huntz
High School
Posts: 9
|
Post by huntz on Sept 18, 2005 19:21:06 GMT -5
OK, then lets do this:
Nebraska vs. Washington Missouri vs. Stanford Texas A&M vs. UCLA Texas vs. USC Kansas St. vs. Arizona Kansas vs. Cal
Yeah, the Big 12 would probably go 1-5 in those games, maybe 0-6. With the exception of Nebraska the rest of the Big 12 has played an increadibly easy schedule, with absolutely no quality wins over ranked opponents.
And why is Colorado on that list? Who have they beaten. I know that they have been getting beat, but I haven't heard about them making any noise at all.
Missouri has a good record, but against who? The only ranked opponent that they have played is Texas A&M, who seems to be overrated at the moment.
What has Kansas State done to get recognition?
Like I said, the Big 12 is Nebraska, and everybody else.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2005 19:24:42 GMT -5
Nebraska-Washington (tossup?) Missouri-Stanford (advantage Pac10, but who knows?) Texas-USC KSU-UCLA TAMU-Arizona Kansas-California Colorado- Right now, most of these matchups would go to the Pac10. But I don't see any blowouts in there. And I still don't see Nebraska's big disadvantage with a Big12 schedule EXCEPT that they don't play back-to-back nights. Big10-Pac10 is pretty close, too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2005 19:26:20 GMT -5
Missouri beat Wisconsin, who just crushed UCLA. Missouri is a legit top 10.
I think you need to look closer at who the Big12 and Pac10 has played. I'll do it when I get back, if you'd like. I need to go jump my $%#@ car.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Sept 18, 2005 19:26:25 GMT -5
I don't think the outcome for any of those first five matchups is guaranteed.
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Sept 18, 2005 19:26:52 GMT -5
Here is a good test to decide who has the best conference. Which conference would be the hardest to finish 5th or 6th? PAC10 has UW and Stanford, Big 12 Neb/Mizzou etc, Big Ten PSU and Minnesota. All are very tough conferences to finish 1st, but how deep it goes is the best test.
|
|
|
Post by 2c on Sept 18, 2005 19:38:20 GMT -5
OK, then lets do this: Nebraska vs. Washington Missouri vs. Stanford Texas A&M vs. UCLA Texas vs. USC Kansas St. vs. Arizona Kansas vs. Cal OK, lets... if they played 10 matches on neutral court. Nebr v Wash (tossup 5-5) Mizzouri v Stanford (Stanford wins 7-3 matches; even less right now, but by tournament time stanford wins most) TexasA&M vs UCLA (TexasA&M 6-4) Texas v USC (5-5; depending on which UT team shows up; could go to USC 6-4 based on texas erradic play.) KSU vs Arizona (6-4 KSU; depends highly on which Arizona team shows up but since history indicates that UA tends to not show up more often) Kan v Cal (6-4 Kansas) Now lets go to the next level: Colo v ASU (CU 7-3) ISU v OSU (ISU 6-4) TT v Oregon (TT 7-3) Baylor/OU vs WSU (5-5) I don't really think the Big 12 is that behind. Big 11 is even better.
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Sept 18, 2005 19:38:47 GMT -5
College Volleyball is still along way away from basketball and football in terms of depth. In Div 1 hoops # 25 could be #1 on any given night. In these polls Florida is ranked 5. If they played Nebraska or Washington 10 times they might win 1. There is a big gap between 1 and 10 in college vb. Having said that it is way better than 10 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Sept 18, 2005 20:13:44 GMT -5
I mentioned this in an earlier thread. Nebraska plays in the Big 12, and Washington plays in the Pac 10. Right now Nebraska has played the harder schedule, but once conference play starts Washington will have a much harder schedule than Nebraska, and they will be more seasoned than the Huskers. Three out of the last four years Nebraska has lost to a Pac 10 team in the tournament. A tough schedule near the end of the season is much better than a tough schedule at the beginning. Advantage come tourney time: Washington. This is a down year for the PAC 10. I think the conference schedules for the Huskies and Huskers would at least be even if not in Nebraska's favor. Does it matter to U Dub? probably not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2005 20:38:57 GMT -5
For the first time that I can remember there will be no Big West teams ranked in the top 25, with their losses I think both UCSB and Long Beach will drop out.
The Big West sure isn't what it used to be that's for sure.
|
|
|
Post by plm on Sept 18, 2005 20:50:41 GMT -5
As for the Washington Nebraska debate; Nebraska played Hawaii once in Nebraska in front of their fans not to mention that Hawaii had to travel a huge distance. Of course Nebraska was going to win, it was only a matter of by how much. Washington on the other hand goes into the SSC and sweeps Hawaii twice in dominating fasion. Which win was more impressive? Washington's of course. They have my vote right now. Yeah, it was also early in the year when NU was still in it's infancy on running the 6-2, on a court that neither team had ever played on before, NU wasn't playing Stalls yet, and the setters weren't connecting very well with Pavan yet. NU has gotten much better running the 6-2, Stalls is back to playing though she may not be quite 100% yet, and the setters are connecting much better with Pavan. Do you need more reasons why one can't really go by the match at the NACWAA tourney? I'm sure that I can come up with some more reasons.
|
|
huntz
High School
Posts: 9
|
Post by huntz on Sept 18, 2005 20:54:11 GMT -5
I already looked at the Big 12 schedules before I wrote what I did. If you care to look back over them yourself you can.
USC already beat Texas in Texas.
I see nothing in Texas A&M to make me believe that they would beat UCLA. They are 1 and 3 against ranked teams already losing to USC, and the only win coming against St. Mary's which in my opinion isn't a top team.
Kansas State has yet to play a quality opponent, what makes you think that they would beat Arizona 6 out of 4 times.
Who has Kansas beaten outside of the Big 12 teams?
|
|
huntz
High School
Posts: 9
|
Post by huntz on Sept 18, 2005 20:55:16 GMT -5
Oh, and welcome back to the top 20 BYU.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Sept 18, 2005 20:58:01 GMT -5
As for the Washington Nebraska debate; Nebraska played Hawaii once in Nebraska in front of their fans not to mention that Hawaii had to travel a huge distance. Of course Nebraska was going to win, it was only a matter of by how much. Washington on the other hand goes into the SSC and sweeps Hawaii twice in dominating fasion. Which win was more impressive? Washington's of course. They have my vote right now. Yeah, it was also early in the year when NU was still in it's infancy on running the 6-2, on a court that neither team had ever played on before, NU wasn't playing Stalls yet, and the setters weren't connecting very well with Pavan yet. NU has gotten much better running the 6-2, Stalls is back to playing though she may not be quite 100% yet, and the setters are connecting much better with Pavan. Do you need more reasons why one can't really go by the match at the NACWAA tourney? I'm sure that I can come up with some more reasons. I would agree with your thoughts on the NACWAA but for different reasons. Hawai'i was without Tara Hittle, a major component to Hawaii's offensive/defensive strategy so while Nebraska was playing without stalls and in the infancy of their 6-2, Hawai'i was not without problems of their own.
|
|
|
Post by bucky415 on Sept 18, 2005 21:08:13 GMT -5
Kansas State lost to Minnesota at home in four. KU's strongest wins are against Alabama and Michigan State, so not the strongest there. Mizzou swept Tennessee, a team falling but probably still in the top 25, in addition to Wisconsin. Thus, the Big 12 is not as strong as in years past (other than Nebraska and Missouri), but still solid. Also, I think the Pac Ten is definitely down from where it has been. UCLA and USC are trying to find lineups that will work well for them. Arizona? Who knows, but the loss of Butkus has to hurt a lot. Washington is very good. Stanford might be as good as they were last september or better, but not where they were last december. I don't know about Cal, but they are going to at least stay in the perennial NCAA team mold, in my opinion, which is a step up. I am taking it that the Oregon schools, ASU (maybe) and WSU are still down. I think it hurts the conference strength to have WSU down, because they used to be so strong, but maybe Cal's resurgence balances that out. I think that the Big Ten might be the best conference, but I am of course biased. I do agree that the top teams are more clearly separated from everyone else this year than was the case last year.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2005 21:22:58 GMT -5
I already looked at the Big 12 schedules before I wrote what I did. If you care to look back over them yourself you can. It must not have sunk in then, because you're still missing matches in your summary below. That was TAMU and not a home match. Well, that's one way to look at it: just say the teams they've beaten are not top teams. And thanks for reminding me of TAMU's win over St Marys. Minnesota is not a quality opponent? They also swept a decent Missouri State team, beat Arkansas, Utah State. Alabama, Michigan State--both sweeps. Decent teams. Not great, but decent. Now let's look at your Pac10: Washington--only Hawaii, but we know Udub's good Stanford--PSU is their only win that is not comparable to some of the wins you dismiss above USC--TAMU and Pepperdine UCLA--San Diego, Nevada Arizona--UCSB? North Carolina? Cal--nobody I'm not dissing the Pac10. You're just dissing the Big12.
|
|