|
|
Post by sullivanfieldfan on Nov 16, 2010 22:35:31 GMT -5
I'm not whining about the Lions not making the tournament, well not yet anyway.
But tell me how New Mexico gets in?
The NCAA posted the final rpi on 11/14 and had them at 55. Well out of the zone of rational consideration. At least Denver was at 42. Sacramento won the MWSF tourney to get the automatic bid. How do they get two more spots?
The rpi, the NCAAs version anyway is supposed to be the end of discussion of who gets in. (The validity of their system is a completely different story and argument )
So tell me and the guys say at Washington who didn't get in why they weren't selected. The Husky rpi was way up there. The NCAA didn't want to send a third team from a six team conference? Please! Look how many Big this and big that teams got picked, let alone the favorite sons from the ACC.
Maybe they didn't think Washington could afford the tickets or would want to travel so far to play Creighton? C'mon, the boys at Washington would have ridden their skateboards there to get a bid and slept on the ground outside. That explanation doesn't hold much water. If that's their rational the committee is all wet.
I haven't seen a good explanation anywhere. I'm sure Washington and a few other teams are searching for answers.
|
|
|
|
Post by sullivanfieldfan on Nov 18, 2010 17:25:14 GMT -5
What about Irvine? I can't believe it!
You think maybe something is rotten, excuse me wrong with the NCAA program they're using for figuring out the RPI. Just maybe a calculation or two to amplify an east coast bias this year, maybe?
Irvine had a 14-3-3 record, sounds pretty good, and they won the Big West. But the auto bid went to UCSB, the conference tourney winners.
Top Drawer had them picked 39 out of 48 to get a bid, the second BW team. CSN had them #11! Massey had them #20 and the coaches had them #13.
The NCAA RPI had them at 78. Something is rotten and it's not in Denmark!
|
|
|
|
Post by fanblade on Nov 18, 2010 19:51:40 GMT -5
Sounds really bad, very unfortunate for the anteaters. Little love for the west coast ?
|
|
|
|
Post by sullivanfieldfan on Nov 19, 2010 12:05:49 GMT -5
The men are in the middle of the first round in a tournament of 48.
Why not 64, the women have 64, basketball has 64, no more than 64.
They seed 16 teams and give them a first game bye to get down to 32 teams so it will mathematically reduce to a champion.
Grossly unfair to the 16 winners in the first round. There may be a difference between #1 and 48 but certainly not between 16 and 17. Why does # sixteen arbitrarily get a huge advantage over # seventeen and below and not have to play a game when the other team rests?
The (perceived) top teams want protection, added protection. Because more so now than ever they know there are a lot of good teams out there that could beat them on a given day, hot goal tender or bounce of the ball.
And with only 48 teams in anyway a lot of threats are immediately eliminated.
There will always be arguments about who should have gotten in whether the tourney has 32,48,64,or 128. The bigger inequity in mens soccer is the first round bye. The women got it right guys, time to change.
|
|
|
|
Post by sullivanfieldfan on Nov 19, 2010 20:30:24 GMT -5
Sacramento did it again to the WCC. This time the victim was Santa Clara.
|
|
|
|
Post by sullivanfieldfan on Nov 19, 2010 21:11:46 GMT -5
First exhibit to review in illuminating the parity in mens soccer are the results from the first round.
Of the sixteen first round matches, six lower Top Drawer rated teams defeated higher rated teams.
Old Dominion 33 knocked off defending champion Virginia 11.
UMBC 35 over Princeton 12
Dartmouth 32 over Monmouth 14
Brown 40 over Boston College 23
Sacramento 45 over Santa Clara 25
Unranked Charleston over East Tennessee 34
We'll see Sunday if more lower seeded teams survive. Or will the disadvantage of playing on Thursday will provide cover for the seeded sixteen.
|
|
|
|
Post by sullivanfieldfan on Nov 19, 2010 21:14:17 GMT -5
By the way New Mexico rpi 55 was crushed by Creighton 4-1.
|
|
|
|
Post by sullivanfieldfan on Nov 19, 2010 22:20:10 GMT -5
Sunday the entire West has a chance for only two teams to advance to the last 16.
The Big ten alone has a chance for at least four teams to advance. They were seeded and haven't played yet!
Michigan State at least had to win a first round game, so that makes five for the Big ten.
|
|
|
|
Post by sullivanfieldfan on Nov 21, 2010 19:58:15 GMT -5
Looks like all 5 Big ten schools are in the final 16.
UCSBs hopes of playing in the final 4 at home are over after dropping an overtime game to Cal 1-0.
|
|
|
|
Post by sullivanfieldfan on Nov 21, 2010 20:22:20 GMT -5
The appearance of manipulation even if none occurred should raise questions or at least a few eyebrows.
Five schools from one conference are in the final sixteen when they have only won six games in the tournament.
Only two teams from the West will remain after the outcome of tonights UCLA/Sacramento match. Six West teams were bracketed together thus ensuring only two would advance. And I'm not counting New Mexico, that scam is a bit different.
Travel costs is a smoke screen. Some AD's and Conference Commishes should be upset.
|
|
|
|
Post by sullivanfieldfan on Nov 23, 2010 16:34:39 GMT -5
I'll be rooting for anyone matched up against the Big ten after turkey day.
How can you have a 2-3-1 record in conference and get a first round bye, or how can you even say you're in the Big Ten. Maybe they should call it the half a ten conference.
Our "friends" at UCSB were rather upset after their loss to Cal in overtime. So upset that three of them got kicked out of the game after it was over. Like maybe they thought the ref would appreciate their "comments", points of view or suggestions?
Depending on what happened the three will miss at least one game next year, maybe more.
We'll root for Cal against Brown. West coast right? But what about UCLA against Dartmouth? Dartmouth of course!
|
|
|
|
Post by sullivanfieldfan on Nov 29, 2010 11:54:21 GMT -5
Well look what happened yesterday. Four out of the five little ten failed to advance. Only Michigan remains.
UCLA and Cal both advance to face two of the toughest opponents left in the tournament, Louisville and Akron. If both win they will face each other in the semis.
|
|
|
|
Post by sullivanfieldfan on Nov 29, 2010 12:24:52 GMT -5
Top Drawer has Michigan ranked at the bottom of the last eight, it would be an upset if they got by Maryland. We'll have to wait and see what happens.
|
|
|
|
Post by fanblade on Nov 29, 2010 13:54:22 GMT -5
Well look what happened yesterday. Four out of the five little ten failed to advance. Only Michigan remains. UCLA and Cal both advance to face two of the toughest opponents left in the tournament, Louisville and Akron. If both win they will face each other in the semis. Interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by sullivanfieldfan on Dec 1, 2010 20:00:08 GMT -5
The men are down to eight teams. Where are the quarter finals to be played? I haven't seen it posted yet but the home field will play a pivotal roll.
Will UCLA be at home or have to travel? I would think travel, Louisville has been ranked higher all year but who knows, the same for Cal and Akron.
|
|
