|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Nov 6, 2012 11:21:59 GMT -5
What schools will likely not be over .500? Arizona, Oregon State, Cal? Any predictions on what schools move out and what schools move in? Last year the requirement was "over .500". This year the requirement is "at or above .500". Where did you get this information? Why should we believe it? |
|
|
|
Post by Xplaya on Nov 6, 2012 11:36:34 GMT -5
What schools will likely not be over .500? Arizona, Oregon State, Cal? Any predictions on what schools move out and what schools move in? Last year the requirement was "over .500". This year the requirement is "at or above .500". Saw the manual "To be considered during the at-large selection process, a team must have an overall won-lost record of .500 or better." This is a change from last year. |
|
|
|
Post by lionsfan on Nov 6, 2012 12:49:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by GatorVball on Nov 6, 2012 13:22:11 GMT -5
Last year the requirement was "over .500". This year the requirement is "at or above .500". Saw the manual "To be considered during the at-large selection process, a team must have an overall won-lost record of .500 or better." This is a change from last year. I assume this rule was changed to keep teams from adding a match late against a weak opponent to get over .500. I seem to recall Arizona doing this a few years back. |
|
|
|
Post by wonderwarthog79 on Nov 6, 2012 13:49:17 GMT -5
Some of those "mediocre teams of the big conferences" are pretty good. If Oregon State can beat Penn State, they can't be as bad as they seem to be playing. Right? Yes, they can. |
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Nov 6, 2012 13:54:46 GMT -5
Saw the manual "To be considered during the at-large selection process, a team must have an overall won-lost record of .500 or better." This is a change from last year. I assume this rule was changed to keep teams from adding a match late against a weak opponent to get over .500. I seem to recall Arizona doing this a few years back. Maybe, but I'd really like to know why they should have done that. Why shouldn't teams be allowed to throw in an extra match if they a) want, and b) have the room in their allowed dates to do it? Keep in mind, if the opponent is weak it will also affect their RPI. But why does it matter if the team is added at the end, or if it was there from the beginning? |
|
|
|
Post by bkedane on Nov 6, 2012 14:14:06 GMT -5
Last year the requirement was "over .500". This year the requirement is "at or above .500". Where did you get this information? Why should we believe it? I got it from an NCAA document in the possession of a coach whose team is on the bubble this year. I confirmed the information with another coach whose team is on the bubble and who recently asked for confirmation with the NCAA about the issue. |
|
|
|
Post by bkedane on Nov 6, 2012 14:15:17 GMT -5
Saw the manual "To be considered during the at-large selection process, a team must have an overall won-lost record of .500 or better." This is a change from last year. I assume this rule was changed to keep teams from adding a match late against a weak opponent to get over .500. I seem to recall Arizona doing this a few years back. In the document I looked at, no reason was given for the change. |
|
|
|
Post by urkillinmesmalls on Nov 6, 2012 15:20:56 GMT -5
Is this document online at all?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Nov 6, 2012 15:36:44 GMT -5
The official "Documents and Manuals" page of the NCAA does not have it shown yet, only the 2011 version (which was updated, I note, 11/8/2011)
|
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Nov 6, 2012 16:12:32 GMT -5
Where did you get this information? Why should we believe it? I got it from an NCAA document in the possession of a coach whose team is on the bubble this year. I confirmed the information with another coach whose team is on the bubble and who recently asked for confirmation with the NCAA about the issue. OK, thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by GatorVball on Nov 6, 2012 22:09:54 GMT -5
I assume this rule was changed to keep teams from adding a match late against a weak opponent to get over .500. I seem to recall Arizona doing this a few years back. Maybe, but I'd really like to know why they should have done that. Why shouldn't teams be allowed to throw in an extra match if they a) want, and b) have the room in their allowed dates to do it? Keep in mind, if the opponent is weak it will also affect their RPI. But why does it matter if the team is added at the end, or if it was there from the beginning? Simple. Quite a few teams from the big conferences can have a high enough rpi, but maybe not the above .500 record. When all they need is an extra win, knowing it won't drop the rpi too much, there is incentive to add a match late. Had they not added the match, they couldn't even be considered for participation in the tournament |
|
|
|
Post by Babar on Nov 6, 2012 22:36:58 GMT -5
I assume this rule was changed to keep teams from adding a match late against a weak opponent to get over .500. I seem to recall Arizona doing this a few years back. Maybe, but I'd really like to know why they should have done that. Why shouldn't teams be allowed to throw in an extra match if they a) want, and b) have the room in their allowed dates to do it? Keep in mind, if the opponent is weak it will also affect their RPI. But why does it matter if the team is added at the end, or if it was there from the beginning? Because if a team were allowed to add a match late in the season why couldn't they come up with a reason for not playing a non-conference opponent if they felt they might lose and it would hurt their RPI. Just pay the guarantee. |
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Nov 7, 2012 7:47:08 GMT -5
Maybe, but I'd really like to know why they should have done that. Why shouldn't teams be allowed to throw in an extra match if they a) want, and b) have the room in their allowed dates to do it? Keep in mind, if the opponent is weak it will also affect their RPI. But why does it matter if the team is added at the end, or if it was there from the beginning? Simple. Quite a few teams from the big conferences can have a high enough rpi, but maybe not the above .500 record. When all they need is an extra win, knowing it won't drop the rpi too much, there is incentive to add a match late. Had they not added the match, they couldn't even be considered for participation in the tournament And? So what if they do? Why is it wrong or should it be discouraged? |
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Nov 7, 2012 7:48:45 GMT -5
Maybe, but I'd really like to know why they should have done that. Why shouldn't teams be allowed to throw in an extra match if they a) want, and b) have the room in their allowed dates to do it? Keep in mind, if the opponent is weak it will also affect their RPI. But why does it matter if the team is added at the end, or if it was there from the beginning? Because if a team were allowed to add a match late in the season why couldn't they come up with a reason for not playing a non-conference opponent if they felt they might lose and it would hurt their RPI. Just pay the guarantee. Who knows why teams have space in their schedule? |
|
