Well, now that the dust has settled at Swarthmore, we can share our Pool C predictions. The writers at D3soccer.com don’t all agree on all of this, but we are on the same page generally (so to speak). It is always a challenge to replicate the conditions of the committee and their parameters, but we think the following teams most deserve a shot at San Antonio.
Our scenarios assume that UW-Oshkosh and UW-Whitewater will grab the two available Pool B berths.
These are locks:
Bowdoin (NESCAC)
Emory (UAA)
Wash U (UAA)
Williams (NESCAC)
These are highly likely:
Muhlenberg (Centennial)
Amherst (NESCAC)
Rochester (UAA)
William Paterson (NJAC)
So that is 8 out of 17. It gets trickier from here:
Likely:
Johns Hopkins (Centennial) – the Centennial should get the benefit of the doubt after last year’s snub of Dickinson and Muhlenberg. No such dilemma this year as Hopkins is the best next option after finalists Muhlenberg and Swarthmore.
North Carolina Wesleyan (USA South) – At No. 5 in the South Atlantic they were ahead of Montclair State coming into the week, and a conference final loss to Christopher Newport shouldn’t change that.
Macalester (MIAC) – 4-1-0 record versus ranked teams, but perhaps the weakest of the “likely” choices.
Now we have 11. 6 more to count.
Bubble teams – our bias is that these teams are in, but also on the edge:
Merchant Marine (Landmark) – Not sure they or Drew are post-season material, but given Drew was No. 2 in the Mid-Atlantic coming into the week, we think one of them gets in. Merchant Marine won the head-to-head Landmark semifinal which we think pulled them even with Drew and could be the tie-breaker even though Drew won the regular season match.
Oneonta (SUNYAC) – Neck and neck with Hamilton, but Hamilton’s semifinal Liberty league loss to St. Lawrence dropped their record versus ranked teams to 1-2-0 while Oneonta is 2-2-2 with their tie in the SUNYAC semifinal.
Mary Hardin-Baylor (ASC) – Had six matches versus regionally ranked teams, going 3-3-0 while UC Santa Cruz went 1-1-1 in three such matches. MHB edges Santa Cruz despite the ASC semifinal loss this weekend.
Calvin (MIAA) – They edge Kenyon and Hamilton for one of the final spots on the basis of superior record versus ranked teams (3-2-0).
Heidelberg (OAC) – Despite their OAC final OT loss to ranked Ohio Northern, we think they nose ahead of Kenyon who lost to unranked Denison in the NCAC semifinals. But could go either way as they have vey similar numbers and were No. 2 to No. 3 in the Great Lakes region.
Eastern Connecticut (LEC) – Not sure it’s deserved but we think the New England region, which is never underrepresented, will get a fourth berth.
So there are our 17. Here are those teams on the edge that we think will be left out of the bracket.
Bubble Teams left out:
Hamilton (Liberty) – just edged by Oneonta – see comments above.
UC-Santa Cruz (Independent) – Not sure Santa Cruz’s win over a NAIA program combined with Mary Hardin-Baylor’s ASC semifinal loss to eventual champion UT-Tyler is enough for the Slugs, starting at No. 4 in the West, to edge MHB who was No. 2 in the region.
Drew (Landmark) – pushed out by conference rival Merchant marine – see comments above.
Kenyon (NCAC) – pushed out by Calvin – see comments above.
Just don’t have enough to to be considered:
Brockport (SUNYAC) – just too low a strength of schedule to really compete for a berth with a so-so 1-1-1 record versus ranked teams.
Wheaton (CCIW) – way too many blemishes on their record, but ranked No. 4 in the Central due to the weakness of the region and their high strength-of-schedule; they were 2-5-2 versus ranked teams.
Carnegie Mellon (UAA) – perhaps good enough, but too deep in the UAA to get in.
Montclair State (NJAC) – eight blemishes is a lot even with a high strength-of-schedule.
Salisbury (CAC) – we can’t understand them having been ranked only No. 8 in the South Atlantic (probably down to being only 1-2-2 versus ranked teams), but that was always going to be hard to overcome this week without winning the CAC title and AQ in the process. Two ties going to PKs wasn’t enough.
So what do you think? Give us your thoughts, and we’ll see how good we really are at 2 p.m. ET on Monday.
Babson · Bowdoin · Division 3 soccer · Messiah · NCAA national champions · NCAA soccer
Author comment by bwo2 · November 7, 2010 at 9:42 pm
It would be unfortunate if only one Liberty League team (AQ – St. Lawrence – ranked 8th nationally) gets invited to the dance given the overall strength of the conference. Hamilton should be invited (ranked # 5 in East Region).
Perspective. Messiah had one loss this year – to a Liberty League team (Hobart). Hobart won only ONE Liberty League game all season. Its a tough conference.
Two of Hamilton’s losses were at the hands of St. Lawrence (the last being with one minute left in double overtime). No shame is losing under those circumstances to the #8 team in the country.
So to compare Hamilton’s and Oneonta’s records against ranked teams is misleading. Both of Hamilton’s key losses were to St. Lawrence by one goal each time. St. Lawrence allowed two goals in a regular season game only once all season. Hamilton knocked in two goals against St. Lawrence in its double overtime loss last week.
To select three teams from the Centennial Conference and only one from the Liberty League would not be paying sufficient respect to the caliber of play in the Liberty League.
Author comment by lesbleus3 · November 7, 2010 at 11:23 pm
Agreed bwo2. Hamilton’s schedule is tough just based on the fact that their conference is so competitive. Any thoughts on DePauw? Seems as though a team with their record, regardless of their strength of schedule, and schedule against non-regional opponents, should receive a bid. I mean, I know the NCAA has their criteria, but a team of 14-2-2 should find themselves competing in the tournament. As far as Case Western, I know their conference is incredibly tough, but their record against other regional teams isn’t one worth bragging about. A 4-0 loss when it mattered showed their true colors, and they may not be the best fit for a pool c bid, at least not over DePauw or Ohio Northern.
Author comment by Jim Matson · November 7, 2010 at 11:27 pm
Absolutely – on the conference comments. But with regard to the committee choosing teams from one conference over another, they really don’t. They are required to use the data that they are given and also consider geography/costs. That said, I would have to think that they would consider the consequences of an obvious overweight to any one conference.
In the end, the committee wants what all of us fans want – a great tournament with the best teams possible. But in Division III, there are other considerations that don’t always allow the best teams to compete.
Author comment by Jim Matson · November 8, 2010 at 12:07 am
Good point on the comment about DePauw. But they sat at No. 7 in the region last week, then lost to TU and beat Southwestern. Unless the committee moves them up three or four spots, I don’t see them getting a shot at Pool C. Those NCAA regional rankings are really the more appropriate predictor in this case.
Author comment by d3sportsnut · November 8, 2010 at 1:23 am
Not Only is Chapman University NOT mentioned, but as an independent they beat #9 UW-Whitewater (D3 soccer), UC Santa Cruz (both pool B prospects), Centre (Receiving top 25 votes), and #16 Redlands (NSCAA). Their in-region record is 8-2-1 (one loss was when they got two red card in first 30 minutes). Either way, Chapman would have been the best team in the SCIAC and beat the Pool B teams ‘ahead’ of them (UCSC has a worse in region record now too). Also, they are somehow not ranked in their region, even though they beat two of the teams ranked.
I would like to know what gives? Any thoughts?
If anything…Oshkosh and Chapman should get pool B’s and Whitewater should be given a shot at a Pool C.
Author comment by bct11 · November 8, 2010 at 1:28 am
I disagree that both Wisconsin teams will grab the pool B bids. Whitewater tied Oshkosh and then lost to Chapman to end the season. Based on head to head record Chapman is in front of Whitewater. Furthermore, Chapman will have beat Redlands when they were nationally ranked at 12 Whitewater at 9 and UCSC ranked regionally.
Author comment by d3sportsnut · November 8, 2010 at 1:30 am
Also, it seems there is a huge East Coast bias in soccer….West coast teams have looked good vs. these ‘ranked’ east coast teams, and seem to get the shaft every year come playoff time. I understand there are a lot more teams but are there any thoughts on this as well?
Author comment by Flying Weasel · November 8, 2010 at 12:45 pm
@ bwo2:
You are stretching a bit to use a single opening weekend game to prove the strength of the Liberty League. The Messiah that Hobart beat was not the same one that is now finding their stride, AND the Hobart that beat Messiah and crushed F&M is not the same Hobart that could hardly get a conference win. Injuries (losing 2 of top 3 scorers from last year) are as responsible for Hobart’s struggles as the strength of the conference. I do think it is a good solid conference, but RPI clearly wasn’t as good this year and Hobart couldn’t deal with the injuries. So it’s not clear if St. Lawrence is so much improved or rather that the rest of the pack took a step back this year. Except for what Hobart did out of the gate, it’s not like any of the conference’s schools have out-of-conference results that made a statement for the conference.
I’m not convinced by any of the SUNYAC schools myself, but if you find the comparison of records versus ranked teams misleading, the same could be said of citing that Hamilton twice lost by just one goal to St. Lawrence. There’s more to that story as well. In the regualr season match St. Lawrence had an advantage in shots 20-10 and SOG 9-5 and scored the game’s lone goal after going a man down. In the confernece final with Hamilton knowing they’d be on the bubble without the AQ, they got outshot 34-9, out SOG 15-5, and out-cornered 8-0. Hats off to them for keeping the game close, twice taking the lead, and forcing OT, but the St. Lawrence dominance after the game was knotted at 2-2 suggests a gap between the two squads. It’s much easier to make the case that Oneonta and Brockport are just as good as the AQ-winning Plattsburgh St. than it is for Hamilton being as good as St. Lawrence.
There’s too little to go on to definitively say whether the Liberty deserves two teams before the SUNYAC does or if they deserve a second team before the Centennial gets a third. It’s quite possible, but the converse if quite possible as well. It’s unfortunate there’s not more key inter-conference match-ups in the East Region (Liberty, Empire 8, SUNYAC) to help compare the teams and conferences. St. Lawrence played UAA Rochster and some NAIA schools. Stevens being down in Jersey is looking elsewhere for non-conference games. And so on. Not too many matches that help us get a good handle on the comparative/realitive strength within the region despite the geographical overlap.
Author comment by Flying Weasel · November 8, 2010 at 12:47 pm
@ lesblues3:
My problem with taking any old school with a high winning pct. regardless of strength-of-schedule is that it’s like a free pass to something that should be earned. While other teams are using the regular season to prove whether they can or cannot hang with the big boys (as they should be doing), some want to be given a berth in the tournament on the basis of incomplete evidence to discover what should already have been discovered along a 18- to 20- game schedule. That’s putting the cart before the horse. Now, I don’t agree fully with the committee’s criteria and what things seem to be weighted most and how much, and I certainly think the SOS formula is seriously flawed and unreliable, but the general concept of considering strength-of-schedule is important. I don’t think teams should be using the tournament to prove what the regular season is meant to prove: that they are among the best. I know it’s difficult and debatable what constitutes proving you are among the best, but teams that don’t make an effort to do so shouldn’t be rewarded in my opinion.
Author comment by Pat Coleman · November 8, 2010 at 3:59 pm
Flying Weasel: I like this sentiment. I might find myself repeating it somewhere.
“I don’t think teams should be using the tournament to prove what the regular season is meant to prove: that they are among the best. I know it’s difficult and debatable what constitutes proving you are among the best, but teams that don’t make an effort to do so shouldn’t be rewarded in my opinion.”
Author comment by Flying Weasel · November 8, 2010 at 7:19 pm
bct11, d3sportsnut, etc.
Keep in mind that the NSCAA polls and the D3soccer.com rankings don’t mean anything to the NCAA. Only there own rankings mean something. Chapman didn’t beat a nationally ranked Redlands, they beat an regionally UNranked team with a good record playing a weak schedule. Right or wrong, that is what the NCAA saw.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - –
That said, the California and northwest schools are at a significant disadvantage in building up a good SOS because they are geographically isolated and thus there are only so many teams and so many good teams to pay. Your SOS from your conference can’t be very good because every win for one opponent means a loss for another so it balances out. And who are the non-conference options? And even playing the other top teams doesn’t help as much as it “should” because their OWP can’t be anything special for the very same reasons. It requires major time and financial investment to do the travel that would be needed to get more and enough quality opponents. The weight placed on SOS and record vs. ranked makes is much more challenging for west coast teams to get ranked than elsewhere. No doubt about that.
So I don’t think it a purposeful east coast bias, but rather an unintended consequence of the ranking/selection criteria that in a all-things-being-equal scenario wouldn’t favor anyone, but in reality that isn’t the case.
Author comment by golfer83 · November 9, 2010 at 8:54 am
This puzzles and disappoints me at the same time. On what do they base selections? Specifically east region seeding. Plattsburgh gets automatic bid and D3soccer had Oneonta on bubble but probably in, Hamilton and Brockport out (for various reasons). The NCAA rankings had #5 Hamilton, #6 Plattsburgh, #7 Oneonta, #8 Brockport. So who gets in? Trying to figure this out. If the rankings mean soooo much to NCAA then Hamilton gets in. When considering a second team from a conference (SUNYAC) with two possibilities wouldn’t it seem logical to go with the team that either won the match between the two or the regular season? Guess not!! How Brockport gets in before Hamilton and/or Oneonta is beyond me. Maybe someone else is in the know cuz I’m clueless!
Author comment by soccernovice · November 9, 2010 at 2:09 pm
A little puzzle – we’ve got two teams. Team A is 14-1-4, the Team B is 14-2-2. They shared 3 common opponents. Each tied Birmingham-Southern 0-0, beat Rhodes (2-0, 3-0 respectively), and beat Sewanee (3-1, 1-0 respectively). Team B also played two top 5 teams, losing 2-1 to Trinity after being tied 1-1 at the half, and lost to Ohio Wesleyan 1-0. Obviously, those were their only 2 losses of the year.
Who are these teams? Team A is Washington U., who gets one of the 1st round byes (and is deserving). Team B is DePauw, who doesn’t even get a sniff of the tournament. Strength of schedule, east coast/west coast, blah, blah, blah. I can’t understand how two teams who had such similar results can be regarded so vastly different. I am not arguing strength of schedule isn’t important, and I know it’s difficult to determine who to give the final slots to. But to leave DePauw out of the tournament just doesn’t make sense.
Author comment by bct11 · November 9, 2010 at 11:50 pm
Flying Weasel-
Not that it matters now but when Chapman played Redlands they were nationally ranked. This season Redlands cracked top 25 twice reaching as high as top 20 in the nscaa poll. I think they made it to number 15 in Nov. Obviously they finished the season unranked but that is probably in part due to the loss they suffered after the Chapman game.
What I don’t understand is if you beat someone, and you are fighting for the same spot, how do you justify putting the loser of that game in? I understand SOS. But head to head has to count for more. What better way can you compare two teams than have them play eachother?
If Chapman had beat UC Santa Cruz twice instead of once and beat Whittier from the SCIAC they would have been undefeated in region with one D3 loss coming in Kentucky to regionally ranked Transylvania and still would not have gone to the tournament. You can only play so many teams in a season. There has to be another way….
Author comment by d3sportsnut · November 13, 2010 at 1:21 am
Flying Weasel-
Unfortunately I agree with you about the west coast’s parody of playing each other and the lack of SOS. However, I think there needs to be a solution to having only 4 teams Texas and west going to the playoffs. Especially, when 3-4 conferences have 4 Teams going alone! Also, the west coast teams eliminate themselves by the 2nd round (i do understand because of the NCAA making them play each other b/c of geographical travel reasons).
There should be a fixed number of west teams each year to solve this SOS, geographic, and other unintended problems. My estimate would be 8 (to help NCAA keep 4 and 4 together b/c they don’t want to travel them everywhere). Although I would love to see east play the west in the tourney. These 8 spots would be the AQ’s, Independent (optional if good enough), and other conference teams that would be up to vote. 8 is still very little, but having a minimum fixed amount could help solve the problem….at least in soccer.