|
Post by ShaneM2005 on Oct 9, 2008 21:09:21 GMT -5
ay, you operate on some sort of alternative plain. "probably say PSU" Find anyone to say anything otherwise. Nebraska not the second best team? Well your two alternatives are Texas and Stanford who are a combined 1-6 vs Nebraska. Just what is it that you are basing your beliefs, because it isn't reality (results) It is very difficult for me to wrap my mind around Nebraska as the #2 team in the land, but I would have to turn my back on reality to accept that. Rank Penn State & Nebraska as you will, but I still don't think Penn State will come away with the National title at the end of the season. They were also undefeated in 1998 as I recall, that worked out well huh? Just because they're undefeated right now doesn't mean anything. If you're into reality, what great teams have PSU played? UCLA? Really?
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Oct 9, 2008 21:17:23 GMT -5
ay, you operate on some sort of alternative plain. "probably say PSU" Find anyone to say anything otherwise. Nebraska not the second best team? Well your two alternatives are Texas and Stanford who are a combined 1-6 vs Nebraska. Just what is it that you are basing your beliefs, because it isn't reality (results) It is very difficult for me to wrap my mind around Nebraska as the #2 team in the land, but I would have to turn my back on reality to accept that. Alternative plain?....really. I think if PSU lost A LOT of people would say otherwise when it came to ranking them #1
|
|
|
Post by justavolleyballfan on Oct 9, 2008 21:22:15 GMT -5
Rank Penn State & Nebraska as you will, but I still don't think Penn State will come away with the National title at the end of the season. They were also undefeated in 1998 as I recall, that worked out well huh? Just because they're undefeated right now doesn't mean anything. If you're into reality, what great teams have PSU played? UCLA? Really? You're one to talk about reality ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png) Give it 48 hours and PSU will have wins against three teams good enough to have defeated the top 3 teams of the Pac-10 earlier this season.
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Oct 9, 2008 21:27:03 GMT -5
Wow! "I think if PSU lost A LOT of people would say otherwise when it came to ranking them #1" That is one of the silliest things I have read. I agree that IF PSU lost alot of people would say that. The point you're missing is THEY HAVEN'T. I respect other peoples view, but back it up with something, anything. Like I said I personally don't see Nebraska as #2, but they beat the two teams who would be considered. If you have a better way of measuring that, than the teams actually playing each other, please, let us know. If you want to say "PSU hasn't beaten one of the top 5 teams in the country, that's why I don't think they are #1" I can live with that, because that is an actuality. Your arguments just don't hold any water.
|
|
|
Post by ShaneM2005 on Oct 9, 2008 21:33:51 GMT -5
Rank Penn State & Nebraska as you will, but I still don't think Penn State will come away with the National title at the end of the season. They were also undefeated in 1998 as I recall, that worked out well huh? Just because they're undefeated right now doesn't mean anything. If you're into reality, what great teams have PSU played? UCLA? Really? You're one to talk about reality ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png) Give it 48 hours and PSU will have wins against three teams good enough to have defeated the top 3 teams of the Pac-10 earlier this season. That's great and all, but I'm not talking about the Pac-10. I'm a Stanford fan, could you tell? The only other team in the Pac-10 that even interests me is UCLA and that's only because of Spicer and Sather. Last I checked the only team that Stanford lost to that actually matters was Nebraska, but I'll chalk that one up to the fact that their National Player of the Year has been training with the National team all spring and summer. How many of PSU's girls were there again?
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Oct 9, 2008 21:37:40 GMT -5
Wow! " I think if PSU lost A LOT of people would say otherwise when it came to ranking them #1" That is one of the silliest things I have read. I agree that IF PSU lost alot of people would say that. The point you're missing is THEY HAVEN'T. I respect other peoples view, but back it up with something, anything. Like I said I personally don't see Nebraska as #2, but they beat the two teams who would be considered. If you have a better way of measuring that, than the teams actually playing each other, please, let us know. If you want to say "PSU hasn't beaten one of the top 5 teams in the country, that's why I don't think they are #1" I can live with that, because that is an actuality. Your arguments just don't hold any water. I think you are a bit confused here. let me explain the timeline a little. a poster said, "If Minnesota does upset PSU, how many Pac-10 teams will be ahead of both of them in the rankings next week?" I commented that, "PSU better win...I could care less what a loss would do to the Pac-10 in the rankings, I just really don't think that Nebraska (who would benefit most from a PSU loss) is the best team in the country.......and don't ask me who I think is, because I'll still probably say PSU....." I wasn't really arguing anything... I'm not missing the point that they haven't lost, I understand this. The hypothetical situation was that they would be upset by Minnesota thus resulting in a loss and then what that would do to the rankings. I commented that I didn't want them to lose because I'm not ready to say that Nebraska, or any other team for that matter, is the #1 team in the country..... or perhaps I'm just the confused one in all of this?..... but I highly doubt it. So before you start popping off that people's "arguement's hold no water" lets make sure that we are all at least talking about the same thing!
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Oct 9, 2008 21:48:50 GMT -5
Shanem, your stepping out beyond your knowledge. First, teams do not train in the summer as a team unless they are cheating, and three PSU players were invited and declined the invitation to train with the national team. Lastly in what way does losing to St. Louis not matter?
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Oct 9, 2008 21:51:29 GMT -5
Shanem, your stepping out beyond your knowledge. First, teams do not train in the summer as a team unless they are cheating, and three PSU players were invited and declined the invitation to train with the national team. Lastly in what way does losing to St. Louis not matter? The same way that Nebraska losing to unranked Colorado in 06' didn't matter......stupid loss, yes.....but when it's all said and done Nebraska walked away with the title that year....
|
|
|
Post by ShaneM2005 on Oct 9, 2008 22:07:09 GMT -5
Shanem, your stepping out beyond your knowledge. First, teams do not train in the summer as a team unless they are cheating, and three PSU players were invited and declined the invitation to train with the national team. Lastly in what way does losing to St. Louis not matter? Oh, so I guess all spring doesn't matter either? I guess you didn't read my whole post. I suppose that when Stanford stepped on the court in Omaha they didn't practice any either. Get real. I also didn't ask how many PSU players got invited to train with the national team, I asked how many were THERE. Finally, losing to St. Louis doesn't matter because they won't even make it a regionals, let alone NCAA final. Just like how PSU winning against all the teams on their mediocre schedule won't help them repeat any quicker.
|
|
|
Post by mplssetter on Oct 9, 2008 23:11:45 GMT -5
ay, you operate on some sort of alternative plain. "probably say PSU" Find anyone to say anything otherwise. Nebraska not the second best team? Well your two alternatives are Texas and Stanford who are a combined 1-6 vs Nebraska. Just what is it that you are basing your beliefs, because it isn't reality (results) It is very difficult for me to wrap my mind around Nebraska as the #2 team in the land, but I would have to turn my back on reality to accept that. Rank Penn State & Nebraska as you will, but I still don't think Penn State will come away with the National title at the end of the season. They were also undefeated in 1998 as I recall, that worked out well huh? Just because they're undefeated right now doesn't mean anything. If you're into reality, what great teams have PSU played? UCLA? Really? Welcome to VT "Shanem2005"... Now, do you have a point that you're trying to make? You don't think PSU will win the championship and it really pisses you off that your beloved Cardinals are not considered the best. Ok I get it. You're getting mad at "Dorothymantooth" because she's calling you out. You want to ignore that fact that Stanford lost to St. Louis but use the fact that PSU was undefeated in 98 (when most of the current players were 10 or 11 years old) and didn't win the national championship... So what? Totally different players. You're argument that PSU hasn't played any great teams doesn't hold water either. Both Hawaii and UCLA are pretty good teams. What's impressive to me is even against lesser teams, PSU has played at a high level with no let downs. They are consistantly good. And even if they don't have the toughest schedule in the country, don't you think they go at each other in practise everyday?
|
|
|
Post by bucky415 on Oct 10, 2008 0:11:02 GMT -5
This year's Penn State team, unlike the 1998 one, won't have to deal with that Misty May woman if they want to win the title. She was pretty good. Anyone have any idea what she has been up to since then? You don't hear much about her.
|
|
|
Post by spikerthemovie on Oct 10, 2008 2:13:07 GMT -5
Shanem, your stepping out beyond your knowledge. First, teams do not train in the summer as a team unless they are cheating, and three PSU players were invited and declined the invitation to train with the national team. Lastly in what way does losing to St. Louis not matter? I'll acknowledge my snarkiness in advance, but if you're going to accuse someone of stepping out beyond their knowledge, it'd be good to spell your own sentence correctly. Meanwhile, what is it with the defensiveness of Penn State fans? Your team is undeniably terrific; its play tells the story.
|
|
|
Post by MTC on Oct 10, 2008 8:01:07 GMT -5
Wouldn't it be terrible if the only reason Penn State went undefeated was that every team that played against them had a bad night all season long and through the playoffs. Everyone could just say they were lucky but not the best team. I could live with that and enjoy my greatest season ever. Some other teams have great talent but if they don't use all of it, what purpose does it serve. I'll take a team of over-achievers like Penn State every time. It would be frustrating for me to root for another team with great talent and coaching knowing that they would not hustle.
|
|
|
Post by VBSID on Oct 10, 2008 9:07:16 GMT -5
There was a miscommunication somewhere along the line between the Big Ten Conference and the Big Ten Network. Therefore, the women's volleyball match between Penn State and Minnesota in Minneapolis on Saturday, Oct. 11 (tomorrow) will be played at 6:00 p.m. CT/7:00 p.m. ET like scheduled but will air on the BTN on a one-hour delay at 7:00 p.m. CT/8:00 p.m. ET.
|
|
|
Post by ShaneM2005 on Oct 10, 2008 9:17:50 GMT -5
Rank Penn State & Nebraska as you will, but I still don't think Penn State will come away with the National title at the end of the season. They were also undefeated in 1998 as I recall, that worked out well huh? Just because they're undefeated right now doesn't mean anything. If you're into reality, what great teams have PSU played? UCLA? Really? Welcome to VT "Shanem2005"... Now, do you have a point that you're trying to make? You don't think PSU will win the championship and it really pisses you off that your beloved Cardinals are not considered the best. Ok I get it. You're getting mad at "Dorothymantooth" because she's calling you out. You want to ignore that fact that Stanford lost to St. Louis but use the fact that PSU was undefeated in 98 (when most of the current players were 10 or 11 years old) and didn't win the national championship... So what? Totally different players. You're argument that PSU hasn't played any great teams doesn't hold water either. Both Hawaii and UCLA are pretty good teams. What's impressive to me is even against lesser teams, PSU has played at a high level with no let downs. They are consistantly good. And even if they don't have the toughest schedule in the country, don't you think they go at each other in practise everyday? Actually I'm not mad at anyone, but thanks for your concern. I could care less if anyone considers the CARDINAL the best. I'll let post-season talk for itself. As for the teams you mentioned, UCLA is decent at best right now and they beat Hawaii. UCLA lost to USC. Enough said. I think PSU is a good team, but they're going to be beaten at some point.
|
|