Utes (13-18, 4-140 win first two 25-19, 25-17
Cal (14-14, 8-10) wins next two. 25-16, 25-15
Cal wins set 5 15-13
Like I said, it would have been an embarrassment for the NCAA (Selection) Committee if Cal — one of the 4 predetermined regional hosts — had lost. Now when the Bears lose to Stanford in the last match of the regular season for both, Cal — with a .500 overall record — can receive a proper invite to the Big Dance without a lot of conspiracy theories busting out.
For certain (says me), the Pac-12 will have 6 teams in the NCAA Tournament: RPI #1 Stanford, #8 UCLA, #10 USC, #11 Oregon, #12 Washington, and #39 California. But will it have 7 — #41 Arizona — or 8 — #45 Arizona St — is a question that can’t be answered yet as Pac-12 squads — except Cal and Utah, which now have 1 match left — have 2 more conference matches to play Tuesday, Wednesday and/or Friday.
You didn’t answer when I asked why would it be an embarrassment? Wonder why you think so.
For one thing the NCAA selection committee has nothing to do with who gets the regionals. That is done by the championship committee.
The regionals were set years ago. Not like the coaches knew what they had back in 09 when the bids were put in.
Sometimes we assume too much, it’s true.
We tend to ALWAYS go with what’s traditional. It’s comfortable in our supposed mastery of predictions; it allows, for those of us who need to be in the know, those feelings of grandeure.
California (1) doesn’t host.
UH (2) still ends up travelling into a westcoast subregional.
Not my comments.
It would be more than nice to get an article published, as it likely ends up being Cindy Luis anyway…BYUH is hosting a volleyball regional.
#26 vs. #22
San Francisco State vs. #20
#33 vs. #15
#29 vs. #5
We ran a brief in yesterday’s paper (Monday) and i will be doing a feature on Tuli Peters for next week
tournament not until Nov. 29.
And what would be REALLY nice is if you used a real email address so I could answer you personally.