NCAA at-large selection

May 1st, 2012

Thought the discussion on another thread deserved a new one.

Several people have said Stanford ‘got robbed.’

I don’t, based on how the selection has worked for decades IF there was a strong No1 1 through the regular season. Hawaii benefitted with that in 1996.  Granted that SC 18-4 was only 1 game ahead of second but they had won 16 in a row before the MPSF tourney.
there was a 3-way tie for 2nd. Stanford, BYU and UCI.
committee looks at the last 10 matches.
heading into the MPSF tourney
USC had won 16 in a row, last loss was 0-3 at UCLA Feb. 3. they beat Stanford twice in the regular season, lost twice early AT BYU, split with UCI.
BYU: 8-2, then 3-2 over the Beach, 2-3 vs. Stanford. regular seaaon 2-0 AT UCI, 2-0 vs. USC, 0-2 Stanford. Those six matches played consecutively over four weeks very early in the season.
UCI: 8-2, then 3-2 vs. USC, 3-2 vs. Stanford.
Stanford 7-3, including a 3-1 loss to Hawaii, which finished last. then 3-1 vs. Pep, 3-1 vs. BYU, 2-3 to UCI.
The solution, IMHO, is to go to an 8-team playoff for the NCAAs, 2 teams from the 3 conferences, 2 at large,
OR wishful thinking, PacWest sponsors men’s volleyball. current PacWest teams Cal Baptist and Grand Canyon already do. If UHHilo, HPU, BYUH and Chaminade would add the sport — in conjunction with adding women’s sand volleyball , which they’ve been discussing— you’d have four leagues. 4 champions, and then go to an 8 team with 4 at-large. just a thought.
I wish the DII schools here would add it. All of them, except for Chaminade, used to men’s volleyball. It would open up opportunities for the local kids to play and not have to leave home. As we’ve seen numerous times, that some local kids have a hard time adjusting to the mainland and are back home after a year.
Be Sociable, Share!