|
Post by aardvark on Sept 27, 2021 14:00:50 GMT -5
Penn St. hopping above G Tech, with G Techs only loss to a team that beat a team Penn St. lost to. I think it more relevant that GT beat Penn State 3-1 at a neutral site.
|
|
|
Post by Cruz'n on Sept 27, 2021 14:03:20 GMT -5
I don't think you should rank teams on how much talent they have, on how well they recruit, on how well you think they might do later on, or on their history in the tournament. You should rank teams on how well they have performed so far this year, and how they are currently performing.
That said, the VT poll looks much better than the AVCA poll. Well done, gals and guys.
|
|
|
Post by hornshouse23 on Sept 27, 2021 14:17:19 GMT -5
Penn St. hopping above G Tech, with G Techs only loss to a team that beat a team Penn St. lost to. B1G perception bias will always do its thing.
|
|
|
Post by vbprisoner on Sept 27, 2021 14:23:37 GMT -5
I felt Ohio St. two losses this week were both on the road and also could be the result of having several tough 5 set matches that wore them down and they still have the resume of a top 10 team. But like, do they? Washington was their newsworthy win of the non con...that win is looking less and less remarkable given how Washington has looked. Other than them, they didn't play anyone except Notre Dame if you count them, who just got swept by Miami. I watched the Ohio St. vs Purdue match and it was a 5 set match at Purdue that could have gone either way. Those two teams are very evenly matched and if I have Purdue at #7 then Ohio St. was going to be 8, 9, or 10 on my ballot. Just like Utah, Washington, Washington St, and Colorado were all ranked near each other. It's still early and we may not see any real separation, outside the top 3 - 5 teams, with all the teams that are #5 - #20.
|
|
|
Post by bruinsgold on Sept 27, 2021 14:34:43 GMT -5
lionsfan - Week 5 – September 26, 2021 1. Texas 2. Pittsburgh 3. Louisville 4. Wisconsin 5. Baylor 6. Minnesota 7. Kentucky 8. Oregon 9. Purdue 10. UCLA 11. Stanford 12. BYU 13. Tennessee 14. Georgia Tech 15. Penn State 16. Ohio State 17. Washington State 18. Utah 19. Nebraska 20. Washington 21. Creighton 22. Pepperdine 23. Colorado 24. San Diego 25. Marquette Purdue feels low? Otherwise I think this is pretty good. Every single week. Starting to really think lionsfan is trolling me 🤨
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Sept 27, 2021 14:40:04 GMT -5
I don't think you should rank teams on how much talent they have, on how well they recruit, on how well you think they might do later on, or on their history in the tournament. You should rank teams on how well they have performed so far this year, and how they are currently performing. That said, the VT poll looks much better than the AVCA poll. Well done, gals and guys. I agree with this. But I suspect many voters using this justification are fans of that group of schools which stockpile AAs and traditionally win NCAA titles. Artificially elevating such schools when they struggle (see Nebraska this year as an example) allows them to keep a high poll spot, which helps them recruit and keep the dynasty going even when they hit a rough patch or two. There is no margin of error for the schools/conferences of lesser pedigree. So gripe about it if you want, but don't expect them to change.
|
|
|
Post by knapplc on Sept 27, 2021 14:41:41 GMT -5
(see Nebraska this year as an example) We're 16th in the VT poll. We lost two spots despite sweeping the weekend. We started dropping in the poll as soon as we started losing. This is a terrible example.
|
|
|
Post by baytree on Sept 27, 2021 14:43:25 GMT -5
I don't think you should rank teams on how much talent they have, on how well they recruit, on how well you think they might do later on, or on their history in the tournament. You should rank teams on how well they have performed so far this year, and how they are currently performing. That said, the VT poll looks much better than the AVCA poll. Well done, gals and guys. I agree with this. But I suspect many voters using this justification are fans of that group of schools which stockpile AAs and traditionally win NCAA titles. Artificially elevating such schools when they struggle (see Nebraska this year as an example) allows them to keep a high poll spot, which helps them recruit and keep the dynasty going even when they hit a rough patch or two. There is no margin of error for the schools/conferences of lesser pedigree. So gripe about it if you want, but don't expect them to change. There may be some of that but it can go the other way too. E.g., when WI lost Hart, I immediately wondered if they were still a T5 team. If Oglivie is out for a while, I'm dropping Stanford even if they start winning. IMO if you're just going by current results, you may as well use Pablo instead of having ppl vote.
|
|
|
Post by mcmike on Sept 27, 2021 14:46:48 GMT -5
From the outside looking in
I fail to understand why the results of preseason matches gets as much weight as they do leading to A beat B, B beat C, and C beat A ruminations about ranking. How many teams are NOT tinkering with on court chemistry and lower classperson tryouts such that their preseason grade is a reliable indicator of current performance expectation?
Ranking based on where you think a team will end up is a form of self-stimulation, imo, so you can say 'I told you so' later. Winning and/or losing may be the primary criteria in the AVCA poll, but the wisdom of the VT poll is the fact that knowledgeable lovers of Div I take into account home vs. road, good vs bad wins or losses, quality of competition and the arc of a squad's development To Date.
From here in the Upper Midwest it was disappointing to watch (live) the team that beat WI at home be unable to hit positive in Minneapolis. Md over WI then MN over Md certainly doesn't mean that MN will have it's way Friday in Madison. I expect MN at WI will be a real tussle and will be disappointed if either team is dominated.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2021 14:54:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Sept 27, 2021 15:05:00 GMT -5
From the outside looking in I fail to understand why the results of preseason matches gets as much weight as they do leading to A beat B, B beat C, and C beat A ruminations about ranking. How many teams are NOT tinkering with on court chemistry and lower classperson tryouts such that their preseason grade is a reliable indicator of current performance expectation? "Preseason" (really non-conference) matches count just as much as conference matches do and are one of the best ways to compare conferences. They're also one of the ways (apart from the tournament itself) that an unheralded conference like the ACC can get more respect than they have previously.
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Sept 27, 2021 15:12:44 GMT -5
I don't think you should rank teams on how much talent they have, on how well they recruit, on how well you think they might do later on, or on their history in the tournament. You should rank teams on how well they have performed so far this year, and how they are currently performing. That said, the VT poll looks much better than the AVCA poll. Well done, gals and guys. I agree with this. But I suspect many voters using this justification are fans of that group of schools which stockpile AAs and traditionally win NCAA titles. Artificially elevating such schools when they struggle (see Nebraska this year as an example) allows them to keep a high poll spot, which helps them recruit and keep the dynasty going even when they hit a rough patch or two. There is no margin of error for the schools/conferences of lesser pedigree. So gripe about it if you want, but don't expect them to change. Wait, you think volleytalk week to week rankings are helpful in recruiting? I do feel strongly the AVCA rankings are helpful, I’ve heard coaches say as much. But volleytalk? Just...no.
|
|
|
Post by BuckysHeat on Sept 27, 2021 15:22:52 GMT -5
I read the minor rationales for keeping Florida in. You want to? Fine it's your ballot. However, I don't see what WKU has done to drop completely out and Marquette still isn't in. Yet Florida still gets the love
And I love Florida. But they are a mess and don't belong right now in the cool kids clubhouse
|
|
|
Post by vbprisoner on Sept 27, 2021 15:30:11 GMT -5
2nd post has been updated with Volleytalk / AVCA Poll Comparison.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Sept 27, 2021 15:38:16 GMT -5
I agree with this. But I suspect many voters using this justification are fans of that group of schools which stockpile AAs and traditionally win NCAA titles. Artificially elevating such schools when they struggle (see Nebraska this year as an example) allows them to keep a high poll spot, which helps them recruit and keep the dynasty going even when they hit a rough patch or two. There is no margin of error for the schools/conferences of lesser pedigree. So gripe about it if you want, but don't expect them to change. There may be some of that but it can go the other way too. E.g., when WI lost Hart, I immediately wondered if they were still a T5 team. If Oglivie is out for a while, I'm dropping Stanford even if they start winning. IMO if you're just going by current results, you may as well use Pablo instead of having ppl vote. If they are stockpiling AAs then they should be able to bring in one when a player gets hurt. Again, look at Nebraska. Stivrins goes out, so play some of that army of frosh blue chips and give them experience that will help the team when tourney time rolls around. Can GT do that? Nope. They have to cull the international ranks just to get a starting lineup with some relevance. Someone said my using Nebraska was a terrible example. Perhaps it's not the best right now. I picked on them as a very delayed reaction to some Husker fan on here lamenting (apparently in seriousness) how he pitied Cook that he has this problem of trying to keep all of the women happy on shorter amounts of playing time. Yeah, that's a pity all right. But don't obsess over the specific school. I was referring to a generic type which fits numerous candidates. To argue a specific school distracts from my main point - which is the rich get richer and still manage to shed crocodile tears that it's all so hard for them, while their support group gives them even more of an edge each and every season. The only real reason there's been a change in the status quo in the last 15 years is the arrival of football money, which is tilting the playing field in a different direction. Get used to it.
|
|