|
|
Post by tomclen on Nov 27, 2022 11:39:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Nov 27, 2022 11:40:14 GMT -5
Why should I have to travel THERE to watch THEM?
|
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Nov 27, 2022 11:42:58 GMT -5
The San Diego and Pittsburgh fans are going to be the most outraged come this evening . . . if Pitt is any higher than 6, they should be elated, they don’t deserve to be top 5, much less a top 4 seed. now San Diego fans can be as mad as they want, imo. I’m not sure what else they could’ve done to earn the a top 4 seedWell, it's not necessarily their fault that some of their non-conference choices ended up backfiring on them (like UCLA); but, it's no one else's fault either. So, they have to own it. Every team takes a similar gamble when trying to assemble their non-conference opponents. And, BYU not finishing in the RPI Top 25 (at #26) will work against them. Having just two RPI Top 25 wins compared to the other projected top seeds having 5 or more makes it pretty clear to me that their overall body of work just doesn't measure up. |
|
|
|
Post by uofaGRAD on Nov 27, 2022 11:44:35 GMT -5
if Pitt is any higher than 6, they should be elated, they don’t deserve to be top 5, much less a top 4 seed. now San Diego fans can be as mad as they want, imo. I’m not sure what else they could’ve done to earn the a top 4 seedWell, it's not necessarily their fault that some of their non-conference choices ended up backfiring on them (like UCLA); but, it's no one else's fault either. So, they have to own it. Every team takes a similar gamble when trying to assemble their non-conference opponents. And, BYU not finishing in the RPI Top 25 (at #26) will work against them. Having just two RPI Top 25 wins compared to the other projected top seeds having 5 or more makes it pretty clear to me that their overall body of work just doesn't measure up. oh they’ll have to live with it, I’m just saying they can be mad at it🤣 pretty much everything could’ve gone wrong with their non-con did (plus like you said the whole BYU finishing 1 spot outside the T25 thing) |
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 31,431 
|
Post by trojansc on Nov 27, 2022 12:01:27 GMT -5
if Pitt is any higher than 6, they should be elated, they don’t deserve to be top 5, much less a top 4 seed. now San Diego fans can be as mad as they want, imo. I’m not sure what else they could’ve done to earn the a top 4 seedWell, it's not necessarily their fault that some of their non-conference choices ended up backfiring on them (like UCLA); but, it's no one else's fault either. So, they have to own it. Every team takes a similar gamble when trying to assemble their non-conference opponents. And, BYU not finishing in the RPI Top 25 (at #26) will work against them. Having just two RPI Top 25 wins compared to the other projected top seeds having 5 or more makes it pretty clear to me that their overall body of work just doesn't measure up. The hope for San Diego is the committee can (and has) created their own narratives. If they seed BYU higher than James Madison (an actual top 25 team) they can then justify their decisions based on that. They can double down on teams that explain other decisions. Same with UCLA - UCLA may be outside Top 50, but they admit them instead of Auburn and de-value teams who have Auburn as a Top 50 win in their profile. I'm not saying that will happen, but they can find ways around whatever they want to do. UCLA had a 5-2 record vs. Top 25 competition last year, which was better than most of the teams in front of them and they pretty much ignored it. They also didn't admit USC and dropped Washington a spot from their RPI. They also admitted the entire Big 12. They can go all-in when it comes to conferences and teams and create their own narrative. |
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Nov 27, 2022 12:11:23 GMT -5
Well, it's not necessarily their fault that some of their non-conference choices ended up backfiring on them (like UCLA); but, it's no one else's fault either. So, they have to own it. Every team takes a similar gamble when trying to assemble their non-conference opponents. And, BYU not finishing in the RPI Top 25 (at #26) will work against them. Having just two RPI Top 25 wins compared to the other projected top seeds having 5 or more makes it pretty clear to me that their overall body of work just doesn't measure up. The hope for San Diego is the committee can (and has) created their own narratives. If they seed BYU higher than James Madison (an actual top 25 team) they can then justify their decisions based on that. They can double down on teams that explain other decisions. Same with UCLA - UCLA may be outside Top 50, but they admit them instead of Auburn and de-value teams who have Auburn as a Top 50 win in their profile. I'm not saying that will happen, but they can find ways around whatever they want to do. UCLA had a 5-2 record vs. Top 25 competition last year, which was better than most of the teams in front of them and they pretty much ignored it. They also didn't admit USC and dropped Washington a spot from their RPI. They also admitted the entire Big 12. They can go all-in when it comes to conferences and teams and create their own narrative. Obviously, the committee is the biggest wildcard which matters the most. But, isn't the criteria they use clearly defined as "wins versus (published) RPI Top 25 teams" and not their seeded Top 25? I haven't looked at the nittygritty, but thought the rankings there and in figststats defined RPI Top 25. And, if you fall below #25 then said team is not grouped in the "published" RPI Top 25, snd the committee classifies you as "RPI Top 50". As we've discussed in the other threads, Stanford getting credit for their 2 wins over USC while San Diego not getting credit for their 2 wins over BYU as far as RPI Top 25 wins could be the determining factor for that final Top 4 nationsl seed. |
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 31,431
|
Post by trojansc on Nov 27, 2022 12:18:42 GMT -5
Obviously, the committee is the biggest wildcard which matters the most. But, isn't the criteria they use clearly defined as "wins versus (published) RPI Top 25 teams" and not their seeded Top 25? I haven't looked at the nittygritty, but thought the rankings there and in figststats defined RPI Top 25. And, if you fall below #25 then said team is grouped in the "published" RPI Top 25, then the committee classifies you as "RPI Top 50". As we've discussed in the other threads, Stanford getting credit for their 2 wins over USC while San Diego not getting credit for their 2 wins over BYU as far as RPI Top 25 wins could be the determining factor for that final Top 4 nationsl seed. Remember that Texas only had 3 top 25 wins last year - that's not a all-telling statistic. Their record vs. 26-50 is really what got them the seed they earned because sometimes cutoffs do not tell the whole story when it comes to 1-25. ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/volleyball/d1/women/2022-23D1WVB_PreChampManual.pdfAs for all of the criteria: Some of them are clearly defined. If you look at evaluative tools, it actually lists Record against 1-50 , not even specifying 1-25. But we know on Nitty Gritty and Team Sheets that they separate them by 1-25 category. Anyways, some of these criteria are where you can get into the 'ambiguous'. They already have wins vs. top 50 listed on this page, why do they need to compound that by saying 'significant' - who determines that? Some of these are not explicitly on team sheets and can lead to some... alternative decisions. EVALUATIVE TOOLS AVAILABLE TO THE COMMITTEE Among the other tools the committee uses: ● Regional advisory committee rankings ● Non-conference record ● Record against other teams under consideration ● Significant wins and losses ● Results against teams already receiving at-large bids ● Other circumstances that could affect results (e.g., injuries) |
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Nov 27, 2022 12:28:26 GMT -5
now San Diego fans can be as mad as they want, imo. I’m not sure what else they could’ve done to earn the a top 4 seed Beat Louisville? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2022 12:33:14 GMT -5
The San Diego and Pittsburgh fans are going to be the most outraged come this evening . . . if Pitt is any higher than 6, they should be elated, they don’t deserve to be top 5, much less a top 4 seed. now San Diego fans can be as mad as they want, imo. I’m not sure what else they could’ve done to earn the a top 4 seed that Towson lost isnt much worse rpi wise than the Texas lost |
|
|
|
Post by bprtbone on Nov 27, 2022 12:35:02 GMT -5
Anyways, some of these criteria are where you can get into the 'ambiguous'. They already have wins vs. top 50 listed on this page, why do they need to compound that by saying 'significant' - who determines that? Some of these are not explicitly on team sheets and can lead to some... alternative decisions. EVALUATIVE TOOLS AVAILABLE TO THE COMMITTEE Among the other tools the committee uses: ● Record against other teams under consideration ● Significant wins and losses ● Other circumstances that could affect results (e.g., injuries) These three seem especially suspect to manipulation. How deep do they reach to find "other teams under consideration"? Anyone on the committee can drive the "other circumstances" discussion. I'm hopeful for fair decisions across the board, but prepared to be outraged. |
|
|
|
Post by uofaGRAD on Nov 27, 2022 12:37:15 GMT -5
if Pitt is any higher than 6, they should be elated, they don’t deserve to be top 5, much less a top 4 seed. now San Diego fans can be as mad as they want, imo. I’m not sure what else they could’ve done to earn the a top 4 seed that Towson lost isnt much worse rpi wise than the Texas lost they also lost to SD, who is one of the teams I mentioned fighting for a top 4 spot, and got swept by a backrow-only-DeBeer Louisville. their only win over Louisville was without DeBeer completely, and just this week went 5 with a team that won’t be in the top 16 (at home!) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2022 12:39:31 GMT -5
that Towson lost isnt much worse rpi wise than the Texas lost they also lost to SD, who is one of the teams I mentioned fighting for a top 4 spot, and got swept by a backrow-only-DeBeer Louisville. their only win over Louisville was without DeBeer completely, and just this week went 5 with a team that won’t be in the top 16 (at home!) Louisville also went 5 against Georgia tech lol. Going 5 with them isn’t a bad thing. You can keep trying to paint these narratives but a 5 set loss to San Diego without Akeo isn’t bad and they came DAMN close to sweeping Louisville as well. Choked a late 3rd set lead. Y’all are acting like they suck lol….. |
|
|
|
Post by uofaGRAD on Nov 27, 2022 12:42:26 GMT -5
they also lost to SD, who is one of the teams I mentioned fighting for a top 4 spot, and got swept by a backrow-only-DeBeer Louisville. their only win over Louisville was without DeBeer completely, and just this week went 5 with a team that won’t be in the top 16 (at home!) Louisville also went 5 against Georgia tech lol. Going 5 with them isn’t a bad thing. You can keep trying to paint these narratives but a 5 set loss to San Diego without Akeo isn’t bad and they came DAMN close to sweeping Louisville as well. Choked a late 3rd set lead. Y’all are acting like they suck lol….. no I’m acting like they shouldn’t be higher than the 6 seed😁 idk how you can put them over Texas, Louisville, Wisconsin, Stanford, or San Diego, but that’s why I’m not on the committee probably! San Diego would be the biggest one they’d be put over but they literally lost the H2H. So, therefore anything above 6, Pitt fans should be elated imo |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2022 12:43:42 GMT -5
Louisville also went 5 against Georgia tech lol. Going 5 with them isn’t a bad thing. You can keep trying to paint these narratives but a 5 set loss to San Diego without Akeo isn’t bad and they came DAMN close to sweeping Louisville as well. Choked a late 3rd set lead. Y’all are acting like they suck lol….. no I’m acting like they shouldn’t be higher than the 6 seed😁 idk how you can put them over Texas, Louisville, Wisconsin, Stanford, or San Diego, but that’s why I’m not on the committee probably! San Diego would be the biggest one they’d be put over but they literally lost the H2H. So, therefore anything above 6, Pitt fans should be elated imo Stanford has no case to be above them. Stanford should not be a regional seed. Pitt should be 5 at worst. |
|
|
|
Post by uofaGRAD on Nov 27, 2022 12:51:46 GMT -5
no I’m acting like they shouldn’t be higher than the 6 seed😁 idk how you can put them over Texas, Louisville, Wisconsin, Stanford, or San Diego, but that’s why I’m not on the committee probably! San Diego would be the biggest one they’d be put over but they literally lost the H2H. So, therefore anything above 6, Pitt fans should be elated imo Stanford has no case to be above them. Stanford should not be a regional seed. Pitt should be 5 at worst. mmm we shall see. All of Stanford’s losses are to very comfortably seeded teams, and they have wins over Nebraska, Minnesota, and Florida, which are all comfortably seeded teams. So 3-4 against top 16. Pitt is 2-2. Common loss in Louisville, granted Stanford’s was with healthy DeBeer. Stanford lost to Texas, which won’t penalize them probably at all. So then the debate becomes, what’s better between wins against Nebraska, Minnesota, and Florida with losses to Oregon and Penn State, or wins against Louisville and Ohio State and loss to Towson. I could see it going either way. Louisville, even without DeBeer, would be the best win between the two, but Towson is a significantly worse loss than Oregon or Penn. plus stanford does have the extra win (they again have the Texas loss but I just don’t see the committee penalizing them) |
|
