Which team is the best ever?

[fritzer5849]

My vote goes to the 1996 Stanford Cardinals. They lost 2 matches on the season, but they were unbeatable when they were playing their best. They had 2 1st Team AA's(I don't understand how Folkl was the last player cut from the olympic team but was only a 2nd team AA), and two 2nd team AA's. They were also very big, every player who went to the front row was 6-0 or over. That team also had Walsh when she was the healthiest, and Sharpley when she was the healthiest. When they swept Hawaii in the championship, it was the most dominating championship game ever, and still is to this day.

[Wolfgang]

You left off 1976 and 1977 USC teams, but I guess technically, they were AIAW teams since the NCAA did not start holding tournaments until 1981 or 1982 (I forgot the year).

You're also including only national champions. An argument can be made that they're not necessarily the best team that year, just that they' were very good late in the season given the particular pairings. Luck is very important. I'm a believer in luck.

The 2001 Long Beach State team was damn good, until the Finals.

The Penn State teams prior to 1999 were very very good, but again, they lost in the Finals.

The 1995 Hawaii team was pretty solid, too, but they got upset by Michigan State in the Regionals.

[Wolfgang]

And of course, the worst team to win a national championship is the 2004 Stanford Cardinals. Ugh...

I know it's bad for volleyball, but I wish the Committee would revise the format to only include those teams WORTHY of being national champions that year. So, yeah, no more 64 single elimination tournament. The number would fluctuate so only the best and most worthy teams get invites. Some years, it will be only eight, and other years, five. That means leaving off teams like Princeton, Xavier, UCSB, maybe Florida, the 2004 Stanfords, maybe a few Hawaii teams, and the like... And you can't be invited unless you win your conference. I know...absolutely terrible for volleyball and sports in general.

I just hate it when teams that end up winning the title don't really deserve it.

[dishdaball]

What a hoot - a team that doesn't deserve it.......you're right, those girls don't deserve it. I'm sure you can just inform them and they'll give back the national championship they "WON" because Wolfgang says they are not "worthy".

[Psychopotamus]

Too much football for you today, Wolfgang. Kind of like a BCS-format thing for volleyball? The only flaw in that is that they do it out of necessity in football. Do you mean to say you think they should only choose the top 10 or so teams for the NCAA basketball tournament? From my perspective it's pretty much the same situation.

[fritzer5849]

wolfgang said:

You left off 1976 and 1977 USC teams, but I guess technically, they were AIAW teams since the NCAA did not start holding tournaments until 1981 or 1982 (I forgot the year).

You're also including only national champions. An argument can be made that they're not necessarily the best team that year, just that they' were very good late in the season given the particular pairings. Luck is very important. I'm a believer in luck.

The 2001 Long Beach State team was damn good, until the Finals.

The Penn State teams prior to 1999 were very very good, but again, they lost in the Finals.

The 1995 Hawaii team was pretty solid, too, but they got upset by Michigan State in the Regionals.

I made it just NCAA, I don't know anythinkg about the AIAW days. I almost included the 1992 UCLA team, but then if I did that I'd need to include the 1992 Stanford team because Stanford beat UCLA, same situation with Stanford 01. The 1997 and 1998 Penn State teams were some of the best teams to play, possibly better than the 1999 team. In 1997 they may have had their most talent, but they were younger(3 soph's starting). In 1998 they were probably even better with 3 AA's, Cochran who hit around .370 as an OH, and Schonveld who was HM All-Bigten, but everybody played poorly in the finals besides Cacciamani. In 1999 they destroyed Stanford and won the championship, so I put that PSU team in the top 10 instead of the 1997 or 1998 squads. In 1988, 1992 and 1993 I think that UCLA was undefeated before the NCAA's, Nebraska was in 94 and Hawaii was in 1995 and in 04, but I don't think those teams deserve to be ranked with or ahead the eventual champions.

[Wolfgang]

Don't get your panties in a bunch...

I was just trying to promote discussion. Or, just provoke deep feelings in people... Whichever comes first.

[GatorVball]

I voted 2003 USC. They were so balanced and dominant. Even when they lost a game, you never felt they were in danger of losing a match. If not for them, Mary would have 1, maybe 2 national titles as USC ended Florida's season in 2002 and 2003. I just think in this day and age, to go undefeated and do it so dominantly puts them above all the rest.

[Lost]

Wolfgang:

Although a bit off the wall, it is a bit interesting. I am not sure how many conferences there are but maybe instead of the champions of each conference... maybe the top 2 from each conference. Although champions of smaller conferences may not be worthy of an invite to the tournament, they should get a shot as they worked fairly hard to win their conference.

[fritzer5849]

Only 18 votes ? C'mon, I know not everybody has voted....

[Gorf]

I votred 12 times though, just to make sure there was none of that west coast bias in the poll.

[Gorf]

Why aren't either of Pacific's 1985 or 1986 teams in the list?

I like those two teams!

[Wolfgang]

Which team used a ringer? Which of those teams were probably in violation of some NCAA rule, but never caught because the NCAA doesn't care about volleyball?

[Gorf]

Was one of those teams the one (R)uffda! Svetlana was playing on?

[IdahoBoy]

The list omits Hawaii 2002 and 2003 teams.