04-29-2014, 04:00 PM
MVB: Stanford v Erskine
04-29-2014, 04:56 PM
(This post was last modified: 04-29-2014, 05:10 PM by Viking_Guy.)
25-14, 25-16 in the first two sets. Erskine just doesn't have the size/weapons to be that competitive. Will be interesting to see the Penn State/Lewis match.
There's a lot of argument about the selection of Lewis as the second at-large team - given that they spent most of the year ranked between #10 and #12. It also set up the tournament so that host Loyola won't have to play an MPSF team until the final (seeded against the winner of Lewis, whom Loyola's beaten three times this year, and Penn State, whom they beat 3-1 at home), AND guarantees a non-MPSF team in the final. Indeed, both semis, if they went by seed, would feature fourth meetings between schools. Hope Penn State can win simply to shake that up a bit (oh, and they did beat Lewis 3-1 at Lewis earlier in the year.)
VG
There's a lot of argument about the selection of Lewis as the second at-large team - given that they spent most of the year ranked between #10 and #12. It also set up the tournament so that host Loyola won't have to play an MPSF team until the final (seeded against the winner of Lewis, whom Loyola's beaten three times this year, and Penn State, whom they beat 3-1 at home), AND guarantees a non-MPSF team in the final. Indeed, both semis, if they went by seed, would feature fourth meetings between schools. Hope Penn State can win simply to shake that up a bit (oh, and they did beat Lewis 3-1 at Lewis earlier in the year.)
VG
(This post was last modified: 04-29-2014, 05:10 PM by Viking_Guy.)
25-14, 25-16 in the first two sets. Erskine just doesn't have the size/weapons to be that competitive. Will be interesting to see the Penn State/Lewis match.
There's a lot of argument about the selection of Lewis as the second at-large team - given that they spent most of the year ranked between #10 and #12. It also set up the tournament so that host Loyola won't have to play an MPSF team until the final (seeded against the winner of Lewis, whom Loyola's beaten three times this year, and Penn State, whom they beat 3-1 at home), AND guarantees a non-MPSF team in the final. Indeed, both semis, if they went by seed, would feature fourth meetings between schools. Hope Penn State can win simply to shake that up a bit (oh, and they did beat Lewis 3-1 at Lewis earlier in the year.)
VG
There's a lot of argument about the selection of Lewis as the second at-large team - given that they spent most of the year ranked between #10 and #12. It also set up the tournament so that host Loyola won't have to play an MPSF team until the final (seeded against the winner of Lewis, whom Loyola's beaten three times this year, and Penn State, whom they beat 3-1 at home), AND guarantees a non-MPSF team in the final. Indeed, both semis, if they went by seed, would feature fourth meetings between schools. Hope Penn State can win simply to shake that up a bit (oh, and they did beat Lewis 3-1 at Lewis earlier in the year.)
VG
04-29-2014, 05:19 PM
Fourth meeting between Stanford and BYU is set - hope fourth time is the charm for the good guys...! 8)
04-29-2014, 05:20 PM
14, 16 and 16.
Erskine is a solid team, but would have a tough time competing in the top half of the MPSF. They did beat C.al Baptist (who tied with Pacific for last place in the MPSF) on the road. But they are new team in a new conference, so good luck to them improving.
As I said, interested in the Lewis/Penn State outcome. If Lewis loses, people from Pepperdine are going to be even more irate at being passed over for the final at-large spot.
What do people think - is the benefit of playing a match in the venue good here? Or does it help when playing two teams who are completely different levels of opponent?
VG
Erskine is a solid team, but would have a tough time competing in the top half of the MPSF. They did beat C.al Baptist (who tied with Pacific for last place in the MPSF) on the road. But they are new team in a new conference, so good luck to them improving.
As I said, interested in the Lewis/Penn State outcome. If Lewis loses, people from Pepperdine are going to be even more irate at being passed over for the final at-large spot.
What do people think - is the benefit of playing a match in the venue good here? Or does it help when playing two teams who are completely different levels of opponent?
VG
14, 16 and 16.
Erskine is a solid team, but would have a tough time competing in the top half of the MPSF. They did beat C.al Baptist (who tied with Pacific for last place in the MPSF) on the road. But they are new team in a new conference, so good luck to them improving.
As I said, interested in the Lewis/Penn State outcome. If Lewis loses, people from Pepperdine are going to be even more irate at being passed over for the final at-large spot.
What do people think - is the benefit of playing a match in the venue good here? Or does it help when playing two teams who are completely different levels of opponent?
VG
Erskine is a solid team, but would have a tough time competing in the top half of the MPSF. They did beat C.al Baptist (who tied with Pacific for last place in the MPSF) on the road. But they are new team in a new conference, so good luck to them improving.
As I said, interested in the Lewis/Penn State outcome. If Lewis loses, people from Pepperdine are going to be even more irate at being passed over for the final at-large spot.
What do people think - is the benefit of playing a match in the venue good here? Or does it help when playing two teams who are completely different levels of opponent?
VG
04-29-2014, 05:26 PM
(04-29-2014, 05:20 PM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:As I said, interested in the Lewis/Penn State outcome. If Lewis loses, people from Pepperdine are going to be even more irate at being passed over for the final at-large spot.
Why Pepperdine? Why not UCSB? Pepperdine and UCSB each lost in the semifinals of the MPSF tournament. They both had ample chance to make it to the NCAAs. They had a regular season, and they had a season-ending tournament. Each team beat each other 3-2 at home during the regular season. Lewis was 2-2 against the MPSF...they lost to Stanford and UCI, but beat BYU and UOP. They beat all the midwestern challengers except Loyola.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
(04-29-2014, 05:20 PM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:As I said, interested in the Lewis/Penn State outcome. If Lewis loses, people from Pepperdine are going to be even more irate at being passed over for the final at-large spot.
Why Pepperdine? Why not UCSB? Pepperdine and UCSB each lost in the semifinals of the MPSF tournament. They both had ample chance to make it to the NCAAs. They had a regular season, and they had a season-ending tournament. Each team beat each other 3-2 at home during the regular season. Lewis was 2-2 against the MPSF...they lost to Stanford and UCI, but beat BYU and UOP. They beat all the midwestern challengers except Loyola.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
04-29-2014, 05:28 PM
(04-29-2014, 05:20 PM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:Erskine is a solid team, but would have a tough time competing in the top half of the MPSF. They did beat C.al Baptist (who tied with Pacific for last place in the MPSF) on the road. But they are new team in a new conference, so good luck to them improving.
C.al Baptist used to have about 1/2 dozen foreign players, essentially semi-pros, who were flat out awesome and a cut above their current players. At the time, they were in the NAIA rather than the NCAA, so it wasn't considered a problem. Big difference between the old CB and the new CB.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
(04-29-2014, 05:20 PM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:Erskine is a solid team, but would have a tough time competing in the top half of the MPSF. They did beat C.al Baptist (who tied with Pacific for last place in the MPSF) on the road. But they are new team in a new conference, so good luck to them improving.
C.al Baptist used to have about 1/2 dozen foreign players, essentially semi-pros, who were flat out awesome and a cut above their current players. At the time, they were in the NAIA rather than the NCAA, so it wasn't considered a problem. Big difference between the old CB and the new CB.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
04-29-2014, 05:56 PM
Mick--
The Pepperdine folks have been the most vocal, basically given their lofty end-of-season ranking, I think. I think they, UCSB and UCI all have a legitimate gripe about Lewis being selected, but Pepperdine did finish the regular season tied with BYU for the MPSF lead. Lewis had a great win over BYU (at home), lost to UC Irvine at home, lost to Stanford away, and beat Pacific away, all early in the season. Had a good win vs Harvard, a not-so-good loss to IPFW on the road, and the aforementioned losses to Penn State and Loyola Chicago.
It was interesting listening to an interview with the selection committee chair, when he said that Lewis was "#2 in their scoring system." Unfortunately, the interviewer didn't ask the obvious follow-ups of (1) can you outline the system? and (2) If they're #2, why aren't they seeded #2?
Was the difference between NAIA and NCAA rules part of what did in Lewis when they had to vacate a few years back?
VG
The Pepperdine folks have been the most vocal, basically given their lofty end-of-season ranking, I think. I think they, UCSB and UCI all have a legitimate gripe about Lewis being selected, but Pepperdine did finish the regular season tied with BYU for the MPSF lead. Lewis had a great win over BYU (at home), lost to UC Irvine at home, lost to Stanford away, and beat Pacific away, all early in the season. Had a good win vs Harvard, a not-so-good loss to IPFW on the road, and the aforementioned losses to Penn State and Loyola Chicago.
It was interesting listening to an interview with the selection committee chair, when he said that Lewis was "#2 in their scoring system." Unfortunately, the interviewer didn't ask the obvious follow-ups of (1) can you outline the system? and (2) If they're #2, why aren't they seeded #2?
Was the difference between NAIA and NCAA rules part of what did in Lewis when they had to vacate a few years back?
VG
Mick--
The Pepperdine folks have been the most vocal, basically given their lofty end-of-season ranking, I think. I think they, UCSB and UCI all have a legitimate gripe about Lewis being selected, but Pepperdine did finish the regular season tied with BYU for the MPSF lead. Lewis had a great win over BYU (at home), lost to UC Irvine at home, lost to Stanford away, and beat Pacific away, all early in the season. Had a good win vs Harvard, a not-so-good loss to IPFW on the road, and the aforementioned losses to Penn State and Loyola Chicago.
It was interesting listening to an interview with the selection committee chair, when he said that Lewis was "#2 in their scoring system." Unfortunately, the interviewer didn't ask the obvious follow-ups of (1) can you outline the system? and (2) If they're #2, why aren't they seeded #2?
Was the difference between NAIA and NCAA rules part of what did in Lewis when they had to vacate a few years back?
VG
The Pepperdine folks have been the most vocal, basically given their lofty end-of-season ranking, I think. I think they, UCSB and UCI all have a legitimate gripe about Lewis being selected, but Pepperdine did finish the regular season tied with BYU for the MPSF lead. Lewis had a great win over BYU (at home), lost to UC Irvine at home, lost to Stanford away, and beat Pacific away, all early in the season. Had a good win vs Harvard, a not-so-good loss to IPFW on the road, and the aforementioned losses to Penn State and Loyola Chicago.
It was interesting listening to an interview with the selection committee chair, when he said that Lewis was "#2 in their scoring system." Unfortunately, the interviewer didn't ask the obvious follow-ups of (1) can you outline the system? and (2) If they're #2, why aren't they seeded #2?
Was the difference between NAIA and NCAA rules part of what did in Lewis when they had to vacate a few years back?
VG
04-29-2014, 08:26 PM
(04-29-2014, 05:20 PM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:14, 16 and 16.
Erskine is a solid team, but would have a tough time competing in the top half of the MPSF.Â
I think you are being kind.
It seems that Erskine scored fewer points on Stanford than did any MPSF team this year. Presumably that means they'd have a tough time with more than the top half.
On the other hand, generically I have no problem with conference winners in NCAA tournaments.
(04-29-2014, 05:20 PM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:14, 16 and 16.
Erskine is a solid team, but would have a tough time competing in the top half of the MPSF.Â
I think you are being kind.
It seems that Erskine scored fewer points on Stanford than did any MPSF team this year. Presumably that means they'd have a tough time with more than the top half.
On the other hand, generically I have no problem with conference winners in NCAA tournaments.
(04-29-2014, 05:56 PM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:Mick--
The Pepperdine folks have been the most vocal, basically given their lofty end-of-season ranking, I think. I think they, UCSB and UCI all have a legitimate gripe about Lewis being selected, but Pepperdine did finish the regular season tied with BYU for the MPSF lead. Lewis had a great win over BYU (at home), lost to UC Irvine at home, lost to Stanford away, and beat Pacific away, all early in the season. Had a good win vs Harvard, a not-so-good loss to IPFW on the road, and the aforementioned losses to Penn State and Loyola Chicago.
It was interesting listening to an interview with the selection committee chair, when he said that Lewis was "#2 in their scoring system." Unfortunately, the interviewer didn't ask the obvious follow-ups of (1) can you outline the system? and (2) If they're #2, why aren't they seeded #2?
Was the difference between NAIA and NCAA rules part of what did in Lewis when they had to vacate a few years back?
VG
in reverse order:
1) Yes, that's what did in Lewis. The NAIA can and does offer full scholarships as opposed to the NCAA teams which can only offer 1/4 scholarships. CalBaptist's team was awesome, I think they were ranked #6 overall by middlehitter.com in their transition year between NAIA and NCAA. But I distinctly recall that their five foreign players were significantly better than their domestic players. In 2011, they were 26-6, with wins over Stanford and UCSB, but with losses to to other MPSF schools Hawaii, BYU, UCI (typically close losses).
2) They're not going to explain their scoring system because they don't want to admit that more qualified MPSF schools weren't invited to the NCAA top six. It reminds me of a vignette in Michael Lewis' book, "Liar's Poker." A very successful trader was in a new market, and he realized that the guy on the other side of the trade wasn't valuing the underlying instrument correctly and was getting killed in trades. So he calls him up, walks him through the calculations and ended up breaking (cancelling) all the trades he made with him except for the first one. He didn't do it because he was merciful, he did it because he wanted the overall market to succeed. That's why we work to make a sport successful, rather than a single school or a single league.
If the NCAA (and, not incidentally USA Volleyball) doesn't take steps to make sure that other leagues and other areas succeed, then MVB remains this charming little backwater limited exclusively to California, Hawaii and Provo. Then kids in other areas don't pay attention to it, don't play it, don't participate and American volleyball is limited to (let's be candid), Southern California with minor exceptions elsewhere. Like it was from the early 1970s until very recently, as posters on this board have helpfully pointed out.Â
But who wants an NCAA championship limited to schools from one league? You already have a championship that involves chiefly MPSF schools, wich is the MPSF tournament. Pepperdine, UCSB, UCI and for that matter, UOP, Hawaii, UCSD and CalBaptist all could have made the NCAAs through their MPSF tournament or season. UCSB and Pepperdine could have made it by beating Stanford and BYU, but they lost in straight sets, just like Princeton who could have made it by upsetting Penn State. I have no sympathy. They weren't excluded, they didn't play well enough to make it when it counted.
3) In your summary of Lewis' season, you mentioned their loss to IPFW, but you didn't mention their win over IPFW, and multiple wins over Ohio State and Ball State, among others. They finished 23-8 with a #12 ranking. Pepperdine was 19-7 overall. My guess is that the scoring system includes wins over top 15 teams, and Lewis had a fair number of those.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
(04-29-2014, 05:56 PM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:Mick--
The Pepperdine folks have been the most vocal, basically given their lofty end-of-season ranking, I think. I think they, UCSB and UCI all have a legitimate gripe about Lewis being selected, but Pepperdine did finish the regular season tied with BYU for the MPSF lead. Lewis had a great win over BYU (at home), lost to UC Irvine at home, lost to Stanford away, and beat Pacific away, all early in the season. Had a good win vs Harvard, a not-so-good loss to IPFW on the road, and the aforementioned losses to Penn State and Loyola Chicago.
It was interesting listening to an interview with the selection committee chair, when he said that Lewis was "#2 in their scoring system." Unfortunately, the interviewer didn't ask the obvious follow-ups of (1) can you outline the system? and (2) If they're #2, why aren't they seeded #2?
Was the difference between NAIA and NCAA rules part of what did in Lewis when they had to vacate a few years back?
VG
in reverse order:
1) Yes, that's what did in Lewis. The NAIA can and does offer full scholarships as opposed to the NCAA teams which can only offer 1/4 scholarships. CalBaptist's team was awesome, I think they were ranked #6 overall by middlehitter.com in their transition year between NAIA and NCAA. But I distinctly recall that their five foreign players were significantly better than their domestic players. In 2011, they were 26-6, with wins over Stanford and UCSB, but with losses to to other MPSF schools Hawaii, BYU, UCI (typically close losses).
2) They're not going to explain their scoring system because they don't want to admit that more qualified MPSF schools weren't invited to the NCAA top six. It reminds me of a vignette in Michael Lewis' book, "Liar's Poker." A very successful trader was in a new market, and he realized that the guy on the other side of the trade wasn't valuing the underlying instrument correctly and was getting killed in trades. So he calls him up, walks him through the calculations and ended up breaking (cancelling) all the trades he made with him except for the first one. He didn't do it because he was merciful, he did it because he wanted the overall market to succeed. That's why we work to make a sport successful, rather than a single school or a single league.
If the NCAA (and, not incidentally USA Volleyball) doesn't take steps to make sure that other leagues and other areas succeed, then MVB remains this charming little backwater limited exclusively to California, Hawaii and Provo. Then kids in other areas don't pay attention to it, don't play it, don't participate and American volleyball is limited to (let's be candid), Southern California with minor exceptions elsewhere. Like it was from the early 1970s until very recently, as posters on this board have helpfully pointed out.Â
But who wants an NCAA championship limited to schools from one league? You already have a championship that involves chiefly MPSF schools, wich is the MPSF tournament. Pepperdine, UCSB, UCI and for that matter, UOP, Hawaii, UCSD and CalBaptist all could have made the NCAAs through their MPSF tournament or season. UCSB and Pepperdine could have made it by beating Stanford and BYU, but they lost in straight sets, just like Princeton who could have made it by upsetting Penn State. I have no sympathy. They weren't excluded, they didn't play well enough to make it when it counted.
3) In your summary of Lewis' season, you mentioned their loss to IPFW, but you didn't mention their win over IPFW, and multiple wins over Ohio State and Ball State, among others. They finished 23-8 with a #12 ranking. Pepperdine was 19-7 overall. My guess is that the scoring system includes wins over top 15 teams, and Lewis had a fair number of those.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
04-30-2014, 07:36 AM
I was looking at the MPSF all-league selections and the All-America selections. Here's the All-America link:
http://www.avca.org/awards/all-america/m...visionI-II
Brian Cook made first team, James Shaw and Steve Irvin made second team, Conrad Kaminski made HM. No college had more than one player on the first team.
The awards brought back a whole lot of memories. I recognized all the seniors and redshirt juniors on the list with two exceptions. My son had been playing with and against those players on club teams since they were 14. It was a lot of fun to watch Taylor Sander and Brian Cook (among others) develop. I first saw him play beach volleyball when he was 15. Just an incredible player, the local club coaches had known about him for years. He didn't play club volleyball until he was 17, just beach and high school volleyball...but playing beach volleyball is the best skills practice, candidly. He played on my son's club team along with another first team AA, Taylor Averill, MB from Hawaii.
And Viking Guy, to our earlier conversation, the NAIA announced their All American players too...from Serbia, China, Brazil, Venezuela (2), and five American players
http://www.avca.org/awards/all-america/m...visionI-II
Brian Cook made first team, James Shaw and Steve Irvin made second team, Conrad Kaminski made HM. No college had more than one player on the first team.
The awards brought back a whole lot of memories. I recognized all the seniors and redshirt juniors on the list with two exceptions. My son had been playing with and against those players on club teams since they were 14. It was a lot of fun to watch Taylor Sander and Brian Cook (among others) develop. I first saw him play beach volleyball when he was 15. Just an incredible player, the local club coaches had known about him for years. He didn't play club volleyball until he was 17, just beach and high school volleyball...but playing beach volleyball is the best skills practice, candidly. He played on my son's club team along with another first team AA, Taylor Averill, MB from Hawaii.
And Viking Guy, to our earlier conversation, the NAIA announced their All American players too...from Serbia, China, Brazil, Venezuela (2), and five American players
Audaces fortuna iuvat
I was looking at the MPSF all-league selections and the All-America selections. Here's the All-America link:
http://www.avca.org/awards/all-america/m...visionI-II
Brian Cook made first team, James Shaw and Steve Irvin made second team, Conrad Kaminski made HM. No college had more than one player on the first team.
The awards brought back a whole lot of memories. I recognized all the seniors and redshirt juniors on the list with two exceptions. My son had been playing with and against those players on club teams since they were 14. It was a lot of fun to watch Taylor Sander and Brian Cook (among others) develop. I first saw him play beach volleyball when he was 15. Just an incredible player, the local club coaches had known about him for years. He didn't play club volleyball until he was 17, just beach and high school volleyball...but playing beach volleyball is the best skills practice, candidly. He played on my son's club team along with another first team AA, Taylor Averill, MB from Hawaii.
And Viking Guy, to our earlier conversation, the NAIA announced their All American players too...from Serbia, China, Brazil, Venezuela (2), and five American players
http://www.avca.org/awards/all-america/m...visionI-II
Brian Cook made first team, James Shaw and Steve Irvin made second team, Conrad Kaminski made HM. No college had more than one player on the first team.
The awards brought back a whole lot of memories. I recognized all the seniors and redshirt juniors on the list with two exceptions. My son had been playing with and against those players on club teams since they were 14. It was a lot of fun to watch Taylor Sander and Brian Cook (among others) develop. I first saw him play beach volleyball when he was 15. Just an incredible player, the local club coaches had known about him for years. He didn't play club volleyball until he was 17, just beach and high school volleyball...but playing beach volleyball is the best skills practice, candidly. He played on my son's club team along with another first team AA, Taylor Averill, MB from Hawaii.
And Viking Guy, to our earlier conversation, the NAIA announced their All American players too...from Serbia, China, Brazil, Venezuela (2), and five American players
Audaces fortuna iuvat
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »