|
|
Post by jets on Nov 9, 2009 18:30:14 GMT -5
Do you really think that Washington State is a lock for a tournament bid? They have just lost their last 4 matches and in the remaining six, they have Washington, UCLA and USC on the road and Eastern Washington and the Oregon teams at home. Pretty easy to pencil in 4 more losses meaning they could finish the season 2-8 with something around 6-12 in conference. And USC might not be much better in the conference standings. I'm not saying that these two teams aren't among the 31 best at-large teams, but I just question whether you can justify putting a team that far down in a conference into the tournament. Yes, the conference is very tough, but by allowing that many losses as being "OK", they are essentially giving teams a free pass on about half of the matches they play in a season. If they win any of them, we say "Great, see how good they are." , and if they lose, then its, "Well, you can't expect them to beat so & so.". That attitude really puts them in a win-win situation and is not really fair. If a team is in a tough conference (and I agree that the Pac-10 is the toughest) I just don't think the committee should be pulling teams from the bottom third of the conference standing if they are only winning about a third of their conference matches. But what do us fans know? Agree that the last 10 matches is a criteria for being picked. Too bad for Wazzu that 11th to last match would be a win over UW and 13th a win over USC. But not so sure about conf wins is as big a issue for them. Out of conference they went undefeated and beat some other bubble teams like UCDavis, Mizzou and Utah and in conference they have some good wins and 1 REALLY good win. They are likely playing 14 matches against other NCAA teams and yet will perhaps have an 18-12 record. An 18-12 record against their schedule and considering their good wins versus their worst losses (ASU) really should get them in when you consider the other bubble teams from the Big12, Big10, WCC, BW, BE, ACC, Mid-Amer, MWC conferences. Now if the lose to E.Washington and maybe even Oregon State and finish with an 0-10 record or 1-9 record to end the season then they could be borderline at 16-14 with only wins over Washington, USC to help offset losses to ASU, OSU, EWU. |
|
|
|
Post by jets on Nov 9, 2009 18:45:10 GMT -5
Well, it’s still way too early, but I’m bored and it’s fun! So here are some predictions: Florida Regional:1. Penn State 2. Iowa State 3. Florida 4. Florida State (5. LSU?) If 5 Pac10 teams are seeded, each of the 4 regionals should have a Pac10 team (usually, but you never know with seeding committee) |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Nov 9, 2009 18:49:52 GMT -5
Making sure there is a possibility of an all-Pac10 (or any other conference) Final Four has not been a priority of the selection committee in the past.
|
|
|
|
Post by setterdump on Nov 9, 2009 19:18:50 GMT -5
Making sure there is a possibility of an all-Pac10 (or any other conference) Final Four has not been a priority of the selection committee in the past. Really? As of late, that seems to be becoming more and more like the trend. Not sure if it has been intentional or not. 2008: Texas regional: UCLA, Oregon PSU regional: Cal CSU regional: Stanford, USC Washington regional: Washington 2007: Stanford regional: Stanford, UCLA, Oregon PSU regional: Washington Florida regional: USC Wisconsin regional: Cal 2006: Texas regional: Stanford, Cal Hawaii regional: USC, UCLA, Oregon Washington regional: Washington Florida regional: Arizona St. 2005: Stanford regional: Stanford, Arizona, USC TAMU regional: Washington, Cal Nebraska regional: UCLA 2004: Louisville regional: USC, Arizona Washington regional: UCLA, Washington, Cal Wisconsin regional: Stanford |
|
luke96792
Junior
Hawai'i Volleyball: The Tradition Continues....
Posts: 440
|
Post by luke96792 on Nov 9, 2009 19:21:34 GMT -5
I don't think its intentional on the NCAA's part. I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that the PAC10 is so GOOD, they have to spread them around in the tournament.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Nov 9, 2009 19:32:22 GMT -5
You get six (or more) teams into the tournament, and it's likely going to happen. I just said it hasn't been a priority.
|
|
|
|
Post by austintatious on Nov 9, 2009 19:38:26 GMT -5
IdahoBoy: Not too bad. I really thought this was pretty realistic on Oct 23. Since then the only one's I may disagree with are:
Atlantic Ten: Both Dayton and St Louis will get in
ACC: Ga Tech in/Carolina out (although they play FSU this weekend)
Big East: Get's no more than three, ND, Cincy and Pitt
Big 10 - no Wisconsin
Rest look pretty darn good. Nice work. Don't know enough about Big West or WCC to make any kind of realistic guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by austintatious on Nov 9, 2009 19:41:23 GMT -5
Dayton and St. Louis are virtually a lock to get in, and I wouldn't be surprised if CUSA got a second team. I'd be stunned if the Sun Belt only got one team. I don't know who the 2nd or 3rd teams would be but this conference is not just the FIU show. Middle Tennessee has only lost twice in conference, both to FIU and all six set losses were close. They should get in. CUSA tough call. USM for sure, as they will probably end season with best record, but one of 4 teams can win conference, Tulsa, Rice, Rice, USM and SMU. May get second bid if someone other than USM wins tournament. |
|
|
|
Post by southie on Nov 9, 2009 20:11:22 GMT -5
Well, it’s still way too early, but I’m bored and it’s fun! So here are some predictions: Florida Regional:1. Penn State 2. Iowa State 3. Florida 4. Florida State (5. LSU?) Minnesota Regional:1. Texas 2. UCLA 3. Minnesota 4. Oregon? Some Pac-10 team? Stanford Regional:1. Hawaii 2. Stanford 3. Cal 4. Michigan? Nebraska Regional:1. Washington 2. Illinois 3. Nebraska 4. Kentucky? (Maybe Florida State?) Great looking bracket. Keeping the #1 seeds in their natural geographic regions (close to home) is usually a top priority for the committee; but, this year, the seeding of the host teams is gonna dictate where the #1 seeds get sent, IMO. Florida Regional:1. Penn State 2. Iowa State 3. Cal 4. Florida Minnesota Regional:1. Texas 2. UCLA 3. Minnesota 4. Kentucky Stanford Regional:1. Hawaii 2. Illinois 3. Stanford 4. Oregon Nebraska Regional:1. Washington 2. Nebraska 3. Florida State 4. Michigan |
|
|
|
Post by justavolleyballfan on Nov 9, 2009 21:14:03 GMT -5
PSU is currently a lock for overall #1. So if they go to Florida, then Florida has to be either 8,9 or 16. If Florida is #16, they are seeded below two teams they defeated in preseason (Stanford and FSU). In the past seeds usually reflected preseason results unless there was a very good reason why they shouldn't. Don't see a very good reason here. If Florida does not win the SEC (which seems at this point not unlikely) then giving Florida 8 or 9 means that Kentucky would be at least #7.
|
|
|
|
Post by noah121 on Nov 9, 2009 21:50:53 GMT -5
I noticed on the list that Great West has no automatic bids to the tournament. Why is that?
|
|
|
|
Post by qc on Nov 10, 2009 10:42:14 GMT -5
I noticed on the list that Great West has no automatic bids to the tournament. Why is that? Who wants them? (j/k ;D ) |
|
|
|
Post by Wiswell on Nov 10, 2009 10:42:56 GMT -5
Ugh, how many threads do we need on this topic?
|
|
|
|
Post by jets on Nov 10, 2009 17:33:53 GMT -5
Does anybody have/know of a list of the conferences that determine their auto-bid via conference tournament?
|
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Nov 10, 2009 18:12:03 GMT -5
Well, it’s still way too early, but I’m bored and it’s fun! So here are some predictions: Florida Regional:1. Penn State 2. Iowa State 3. Florida 4. Florida State (5. LSU?) Minnesota Regional:1. Texas 2. UCLA 3. Minnesota 4. Oregon? Some Pac-10 team? Stanford Regional:1. Hawaii 2. Stanford 3. Cal 4. Michigan? Nebraska Regional:1. Washington 2. Illinois 3. Nebraska 4. Kentucky? (Maybe Florida State?) Great looking bracket. Keeping the #1 seeds in their natural geographic regions (close to home) is usually a top priority for the committee; but, this year, the seeding of the host teams is gonna dictate where the #1 seeds get sent, IMO. Florida Regional:1. Penn State 2. Iowa State 3. Cal 4. Florida Minnesota Regional:1. Texas 2. UCLA 3. Minnesota 4. Kentucky Stanford Regional:1. Hawaii 2. Illinois 3. Stanford 4. Oregon Nebraska Regional:1. Washington 2. Nebraska 3. Florida State 4. Michigan I feel like the #1-#4 seeds are tougher than the sweet 16 matchups between the #2-#3 Hawaii-Oregon could REALLY go either way.....whereas Stanford and Illinois would probably be a Stanford victory Washington-Michigan could be really tough if Michigan plays to what they are capable of....whereas Nebraska is coming on strong and it's hard to determine just how strong FSU is, though I don't think they are that tough Texas-Kentucky at this point is a more intriguing matchup than UCLA-Minnesota. UCLA is hot right now, Minnesota's prospects are dropping pretty fast. only the PSU regional actually pits the weakest team of the 4 with Penn State in the sweet 16 |
|
