|
|
Post by david on Mar 24, 2010 21:40:30 GMT -5
Anyone care to rank conferences by how many teams they could get in the NCAA, max?
For example:
Pac-10 7
Big 10 6
etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2010 22:16:54 GMT -5
Anyone care to rank conferences by how many teams they could get in the NCAA, max? For example: Pac-10 7 Big 10 6 etc. Why don't you just go to RichKern.com and click to the last 10 years' or so history for actual results? |
|
|
|
Post by baywatcher on Mar 25, 2010 1:41:42 GMT -5
Despite the dissension of a professor emeritus I will bite:
Pac 10- 6 teams; poor performance this last tourney reflected
Big 10- 7 teams; 2 out of Purdue, Wisconsin,Northwestern make it
Big 12- 7 teams
ACC 4 teams, not sure who the fourth will be
SEC 4 teams, same difference, unsure who is fourth
WCC 4 teams, Pepperdine and Santa Clara are back
MWC I got 4 in
WAC 2 New Mexico State returns
Big East 3 teams
|
|
|
|
Post by david on Mar 25, 2010 9:24:47 GMT -5
Thanks for playing, Baywatcher. If the answer to any post on here was "why don't you just go to XXXXXXXX and look it up" or "why don't you tell someone who cares" or "why don't you just send the person a note", there'd be no point to this board, would there?
And I'm not asking about the last 10 years, I'm asking about as things stand today- what are the conference strengths? I assume they change over time, yes?
One interesting thing- you have 32 at-large bids listed from 9 conferences. That's pretty much all of them, yes? So the rest of the leagues are all 1-bid leagues (MAC?) that go to the conference-tourney winners?
Perhaps a corrolary question- which conferences would you say are 1-bid leagues that- no matter how their teams play during the season- the only shot of making the tournament are if you win the conference tournament? All the rest?
|
|
|
|
Post by baywatcher on Mar 25, 2010 11:00:14 GMT -5
I was starting to count at large, but frankly my knowledge of "mid major" volleyball east of the Rockies is so small I stuck with the biggies. I have the SEC with 4 teams, but damned if I know who the fourth team will be after Fla, Tenn and KY. I cannot name a player in the Atlantic 10 or Conference USA, unless perhaps one or two on St. Louis. And both should get multiple teams in. The Big East has so much size, prestige and money that they should start moving up the vball ladder soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by qc on Mar 25, 2010 11:05:42 GMT -5
Despite the dissension of a professor emeritus I will bite: Pac 10- 6 teams; poor performance this last tourney reflected Big 10- 7 teams; 2 out of Purdue, Wisconsin,Northwestern make it Big 12- 7 teams ACC 4 teams, not sure who the fourth will be SEC 4 teams, same difference, unsure who is fourth WCC 4 teams, Pepperdine and Santa Clara are back MWC I got 4 in WAC 2 New Mexico State returns Big East 3 teams The MVC got two teams (UNI, WSU) to the second round of the 2009 NCAA tourney and have had up to four invited (in 2007 (?) ILSU, MSU, UNI, WSU (?) ). So I'll guess MVC 3 MSU, UNI, WSU A-10 2 or 3 Dayton and one or both of SLU & Xavier MWC 2 CSU +  (The MWC crashed & burned in the 2010 NCAA MBB tourney (0/4 in the Sweet 16); karma reduces the at-large WVB NCAA bids to one.  ) |
|
|
|
Post by qc on Mar 25, 2010 11:53:23 GMT -5
The Big East has so much size, prestige and money that they should start moving up the vball ladder soon. That worked perfectly in the 2010 NCAA MBB (men's basketball) tourney. The "size, prestige and money" got the Big East a great record in the MBB tourney. Two out of eight teams advanced to the Sweet 16; compare that with the Big Ten, for example. Notre Dame and Marquette could easily have been left out of the tourney. The Pac Ten got half of its invited teams to the Sweet 16. On the basis of the percentage of invited teams that got to the Sweet 16, you can't beat the Horizon (Butler), Ivy League (Cornell) and Missouri Valley (UNI) at 100% plus you have Big 10 (60%), Pac-Ten (60%), SEC (50%). The Big East got 25% of its invited teams to the Sweet 16. Notre Dame lost to Old Dominion. Villanova beat Robert Morris; lost to St. Mary's. Marquette lost to Washington. Georgetown lost to Ohio. West Virginia beat Morgan State; beat Missouri. Pittsburgh beat Oakland; lost to Xavier. Syracuse beat Vermont; beat Gonzaga. Louisville lost to California. So how did the Big East do in the 2009 NCAA WVB tourney? Louisville lost to Minnesota. Notre Dame lost to Ohio. Cincinnati lost to Ohio State. The Big East is poised to pass the Pac Ten.  |
|
|
|
Post by qc on Mar 25, 2010 11:54:54 GMT -5
Sorry. Pac Ten was 50%.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedro el leon on Mar 25, 2010 12:18:49 GMT -5
^^ The pac 10 definitely had a down year though, but that is due to the abnormally large early entrants to the NBA, the Pac 10 had 21 underclassmen leave for the NBA in the past 2 years, far more than the 2nd most Big East (16 team conference, mind you) at 13 players leaving. The Pac 10 will be back in men's bball in the next couple years, it's just hard to cope with that much talent leaving.
But I'm happy my Huskies turned their season around, they have the talent, now they're finally using it.
|
|
|
|
Post by tenniscraze on Mar 25, 2010 13:10:13 GMT -5
Pac 10 is definitely the best.. the conference has the best depth all around.
|
|
|
|
Post by qc on Mar 25, 2010 15:40:56 GMT -5
In MBB (2010 NCAA tourney), the following conferences underperformed: WAC (2 teams; both lost in the first round) MWC (4 teams; two lost in the first round and two lost in the second round) CUSA (2 teams; both lost in the first round) The following conferences got too many at-large invites (based on their performances): ACC (6 teams; only one Sweet 16 team) Big 12 (7 teams; only 2 Sweet 16 teams) Big East (8 teams; only 2 Sweet 16 teams) I'll bet the tourney would be better (i.e. more interesting) if fewer "BCS" (or "Power 6") teams were invited. I would love to see a rule (in basketball and volleyball) that you have to win at least 50% of your conference games/matches to get an at-large invitation to the NCAA tourney. Who needs Oregon State or Washington State in the NCAA WVB tourney when they are near the bottom of the Pac 10? (Or wait; Washington State got to the NCAA tourney and won lost in the first round. ) |
|
|
|
Post by qc on Mar 25, 2010 16:10:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Mar 26, 2010 9:31:41 GMT -5
Anyone care to rank conferences by how many teams they could get in the NCAA, max? For example: Pac-10 7 Big 10 6 etc. Why would you rank them by that? Which conference is stronger? One that gets two teams in the NCAA tournament that both make the final four? Or one that gets 6 teams in the tournament but they all lose in the first round? Why don't you just rank teams by average shoe size? |
|
|
|
Post by qc on Mar 26, 2010 9:42:11 GMT -5
Why don't you just rank teams by average shoe size? This is a great idea. It is simple and objective. Seed the tourney according to shoe size and let them play. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Mar 26, 2010 9:50:32 GMT -5
The following conferences got too many at-large invites (based on their performances): ACC (6 teams; only one Sweet 16 team) Big 12 (7 teams; only 2 Sweet 16 teams) Big East (8 teams; only 2 Sweet 16 teams) You can't do it this way. You have to consider the matchups. True, the ACC only got one Sweet 16 team, but then again, how many did they expect to get? Two. Duke and Maryland were the only teams with top 4 seeds. Clemson also got upset in the first round, so that was a bad result. Therefore, Maryland and Clemson are the only teams that you can say underperformed. Then again, Georgia Tech and Wake Forest both outperformed their seeds. In terms of matchups, the ACC has a bad loss (#7 Clemson vs #10 Missouri), a close loss (Maryland vs #5 Mich St), a close win (#9 Wake over #8 Texas), and a good win (#10 GA Tech over #7 Ok St). So far, the ACC has been pretty much a wash. A #7 or #10 seed not making the Sweet 16 is not a sign of failure, but both are easily worthy of at-large selections. The Big East, otoh, is probably having the biggest meltdown of any conference ever. Every team in the Big East was seeded 6 or higher, and not a single team has yet exceeded their seeding, and West Virginia is the only team to actually MATCH it's expectation. In fact, the best team that any Big East team has beaten has been a #8 seed (Syr over Gonzaga). Shoot, even West Virginia making the final 8 doesn't mean much because to get there, they have had to beat the #15 seed, #10 seed, and #11 seed (if Baylor wins tonight, they will have had a similarly easy path). This is what I mean when I say you have to consider matchups. The Big 12 performance is most affected by Kansas's loss, but there is also Ok St's loss. However, unlike the Big East, the Big 12 had a good win with Missouri. The Big Ten similarly has a mix of results (Mich St had a good win, Wisc bad loss). Every year, there will be conferences that do better, and some do worse, and there are usually mixes of results. I think the Big East's incompetence, however, is probably unprecedented. |
|
(The MWC crashed & burned in the 2010 NCAA MBB tourney (0/4 in the Sweet 16); karma reduces the at-large WVB NCAA bids to one. 
)
