|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Apr 29, 2024 17:20:25 GMT -5
please provide source of bias? was it biased from 2014-2017 when the MIVA won championships? when the MIVA & EIVA combined have 7 to 8 of the top 10 teams regularly, then I think you'd see so called 'bias' go away. Penn State beat one top 10 team, . Ohio State. Ohio State beat one top ten team. I'm struggling to find where teh bias is only 4 coaches (out of 13) are from west of the ROckies on the committee, so are those coaches east of the rockies also biased to the west coach teams, that would be odd that they would have bias. how is biased being introducted? recency bias? familarity bias? (with only 4 out of 13 coaches), any other type of bias maybe ask those 9 coaches why they are biased towards the western teams perhaps? and I think Ohio State has a legit shot to make the finals and win the NC, but maybe I'm biased You made your own point. I agree Ohio St. can get there and IMO the MIVA was the 2nd best conference this year. How is the MIVA suppossed to get top 10 wins in conference when Ball St. or Ohio St. couldn't get passed #9 each week. How about you do a study on week by week from week 9 to current on how the top 10 changed. Stanford, Pepperdine, and BYU conitnually in the top 10 each week, why? Pepperdine lost to NAIA school (yes they are good) and fell one spot. USC and CSUN with losing records and still ranked. This is not mens vollebyball back in the 90s where the MPSF last place team was ranked in the top #15. It has to stop. Look st George Mason ranked behind teams with losing records. UCSB ranked pretty much all year and their final record 9-18 overall and were ranked at 7-14. Really? West Coast schools have the freeway series and advantage of playing everyone ranked in the top #15. Voters don't move them. Penn St. and Ohio St. have the budget to travel wherever they want. well, to begin with Ball State and Ft. Wayne going 0-3 vs. Hawaii. so, go 2-1 and you might end up in top 10 or have Lewis beating Long Beach or Ohio State beating PSU once Loyola beating Stanford or UCLA Lindenwood well beat Grand Canyon on and on, the MIVA did have their chances, I mean BEAT SOMEBODY more than a couple teams ranking higher, and you'll be top 10 or 5. Ball State proved that a couple years ago. MIVA #2? ahead of which conference, that would be interesting to hear. yeah, the MIVA is good, but no real stand-out team at the top Lewis and Loyola travel out west, not sure about all the whining. you got to beat better teams. Massey & KPI both support the Big West and MPSF rankings. it's not bias |
|
|
|
Post by morevb on Apr 29, 2024 17:54:35 GMT -5
When a player stands out from a lesser known school, coaches talk. If that player’s team continues to do well, the stage gets bigger, the name spreads more. It may take longer for the name to spread, but it will. Teams like McKendree and Lindenwood need more big stage games. (Semis/finals/top10) Until then your players aren’t playing a schedule that would allow stats to be compared equally.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachmp24 on Apr 29, 2024 19:01:57 GMT -5
It seems like there's not too much outrage with this list. They got it pretty much right. Just a few names I was surprised to not even see as HM:
+ Nathan Lietzke - absolute blocking and defensive beast. One of the most athletic setters in the country
+ Rico Wardlow - .498 on the year
+ Wes Smith - .509 on the year getting set more than any other middle (except maybe Ezeonu or Gentry), injured but dominant when in
+ Trey Cole - 2nd best defensive lib in the country
+ Thomas Poole - most underrated player in the country! please watch him tomorrow
|
|
|
|
Post by ManapuaSurprise on Apr 29, 2024 19:29:42 GMT -5
It seems like there's not too much outrage with this list. They got it pretty much right. Just a few names I was surprised to not even see as HM:
+ Nathan Lietzke - absolute blocking and defensive beast. One of the most athletic setters in the country
+ Rico Wardlow - .498 on the year
+ Wes Smith - .509 on the year getting set more than any other middle (except maybe Ezeonu or Gentry), injured but dominant when in
+ Trey Cole - 2nd best defensive lib in the country
+ Thomas Poole - most underrated player in the country! please watch him tomorrow wait til the Hawaii people get off work 😂 |
|
|
|
Post by nodigitygotbounce on Apr 29, 2024 19:53:42 GMT -5
You made your own point. I agree Ohio St. can get there and IMO the MIVA was the 2nd best conference this year. How is the MIVA suppossed to get top 10 wins in conference when Ball St. or Ohio St. couldn't get passed #9 each week. How about you do a study on week by week from week 9 to current on how the top 10 changed. Stanford, Pepperdine, and BYU conitnually in the top 10 each week, why? Pepperdine lost to NAIA school (yes they are good) and fell one spot. USC and CSUN with losing records and still ranked. This is not mens vollebyball back in the 90s where the MPSF last place team was ranked in the top #15. It has to stop. Look st George Mason ranked behind teams with losing records. UCSB ranked pretty much all year and their final record 9-18 overall and were ranked at 7-14. Really? West Coast schools have the freeway series and advantage of playing everyone ranked in the top #15. Voters don't move them. Penn St. and Ohio St. have the budget to travel wherever they want. well, to begin with Ball State and Ft. Wayne going 0-3 vs. Hawaii. so, go 2-1 and you might end up in top 10 or have Lewis beating Long Beach or Ohio State beating PSU once Loyola beating Stanford or UCLA Lindenwood well beat Grand Canyon on and on, the MIVA did have their chances, I mean BEAT SOMEBODY more than a couple teams ranking higher, and you'll be top 10 or 5. Ball State proved that a couple years ago. MIVA #2? ahead of which conference, that would be interesting to hear. yeah, the MIVA is good, but no real stand-out team at the top Lewis and Loyola travel out west, not sure about all the whining. you got to beat better teams. Massey & KPI both support the Big West and MPSF rankings. it's not bias No whining hear, just stating the facts. Everytime time @beachbythebay you reply to my posts you prove my point. So in other words MIVA teams need to continue to travel out West and should be winning on the road. How many teams won in Hawaii with Spyros healthy? Lindenwood played GCU at the beginning of the year, not the same team now. BYU traveled to Lewis and Loyola and split. LOC didn't even have their best setter and lost in 5. Ball St. had the big win (2) years ago because Hawaii decided to play there. If I remeber correctly Hawaii didn't even have their full roster then. MIVA top 7 vs MPSF is even besides UCLA IMO. I expect them to repeat as Champions, but I don't think they would go 7-0 @ MIVA schools. Play those matches home and home and I think MIVA comes on top this year as the better conference. Grow the game they say, but NCAA won't spend the money. To many great teams this year are left out of the playoffs. Only (2) at larges with literally a top 20 that all teams could win against each other. That is why we love the Men's Bball tourney. Just as basketball players dreamof playing in the NCAA tournament so do the volleyball players. Many of them played basektball in HS and dream of this and only a small percentage get that opportunity. Sad. Maybe one day.... |
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Apr 29, 2024 19:58:47 GMT -5
well, to begin with Ball State and Ft. Wayne going 0-3 vs. Hawaii. so, go 2-1 and you might end up in top 10 or have Lewis beating Long Beach or Ohio State beating PSU once Loyola beating Stanford or UCLA Lindenwood well beat Grand Canyon on and on, the MIVA did have their chances, I mean BEAT SOMEBODY more than a couple teams ranking higher, and you'll be top 10 or 5. Ball State proved that a couple years ago. MIVA #2? ahead of which conference, that would be interesting to hear. yeah, the MIVA is good, but no real stand-out team at the top Lewis and Loyola travel out west, not sure about all the whining. you got to beat better teams. Massey & KPI both support the Big West and MPSF rankings. it's not bias No whining hear, just stating the facts. Everytime time @beachbythebay you reply to my posts you prove my point. So in other words MIVA teams need to continue to travel out West and should be winning on the road. How many teams won in Hawaii with Spyros healthy? Lindenwood played GCU at the beginning of the year, not the same team now. BYU traveled to Lewis and Loyola and split. LOC didn't even have their best setter and lost in 5. Ball St. had the big win (2) years ago because Hawaii decided to play there. If I remeber correctly Hawaii didn't even have their full roster then. MIVA top 7 vs MPSF is even besides UCLA IMO. I expect them to repeat as Champions, but I don't think they would go 7-0 @ MIVA schools. Play those matches home and home and I think MIVA comes on top this year as the better conference. Grow the game they say, but NCAA won't spend the money. To many great teams this year are left out of the playoffs. Only (2) at larges with literally a top 20 that all teams could win against each other. That is why we love the Men's Bball tourney. Just as basketball players dreamof playing in the NCAA tournament so do the volleyball players. Many of them played basektball in HS and dream of this and only a small percentage get that opportunity. Sad. Maybe one day.... UCLA and BYU went out to Loyola & Lewis, Beach has made that trip as well, twice. Went to Ball State last year Grand Canyone played like 20 road matches this year. Hawaii went to Ball State and Ft. Wayne man, go look at some schedules. so Beach went to New Juersey this year, Pepperdine went to Belmont Abbey just not sure where you are getting this narrative talking about 16 teams is changing the subject lol, about proving your point, which I think was about bias and about that some setter didn't get teh recognition they deserved, well beat teams that'll get one that recognition. not much else to say. 9 out of 13 AA voting members not from teh west, well whatever |
|
|
|
Post by nodigitygotbounce on Apr 29, 2024 20:21:56 GMT -5
When a player stands out from a lesser known school, coaches talk. If that player’s team continues to do well, the stage gets bigger, the name spreads more. It may take longer for the name to spread, but it will. Teams like McKendree and Lindenwood need more big stage games. (Semis/finals/top10) Until then your players aren’t playing a schedule that would allow stats to be compared equally. Clearly you don't understand how scheduling works. With your example of McKendree and Lindenwood who is going to pay for all of their travel? They don't have the luxury of Penn St. and Ohio St. with large Athletic budgets due to football. They don't have the budget of Princeton who basically goes to CA for a month and stay in alumni mansions because school doesn't start till February. I don't see CA schools coming to the MIVA in March / April. Everyone is going to CA or Hawaii and what a great opportunity for those student athletes to play there. Also, when smaller schools make that trip the hosts schools are helping them out with the travel cost. This year the MIVA had their top (7) teams ranked, but no one in the top 10 would move out. How do you expect them to play against top 10 teams if the voters continue to vote CA shcools in the top 10. Someone explain to me how Pepperdine loses 6 of their last 7 including one to a NAIA school and don't drop out of the top 10. Stanford form Feb3 to March 30 went 2-11. Basically stayed at #6 the whole time. Really? To finally prove my West Coast Bias lets look at Ohio St. this year. Ranked #1 after beating UCLA and USC in First Point Challenge on a Neutral Court in Texas. Next match they have a let down to Penn St. #9 and then lose @ Penn St. (3) days later. They fall from #1 to #6, five spots in a week and Stanford at the most fell to #8 (3) sports over two months. Ohio St. is only as good as Pasteur carries that team. He was hurt the last half of the MIVA conference, but if he is hot he can carry them just like he did when they beat UCLA earlier in the year. This happens every year. Name one sport voting is this way where a team goes 2-11 over (2) months and never leaves the top 10? |
|
|
|
Post by soljah808 on Apr 29, 2024 20:36:07 GMT -5
Congrats to all awarded! Special shout out to Voss for ending his career as another AA.
And Tread our young gun at setter only to improve!
And Alakai....what else can you say about him? This dude was literally behind two different 1st Team All Americans (Rado and Dimi) his entire career but had the patience to still wait his turn in his 6th year with the program. And boy did he perform when he needed too. Many including myself underestimated his abilities but he proved me wrong and then some! Congrats Alakai! All the best in your endeavors!
|
|
|
|
Post by macfan11 on Apr 29, 2024 20:40:13 GMT -5
It seems like there's not too much outrage with this list. They got it pretty much right. Just a few names I was surprised to not even see as HM:
+ Nathan Lietzke - absolute blocking and defensive beast. One of the most athletic setters in the country
+ Rico Wardlow - .498 on the year
+ Wes Smith - .509 on the year getting set more than any other middle (except maybe Ezeonu or Gentry), injured but dominant when in
+ Trey Cole - 2nd best defensive lib in the country
+ Thomas Poole - most underrated player in the country! please watch him tomorrow 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼 yes please show Tommy Poole some love!!! Such a solid player for OSU. |
|
|
|
Post by coy on Apr 30, 2024 10:15:05 GMT -5
How many teams are there at the this level? Something like 60? Putting 16 teams in the Tournament would be wild. And comparing it to the NCAA Tournament is crazy.
You want 16 out of 60 teams to make the NCAA Tournament (over 1/4 of all teams), and site the men's NCAA basketball Tournament as proof of how exciting it would be. 68 (really 64) teams get into the NCAA men's basketball Tournament. There's 351 men's D1 basketball teams. So 19% of D1 teams make the NCAA men's basketball Tournament.
And the most popular sport of all of them has a similar system as men's volleyball. If you aren't in one of the elite conferences (whether it's basketball or football), you probably aren't beating many elite teams, which means you probably aren't jumping way up in the rankings. SEC teams can lose 3 or 4 games and still be ranked. The minute a Sun Belt team (take James Madison, for example) loses their first game, they're falling out of the rankings (because it means they lost to a bad team, and haven't beat a good team). Next year 12 out of 128 teams will make the Playoffs. Or less than 10%.
Heck, even the college basketball you site ranks teams the same way. If you're in a Power 6 conference, you can lose 10 games and still be ranked. If you're 31-3 in the Ivy League you aren't even sniffing the rankings. Women's volleyball the same.
Quit acting like this is something unique to men's volleyball or an issue of nobody having the best interests of the sport. It's in literally every college sport out there. There are stronger conferences that see teams remain ranked highly because when you lose to good teams you aren't penalized and when you beat good teams you are rewarded. And when you play in a worse conference, you aren't beating good competition.
|
|
|
|
Post by nodigitygotbounce on Apr 30, 2024 15:23:59 GMT -5
How many teams are there at the this level? Something like 60? Putting 16 teams in the Tournament would be wild. And comparing it to the NCAA Tournament is crazy. You want 16 out of 60 teams to make the NCAA Tournament (over 1/4 of all teams), and site the men's NCAA basketball Tournament as proof of how exciting it would be. 68 (really 64) teams get into the NCAA men's basketball Tournament. There's 351 men's D1 basketball teams. So 19% of D1 teams make the NCAA men's basketball Tournament. And the most popular sport of all of them has a similar system as men's volleyball. If you aren't in one of the elite conferences (whether it's basketball or football), you probably aren't beating many elite teams, which means you probably aren't jumping way up in the rankings. SEC teams can lose 3 or 4 games and still be ranked. The minute a Sun Belt team (take James Madison, for example) loses their first game, they're falling out of the rankings (because it means they lost to a bad team, and haven't beat a good team). Next year 12 out of 128 teams will make the Playoffs. Or less than 10%. Heck, even the college basketball you site ranks teams the same way. If you're in a Power 6 conference, you can lose 10 games and still be ranked. If you're 31-3 in the Ivy League you aren't even sniffing the rankings. Women's volleyball the same. Quit acting like this is something unique to men's volleyball or an issue of nobody having the best interests of the sport. It's in literally every college sport out there. There are stronger conferences that see teams remain ranked highly because when you lose to good teams you aren't penalized and when you beat good teams you are rewarded. And when you play in a worse conference, you aren't beating good competition. Where are you getting 128 teams from for next year? There are 60+ as you mentioned and I don't know the exact total for next year as new programs are arriving. However they are not at the Power Conference level so really doesn't matter. Men's bball does not leave out the Top 30-40 ranked teams whether they win their conference tournament or not. The NCAA runs all of their post season tournaments the same in that the conference winner / tournament winners get the automatic bid and then the rest are "at large bids." (12) teams has not been approved for next year is my understanding, but I could be wrong. Defintely will be better as it will allow (6) at large bids when it happens. As I posted earlier Stanford went 2-11 over (2) months of the season and basically stayed at #6. They were at #8 for one week. Show me where that happens in any sport that they remain in the top 10? In mens basketball they would not even be ranked anymore. Yes they would have a chance at making the tournament (basketball) because they have so many at large bids. Currently men's volleyball has (2). M As we move to (12) teams this is going to create more of a problem. Right now MIVA teams could not get in the top 10 because of the tradition of keeping ranked teams in the MPSF / Big West in the top 10. When it is time for "Bracketolgy" calculations for the (6) at large bids, MPSF / Big West will win that arguement because the teams stay in the top 10 producing better KPI, RPI and strength of schedule. Long Beach St. and UCLA are the only (2) teams that have separated themselves this year IMO. Exclude Conordia Irvine, Quincy, and Queens from the MIVA and the rest of the teams in the Big West / MPSF / MIVA are very similar. It would be great to see them battle in a tournament setting at the end of the year. I have always compared mens Volleyball to Mens Hockey for post season play. 60 D1 teams and they do a (16) team tournament. Why can't volleyball do that? Answer is money becasue NCAA doesn't want to spend it on that many teams. |
|
|
|
Post by coy on Apr 30, 2024 15:54:40 GMT -5
How many teams are there at the this level? Something like 60? Putting 16 teams in the Tournament would be wild. And comparing it to the NCAA Tournament is crazy. You want 16 out of 60 teams to make the NCAA Tournament (over 1/4 of all teams), and site the men's NCAA basketball Tournament as proof of how exciting it would be. 68 (really 64) teams get into the NCAA men's basketball Tournament. There's 351 men's D1 basketball teams. So 19% of D1 teams make the NCAA men's basketball Tournament. And the most popular sport of all of them has a similar system as men's volleyball. If you aren't in one of the elite conferences (whether it's basketball or football), you probably aren't beating many elite teams, which means you probably aren't jumping way up in the rankings. SEC teams can lose 3 or 4 games and still be ranked. The minute a Sun Belt team (take James Madison, for example) loses their first game, they're falling out of the rankings (because it means they lost to a bad team, and haven't beat a good team). Next year 12 out of 128 teams will make the Playoffs. Or less than 10%. Heck, even the college basketball you site ranks teams the same way. If you're in a Power 6 conference, you can lose 10 games and still be ranked. If you're 31-3 in the Ivy League you aren't even sniffing the rankings. Women's volleyball the same. Quit acting like this is something unique to men's volleyball or an issue of nobody having the best interests of the sport. It's in literally every college sport out there. There are stronger conferences that see teams remain ranked highly because when you lose to good teams you aren't penalized and when you beat good teams you are rewarded. And when you play in a worse conference, you aren't beating good competition. Where are you getting 128 teams from for next year? There are 60+ as you mentioned and I don't know the exact total for next year as new programs are arriving. However they are not at the Power Conference level so really doesn't matter. Men's bball does not leave out the Top 30-40 ranked teams whether they win their conference tournament or not. The NCAA runs all of their post season tournaments the same in that the conference winner / tournament winners get the automatic bid and then the rest are "at large bids." (12) teams has not been approved for next year is my understanding, but I could be wrong. Defintely will be better as it will allow (6) at large bids when it happens. As I posted earlier Stanford went 2-11 over (2) months of the season and basically stayed at #6. They were at #8 for one week. Show me where that happens in any sport that they remain in the top 10? In mens basketball they would not even be ranked anymore. Yes they would have a chance at making the tournament (basketball) because they have so many at large bids. Currently men's volleyball has (2). M As we move to (12) teams this is going to create more of a problem. Right now MIVA teams could not get in the top 10 because of the tradition of keeping ranked teams in the MPSF / Big West in the top 10. When it is time for "Bracketolgy" calculations for the (6) at large bids, MPSF / Big West will win that arguement because the teams stay in the top 10 producing better KPI, RPI and strength of schedule. Long Beach St. and UCLA are the only (2) teams that have separated themselves this year IMO. Exclude Conordia Irvine, Quincy, and Queens from the MIVA and the rest of the teams in the Big West / MPSF / MIVA are very similar. It would be great to see them battle in a tournament setting at the end of the year. I have always compared mens Volleyball to Mens Hockey for post season play. 60 D1 teams and they do a (16) team tournament. Why can't volleyball do that? Answer is money becasue NCAA doesn't want to spend it on that many teams. 12 out of 128 teams is what NCAA Football will have in their Playoffs next year. So 8 out of 60 is an even higher percentage of teams than Football gets in their Playoffs. MIVA teams absolutely have a chance to get in the top 10. And the coaches and media polls mean nothing for NCAA Tournament selection criteria anyway. But here's how the MIVA gets at large bids. Don't have your regular season champion get swept in back to back matches against the 3rd place MPSF team. Be competitive, at least. Get a win against the 6th (out of 7) place team in the Big West. Beat the .500 MPSF team. Beat the .500 Big West team. Be competitive at home against Penn State. Loyola got a great split against a .500 Big West team, and then followed that up with 4 straight losses to a .500 MPSF team, the 3rd place MPSF team, and then the best team in the country. Ohio State is in the Tournament. And they would've been in the running on the back of their wins over a bad UCSD team, a great win over UCLA, and a solid win over USC. But following those 3 wins up with back to back losses to Penn State isn't great. The MIVA had chances to have their numbers be good. They didn't take advantage of those opportunities. The idea that "the rest of the MIVA" outside of Queens and Quincy are "very similar" to the Big West and the MIVA outside of Concordia Irvine, UCLA, and Long Beach is wild. Ball State won the MIVA and lost to the 6th place Big West team, a .500 MPSF team, a .500 Big West team, and wasn't competitive in 2 matches with the 3rd place MPSF team. The idea that Ball State (or Loyola) are on the same level as GCU or UC Irvine is crazy. Do you really think the NCAA doesn't want to spend money on men's volleyball but is fine spending money on men's hockey? |
|
|
|
Post by nodigitygotbounce on Apr 30, 2024 18:56:03 GMT -5
Where are you getting 128 teams from for next year? There are 60+ as you mentioned and I don't know the exact total for next year as new programs are arriving. However they are not at the Power Conference level so really doesn't matter. Men's bball does not leave out the Top 30-40 ranked teams whether they win their conference tournament or not. The NCAA runs all of their post season tournaments the same in that the conference winner / tournament winners get the automatic bid and then the rest are "at large bids." (12) teams has not been approved for next year is my understanding, but I could be wrong. Defintely will be better as it will allow (6) at large bids when it happens. As I posted earlier Stanford went 2-11 over (2) months of the season and basically stayed at #6. They were at #8 for one week. Show me where that happens in any sport that they remain in the top 10? In mens basketball they would not even be ranked anymore. Yes they would have a chance at making the tournament (basketball) because they have so many at large bids. Currently men's volleyball has (2). M As we move to (12) teams this is going to create more of a problem. Right now MIVA teams could not get in the top 10 because of the tradition of keeping ranked teams in the MPSF / Big West in the top 10. When it is time for "Bracketolgy" calculations for the (6) at large bids, MPSF / Big West will win that arguement because the teams stay in the top 10 producing better KPI, RPI and strength of schedule. Long Beach St. and UCLA are the only (2) teams that have separated themselves this year IMO. Exclude Conordia Irvine, Quincy, and Queens from the MIVA and the rest of the teams in the Big West / MPSF / MIVA are very similar. It would be great to see them battle in a tournament setting at the end of the year. I have always compared mens Volleyball to Mens Hockey for post season play. 60 D1 teams and they do a (16) team tournament. Why can't volleyball do that? Answer is money becasue NCAA doesn't want to spend it on that many teams. 12 out of 128 teams is what NCAA Football will have in their Playoffs next year. So 8 out of 60 is an even higher percentage of teams than Football gets in their Playoffs. MIVA teams absolutely have a chance to get in the top 10. And the coaches and media polls mean nothing for NCAA Tournament selection criteria anyway. But here's how the MIVA gets at large bids. Don't have your regular season champion get swept in back to back matches against the 3rd place MPSF team. Be competitive, at least. Get a win against the 6th (out of 7) place team in the Big West. Beat the .500 MPSF team. Beat the .500 Big West team. Be competitive at home against Penn State. Loyola got a great split against a .500 Big West team, and then followed that up with 4 straight losses to a .500 MPSF team, the 3rd place MPSF team, and then the best team in the country. Ohio State is in the Tournament. And they would've been in the running on the back of their wins over a bad UCSD team, a great win over UCLA, and a solid win over USC. But following those 3 wins up with back to back losses to Penn State isn't great. The MIVA had chances to have their numbers be good. They didn't take advantage of those opportunities. The idea that "the rest of the MIVA" outside of Queens and Quincy are "very similar" to the Big West and the MIVA outside of Concordia Irvine, UCLA, and Long Beach is wild. Ball State won the MIVA and lost to the 6th place Big West team, a .500 MPSF team, a .500 Big West team, and wasn't competitive in 2 matches with the 3rd place MPSF team. The idea that Ball State (or Loyola) are on the same level as GCU or UC Irvine is crazy. Do you really think the NCAA doesn't want to spend money on men's volleyball but is fine spending money on men's hockey? Ball St. vs BYU @ BYU is your first reference. Clearly you didn't watch the match else you would have known "Mr. T," didn't play. One of the best OH in the NCAA was suspended 9 games to start the season. I believe against Stanford and USC were his first matches back. Laughable, beat the .500 BW team which was Hawaii who was healthy at the time and ranked top 4. Again Loyola with a split against a 500 BW team. Again @ Hawaii to start the season and they were healthy. I laugh at how you brush it off like we should have swept them becuase they were only a .500 team in the Big West. Oh by the way Loyola did not have their starting setter from last year until MIVA play, but you wouldn't know that becasue again you don't watch MIVA play. Ohio St. is only as good as Pasteur carries them. He has been hurt most of the year. So losing to the #9 team who won the EIVA at their place is a bad loss? Why is this not the same for MPSF / Big West teams when they lose to a top ranked team on the road. Nice try though. Watch some matches next time and you might know what is going on. The MIVA was super competitive this year and they beat up on eachother. |
|
|
|
Post by morevb on May 1, 2024 4:28:36 GMT -5
I think if we do look closely at games and final stats we will see that Mr T didn’t play much when McKendree swept Ball St early on and Pasteur sat when Lindenwood beat OS. These better players were used sparingly or not at all when rest was needed for more important games. I’m guessing this is why the MIVA appeared competitive at times. The nonconference schedules are not even comparable. Middle teams in MIVA only have a chance when that changes.If it is a matter of money for traveling then that is another issue on its own.
|
|
|
|
Post by coy on May 1, 2024 11:54:44 GMT -5
12 out of 128 teams is what NCAA Football will have in their Playoffs next year. So 8 out of 60 is an even higher percentage of teams than Football gets in their Playoffs. MIVA teams absolutely have a chance to get in the top 10. And the coaches and media polls mean nothing for NCAA Tournament selection criteria anyway. But here's how the MIVA gets at large bids. Don't have your regular season champion get swept in back to back matches against the 3rd place MPSF team. Be competitive, at least. Get a win against the 6th (out of 7) place team in the Big West. Beat the .500 MPSF team. Beat the .500 Big West team. Be competitive at home against Penn State. Loyola got a great split against a .500 Big West team, and then followed that up with 4 straight losses to a .500 MPSF team, the 3rd place MPSF team, and then the best team in the country. Ohio State is in the Tournament. And they would've been in the running on the back of their wins over a bad UCSD team, a great win over UCLA, and a solid win over USC. But following those 3 wins up with back to back losses to Penn State isn't great. The MIVA had chances to have their numbers be good. They didn't take advantage of those opportunities. The idea that "the rest of the MIVA" outside of Queens and Quincy are "very similar" to the Big West and the MIVA outside of Concordia Irvine, UCLA, and Long Beach is wild. Ball State won the MIVA and lost to the 6th place Big West team, a .500 MPSF team, a .500 Big West team, and wasn't competitive in 2 matches with the 3rd place MPSF team. The idea that Ball State (or Loyola) are on the same level as GCU or UC Irvine is crazy. Do you really think the NCAA doesn't want to spend money on men's volleyball but is fine spending money on men's hockey? Ball St. vs BYU @ BYU is your first reference. Clearly you didn't watch the match else you would have known "Mr. T," didn't play. One of the best OH in the NCAA was suspended 9 games to start the season. I believe against Stanford and USC were his first matches back. Laughable, beat the .500 BW team which was Hawaii who was healthy at the time and ranked top 4. Again Loyola with a split against a 500 BW team. Again @ Hawaii to start the season and they were healthy. I laugh at how you brush it off like we should have swept them becuase they were only a .500 team in the Big West. Oh by the way Loyola did not have their starting setter from last year until MIVA play, but you wouldn't know that becasue again you don't watch MIVA play. Ohio St. is only as good as Pasteur carries them. He has been hurt most of the year. So losing to the #9 team who won the EIVA at their place is a bad loss? Why is this not the same for MPSF / Big West teams when they lose to a top ranked team on the road. Nice try though. Watch some matches next time and you might know what is going on. The MIVA was super competitive this year and they beat up on eachother. I'm from the Midwest and watched more MIVA than any West Coast volleyball. All you did right here is reiterate that MIVA teams had opportunities to get big wins and didn't. Excuse them any way you want, but if you want to move up in the rankings and get at large bids, you have to win some big matches at some point. The MIVA teams didn't. Was there not some West Coast bias when Loyola, Lewis, and/or Ohio State were being ranked at the very top of the rankings, getting at large bids in the NCAA Tournament, and winning national titles? Why do you think that bias is there now, when it wasn't then? By the way, Ohio State wasn't even competitive with GCU last night. But I'm sure there's an excuse for it, and that Lindenwood would've hung just fine with the likes of GCU and UC Irvine this year. Lol. Please, keep claiming the NCAA is fine spending money on men's hockey but won't do so for men's volleyball. |
|
