2011-2012 Rankings - Page 10 - TennisForum.com
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #136 of 178 (permalink) Old Apr 11th, 2012, 01:21 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 280
                     
Re: 2011-2012 Rankings

That's pathetic!

Interesting. I did knot know that there was an automatic bid for being the only player/pair ranked by conference. I always thought it was by region.

Last edited by 10sE; Apr 11th, 2012 at 02:30 PM.
10sE is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #137 of 178 (permalink) Old Apr 11th, 2012, 03:24 PM
Senior Member
 
form's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 806
 
Re: 2011-2012 Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by gouci View Post
4/10 Singles Rankings

125. Suhaila Jad - South Carolina St. #1 singles
125. Maria Craciun - South Carolina St. #3 singles
125. Sabrina Mendez - South Carolina St. #4 singles

If the season ended today Suhaila Jad would steal an NCAA singles bid.

Their coach has a nice strategy of not playing any fall tournaments. Then his players go undefeated in their weak non-conference schedule, gets ranked and is awarded an NCAA singles auto bid for the MEAC.
I am not saying it can't happen but as the weeks go by, the ITA rankings include more and more wins per player in the calculation so as they sample pool broadens it is possible these three would back up when other players get more 'quality' wins factored in.
form is offline  
post #138 of 178 (permalink) Old Apr 11th, 2012, 04:01 PM
Senior Member
 
tucker1989's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 23,848
                     
Re: 2011-2012 Rankings

Glad to see Chelsey moving up to #6!
tucker1989 is offline  
 
post #139 of 178 (permalink) Old Apr 11th, 2012, 04:19 PM
Senior Member
 
form's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 806
 
Re: 2011-2012 Rankings

Team... several changes with conference 'leaders' moving into the at-large range which then adds back more at large spots.

This week's bubble would be a very high 45... Missouri.

(Sorry this does not paste well)

1 UCLA PAC
2 Florida SEC
3 Duke ACC
4 USC
5 North Carolina
6 Stanford
7 Alabama
8 Georgia
9 Miami
10 California
11 Northwestern Big 10
12 Baylor Big 12
13 Texas
14 Michigan
15 Virginia
16 Mississippi
17 Nebraska
18 Clemson
19 Notre Dame Big East
20 Texas A&M
21 Tennessee
22 Texas Tech
23 Illinois
24 Vanderbilt
25 Georgia Tech
26 Tulsa CUSA
27 South Carolina
28 Yale IVY
29 Arizona
30 Arizona State
31 Minnesota
32 Washington State
33 Florida State x
34 Purdue x
35 Pepperdine WCC x
36 Rice x
37 LSU x
38 TCU MWest x
39 Saint Mary's x
40 South Florida x
41 Stephen F. Austin Southland x
42 VCU Colonial x
43 Arkansas x
44 Utah x
45 Missouri x - LAST AT LARGE
46 Oklahoma State
47 Indiana
48 Brown
49 Oklahoma
50 Washington
51 UNLV
52 Penn State
53 Fresno State WAC
54 Long Beach State Big West
55 Hawaii
56 Memphis
57 Syracuse
58 Tulane
59 Sacramento State Big Sky (would be last # 3 seed)
60 Georgia State
61 Ohio State
62 Wichita State
63 Auburn
64 Wyoming
65 Oregon
66 UC Irvine
67 North Texas Sun Belt
68 Boston
69 DePaul
70 Virginia Tech
71 College of Charleston Southern
72 Harvard
73 Mississippi State
74 UNC Greensboro
75 North Carolina State

Last edited by form; Apr 11th, 2012 at 04:34 PM.
form is offline  
post #140 of 178 (permalink) Old Apr 14th, 2012, 03:59 AM
Le Conte's Sparrow
 
fantic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 11,249
                     
Re: 2011-2012 Rankings

this season, THE topic is definitely STAN ranking SO low

What did they expect? Should we change the rule to suit Stanford?

If Stanford and UF continues to ignore Indoors and play each other, should we change the rule

to give 100 pts to the winner between those two
and
50 pts to the loser


even though they don't play the tournament?

Serena doesn't play much so her ranking is low.
So, should WTA make a special rule for Serena?

Last edited by fantic; Apr 14th, 2012 at 04:07 AM.
fantic is offline  
post #141 of 178 (permalink) Old Apr 14th, 2012, 05:25 AM
Senior Member
 
form's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 806
 
Re: 2011-2012 Rankings

They knew what they were doing and does it really matter if you are # 1 or # 12... the top 16 host anyway and they only seed the 2's now... just read the 3's are even Alpha Seeded. So who cares.

Stanford hosts finals over and over while being by far the WORST hosts in the country... and god forbid it rains and everyone is commuting an hour to play at 1am.

Of course, Stanford does expect a special rule. I mean, they are STANFORD.
form is offline  
post #142 of 178 (permalink) Old Apr 14th, 2012, 02:14 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 280
                     
Re: 2011-2012 Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by form View Post
just read the 3's are even Alpha Seeded. So who cares.
Wow...please post link if you have one
10sE is offline  
post #143 of 178 (permalink) Old Apr 14th, 2012, 03:15 PM
Senior Member
 
2nd_serve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,248
                     
Re: 2011-2012 Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10sE View Post
That's pathetic!

Interesting. I did knot know that there was an automatic bid for being the only player/pair ranked by conference. I always thought it was by region.

There is a counter-fairness argument, If you are a great player that for educational or personal reasons is in a weak conference, with resultant few chances to play ranked players, this is a route.
2nd_serve is offline  
post #144 of 178 (permalink) Old Apr 14th, 2012, 03:47 PM
Senior Member
 
form's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 806
 
Re: 2011-2012 Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10sE View Post
Wow...please post link if you have one
Actually found it in the 2011 handbook as I cannot yet find the 2012 book.
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/champ_handbo..._mw_tennis.pdf

Page 22

Seeding
Team championship. The Division I Tennis Committee will seed teams using the
selection criteria, excluding the “wins versus teams already selected” criterion. The
selection criteria includes a review of team results obtained beginning January 1
through May 1, 2011.

The committee will seed teams 1-16 in order. Nos. 17-32 will be banded in order.
Nos. 33-48 will be banded alphabetically as a group of 16. Nos. 49-64 will be banded
alphabetically as a group of 16. Teams will not be re-seeded after the first and second rounds.
form is offline  
post #145 of 178 (permalink) Old Apr 14th, 2012, 03:51 PM
Senior Member
 
form's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 806
 
Re: 2011-2012 Rankings

The most over ranked program in country proves it.. how are they at 57?

Georgetown 5, # 57 Syracuse 2
form is offline  
post #146 of 178 (permalink) Old Apr 15th, 2012, 03:43 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 280
                     
Re: 2011-2012 Rankings

Thanks for the info Form.

So if I'm understanding that correctly, what it means is that it doesn't matter whether you finish 33 or 45 - you are just a generic 3 seed and will be sent wherever they feel is best to send you?

ps - the "pathetic" comment was in response to Gouci's post and the comment about ranked players in weak conferences was about Forms - two separate responses to two separate posts! I should have clarified.
10sE is offline  
post #147 of 178 (permalink) Old Apr 15th, 2012, 06:11 PM
Le Conte's Sparrow
 
fantic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 11,249
                     
Re: 2011-2012 Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by form View Post
They knew what they were doing and does it really matter if you are # 1 or # 12... the top 16 host anyway and they only seed the 2's now... just read the 3's are even Alpha Seeded. So who cares.

Stanford hosts finals over and over while being by far the WORST hosts in the country... and god forbid it rains and everyone is commuting an hour to play at 1am.

Of course, Stanford does expect a special rule. I mean, they are STANFORD.
That's too harsh Taube has at least one redeeming feature, ULTRA fast internet connection
fantic is offline  
post #148 of 178 (permalink) Old Apr 16th, 2012, 12:42 AM
Senior Member
 
2nd_serve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,248
                     
Re: 2011-2012 Rankings

Stanford is a great host. Outstanding. Only rained 15 minutes the entire tournament, court cleaned in 15 more minutes. 1 am was because of long matches, no rain that day. But if there is a So Cal that can host, it should bid for them.
2nd_serve is offline  
post #149 of 178 (permalink) Old Apr 16th, 2012, 06:23 AM
Senior Member
 
form's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 806
 
Re: 2011-2012 Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2nd_serve View Post
Stanford is a great host. Outstanding. Only rained 15 minutes the entire tournament, court cleaned in 15 more minutes. 1 am was because of long matches, no rain that day. But if there is a So Cal that can host, it should bid for them.
Their first hosting of the mens/womens combo was awful... and it rained ... and the players room even flooded.
Stanford had not arranged the promised indoor courts, they were an hour away, and I know folks that watched matches at 1am after crawling through rainy SF traffic.

Oh, and somehow Stanford hospitality was (nor is it ever) what they promised the other athletes.

BUT, when they won after being # 2 seeds, they ran inside and then all came out wearing NO RESPECT Nike tshirts... just to give a finger to the NCAA.

Stanford is .................................................. ....
form is offline  
post #150 of 178 (permalink) Old Apr 16th, 2012, 03:09 PM
Senior Member
 
2nd_serve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,248
                     
Re: 2011-2012 Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2nd_serve View Post
Stanford is a great host. Outstanding. Only rained 15 minutes the entire tournament, court cleaned in 15 more minutes. 1 am was because of long matches, no rain that day. But if there is a So Cal that can host, it should bid for them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by form View Post


Their first hosting of the mens/womens combo was awful... and it rained ... and the players room even flooded.
Stanford had not arranged the promised indoor courts, they were an hour away, and I know folks that watched matches at 1am after crawling through rainy SF traffic.

Oh, and somehow Stanford hospitality was (nor is it ever) what they promised the other athletes.

BUT, when they won after being # 2 seeds, they ran inside and then all came out wearing NO RESPECT Nike tshirts... just to give a finger to the NCAA.

Stanford is .................................................. ....
Again, wrong. It was because of the first time that Stanford hosted the combined men and women, that I started following college tennis. I remember great weather, at Palo Alto. If I remember correctly there were evening mens matches at SFTC, with Baylor, Notre Dame, and two other teams.

Weston was doing SFTC then, and it truly extended itself to make it a good experience for the player. SFTC is more corporate now, and to evaluate honestly, if matches are going to need to be moved to SFTC, it will be evening matches. It would be impossible to block out the entire courts from the membership during the day. SFTC tends to capacity on weekend morning, ..

You just have a gripe, that you don't want to let go of, or let facts get in the way of enjoying. The monthly rainfall averages for Palo Alto are very low. I hope that Long Beach starts to compete to make it into the round of 16, so that you could come yourself, and appreciate the benefits of a West Coast location. Also, to drive from Stanford to SFTC, you take 280, and would have very little crawling street traffic.
2nd_serve is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome