Latest Victim(s) of the NCAA Selection Committee (injustice)
Nov 28, 2022 0:37:26 GMT -5
Barefoot In Kailua, tnp101, and 28 more like this
Post by trojansc on Nov 28, 2022 0:37:26 GMT -5
Well, sometimes you are willing to split the difference in opinion when two things may be seen differently. This is not one of those times. What committee chair @ Pauline Thiros allowed to transpire by awarding an at-large Ball State into the tournament over Texas State is a shame. UCLA is also a victim here, but we will focus on Texas State who held the advantage in the beloved RPI criteria.
-UCLA and Texas State were projected in the tournament by someone who actually cares about this process and acts in an ethical, responsible manner without bias or committee members who have affiliations with specific institutions/conferences.....
What's more shameful - is we had an hour broadcast and got absolutely zero explanation as to what the at-large selection process looked like or why Texas State, UCLA, and Colorado State were the first teams out, why the last 4 in were there, and why Tennessee, who has an RPI 12 spots worse than Texas State, was not among that graphic. It's a disgrace to our sport and an injustice to coaches who are actually trying to get their teams into the NCAA Tournament by playing legitimate competition to get no explanations or rationale from the selection committee and their chair.
So we continue, and unfortunately, the latest victims added to this list are Janell Fitzgerald, Emily DeWalt, head coach Sean Huiet, and the entire Texas State volleyball team and university.
Texas State was in trouble to even get into the Sun Belt Tournament Finals, but they rallied to beat South Alabama and faced a James Madison team who has a top-25 RPI, and unfortunately did fall in the Championship Game. Janell Fitzgerald was quoted after the tough 5-set Semifinal against South Alabama.
FROM OUTSIDE HITTER JANELL FITZGERALD
Texas State gathered today, only to be left out, and not even get a due explanation to why they were left out in favor of a Ball State team, who frankly didn't schedule like they wanted an at-large, and didn't beat any team to really give them consideration to the tournament. Ball State's win is over a Bowling Green team that has 0 Top 50 wins. Sure, you can say JMU is fraudulent, but you can't say TCU is. Texas State beat TCU in Fort Worth, a TCU team with wins over two at-large teams (Iowa State and Kansas) AND a top-16 seeded team (Baylor).
Anyways, here is the story criteria wise:
Texas State had the better RPI by 8 spots. They had a T25 win (JMU). They had a non-conference Top 50 win at TCU (Ball State did not). Texas State had 2 sub-100 losses, Ball State had 3. Both were 8-2 in their last 10 matches.
The only real criteria in favor of Ball State is the common opponent result of Alabama (Texas State lost, Ball State won). I'm not sure how that outweighs all of the above. It is historically unprecedented to see this RPI jump from a sub-par team. You could also argue S.O.S is in Ball State's favor, but it's extremely close and shouldn't be considered really at #98 vs. #102....
Honorable mention:
The UCLA Bruins.
UCLA was also unfortunately also left out over Ball State. You could argue UCLA should be in over Texas State - but Ball State deserved nothing over these teams. UCLA beat Texas State, won AT Hawaii, and won AT Washington State. They were closer in RPI to Ball State than Ball State was to Texas State
-UCLA and Texas State were projected in the tournament by someone who actually cares about this process and acts in an ethical, responsible manner without bias or committee members who have affiliations with specific institutions/conferences.....
What's more shameful - is we had an hour broadcast and got absolutely zero explanation as to what the at-large selection process looked like or why Texas State, UCLA, and Colorado State were the first teams out, why the last 4 in were there, and why Tennessee, who has an RPI 12 spots worse than Texas State, was not among that graphic. It's a disgrace to our sport and an injustice to coaches who are actually trying to get their teams into the NCAA Tournament by playing legitimate competition to get no explanations or rationale from the selection committee and their chair.
So we continue, and unfortunately, the latest victims added to this list are Janell Fitzgerald, Emily DeWalt, head coach Sean Huiet, and the entire Texas State volleyball team and university.
Texas State was in trouble to even get into the Sun Belt Tournament Finals, but they rallied to beat South Alabama and faced a James Madison team who has a top-25 RPI, and unfortunately did fall in the Championship Game. Janell Fitzgerald was quoted after the tough 5-set Semifinal against South Alabama.
FROM OUTSIDE HITTER JANELL FITZGERALD
"I remember being in shock (during that fifth set). When we were down to (South Alabama's) match point, I just remember blinking and thinking, 'Is this it?' I just wasn't ready to be done playing volleyball, then I got rotated to the front row and if anything, I was going to go out swinging. I didn't play five years to just let it die, especially to the team which ended our season last year."
Texas State gathered today, only to be left out, and not even get a due explanation to why they were left out in favor of a Ball State team, who frankly didn't schedule like they wanted an at-large, and didn't beat any team to really give them consideration to the tournament. Ball State's win is over a Bowling Green team that has 0 Top 50 wins. Sure, you can say JMU is fraudulent, but you can't say TCU is. Texas State beat TCU in Fort Worth, a TCU team with wins over two at-large teams (Iowa State and Kansas) AND a top-16 seeded team (Baylor).
Anyways, here is the story criteria wise:
Texas State had the better RPI by 8 spots. They had a T25 win (JMU). They had a non-conference Top 50 win at TCU (Ball State did not). Texas State had 2 sub-100 losses, Ball State had 3. Both were 8-2 in their last 10 matches.
The only real criteria in favor of Ball State is the common opponent result of Alabama (Texas State lost, Ball State won). I'm not sure how that outweighs all of the above. It is historically unprecedented to see this RPI jump from a sub-par team. You could also argue S.O.S is in Ball State's favor, but it's extremely close and shouldn't be considered really at #98 vs. #102....
| Texas State | Ball State | |
| RPI | 43 | 51 |
| Record vs. Top 25 | 1-2 | 0-0 |
| Record vs. Top 50 | 2-3 | 1-2 |
| Record vs 51-100 | 3-2 | 5-3 |
| Significant Wins (RPI 50 or better) | #21 James Madison at #39 TCU (non-conference) | at #42 Bowling Green |
| Significant Losses (RPI 100 or worse) | #120 Ole Miss #150 Alabama | #109 Central Michigan #109 Central Michigan (yes twice) #117 Dayton |
| Best Non-Conference win | at #39 TCU | at #66 Lipscomb |
| S.O.S | 102 | 98 |
| Results against Common Opponents | 2-1 (2x wins Arkansas State, loss Alabama) | 2-0 (win vs. Arkansas State, win vs. Alabama) |
| Last 10 Matches | 8-2 | 8-2 |
Honorable mention:
The UCLA Bruins.
UCLA was also unfortunately also left out over Ball State. You could argue UCLA should be in over Texas State - but Ball State deserved nothing over these teams. UCLA beat Texas State, won AT Hawaii, and won AT Washington State. They were closer in RPI to Ball State than Ball State was to Texas State
| UCLA | |
| RPI | 58 |
| Record vs. Top 25 | 0-7 |
| Record vs. Top 50 | 3-12 |
| Record vs 51-100 | 2-1 |
| Significant Wins (RPI 50 or better) | at 35 Washington State at 36 Hawaii (non-conference) #43 Texas Sate (non-conference) |
| Significant Losses (RPI 100 or worse) | NONE! The worst loss for UCLA was #70 Utah |
| Best Non-Conference win | at #36 Hawaii |
| S.O.S | 32 |
| Last 10 Matches | 6-4 (against much tougher competition than the others) |
2014 Virginia Tech Hokies
2015 Pittsburgh Panthers
2017 Maryland Terrapins
2017 North Texas Mean Green
2018 Kansas State Wildcats
2018 Kansas Jayhawks
2019 California Golden Bears
2020-21 Florida State Seminoles
2021 Syracuse Orange 
2021 Southern California Women of Troy
2022 Texas State Bobcats
2022 UCLA Bruins
