey plus supporting cast. Which is, as we both know, academic, because no matter how you slice it the Wahine were still a full 4 steps removed from the National Final that year.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Sept 10, 2007 22:45:36 GMT -5
Uh no. Hawai'i beat the Beach in four games earlier in 99, and it wasn't that close. Hawai'i was the 3rd ranked team in the Country and the top seed going into the Mountain regional. I don't know where you are getting your information but if you think LBSU was undeniably the better team, then you are mistaken. TAMU got swept by the Beach the next night because they couldn't replicate their high level of play of the night before. Uh no. 15-13, 15-10, 10-15, 15-10 is pretty close for side-out scoring. And I'll take Haneef, Weaver, Barratt and Nishimoto plus supporting cast over Kahumoku and Lima and Bown and Carey plus supporting cast. Which is, as we both know, academic, because no matter how you slice it the Wahine were still a full 4 steps removed from the National Final that year. Pretty close for sideout scoring? no, it's not close at all. I don't care who "you'd take". The fact of the matter is Hawai'i beat Long Beach State earlier in the season, they were seeded ahead of Long Beach State in the tourney and ranked higher than Long Beach State in the poll. Obviously, not many people felt like Long Beach State was "undeniably" better than Hawai'i. In fact We were already looking forward to the final four before those farmers spoiled it. Try to come up with a more convincing argument next time. You claimed both Texas A &M and LBSU were better than Hawai'i in 99 yet offered nothing but a fool's opinion to back up your claim.
|
|
|
Post by parrotthead on Sept 10, 2007 23:29:36 GMT -5
UNLV actually got a couple of votes from Rich Kern and a 20 Pablo ranking this week. After winning all 3 tourneys with 2 on the road someone noticed. Now if they could upset BYU on Thursday !! GO REBELS !
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Sept 11, 2007 9:53:18 GMT -5
Uh no. 15-13, 15-10, 10-15, 15-10 is pretty close for side-out scoring. And I'll take Haneef, Weaver, Barratt and Nishimoto plus supporting cast over Kahumoku and Lima and Bown and Carey plus supporting cast. Which is, as we both know, academic, because no matter how you slice it the Wahine were still a full 4 steps removed from the National Final that year. Pretty close for sideout scoring? no, it's not close at all. I don't care who "you'd take". The fact of the matter is Hawai'i beat Long Beach State earlier in the season, they were seeded ahead of Long Beach State in the tourney and ranked higher than Long Beach State in the poll. Obviously, not many people felt like Long Beach State was "undeniably" better than Hawai'i. In fact We were already looking forward to the final four before those farmers spoiled it. Try to come up with a more convincing argument next time. You claimed both Texas A &M and LBSU were better than Hawai'i in 99 yet offered nothing but a fool's opinion to back up your claim. I'll more or less concede the TAMU point, because they started that year very raw and didn't have the program history of either UH or LBSU, although I feel their deep postseason performance that year spoke for itself, as did Hawaii's more modest success. But LBSU? Not hardly. At equal maturity, would I take the UH players against LBSU? Probably. But we are talking about a 1999 Long Beach team that not only was loaded with talent (like 1999 Hawai'i), but was loaded with veteran talent that had come off the first undefeated championship season in NCAA history. In crunch time, experienced talent wins over fresh talent -- just ask Jim McLaughlin and John Cook in 2005. Or ask Russ Rose a couple weeks ago -- PSU's roster has just as much raw talent as Nebraska's, but this highly experienced incarnation of Nebraska is clearly the better team for this season. Or ask Jerritt Elliott, Texas arguably has more raw talent than Nebraska in terms of specific skills, but I don't consider a TX/NU National Final with the Longhorns emerging victorious the most likely outcome to the season. Reading your comments is like eating a bowl of Kellogg's Frosted Mini-Wheats. One side seems like simple direct grain cereal, but the other side is sugar coated beyond recognition. Your shredded wheat side claims LBSU's earlier loss to UH is one indication that the 49ers were inferior. With the sugar-coated Wahine "homer" side of your mouth you dismiss Hawaii's postseason meltdown against TAMU as "just one game". Your shredded wheat side claims that 15-13, 15-10, 10-15, 15-10 is not a close match for side-out scoring, but your sugar-coated side neglects to recognize you are also saying that TAMU's 15-9, 12-15, 15-9, 15-12 victory over na Wahine would also therefore be "not close at all", and so you fail to recognize why a team sooo good can lose sooo badly to a team that next got trounced 3-0 by LBSU in the regional Final. Your shredded wheat side claims Hawai'i being ranked ahead of LBSU in the poll is an indication that the Wahine were better. The sugar-frosted side of your mouth is strangely silent about the final poll (you know, the one that matters?) showing the Beach at 4 and the Wahine finishing several spots down at 8, hmm... that's one measly spot above TAMU at 9. You'll have to forgive me if I don't want to take the time to stir the milk until your sugar-coated interpretation of events dissolves, exposing the raw mushy wheat underneath, which is doubtless how you feel about my interpretation. Cheers.
|
|