|
|
Post by volley2022 on May 11, 2021 14:01:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by volley2022 on May 11, 2021 16:00:21 GMT -5
AVCA Collegiate Beach Volleyball Final Poll: May 11, 2021 Rank (Last Week), School (First place votes), Record 1 (2) USC (14) 30-4 2 (1) UCLA 32-5 3 (5) Loyola Marymount 31-8 4 (4) LSU 27-9 5 (3) Florida State 33-6 6 (6) Cal Poly 24-11 7 (8) Stanford 23-13 8 (7) TCU 26-10 9 (10) Grand Canyon 18-11 10 (9) Arizona 22-6 11 (11) Cal 16-13 12 (12) FAU 23-10 13 (13) Hawai'i 17-10 14 (14) Pepperdine 14-17 15 (15) FIU 25-7 16 (16) South Carolina 23-9 17 (17) Georgia State 23-13 18 (18) Stetson 19-13 19 (19) Long Beach State 19-14 20 (20) North Florida 24-10 www.avca.org/polls/beach/5-11-2021.html |
|
|
|
Post by volley2022 on May 11, 2021 18:30:27 GMT -5
Top 10 Plays from the 2021 NCAA Beach Volleyball Championship
#10 Joy Dennis/Delaynie Maple (USC)
#3 Tina Graudina/Megan Kraft (USC)
#1 Haley Hallgren/Hailey Harward (USC)
|
|
|
|
Post by burbank55 on May 11, 2021 19:42:21 GMT -5
Top 10 Plays from the 2021 NCAA Beach Volleyball Championship #10 Joy Dennis/Delaynie Maple (USC) #3 Tina Graudina/Megan Kraft (USC) #1 Haley Hallgren/Hailey Harward (USC) I’ll add #9 The Nourses contributed half of the excitement and skill to make that a top play. |
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on May 11, 2021 23:12:17 GMT -5
I understand where your coming from, but Gradina and Kraft make sense. Kraft and Gradina also went undefeated and scored a point for USC everytime I believe. Still think Nuss and Kloth should get pair of the year if they haven't already. Pretty sure all-tournament is selected based on pretty straight-forward criteria in terms of W-L at each position with some tiebreakers in place like sets lost and then points etc. Graudina-Kraft didn't drop a single set, and went 4-0, and no other pair at that position produced nearly as clean a record over the weekend. I do agree that "all-tournament" the way it is selected is sort of silly. Consider if Graudina-Kraft won every match (4-0) but needed three sets each time. But another pair went 5-0 in dominant straight sets at the same position (never face USC). That pair would be chosen at the No. 1 position to observe the guidelines for selection. How strange would it be though that a 4-0 pair on the national championship winning team would not end up on the all-tournament team? Could have happened! But it didn't... but could have. NCAA probably should reconsider how that happens. Isnt the real reason its silly that they select based on position? Can you imagine if the all NBA team chose their 3rd, 4th, and 5th players only from players who were the 3rd, 4th, and 5th best on their own teams? Whitmarsh/Powers seem to have done good work from the 5 spot but are they even a top 20 team? Do they really deserve to be on the all tournament team over Nuss/Kloth |
|
|
|
Post by volley2022 on May 12, 2021 10:41:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by trianglevolleyball on May 12, 2021 12:50:59 GMT -5
Pretty sure all-tournament is selected based on pretty straight-forward criteria in terms of W-L at each position with some tiebreakers in place like sets lost and then points etc. Graudina-Kraft didn't drop a single set, and went 4-0, and no other pair at that position produced nearly as clean a record over the weekend. I do agree that "all-tournament" the way it is selected is sort of silly. Consider if Graudina-Kraft won every match (4-0) but needed three sets each time. But another pair went 5-0 in dominant straight sets at the same position (never face USC). That pair would be chosen at the No. 1 position to observe the guidelines for selection. How strange would it be though that a 4-0 pair on the national championship winning team would not end up on the all-tournament team? Could have happened! But it didn't... but could have. NCAA probably should reconsider how that happens. Isnt the real reason its silly that they select based on position? Can you imagine if the all NBA team chose their 3rd, 4th, and 5th players only from players who were the 3rd, 4th, and 5th best on their own teams? Whitmarsh/Powers seem to have done good work from the 5 spot but are they even a top 20 team? Do they really deserve to be on the all tournament team over Nuss/Kloth The difference is the format. 3rd thru 5th best NBA players don’t contribute as much as the best points wise, but each flight is quite literally worth the same amount of points in this format. Powers/Whitmarsh contributed more to UCLA than any other flight, even if they’re not as skilled. Think of All-Toirnament as “who contributed most to their team advancing/succeeeding”, not “who were the best players”. You may disagree with the approach, but it is at least logical, and the NBA comparison does not fit here. |
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on May 12, 2021 13:29:48 GMT -5
Isnt the real reason its silly that they select based on position? Can you imagine if the all NBA team chose their 3rd, 4th, and 5th players only from players who were the 3rd, 4th, and 5th best on their own teams? Whitmarsh/Powers seem to have done good work from the 5 spot but are they even a top 20 team? Do they really deserve to be on the all tournament team over Nuss/Kloth The difference is the format. 3rd thru 5th best NBA players don’t contribute as much as the best points wise, but each flight is quite literally worth the same amount of points in this format. Powers/Whitmarsh contributed more to UCLA than any other flight, even if they’re not as skilled. Think of All-Toirnament as “who contributed most to their team advancing/succeeeding”, not “who were the best players”. You may disagree with the approach, but it is at least logical, and the NBA comparison does not fit here. "Who contributed the most to their team advancing/succeeding" is not an accurate description of this All Tournament Team. Kloth/Nuss were 4-0. UCLA 5 were 4-1 and the LMU and FSU teams that made it were both 2-0. It isn't even an accurate description within the flights. The LMU team that was chosen for Court 4 won twice but LSU's Team 4 won 3 matches. |
|
|
|
Post by david38 on May 12, 2021 16:10:01 GMT -5
Pretty sure all-tournament is selected based on pretty straight-forward criteria in terms of W-L at each position with some tiebreakers in place like sets lost and then points etc. Graudina-Kraft didn't drop a single set, and went 4-0, and no other pair at that position produced nearly as clean a record over the weekend. I do agree that "all-tournament" the way it is selected is sort of silly. Consider if Graudina-Kraft won every match (4-0) but needed three sets each time. But another pair went 5-0 in dominant straight sets at the same position (never face USC). That pair would be chosen at the No. 1 position to observe the guidelines for selection. How strange would it be though that a 4-0 pair on the national championship winning team would not end up on the all-tournament team? Could have happened! But it didn't... but could have. NCAA probably should reconsider how that happens. Isnt the real reason its silly that they select based on position? Can you imagine if the all NBA team chose their 3rd, 4th, and 5th players only from players who were the 3rd, 4th, and 5th best on their own teams? Whitmarsh/Powers seem to have done good work from the 5 spot but are they even a top 20 team? Do they really deserve to be on the all tournament team over Nuss/Kloth Agree. Although, and this is a complete aside since I do agree with you, Whitmarsh is great to watch, so mentally strong. Love watching a player in a pressure situation who has that trait. |
|
herewegobru
Freshman
http://www.herewegobru.com
Posts: 69
|
Post by herewegobru on May 12, 2021 16:33:24 GMT -5
I'm not totally sure how they chose All-Tournament team but I think in spirit it is a narrative award, as opposed to just saying here's the #1 and #2 flight from the best teams (which is how All-American selections basically are done). All points count equally so lower flight teams having some representation makes sense.
For the PAC-12 tournament, the top two teams were given two pairs each, while #3/4 were able to recognize one pair each. UCLA went with 3/5, USC went with their 1/4 pairs, Stanford went with their 4s, Cal their 2s. If you watched the tournament it made sense, as those pairs tended to have the best overall record and/or came up with big wins in clutch situations.
|
|
|
|
Post by newbeach on May 12, 2021 19:06:05 GMT -5
I'm not totally sure how they chose All-Tournament team but I think in spirit it is a narrative award, as opposed to just saying here's the #1 and #2 flight from the best teams (which is how All-American selections basically are done). All points count equally so lower flight teams having some representation makes sense. For the PAC-12 tournament, the top two teams were given two pairs each, while #3/4 were able to recognize one pair each. UCLA went with 3/5, USC went with their 1/4 pairs, Stanford went with their 4s, Cal their 2s. If you watched the tournament it made sense, as those pairs tended to have the best overall record and/or came up with big wins in clutch situations. Clutch wins (and/or record at their flight) has definitely played a factor in past all-tournament teams. |
|
|
|
Post by newbeach on May 12, 2021 19:08:17 GMT -5
The difference is the format. 3rd thru 5th best NBA players don’t contribute as much as the best points wise, but each flight is quite literally worth the same amount of points in this format. Powers/Whitmarsh contributed more to UCLA than any other flight, even if they’re not as skilled. Think of All-Toirnament as “who contributed most to their team advancing/succeeeding”, not “who were the best players”. You may disagree with the approach, but it is at least logical, and the NBA comparison does not fit here. "Who contributed the most to their team advancing/succeeding" is not an accurate description of this All Tournament Team. Kloth/Nuss were 4-0. UCLA 5 were 4-1 and the LMU and FSU teams that made it were both 2-0. It isn't even an accurate description within the flights. The LMU team that was chosen for Court 4 won twice but LSU's Team 4 won 3 matches. While I don’t disagree with most of your points here, what would be a better way to recognize deserving “all-tournament” players? I can’t say that I’ve always agreed with the decisions (and I am not sure how the team is selected either?). |
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on May 13, 2021 0:03:24 GMT -5
"Who contributed the most to their team advancing/succeeding" is not an accurate description of this All Tournament Team. Kloth/Nuss were 4-0. UCLA 5 were 4-1 and the LMU and FSU teams that made it were both 2-0. It isn't even an accurate description within the flights. The LMU team that was chosen for Court 4 won twice but LSU's Team 4 won 3 matches. While I don’t disagree with most of your points here, what would be a better way to recognize deserving “all-tournament” players? I can’t say that I’ve always agreed with the decisions (and I am not sure how the team is selected either?). Just choose the best players who played the best. As a rule, although maybe there would be some once in a generation type exceptions, these players should all come from the top two flights. I just don't understand how you can have a team playing in a 5 slot make an all-tournament team over the best team in the country that was undefeated. I'd also suggest choosing players rather than pairs. |
|
|
|
Post by ncaabeachfan on May 13, 2021 1:30:55 GMT -5
While I don’t disagree with most of your points here, what would be a better way to recognize deserving “all-tournament” players? I can’t say that I’ve always agreed with the decisions (and I am not sure how the team is selected either?). Just choose the best players who played the best. As a rule, although maybe there would be some once in a generation type exceptions, these players should all come from the top two flights. I just don't understand how you can have a team playing in a 5 slot make an all-tournament team over the best team in the country that was undefeated. I'd also suggest choosing players rather than pairs. I agree with this point about individuals, but that probably isn't going to change anytime soon. I don't share your opinion that the lower flight pairs should not be recognized for all tournament - the depth of the game has gotten so good and each point matters as much as the other, whether it comes from the 5 or the 1. My solution is to have one from each flight and then 1 or 2 "wildcards" that are selected from the rest of the field. I totally agree that it is ridiculous that the national pair of the year was not selected to the all tournament team. |
|
|
|
Post by david38 on May 13, 2021 2:39:47 GMT -5
I think the "narrative' approach is a valid point - telling the story of the tournament, and therefore including 3-5 in all-tournament, but the way I would put it is: It's a good point, but Guest2 makes a better point. In other words, it would be more unfair to exclude a deserving #1 pair (or individual) than it would be to exclude a 5 pair or individual who had a hand in key moments during the tournament.
|
|
