Volley Shots

AVCA watch list 1st-2nd rounds and delete button

October 29th, 2013

I have asked nicely to stop the name-calling without any results. Previous thread likely won't make a lot of sense because of the number of 'deleted' comments. Guess I need to start charging for baby-sitting.

Anyway ere is the link to the AVCA watch list.


these are the 33 schools who meet at least one of the following criteria. as it also states

These are POTENTIAL hosts.

Teams that are in the AVCA Coaches Top 25 poll as of October 28, 2013.


Teams that are in the top 25 of the Pablo Rankings as of October 28, 2013.


Teams that are in the top 25 of the RPI Rankings as of October 28, 2013.

95 Responses to “AVCA watch list 1st-2nd rounds and delete button”

  1. LC:

    Some of the bigger news media outlets actually employ people to post in their comment sections to further their cause or support the writer of the article.

    Recently we learned that Fox News,CNN,New York Times are just a few of many.Even bloggers post under fictitious names, right Cindy ?

  2. Cindy Luis:

    52. I don't post under any other name than my own and am insulted by your insinuation.

    That we don't require registration does mean that people can use more than one name.

    I have never heard of anyone employing people to post on the comment section to further a cause.
    That is just not ethical journalism.

  3. LC:

    I really hope that this team is done losing conference matches.

  4. LC:

    Ethical journalism is a thing of the past. Americas #1 enemy is the media.

  5. nana kokolele:

    52. I am my own writer. As evident by my misspelled words. I am however a long time fan/player of volleyball and the Wahines. The transformation and popularity of this sport keeps me excited. lol. Hence the word FAN(natic).

  6. You Gotta B Kiddin' Me:

    Despite her 'celeberity', which easily makes things that much more difficult, I believe Cindy has ethics and most importantly her journalism proves it. Mahalo, Cin!!

    MSNBC goes way beyond employed bloggers. How much "group think" can any one person continue to escribe (in belief)/muster (for strife)???
    Quite a few I'm guessing on this blog actually believe taht crap which the station airs...

  7. You Gotta B Kiddin' Me:

    extra 'e', oops!

  8. nana kokolele:

    Sometimes you wish for your team to be invincible as na Wahine have been in its conference. Processing changes can be hard to understand, so we look for solutions. In the end, we are not the coach of this team. It's Dave decision.

  9. LC:

    Although I'm not accusing anyone at the SA of this practice what is stopping any reporter from commenting in their own blog ?

    From a book called Murdoch's World

    Fox's PR staffers would "post pro-Fox rants" in the comments sections of "negative and even neutral" blog posts written about the network.

    According to Folkenflik, the staffers used various tactics to cover their tracks, including setting up wireless broadband connections that "could not be traced back" to the network.

    A former staffer told Folkenflik that they had personally used "one hundred" fake accounts to plant Fox-friendly commentary:

  10. Cindy Luis:

    55. thank you.
    59. just responding to your, "Right, Cindy?"
    True, there is nothing stopping anyone from that practice. other than moral and ethical obligation to their readers and their profession.

    as for Fox and Murdoch and TV .... not the same as what we do at our newspaper.
    not sure how the 'comment section' boosts a story. unless a national media were to pick up one of our stories and actually give us credit. Which I have seen less and less of, even the Associated Press has begun hesitating to credit our paper. I know several local radio stations which read our stories verbatim on the air without attribution as do some of TV stations. but that's another issue.

  11. Cindy Luis:

    54. I disagree. Ethical journalism and journalists are very much alive and well. However it is those who aren't that give the rest of us a bad name.
    I think the immediacy of the internet has created the problem. as well as the acceptance of anonymity for credible comments.
    There is that one school of thought: Never let facts stand in the way of a good story (because they can always run a correction).
    Sadly the days of "Rather be right than first' are gone.
    The goal should be Be First AND Be Right.

    anyway, need to finish other story. be back later

  12. Cubicle1126:

    Cindy -- Last year, there may have been other reasons why hawaii was not seeded. hawaii had a 17 rpi last year at the close of the regular season, but also #14-north carolina and #15-texas a&m were also passed over for seeds by #18-iowa st and #19-kentucky.

    more than the loss to california, the nitty gritty of hawaii's schedule may have been what left hawaii without a seed last year. hawaii went 1-1 against top 25 rpi teams, and 3-2 against top 50 rpi teams. there was arguably not a lot for the committee to go on.

    of the two lower rpi teams that got seeded, iowa st had a better nitty gritty (going 4-4 against top 25 rpi teams and 8-6 against top 50 rpi teams). the head-scratcher was kentucky, who many on the VT board questioned when the seeds were released. kentucky had gone 3-5 against top 25 rpi teams, and 5-8 against top 50 rpi teams.

    based on that, i can see how iowa st would get seeded over hawaii ... but not kentucky. iowa st also had a win over texas in the last 2 weeks of the regular season.

    even if kentucky wasn't seeded, it's not entirely assured that hawaii would have beaten out 14-north carolina or 15-texas a&m for a seed. maybe hawaii would have beaten out texas a&m, who did not have a good nitty gritty part of their record (0-4 against top 25 rpi teams, and 3-5 against top 50).

    but north carolina last year had a nitty gritty that on paper was kinda similar to hawaii (1-2 against top 25 rpi, and 4-4 against the top 50). and north carolina had the "benefit," if you will, of the higher rpi at the end of the season.

    i don't know ultimately if this is how the committee decided things. i too wish that the process was more transparent. but we do know that the committee looks at the nitty gritty of the schedule for the teams who are on the bubble for a seed, which hawaii certainly was last year.

  13. Cindy Luis:

    thank you for your comments.
    however the bias towards BCS conferences that has filtered over to volleyball is unwarranted, especially toward the SEC teams, none of which have ever won a volleyball title.
    The NCAA did its seeding and bracket in part to help its 'geographic pods' Ergo Kentucky.
    I will admit my bias, but only in that I would like it to be fair all the way around and not have some brackets loaded and others not due to agenda and convenience.

  14. View from afar:

    49. You Gotta B Kiddin' Me, if you are suggesting that I'm someone else who posts under other names, I can only say I am not. Everyone is free to believe anything they want. I am new to this blog because I had the opportunity after having attended UH 40+ years ago to attend my FIRST Wahine VB match at UC Davis. So having seen a match in person, I had something useful to contribute which I posted on the "rewind" topic.

  15. Cubicle1126:

    Cindy -- the two higher ranked RPI teams (texas a&m and north carolina) were from the SEC and ACC, respectively. both are BCS conferences. the two lower ranked RPI teams that got seeded last year (iowa st and kentucky) are from the Big-12 and SEC. so really the committee was just swapping two BCS teams for two other BCS teams, including one SEC team for another.

    if kentucky was seeded in order to have enough "geographic pods" for sub-regionals (and on this point, i agree, that looks like what was done last year), then i would think that speaks -- not to a BCS bias -- but either a regional bias or a defect in the criteria given to the committee to select seeds and hosts.

    if you're talking about a bias in the RPI, then that too is more a regional bias than a BCS-related one. and i know you and i have had this back-and-forth before. there's some interesting discussions on VT right now looking at the regional bias of the RPI, with some hard numbers to back it up.

  16. You Gotta B Kiddin' Me:

    Anybody know the dude Reardon?
    Vfa, thanks. You're pretty insightful for someone 40+ years tardy..and truancy?? 😉

    Shoji's delima is that is that he's missing Croson-like-skill type, period. Too many of the OHs are stagnant in their own talents and with sooo many of them, indistinguishable, it's a crap shoot for Dave to place any of them in the lineup (& at ANY given moment).

    I wonder what offensive system would allow for the most T-E-A-M members to be involved/contributing while providing for optimal "personal satisfactions"?

  17. View from afar:

    66. Thanks. Yes I am a very latecomer to sports as I was/am a pretty mediocre athelete. Fortunately my kids are much better athletes than I ever was and they played competitive team sports for both club and high school. I got involved from the parent booster club end and was peripherally involved with fund raising (uniforms, equipment, etc), transportation, but mostly just trying to be a supportive fan.

    Among every coach's dilema is always how to best utilize the skills available to him. I've not watch enough Wahine VB besides the UC Davis match I attended to be able to intelligently comment on the personel mix or tactical move so you won't hear any of that from me.

  18. Rainbow fan:

    So does this mean Hawaii still has a chance to host?

  19. Brandon:

    How come my other comment was not posted?

  20. Brandon:

    I have a quesiton. Say hawaii lost to texas but beat northridge. Would their rpi be the same? Since there is no bad loss or good win?

  21. You Gotta B Kiddin' Me:

    67. Again, thanks. This is SOLELY on me but my dilemma *honestly* is that this computer I type on is w/o Word--cutting/pasting.

    I need OpenOffice asap on this PC.

    Btw, some one on VT gave a workable, present lineup for this 2013 Na Wahine. It could be found in the CSUN vs. Hawai'i (10-24-13) thread.

  22. Cindy Luis:

    64. don't think you were being accuse of anything.
    I did, however, feel that I was being accused of posting under another name.

    I do wish, though, that others would avail themselves of spellcheck or dictionary.com
    It's dilemma not delima. unless it's intended to be a play on Frank DeLima.
    sometimes we live here too long. It's like going to IKEA and I have to think how to pronounce it. eye-KEE-uh or ee-KAY-uh.

  23. View from afar:

    My apologies to "You Gotta B Kiddin' Me". I wasn't understanding what was meant by mentioning me in #49.

  24. Grammy:

    Cindy, I believe that both you and Ann are wonderfully descriptive, highly ethical and above reproach morally based on my many years of reading your articles. I really don't feel comfortable with those who comment so basely and cast aspersions and throw mud on people who are doing the best they can at their jobs to give us insights and background on this team that we mostly follow, support and want to see win. But I guess when there's no more vitriol left for the Warriors, some of it spills over and gets aimed at any team that wears the H. I don't see it as good and if you have to demand full disclosure, I'm sure the haters would find ways to beat that, anyway. Notice they're the first to comment when posts aren't instantaneous or deleted. They seem more concerned about what they are saying then what anyone else says and respond immediately when they feel challenged. I say get a life and stop taking themselves so seriously. And as always for me it's, Go Wahine!

  25. Tiki808:

    Sorry to hear about trash talking. But then again, the topic here is on Women's volleyball or men's volleyball. There are a lot of blogs and forums out there with 15,000 post and all tailored towards PPMcquire and this one may have even a stranger twist.

  26. Cindy Luis:

    68. yes, Hawaii still has a chance to host. they meet all 3 of the criteria,
    which is Top 25 in the RPI, Pablo and AVCA poll.

  27. Cindy Luis:

    69. don't know what comment you mean Brandon. want to try to repost?

  28. Loki:

    So some people were saying hawaii wouldn't even make the tournament. Is that even a probability? I don't think it is but some say so

  29. Brandon:

    77. It posted Cindy thanks! It was the question if they lost to Texas but best northeidge

  30. LC:

    The great thing about twitter is no one removes your post. Twitter is a great place to trash people you don't like.

  31. Grammy:

    Have a safe and fun Halloween Cindy! and everyone. See you at the SSC Friday. Go Wahine!

  32. vballfreak808:

    Emily Hartong is a finalist for the Senior CLASS Award so go vote now!


  33. Cindy Luis:

    see new thread on Hartong

  34. Cindy Luis:

    78. Sure it's a possibility that UH won't make the tournament if they keep losing.

  35. Brandon:

    We'll I meant if they win out or lose one more. Would they still make the tournament

  36. Cindy Luis:

    lose one more ... don't know. all depends on how the rest of the Big West does. they definitively need to be above .500 in the BWC, IMHO.

  37. Cubicle1126:

    loki - if hawaii loses one more match, they will still make the tournament. their rpi would take another drop from the loss, but it will not drop so much that they won't get an at-large bid to the tournament. it would take a lot more losses for hawaii to not make the tournament.

  38. Maverick:

    70,79. Regarding the first two components of the RPI, a loss to Texas combined with a win over Northridge will have the same value as a win over Texas combined with a loss over Northridge. Can't say about the third component exactly without a computer model/spreadsheet, however any differences are likely to be very small.

  39. Brandon:

    88. Thanks! I was always assuming that if they beat good teams the RPI goes up. This is why i was shocked last year because hawaii beat stanford. Thanks for the clarification! I now see why hawaii sometimes isnt seeded. They only play top ranked teams pre season.But cant being in the pac 12 sometimes be bad because even ranked teams lose 5 times in the conference?

  40. Brandon:

    Because its not nessesarly how good the team is. Because lets say texas went 15-5 over the season but were ranked one. And lets say colorado who went perfect but was ranked 15. Even if a team did beat texas wouldnt it hurt their ranking more than if they beat colorado.

  41. OrbitalRipZ:

    Fans of the Boston Red Sox know that almost all the players have beards, which they grew as a sign of the team's camaraderie and bond.

    Not that I am suggesting the Wahine grow beards (lol) but they need something to bring them together and have fun again. Any suggestions we can pass on to Team Shoji?

  42. jake:


  43. OrbitalRipZ:

    Re: 43 Just read the response. In my original response, a subregional hosting bid for Illinois was not even in the cards.

    Now along comes the AVCA, which as you write has determined "these 33 teams meet at least one of the criteria" for one of the 16 subregional hosting bids. If a team has met the subregional-host criteria, its at-large bid to the NCAA Championship tournament is not even in question.

    Here is where we disagree. I am saying that Illinois has not even met the at-large criteria, and is therefore currently not even among those that can expect to receive an at-large bid should it fail to reach the minimum "above .500" W-L overall record. The AVCA begs to differ, saying that as one of the 33 potential hosts of a subregional, its at-large bid is a presumptive lock, thus leading me to believe that guidelines are being rewritten.

    Just a lot of speculation, and not even worth considering until the regular season ends.

  44. Cindy Luis:

    93. you can disagree if you like but Illinois is No. 22 in the RPI, which is one of the criteria.
    they don't meet any of the other.

  45. Brandon:

    Sorry for my double posting! It won't show my comments at times! I apologize