|
|
Post by Wiswell on Sept 19, 2016 16:39:12 GMT -5
What's up with Barry Goldberg? Same top 10 as last week, with Kansas second, BYU third, and Wisconsin ninth? I thought he had submitted the same ballot as last week, but he shuffled a few teams from 11 through 25. He's been spending too much time with Lainey. |
|
|
|
Post by Viki on Sept 19, 2016 16:40:41 GMT -5
In case you are wondering: The Pac-10 occupied the top three spots on 11/14/2011 - #1 USC, #2 UCLA, and #3 Cal You have to go back to 1985 for that to happen again and it was also the Pac-10 with UCLA, USC And Stanford in that order. |
|
|
|
Post by Viki on Sept 19, 2016 16:42:57 GMT -5
Hawai'i Long Beach State University of the Pacific UCSB Cal Poly San Diego State San Jose State from 1982.
|
|
|
|
Post by Viki on Sept 19, 2016 16:46:40 GMT -5
PCAA/BWC up through the early 90s as it were. (92-93ish)
|
|
|
|
Post by jaypak on Sept 19, 2016 17:06:01 GMT -5
I know that TAMU has played a rather tough schedule; but I'm surprised they're ranked this highly still. Typically when you ACTUALLY lose every time you're expected to lose, I don't know if you have a case for yourself. A top 25 team would find a way to win even 1 out of 5 matches against 'better' teams. Meanwhile, TCU beats a ranked opponent in UNC; UNC drops only four places in the poll, is still thought of as top 15, yet the same voters who kept UNC in the top 15 only give TCU a total of 2 points. TCU: Number of matches against a ranked opponent: 2. Number of times TCU won: 1. TAMU: Number of matches against a ranked opponent: 5. Number of times TAMU won: 0. To me, this would suggest that TCU should be AT LEAST on par with TAMU; but instead they're very far behind. TCU is punished for not playing a tough enough schedule I suppose; but does TAMU's tough schedule really matter if they can't get a win against any of their ranked opponents? I agree with everything you said, but if TCU is on par with A&M then what about Creighton, which swept TCU? Creighton gave Nebraska a tougher match (on the road, no less) than Florida and especially Texas (see evidence below), yet the Bluejays remain in 33rd where they were last week. Pablo has the Jays at 25, btw. Talk about being punished for a tough schedule! The Evidence1. Ties & Lead Changes in select Nebraska VB matches this year:
#10 Florida: 21 & 7 #2 Texas: 12 & 4 Iowa State: 10 & 6 CREIGHTON: 31 & 11 2. Creighton Volleyball's 81 points were the most allowed by a Nebraska opponent this fall. 3. Creighton Volleyball's 81 points were the most allowed by Nebraska at home since Oct. 24, 2015, when Wisconsin (97) beat NU in 4 sets. 4. Creighton Volleyball is the first team with 5 aces vs. Nebraska in Lincoln since Penn State also had 5 on Oct. 3, 2014. |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Sept 19, 2016 17:13:17 GMT -5
I know that TAMU has played a rather tough schedule; but I'm surprised they're ranked this highly still. Typically when you ACTUALLY lose every time you're expected to lose, I don't know if you have a case for yourself. A top 25 team would find a way to win even 1 out of 5 matches against 'better' teams. Meanwhile, TCU beats a ranked opponent in UNC; UNC drops only four places in the poll, is still thought of as top 15, yet the same voters who kept UNC in the top 15 only give TCU a total of 2 points. TCU: Number of matches against a ranked opponent: 2. Number of times TCU won: 1. TAMU: Number of matches against a ranked opponent: 5. Number of times TAMU won: 0. To me, this would suggest that TCU should be AT LEAST on par with TAMU; but instead they're very far behind. TCU is punished for not playing a tough enough schedule I suppose; but does TAMU's tough schedule really matter if they can't get a win against any of their ranked opponents? I agree with everything you said, but if TCU is on par with A&M then what about Creighton, which swept TCU? Creighton gave Nebraska a tougher match (on the road, no less) than Florida and especially Texas (see evidence below), yet the Bluejays remain in 33rd where they were last week. Pablo has the Jays at 25, btw. The Evidence1. Ties & Lead Changes in select Nebraska VB matches this year:
#10 Florida: 21 & 7 #2 Texas: 12 & 4 Iowa State: 10 & 6 CREIGHTON: 31 & 11 2. Creighton Volleyball's 81 points were the most allowed by a Nebraska opponent this fall. 3. Creighton Volleyball's 81 points were the most allowed by Nebraska at home since Oct. 24, 2015, when Wisconsin (97) beat NU in 4 sets. 4. Creighton Volleyball is the first team with 5 aces vs. Nebraska in Lincoln since Penn State also had 5 on Oct. 3, 2014. It's the name. "Bluejays". Lions, Tigers, Bulldogs, etc. all sound fearsome. But who could be scared of blue jays? |
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Sept 19, 2016 17:22:56 GMT -5
Yeah, not a Final Four team at this point. A combination of the "float effect" (from Texas losing) and coaches still impressed by UW beating Nikki Taylor. If their "puppies" grow up, watch out, however. Getting a Top Four seed could be the only way to avoid being sent to Lincoln or Bloomington... |
|
|
|
Post by vbgal on Sept 19, 2016 17:41:01 GMT -5
I know that TAMU has played a rather tough schedule; but I'm surprised they're ranked this highly still. Typically when you ACTUALLY lose every time you're expected to lose, I don't know if you have a case for yourself. A top 25 team would find a way to win even 1 out of 5 matches against 'better' teams. Meanwhile, TCU beats a ranked opponent in UNC; UNC drops only four places in the poll, is still thought of as top 15, yet the same voters who kept UNC in the top 15 only give TCU a total of 2 points. TCU: Number of matches against a ranked opponent: 2. Number of times TCU won: 1. TAMU: Number of matches against a ranked opponent: 5. Number of times TAMU won: 0. To me, this would suggest that TCU should be AT LEAST on par with TAMU; but instead they're very far behind. TCU is punished for not playing a tough enough schedule I suppose; but does TAMU's tough schedule really matter if they can't get a win against any of their ranked opponents? I wouldn't say that TCU didn't have a tough pre-season schedule... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2016 17:59:25 GMT -5
I know that TAMU has played a rather tough schedule; but I'm surprised they're ranked this highly still. Typically when you ACTUALLY lose every time you're expected to lose, I don't know if you have a case for yourself. A top 25 team would find a way to win even 1 out of 5 matches against 'better' teams. Meanwhile, TCU beats a ranked opponent in UNC; UNC drops only four places in the poll, is still thought of as top 15, yet the same voters who kept UNC in the top 15 only give TCU a total of 2 points. TCU: Number of matches against a ranked opponent: 2. Number of times TCU won: 1. TAMU: Number of matches against a ranked opponent: 5. Number of times TAMU won: 0. To me, this would suggest that TCU should be AT LEAST on par with TAMU; but instead they're very far behind. TCU is punished for not playing a tough enough schedule I suppose; but does TAMU's tough schedule really matter if they can't get a win against any of their ranked opponents? I wouldn't say that TCU didn't have a tough pre-season schedule... I didn't say they didn't. |
|
|
|
Post by gopherguy on Sept 19, 2016 18:07:09 GMT -5
Is this Brian Gimmy's latest alias? Gimmillaro's votes have actually been pretty reasonable so far this year, from my perspective. He's had Washington at number 2 all year, which is at least defensible based on their undefeated record and a victory at Hawaii. How does Goldberg end up with Kansas 2 and Wisconsin 9? Wisconsin's got wins over 5 top 25 teams and a loss at North Carolina. Kansas has wins over whom? Creighton? Northern Iowa? Maryland? Couple that with the loss to Purdue, and how does that justify ranking them second? Washington? Ok, I disagree but you can make a case. Minnesota? That's what the majority of voters thought. Wisconsin? Reasonable. Florida? Defensible. Kansas? No way. There were also voters that left off Colorado, Kansas, North Carolina, Ohio State and Penn State (one each). Florida State was missing from 2 ballots, as was Hawaii. |
|
|
|
Post by sideoutnow on Sept 19, 2016 18:35:23 GMT -5
Hawaii will always be ranked in the top 16................. What does this mean? Hawai'i spent all of 2014 outside the top 16, and started last season outside the top 16. Is there a new rule in place that states they cannot drop below 16? I'm confused. Yes, there is a new rule that exempts Hawaii from falling out of the top 15. Duh! Duh! So your point in clarifying the previous poster's comment is what? ... In any case, I'd take Hawaii's top 25 record history over Minnesota's any day. So, Minn beat Hawaii how many times in their entire series? (ONE?) And Mnn has won how many national championships again? Please do a fact check. I'm confused. (lol) My point is that previous comment by the other poster wasn't meant to be factual. |
|
|
|
Post by greenpier on Sept 19, 2016 18:50:19 GMT -5
What does this mean? Hawai'i spent all of 2014 outside the top 16, and started last season outside the top 16. Is there a new rule in place that states they cannot drop below 16? I'm confused. Yes, there is a new rule that exempts Hawaii from falling out of the top 15. Duh! Duh! So your point in clarifying the previous poster's comment is what? ... In any case, I'd take Hawaii's top 25 record history over Minnesota's any day. So, Minn beat Hawaii how many times in their entire series? (ONE?) And Mnn has won how many national championships again? Please do a fact check. I'm confused. (lol) My point is that previous comment by the other poster wasn't meant to be factual.  |
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Sept 19, 2016 18:51:39 GMT -5
Hawaii has 4 losses this season, all to teams ranked within the AVCA top 25. Hawaii started the season at 6 in the AVCA preseason poll based on returning the majority of a team that was a win away from the final four. They haven't been healthy this season. They loss to Wisconsin (currently ranked 3rd) and Kansas State (currently ranked 23rd) without 3 front row starters, including Nikki Taylor; loss to UCLA (currently ranked 9th) and Washington (currently ranked 4th) with Taylor back but still missing Annie Mitchem and Kalei Greeley in the front row. Mitchem is back and played well against Pepperdine this past week but they're still down a front row starter as Greeley continues to only play backrow for Hawaii during her recovery from shoulder surgery. Is Hawaii too high at 14? I don't know. I do know that 3 of their 4 losses are to teams currently ranked in the AVCA top 10, and they have yet to play a match this year with a full lineup of projected starters.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldmanred on Sept 19, 2016 19:08:52 GMT -5
I agree with everything you said, but if TCU is on par with A&M then what about Creighton, which swept TCU? Creighton gave Nebraska a tougher match (on the road, no less) than Florida and especially Texas (see evidence below), yet the Bluejays remain in 33rd where they were last week. Pablo has the Jays at 25, btw. The Evidence1. Ties & Lead Changes in select Nebraska VB matches this year:
#10 Florida: 21 & 7 #2 Texas: 12 & 4 Iowa State: 10 & 6 CREIGHTON: 31 & 11 2. Creighton Volleyball's 81 points were the most allowed by a Nebraska opponent this fall. 3. Creighton Volleyball's 81 points were the most allowed by Nebraska at home since Oct. 24, 2015, when Wisconsin (97) beat NU in 4 sets. 4. Creighton Volleyball is the first team with 5 aces vs. Nebraska in Lincoln since Penn State also had 5 on Oct. 3, 2014. It's the name. "Bluejays". Lions, Tigers, Bulldogs, etc. all sound fearsome. But who could be scared of blue jays? Sparrows; maybe! To be fair; Creighton will beat a lot of teams this year! GO HUSKERS |
|
|
|
Post by BuckysHeat on Sept 19, 2016 19:10:12 GMT -5
There were also voters that left off Colorado, Kansas, North Carolina, Ohio State and Penn State (one each). Florida State was missing from 2 ballots, as was Hawaii. It is possible that a wave of euphoria swept over the voters when they were able to leave PSU off the ballot, probably not an oversight |
|
