|
|
Post by IdahoBoy on Aug 9, 2004 20:38:34 GMT -5
I can admit it when I make a mistake. I meant to say fourth. Third was still in my mind from the previous comment. And for the record, ROY is great when it comes to stats and I am too, albeit probably to a lesser degree. But I check everything I put out, unless I put an arbitrary disclaimer on it. It was No. 1 Hawaii, No. 2 CSU, No. 3 UCSB and No. 4 BYU ... see for yourself. www.avca.org/collegiate/04DIWPreview.asp#WestI don't buy it. They are listed 4th on that list, but, it doesn't make sense. Clearly, there were at least 4 teams better than BYU in that region in 2003. Reading the top of the page: The following NCAA Division I teams (listed by region, then 2003 RPI region ranking, others receiving NCAA Tournament bids, then all others in the region) have submitted preseason information to the AVCA for inclusion in the 2004 AVCA Division I Preseason Preview. The 2003 RPI region ranking takes the top 10 from each region within the final 2003 NCAA Division I RPI and forms a regional ranking from last year (DOES NOT represent a 2004 preseason regional ranking). Abbreviations have been made in order to minimize the pages of this document.1. Hawaii (#3 RPI, #3 AVCA) 2. Colorado State (#11 RPI, #14 AVCA) 3. UC Santa Barbara (#23 RPI, #22 AVCA) 4. BYU (#32 RPI, #31 AVCA) 5. Utah (#39 RPI, #23 AVCA) 6. Long Beach State (#38 RPI) 7. UC-Irvine (#42 RPI, #32 AVCA) 8. Cal State Northridge (#44 RPI) 9. Fresno State (#45 RPI) 10. SMU (#46 RPI) I know they did a Regional Ranking last year. I know that information was NOT released. We all know about the RPI and what a crock of butter it is. If they ranked these teams based on their RPI, than I am wouldn't be surprised, but the RPI is useless in accessing skill of a team. I really don't think that the order these teams are listed in makes sense to be reasonable Regional Ranking. As they say: Trash-In, Trash-Out. The RPI sucks. Plain and Simple. |
|
|
|
Post by IdahoBoy on Aug 9, 2004 20:48:02 GMT -5
Ok, so you're equating winningnest with all-time wins. Others would equate winningnest with all-time win percentage! It is important to clarify. I think the latter fits the definition better. No. 1 is UCLA with 960+, No. 2 is Southwest Missouri State with 930 and No. 3 BYU with 925. The following is a link to the SMS release, which is a pdf and the info you'd be looking for is on the first page on the left. By the way Andy Banachowski has all the wins for UCLA and former BYU coach Elaine Michaelis is second alltime in NCAA Division I volleyball with 887. |
|
|
|
Post by GatorVball on Aug 9, 2004 20:57:32 GMT -5
I actually think that Tennessee is going to surprise a few of you this year. Though the SEC is not the toughest conference, expect them to finish near the top. They have all players returning, not to mention a few good ones. One player being Amy Morris, a transfer from Penn State, who has the ability to be an all american quality hitter. I have watched her since her high school days in Indiana, and I believe after having last year to gel with the team, will this season have a breakout year. Count me as the first to say on here that this team will have a good season and don't be surprised to see them in the NCAA's. They are the team that scares me the most in the SEC this year. Knytych is a good setter, the combination of Morris and Piantadosi on the OH is pretty good. If they are able to be more consistent, they will be a very good team this year. Andre and Blum are 2 very solid middles |
|
|
|
Post by TheSantaBarbarian on Aug 9, 2004 21:06:43 GMT -5
Ok, so you're equating winningnest with all-time wins. Others would equate winningnest with all-time win percentage! It is important to clarify. I think the latter fits the definition better. Percentage is a very iffy way to compare. For example, 10% has very different meanings depending on whether you are talking about $10 or $10000. In volleyball terms, a record of 1-0 is the best possible when using percentage. That is why most use total wins or at least set a minimum number of matches played with percentage. |
|
|
|
Post by IdahoBoy on Aug 9, 2004 21:07:26 GMT -5
They are the team that scares me the most in the SEC this year. You keep saying Florida is overrated... but c'mon! Tennessee to win the SEC?  |
|
|
|
Post by GatorVball on Aug 9, 2004 21:13:46 GMT -5
You keep saying Florida is overrated... but c'mon! Tennessee to win the SEC? I didn't say they'd win, I said they scare me the most of any SEC teams. Usually it's Arkansas or South Carolina. This year, Tennessee will be a veteran team, lots of talent and they will be no worse than 2nd best in the league. I still think Florida is the best team in the league, but nationally, I see them like they were in 2000. A sweet 16 team, but probably won't go much further. They are talented, but they have a lot of question marks. |
|
|
|
Post by cougarize on Aug 9, 2004 21:15:48 GMT -5
Ok, so you're equating winningnest with all-time wins. Others would equate winningnest with all-time win percentage! It is important to clarify. I think the latter fits the definition better. I don't need to clarify anything. Anybody knows when you talk about winningest teams that connotes with number of wins. I answered all your questions with info to back it up and yet you want more. That's fine. I back up my statments and when I do make cockamane statements I can admit it. And the regional ranking thing, did i lie about it or make it up? No i didn't. You see it, but you still don't buy it. Impossible to please aren't you? It's like going into Duke's and coming up with a reason, ANY REASON, to get a free meal. IB, just call me meal ticket, cause that's what i am and you can keep punching it. |
|
|
|
Post by Boom on Aug 9, 2004 21:20:49 GMT -5
As far as BYU's BAD losses go, any loss to Utah is very bad and any loss to CSU is bad, so they did have five (damn Utes and Rams) 'bad losses. What do you mean by bad losses? I usually consider them to be the ones should've won, and BYU and Utah were so close last year that it seems like that one's a wash, and the loss to CSU was not "bad" -- they were good last year. Using Rich Kern's ratings, BYU had no bad losses and one good win - PSU. Utah on the other hand had a slew bad losses and CSU had one bad loss - Minnesota, but in retrospect, that was just because UM had some early season losses and shouldn't really have been rated below CSU at the time. |
|
|
|
Post by GatorVball on Aug 9, 2004 21:27:21 GMT -5
I don't need to clarify anything. Anybody knows when you talk about winningest teams that connotes with number of wins. I answered all your questions with info to back it up and yet you want more. That's fine. I back up my statments and when I do make cockamane statements I can admit it. And the regional ranking thing, did i lie about it or make it up? No i didn't. You see it, but you still don't buy it. Impossible to please aren't you? It's like going into Duke's and coming up with a reason, ANY REASON, to get a free meal. IB, just call me meal ticket, cause that's what i am and you can keep punching it. IB wants it done by winning pct. cause then Shoji is #1. |
|
|
|
Post by IdahoBoy on Aug 9, 2004 21:34:30 GMT -5
I don't need to clarify anything. Anybody knows when you talk about winningest teams that connotes with number of wins. So, now I'm not anybody because I have a better perspective of winningnest? Even the NCAA lists percentage over quantity on their list. It's the more common indicator. Now you're just resulting to slander because you were wrong. If you're going to quote things from a movie you saw last night, at least spell it right: "cockamamie." I don't buy the list they published as the true Regional Ranking. If it is, then there are some serious problems with the way the ladies put together rankings at the NCAA. What is Duke's? Practicing for what you can do with your BYU degree? Yes, I would like fries with that. |
|
|
|
Post by IdahoBoy on Aug 9, 2004 21:35:24 GMT -5
Percentage is a very iffy way to compare. For example, 10% has very different meanings depending on whether you are talking about $10 or $10000. In volleyball terms, a record of 1-0 is the best possible when using percentage. That is why most use total wins or at least set a minimum number of matches played with percentage. Yeah, yeah, yeah. You're just jumping on an anti-IdahoBoy bandwagon any chance you get. |
|
|
|
Post by IdahoBoy on Aug 9, 2004 21:38:28 GMT -5
IB wants it done by winning pct. cause then Shoji is #1. One more season like 2003 for USC and Haley will top that list. I like the percentage (with criteria for amounts of matches coached) as it seems to be a better indicator of overall success. |
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Aug 9, 2004 21:45:44 GMT -5
I'd like to hear what everybody else has to say about the AVCA preseason coaches poll. Seeing so many BYWho posts makes me wonder. Talking about BYU and the AVCA Coaches poll is like having a Superbowl discussion and some lame person brings the Cincinnatti Bengals into the mix.  |
|
|
|
Post by st15 on Aug 9, 2004 21:53:20 GMT -5
Now you're just resulting to slander because you were wrong. If you're going to quote things from a movie you saw last night, at least spell it right: "cockamamie." Correcting spelling and grammar is the first thing anybody on the internet does when they have no argument. And the word you're looking for above is libel. |
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Aug 9, 2004 21:55:50 GMT -5
I didn't say they'd win, I said they scare me the most of any SEC teams. Usually it's Arkansas or South Carolina. This year, Tennessee will be a veteran team, lots of talent and they will be no worse than 2nd best in the league. I still think Florida is the best team in the league, but nationally, I see them like they were in 2000. A sweet 16 team, but probably won't go much further. They are talented, but they have a lot of question marks. I will take the opposite approach. I see Hawai'i the way they were in 2000 as well. They are talented, and have some question marks but they will still "Layeth The Smacketh Down on the Roody Pooh Candy asses of their opponents!" |
|
