|
Post by beachbum96 on Apr 11, 2017 17:03:37 GMT -5
I believe Stetson does control their own destiny. They need to close out FGCU tomorrow and beat FIU in Tallahassee on Friday. Pepperdine match is a non factor IMHO. A nice showing would be beneficial but lets be real. The GCU match will be a good one; Hatter win certainly helps their case. ASUN matches hurt? Really? For sure its a weak conference, but pose those teams against the "gimmie" matches that everyone else in the East conversation has played and its a non factor. Spring Hill, Charleston, Central Arkansas, Colorado Mesa, Irvine valley, Texas A&M, Houston Baptist......you really think these teams are better than the ASUN teams? I've seen all of these play this year and I can assure you they are not. Record padding matches for sure.....why do you think SCU got off to such a great start this year.....weak strength of schedule. Talking about strength of schedule, 5 of Stetsons losses this year are to FSU, Hawaii, USC, & Long Beach. The LSU loss came down to 2 points in the third set of the last match.....could very easily have gone the other way. Looking at schedule and head to head, I don't see how SCU is even in the conversation. TCU certainly has improved this year with their new coach....and I'm glad to see it. So the TCU/Stetson match up is the one that should be the focus. SOS, the Hatters by far. By the time this is over, I expect Stetson to have the better regional record. Common opponents are LMU, FSU, NM, Hawaii, GSU, FAU, GCU & Pepperdine. Slight advantage TCU via LMU win; GCU Pepperdine still to come for Stetson. CCSA tourney....gonna be some good VBall but not a factor for the 3rd spot in the east unless someone shocks the world....anyone really think that's probable? I think this comes down to Stetson and TCU with it being Stetson's spot to lose.....you heard it here first
|
|
|
Post by trollhunter on Apr 11, 2017 18:47:42 GMT -5
I believe Stetson does control their own destiny. They need to close out FGCU tomorrow and beat FIU in Tallahassee on Friday. Pepperdine match is a non factor IMHO. A nice showing would be beneficial but lets be real. The GCU match will be a good one; Hatter win certainly helps their case. ASUN matches hurt? Really? For sure its a weak conference, but pose those teams against the "gimmie" matches that everyone else in the East conversation has played and its a non factor. Spring Hill, Charleston, Central Arkansas, Colorado Mesa, Irvine valley, Texas A&M, Houston Baptist......you really think these teams are better than the ASUN teams? I've seen all of these play this year and I can assure you they are not. Record padding matches for sure.....why do you think SCU got off to such a great start this year.....weak strength of schedule. Talking about strength of schedule, 5 of Stetsons losses this year are to FSU, Hawaii, USC, & Long Beach. The LSU loss came down to 2 points in the third set of the last match.....could very easily have gone the other way. Looking at schedule and head to head, I don't see how SCU is even in the conversation. TCU certainly has improved this year with their new coach....and I'm glad to see it. So the TCU/Stetson match up is the one that should be the focus. SOS, the Hatters by far. By the time this is over, I expect Stetson to have the better regional record. Common opponents are LMU, FSU, NM, Hawaii, GSU, FAU, GCU & Pepperdine. Slight advantage TCU via LMU win; GCU Pepperdine still to come for Stetson. CCSA tourney....gonna be some good VBall but not a factor for the 3rd spot in the east unless someone shocks the world....anyone really think that's probable? I think this comes down to Stetson and TCU with it being Stetson's spot to lose.....you heard it here first Stetson does control their own destiny versus TCU. However, FIU also controls their own destiny, they just need to beat Stetson and LSU/FSU. And same for GSU who has a head to head split with Stetson, if they beat LSU or FSU they pull ahead of Stetson in a couple categories. Even if Stetson beats FIU, GSU/FAU/SCU/FIU all have a chance to beat LSU/FSU in tournament - if they do that could put Stetson out since it affects CommOpp, RegionRec (significant wins/losses), and OvRec (significant wins/losses). ASUN matches hurt Stetson SoS bad - because they are playing teams with horrible records 2-3 times each! Twice each in regular season and possibly another in ASUN tournament. Stetson will have 8 matches against teams with awful records. They are very close to TCU in SoS, I challenge you to calculate it. Note that Benedictine and Irvine Valley do not count toward wins or SoS, they are NAIA and JuCo. 4 of TCU losses came to Hawaii, Pepperdine, FSU and LBSU (you left that off Common Opps). You also forgot the Stetson loss to GSU in one of your comparisons. If Stetson beats just FIU and ASUN, losing to GCU/Pepp, here is how they will compare with TCU at the end: 1) RegRec = TIE?? (records are similar) both beat FAU/GSU/FIU and lost to LSU/FSU. TCU (9-2 region) Stetson (19-4 region) difference is Stetson beat SCU, but lost to GSU. 2) SoS = STETSON?? Need someone to calculate via Excel please. It is very close using quick approximation .574 to .562 3) H2H = TIE (did not play) 4) ComOpp = TCU (via GSU, LMUx2) 5) OvRec = TIE?? Stetson (20-12) lost to GSU, GCU and LMUx2 = TCU (16-8) lost to GCU, AZ, ASU If Stetson also beats GCU, OvRec sways their way, since it gives them one more quality win in comparison and one less loss. If Stetson beats both GCU and Pepp, CommOpp becomes a TIE and Stetson wins OvRec. This may be needed if they lose SoS.
|
|
|
Post by sandyfan on Apr 11, 2017 18:48:39 GMT -5
Talking about strength of schedule, 5 of Stetsons losses this year are to FSU, Hawaii, USC, & Long Beach. The LSU loss came down to 2 points in the third set of the last match.....could very easily have gone the other way. Looking at schedule and head to head, I don't see how SCU is even in the conversation. TCU certainly has improved this year with their new coach....and I'm glad to see it. So the TCU/Stetson match up is the one that should be the focus. SOS, the Hatters by far. By the time this is over, I expect Stetson to have the better regional record. Common opponents are LMU, FSU, NM, Hawaii, GSU, FAU, GCU & Pepperdine. Slight advantage TCU via LMU win; GCU Pepperdine still to come for Stetson. CCSA tourney....gonna be some good VBall but not a factor for the 3rd spot in the east unless someone shocks the world....anyone really think that's probable? I think this comes down to Stetson and TCU with it being Stetson's spot to lose.....you heard it here first I think if you look at the record vs. ranked opponents I think you will find that USC is 4-7 and Stetson is 3-8. I think that merits being in the conversation and if you dig a little deeper and look at the actual scores of some of those losses you will understand that they are very, very close.
|
|
|
Post by quiksetz on Apr 12, 2017 6:58:20 GMT -5
Does anyone know if matches won with invalid lineups will be looked at differently by the selection committee? I think coaches can protest matches, but I don't think there are any consequences for coaches that get away with lineups that don't abide by the rules. I think there are some matches which teams have lost 2-3 to a school that played with an invalid lineup and it wasn't caught until afterwards.
|
|
|
Post by trollhunter on Apr 12, 2017 10:00:39 GMT -5
Does anyone know if matches won with invalid lineups will be looked at differently by the selection committee? I think coaches can protest matches, but I don't think there are any consequences for coaches that get away with lineups that don't abide by the rules. I think there are some matches which teams have lost 2-3 to a school that played with an invalid lineup and it wasn't caught until afterwards. I know that Stetson has been reported a couple times for illegal lineup (vs Hawaii/LMU), but they lost them anyways. The rules and reporting instructions for illegal lineups are clear, but not the penalty. Not sure if it becomes a forfeit, or a no-contest. Or just a warning first time. However, Stetson did later beat South Carolina 3-2 by moving a player from their #1 pair to the #5 position. Not sure if that has been reported or not, but it was not legal. Could have some big implications if it is under review.
|
|
|
Post by beachbum96 on Apr 12, 2017 10:53:54 GMT -5
My understanding is the moves were reviewed by the NCAA and cleared as not violation(s). Its been put to bed. I was there for the whole fiasco....interesting times.
|
|
|
Post by trollhunter on Apr 12, 2017 11:28:27 GMT -5
My understanding is the moves were reviewed by the NCAA and cleared as not violation(s). Its been put to bed. I was there for the whole fiasco....interesting times. Wow, thanks for the info. If the NCAA is allowing teams to put #6 pairs at the #2 spot, we will certainly see more of that in the future from coaches. It is expressly against the rules, wonder how it got allowed? Interestingly, those two players that got moved up to #2 spot that weekend are now back playing at #5 and #6 spots, or not playing. Really fishy. Have you heard anything about the lineup issue when Stetson recently played South Carolina?
|
|
|
Post by beachbum96 on Apr 12, 2017 11:57:20 GMT -5
Not sure how the moves were justified, just reporting the news! I don't believe there was any issue reported with the South Carolina match. I understand where you are coming from but the player in question sat out for a number of matches, re-entered in the exhibition spot then move up to #5. It seems to be the theme that the NCAA is allowing. I didn't hear any rumblings that Moritz questioned it.
|
|
|
Post by quiksetz on Apr 12, 2017 12:11:06 GMT -5
From my understanding, the 6's pair isn't part of the official lineup. It's equivalent to the #7 or #8 pair. Someone from the "#8" pair could jump right into anywhere in the lineup. But if you exit the lineup from the #2 spot, the next time you re-enter into the lineup should be in the #2 spot regardless if you played in the #6 which isn't an official lineup spot. That's my understanding. South Carolina lost to Stetson 2-3 and lost in the #5 position.
Another interesting match that could have changed a teams tournament resume is Georgia State vs TCU this past weekend at FSU. Looking at TCU's lineup there is a player who played in the #1 spot and was out of the lineup for a couple of weeks and then entered back into the lineup against GSU and played in the #2 position, when I think she would have to enter back in the #1 position. Georgia State lost 2-3 and lost in the #1 position during that match up.
So there have been some important games which could change the picture of the #3 East bid if the selection committee looks into it.
|
|
|
Post by txjulia on Apr 12, 2017 12:22:15 GMT -5
TCUs 1s and 2s have switched somewhat throughout the season, with injuries occurring on the team. Neal/Greene have played at the 1s most of the season, with Scheel/Hill playing at 2 most of the season, but playing at 1 occasionally. Scheel is then player you're mentioning, and I think she'll remain at 2.
|
|
|
Post by beachbum96 on Apr 12, 2017 12:38:12 GMT -5
I've been to most of these matches and there is a lot of movement. These aren't rookie coaches so there must be some nuance of the rules that is open for interpretation. Tallahassee will be interesting Friday. Cant wait to see what moves materialize.
|
|
|
Post by rainmaker on Apr 12, 2017 13:33:50 GMT -5
FIU big on this as well, they had a player move down from 1 to 4 in a weekend (while winning) in Miami. Hard to see the justification for dropping a player while winning..?? We will know more about where Stetson stands after this weekend. They need more wins against ranked teams that the SCU, TCU, FIU, GSUs of the world.. Love the fact they can get it done this weekend, don't really need to worry about anyone else, imo.. I hope for more scheduling like this next year as well, at the end , when it matters
|
|
|
Post by quiksetz on Apr 12, 2017 16:03:50 GMT -5
TCUs 1s and 2s have switched somewhat throughout the season, with injuries occurring on the team. Neal/Greene have played at the 1s most of the season, with Scheel/Hill playing at 2 most of the season, but playing at 1 occasionally. Scheel is then player you're mentioning, and I think she'll remain at 2. The last match Scheel played in before being removed from the lineup was in the #1 position against Arizona. The next time she played was against Georgia State in the #2 position and the rule states that when a player is removed from the lineup, they must re-enter at the same position. So she should have played in the #1 position against Georgia State. Georgia State lost in the #1 position, but could have an argument that they could have won if Scheel played in the #1 like the rule says.
|
|
|
Post by txjulia on Apr 12, 2017 17:41:09 GMT -5
TCUs 1s and 2s have switched somewhat throughout the season, with injuries occurring on the team. Neal/Greene have played at the 1s most of the season, with Scheel/Hill playing at 2 most of the season, but playing at 1 occasionally. Scheel is then player you're mentioning, and I think she'll remain at 2. The last match Scheel played in before being removed from the lineup was in the #1 position against Arizona. The next time she played was against Georgia State in the #2 position and the rule states that when a player is removed from the lineup, they must re-enter at the same position. So she should have played in the #1 position against Georgia State. Georgia State lost in the #1 position, but could have an argument that they could have won if Scheel played in the #1 like the rule says. I understand what you are saying, but I was noting that at the beginning of the season Scheel was playing at the 2s position, so it wasn't that unusual to see her move back to 2s after she returned. The rule just seems somewhat unusual to me. If a player is injured then returns at 80% strength, it doesn't make sense to remember them at the 1s just because they were there before. But, I do understand there is a reason for doing this.
|
|
|
Post by trollhunter on Apr 12, 2017 20:57:05 GMT -5
From my understanding, the 6's pair isn't part of the official lineup. It's equivalent to the #7 or #8 pair. Someone from the "#8" pair could jump right into anywhere in the lineup. But if you exit the lineup from the #2 spot, the next time you re-enter into the lineup should be in the #2 spot regardless if you played in the #6 which isn't an official lineup spot. That's my understanding. South Carolina lost to Stetson 2-3 and lost in the #5 position. For the past 4 years, the #6 or lower pair used to have to come in at the #5 spot. It appears they just changed the rule a week ago in middle of the season to allow them to come in anywhere. See my new thread on this titled NCAA Sandbagging
|
|