|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Dec 4, 2004 12:42:50 GMT -5
The Pac 10 has done well also - the only team from their conference that has lost so far is California and they did win their first round match. I called the Pac Ten "about as expected," considering I didn't see any of their first round matches as all that questionable. Cal and Arizona were the two biggest questionmarks of the quailifiers, but they got pretty favorable matchups in Pacific and UCI. They weren't close enough to call them "sufficiently close" and either losing would have been considered a pretty bad loss. As I said, it's not sufficient to just say "they all won their first round matches." I prefer to note that they won all the matches they should have in the first round, and Cal's loss to St Mary's isn't all that bad (at best it is a "sufficiently close" match, but I don't think it is all that close)
|
|
|
Post by 2c on Dec 4, 2004 12:49:19 GMT -5
Keeping in mind that the NCAA tournament, more than anything else, is about matchups and the expectations that arise from them. Absolute peformance is hard to asses. You can't just say they should get x wins without considering who they are playing. That being said, what I would consider good for a conference would be to win those matches they should win (seeds, ranked, etc), to pull more than their share of those that are sufficiently close, and/or to pull a clear upset or two. You obviously don't want a top fleet representative going down, but you can survive some of the lower end bowing out, especially if they are clear underdogs. Yeah, sorry I should have been more clear. The question wasn't posed as a benchmark without evaluating the matchups. After evaluating the matchups, I was wondering how BigWest fans would expect the first round to go. UCSB, LBSU, UOP, UCI to win? Or only 3, or 2? If 3-3 was what was expected by UCSB, LBSU, and UCI winning but UOP pulls the upset and UCI loses, then conf still holds to expectations. etc. Regarding WAC, Rice's loss to Mich wasn't completely a SHOCKER... but Nevada getting combined (Gleener'd, JohnDeere'd, MassyFergeson'd, AllisChalmer'd) off the court by WSU was just ugly. Hawaii losing a game to CU was about as expected. WAC showing is very disappointing.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Dec 4, 2004 13:02:59 GMT -5
Yeah, sorry I should have been more clear. The question wasn't posed as a benchmark without evaluating the matchups. After evaluating the matchups, I was wondering how BigWest fans would expect the first round to go. UCSB, LBSU, UOP, UCI to win? Or only 3, or 2? If 3-3 was what was expected by UCSB, LBSU, and UCI winning but UOP pulls the upset and UCI loses, then conf still holds to expectations. etc. Regarding WAC, Rice's loss to Mich wasn't completely a SHOCKER... but Nevada getting combined (Gleener'd, JohnDeere'd, MassyFergeson'd, AllisChalmer'd) off the court by WSU was just ugly. Recall my picture: the MVC is the WAC with Hawaii replaced by Drake. Thus, the top team in the Valley should be about the same as the 2nd team in the WAC, and I would put WSU about the same level as Rice. I'd take Rice over Nevada, so I'd go with WSU. Maybe how dominating it was is a surprise, but not that WSU won. You don't think the 2nd place WAC team losing to the 6th place Big Ten team is exceedingly disappointing? Especially noting that even though Hawaii has made it to the Sweet 16, they still don't have a quality win.
|
|