Pre-season Polls for both Disvisions of the Middle ATlantic Conference (MAC). Not surprising Misericordia and Messiah are favorites to win their divisions again. York and Stevens are the second choices.

https://gomacsports.com/news/2024/8/15/messiah-picked-as-favorite-in-mac-commonwealth-womens-soccer-coaches-preseason-poll2.aspx

https://gomacsports.com/news/2024/8/15/misericordia-picked-as-favorite-in-mac-freedom-womens-soccer-coaches-preseason-poll.aspx

As expected, the 6 yr followup results of the BEAR I trial were published three days ago.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/23259671241260632

The purpose of this study was to compare the 6-year follow-up outcomes of patients who underwent the BEAR procedure compared with those of a nonrandomized concurrent control group receiving autograft ACL reconstruction (ACLR). Since this was the first trial of its kind, the number of patients involved was small, consisting of only 10 patients in each group. We still await the results of subsequent BEAR II trial that evaluated a larger group of patients. Still, the results of the preliminary trial remain promising.

The 2-year follow-up data from the first 2 BEAR trials determined that the BEAR implant was safe, that the clinical and patient-reported outcomes of the BEAR procedure were equal to or greater than those of ACLR procedures and that those having the BEAR procedure had greater hamstring function than those patients receiving the ACLR procedure, However, long-term assessments were needed to determine if the 2-year results of BEAR would be maintained. This study provides the clinical and patient-reported outcomes 6 years after the date of surgery.

The most important finding of this study was that patients who underwent the BEAR procedure had outcomes no worse than those after ACLR with a hamstring tendon autograft at the 6-year follow-up. While the outcome in certain categories for both groups were comparable, there were several categories where the BEAR procedure exceeded the outcomes for the ACLR group.

As suspected, the study showed that the isometric hamstring strength of patients remained significantly greater in the BEAR group compared with the ACLR group, as was the case at the 2-year follow-up. IKDC physical examination grades for BEAR were also superior to those after ACLR, another finding that was present at the 2-year follow-up. Approximately two-thirds of patients in each group had ligament or graft tissue with low signal intensity (indicating a stronger ligament) on the 6-year MRI scans. Instrumented anterior laxity values for BEAR and ACLR were similar at the 2- and 6-year follow-ups. It is interesting to note that the 2-year results of the BEAR I trial were similar to those reported in the 2-year follow-up of the larger BEAR II trial (NCT02664545), in which patients were randomized to receive BEAR or ACLR. It will be interesting to see if the 6-year BEAR II results will follow suit when those data become available.

It is also interesting to note that at the 2-year follow-up, there were no ipsilateral ACL reinjuries within either group in the BEAR I trial. Since the 2-year follow-up, an additional patient in each group underwent another knee surgery: a partial meniscectomy in the ACLR group and hardware removal in the BEAR group.So there appears to be no difference in reported re-injuries between the 2 groups in this study.

Quadriceps and hamstring muscle weakness after ACLR surgery has been well documented. In an adolescent population, it was reported that patients receiving hamstring tendon grafts have a 32% deficit in hamstring muscle strength at the 6- to 9-month follow-up. Morphological and strength deficits of the hamstring muscles after hamstring tendon reconstruction in adults are present at 2-year follow-up. In the current study, patients receiving BEAR did not exhibit significant muscle strength deficits at 6 years, while those in the ACLR group, all of whom received a hamstring tendon graft, had a significant reduction in isometric hamstring strength.

In short, the data in this small study continue to support the position that the BEAR procedure is at least as good as ACLR and exceeds ACLR in several key categories. However, more data is needed. Studies are underway to identify which patients will do better with BEAR. Animal studies suggest that the post-traumatic osteoarthritis after BEAR is less than that seen after ACLR. It will be interesting to see if these findings translate to humans.

With less than a month before training camps start, I figured I'd take an early look at the impact of graduation on the Liberty League teams for the upcoming year. Since this will be the last year for players to use their COVID eligibility, there is some uncertainty as to which 2023 seniors will return for a final 5th year and how that they will impact their team's season. Plus, there is no way to account how the incoming class will impact the upcoming season. Nonetheless, there is still a significant gap between the top 3 teams and the rest of the League. I will list the teams in order of the League rankings in 2023.

1. William Smith (6-0-3 LL, 14-1-4 overall) William Smith won the Liberty League championship 1-0 over RIT last year, winning its 15th championship in the last 16 years. The team scored 46 goals with a 2.42 goal per game average while giving up only 9 goals for a 0.47 goal per game average. The team lost in the 2d round of the NCAA playoffs. However, there will be some turnover of key players this year. William Smith is losing 4 graduate students that were impact players (Berg sisters, Dimenna & Faso) and losing at least 2 key contributors from last year's 8 seniors (Blakely-Armitage and Van der put).Those 6 players were responsible for 50% of the team's goals and assists last season. In addition, it is unclear whether Ava Ruppersberger, their top scorer from last year, will use her COVID eligibility. If Ruppersberg doesn't return, the team will have lost 70% of their offense from last season. Either way, players will have to step up to fill the gaps created by the leaving players. Fortunately, the core of their strong defense will be returning. William Smith also has the advantage of a big bench, drawing from the returning players on their main team as well as players from their developmental team. Plus who knows what talent lies in the incoming freshman class. But while winning the Liberty League last year, the gap between William Smith and its League challengers was much closer than prior years. That may be a trend that continues next year.
Early Projection: Frontrunner for League Champion

2. RIT (5-0-4 LL,9-6-5 overall) RIT had a slow start last season, losing 4 of their first 6 games while the team adjusted to the transfer of the prior year's top scorer. However, after posting a 1-1 tie against William Smith, RIT rebounded in the remainder of the season to reach the Liberty League finals and to go toe-to-toe with William Smith before losing 1-0. The team lost in the 2d round of the NCAA playoffs. The team scored 30 goals with a 1.50 goal per game average while giving up only 20 goals for a 1.00 goal per game average. RIT is returning its top 5 scorers from last year with another impact player expected to return from injury. Overall, the core of the team was not affected by graduation and should be expected to challenge for the League championship next year.
Early Projection: Challenger for Championship

3. Ithaca (5-1-3 LL,10-3-4 overall) Ithaca had a strong season last year, losing only to Cortland and William Smith in the regular season and losing 4-2 to RIT in the League semi-finals.The team lost in the 2d round of the NCAA playoffs. The team scored 34 goals with a 2.00 goal per game average while giving up only 10 goals for a 0.59 goal per game average. Ithaca has published its 2024 roster and is returning all of its scorers from last year's squad as well as its key defenders. Ithaca should be expected to challenge for a League championship next year.
Early Projection: Challenger for Championship

4. Clarkson (5-4 LL, 11-5-2 overall) Clarkson had a good season last year, advancing to the League playoffs but losing in the first round. The team scored 32 goals with a 1.78 goal per game average while giving up 12 goals for a 0.67 goal per game average. The team had 8 seniors on last year's squad and it is unclear how many may return. However, the team is definitely returning its top 4 scorers. Last year, Clarkson started the year strong in all offensive categories but the quality of their opponents clearly contributed to that since their shot attempts and goals dropped off as they faced the stronger Liberty League opponents. Expect them to be middle of the pack next year and compete for a playoff spot.
Early Projection: Playoff Contender

5. RPI (3-4-2 LL, 9-5-4 overall) RPI had a good season last year, advancing to the League playoffs before losing in the semi-final round. RPI had 1 grad student and 11 seniors on last year's team. Their top 4 scorers were seniors but have their COVID elibility. If they choose not to return, the upcoming season may be more challenging. Also expect them to be middle of the pack next year and compete for a playoff spot.
Early Projection: Playoff Contender

6. St. Lawrence (3-4-2 LL, 7-7-4 overall) St. Lawrence had a young offense last year, with 7 of its 8 top scorers being either 1st or 2d year students. However, its top scorer only recorded 4 goals and everyone else scored 2 goals or less. St. Lawrence was unable to score a goal in 7 of their 9 Liberty League games, only scoring 2 goals against Bard and 1 goal against Vassar. With an additional year of seasoning, the offense may get stronger and the team may make some improvement in the standings. However, absent an improvement in scoring for their League games, they may be facing another tough year.
Early Projection: Playoff Contender

7. Vassar (2-2-5 LL, 8-4-5 overall) Vassar is in the same spot as St. Lawrence except that it had 8 seniors on last year's squad and it is unclear how many may return. Vassar is definitely returning its top 5 scorers, who were all underclassmen. Unfortunately, Vassar was unable to score a goal in 7 of their 9 Liberty League games, only scoring 2 goals against Skidmore and 1 goal against Clarkson. With an additional year of seasoning, the offense may get stronger and the team may make some improvement in the standings. Absent an improvement in scoring for their League games, they may be facing another tough year.
Early Projection: Playoff Contender

8. Union (2-5-2 LL, 6-8-3 overall) Union had 6 seniors on its roster last year and it is unclear how many are returning. Fortunately, its top 6 scorers will be returning. This team had a little more success scoring against its League opponents than the 2 teams above them in the standings and should compete for a League playoff spot.
Early Projection: Playoff Contender

9.Skidmore (1-4-4 LL, 6-4-6 overall) Skidmore had an inconsistent season last year while pulling off ties against William Smith, RIT and several other League opponents. It had 7 seniors on last year's roster and it is unclear how many are returning. 2 of its top scorers were seniors. Depending on who returns, the team could improve and have a chance to compete for the playoffs.
Early Projection: Playoff Contender

10. Bard (0-8-1 LL, 4-10-1 overall). The perennial last place team showed some improvement last season with the highlight being the 0-0 tie against Vassar. Their top 5 scorers are returning underclassmen and hope springs eternal.
Early Projection: Improved but out of Playoffs

Feel free to share your thoughts and any information regarding additions to any of the above teams.

Hopefully, this is not getting too technical but the below linked article provides a meta-analysis of the reported clinical outcomes of autograft ACL reconstruction compared to augmented ACL repair procedures.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/23259671231223743#bibr1-23259671231223743

The article concludes that autograft ACL reconstruction remains the gold standard for ACL injuries. The authors note that, as a group, augmented ACL repair was associated with higher rates of reoperation, hardware removal, and failure compared with autograft ACL reconstruction in studies with minimum 2-year follow-up data. While also noting that augmented ACL repair had higher Lysholm scores and hamstring strength versus autograft ACL reconstruction, they suggest that these advantages are short-lived. "It seems that, compared with ACL reconstruction, ACL repair has a better return to activity, knee function, and quality of life during early follow-up, but, when regarding the longer follow-up time, no significant difference was found. A randomized clinical trial by Barnett et al5 with a maximum follow-up time of 2 years showed that patients undergoing the BEAR procedure had a higher IKDC score and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) as well as better hamstring muscle strength than patients undergoing ACL reconstruction at early timepoints postoperatively. However, the gap between BEAR and ACL reconstruction in IKDC score and KOOS narrowed over time, whereas significant differences in hamstring strength persisted until the 2-year follow-up."

This study has some limitations, especially as it applied to the BEAR procedure. First, the data on some new procedures, like BEAR, is not long enough to be conclusive since post-op data on reported clinical outcomes has yet to reach beyond the five year point. While the two year data on BEAR has been released,  the six year post-op data on the first BEAR Study is only now expected to be released later this year. As such, their conclusions, as it applies to BEAR procedures, may have to be re-visited.

 Second, the authors did not conduct a subgroup analysis. Instead, they included a variety of arthroscopic ACL repair techniques under the category of augmented ACL repair. Those techniques include suture anchor repair (SAR), suture augmentation repair, repair with dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS), bridge-enhanced ACL repair (BEAR), and internal brace ligament augmentation (IBLA). A high negative rate relative to only one such technique could skew the conclusions as to the entire group.  For example, the ACL repair group showed a significantly higher hardware removal rate. As the authors note, this is probably because most of their included studies used a DIS augmentation technique, in which the monobloc spring-screw is much bulkier than that used in ACL reconstruction, leading to a frequent removal of hardware. Review of the studies indicated that most reoperations were caused by hardware removal, scar tissue, range of motion deficits, and arthrofibrosis, which might be caused by the additional spring device that is implanted in the tibia during repair, especially repair with dynamic augmentation. Since such hardware in not included in the BEAR  procedure, the negative rates for hardware rate and re-operations are likely not applicable to the BEAR procedures and  may be misleading to a patient considering BEAR.

Moreover, the authors recognized that certain procedures are limited to certain patient populations and different rupture locations. For example, a BEAR procedure is generally limited to ruptures with frayed ends and must be conducted within the first 90 days following injury. Different qualifiers apply to other procedures.  Whether the results will be sustained at long-time follow-up is still unknown because there are too few long-term comparative studies focusing on different surgical techniques and patient populations to conduct subgroup analysis. Some potential confounders, such as age and preoperative activity level, were not corrected, which might cause risk of bias because younger age and (pursuit of) higher activity level have been reported to negatively influence the outcomes of both modern ACL repair and ACL reconstruction. In other words, younger patients may have different results than older patients.

My takeaway from the report is that it is still too early to determine whether the BEAR procedure is more or less effective than ACL reconstruction.

At least 2 of the BEAR trials should be reporting new data sometime this year as the participants in the respective studies reach the 2 yr and 6 year post-op stages. In the interim, I figured I'd share
some interesting articles with implications for advances in ACL repair. The first is:
New understanding of avian eggshell attachment -- implications for medical procedures and egg industry
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/02/240214122613.htm


This new understanding could someday allow doctors to use nanospikes to attach the ligament or replacement graft to the bone rather than placing a screw into the bone to serve as the anchor.

The second is:
Females less likely to heal from ACL injuries than males | ScienceDaily
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/10/231018115125.htm


While not earth-shattering, the data gives some insight into a cause for the disparate rate of ACL injuries between male and female athletes and may eventually lead to changes that could reduce the occurrence of ACL injuries for female athletes.

So happy this board has returned. Figured I'd update you all with a link to an article published in April 2023 providing the first meta-analysis comparing the BEAR and the ACLR techniques in the management of ACL tears.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37042698/

The study compares the results of BEAR ACL surgery to ACL reconstruction using a hamstring graft. The authors note that the analysis may be different for ACL reconstruction using a patellar graft since the patellar tendon is stronger.

The study confirms that "compared to the ACLR technique, the BEAR surgery showed no differences in muscle strength (quadriceps and hip abductors) knee joint laxity, and postoperative knee scores. However, it showed better hamstring strength. Earlier resolutions of symptoms and return to activities were also seen in the BEAR group. These results prove that this primary repair technique is a reliable and efficacious technique for the treatment of ACL ruptures, however, further randomized clinical studies will be needed to compare both of these techniques."

I'll share further studies as they are published.

I'll try to repost the  links to the studies are below:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27900338/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30923725/

Hopefully they work.

I shared this post in another forum.

Last season, one of my worst fears as a parent of a college athlete was realized as I watched my daughter land oddly after jumping to secure a soccer ball and collapse to the ground. She was diagnosed as sustaining a torn ACL and sprained MCL that required surgery. While her school helped arrange a quick surgical consult with a local surgeon for standard ACL surgery, my wife performed her own research and came across a new surgical procedure that neither the surgeon, the school's training staff or athletic department had any familiarity. The procedure is called Bridge Enhanced ACL Repair or BEAR and in simple terms allows the ends of the torn tendon re-grow together with the help of an absorbable collagen implant. Unlike standard ACL re-construction, the procedure does not require a hamstring graft or graft from a cadaver. The recovery time is similar to that of standard ACL re-construction but does require that the patient remain in a brace for a few weeks longer than the normal procedure. Preliminary studies suggest that the BEAR procedure will lead to less osteo-arthritis in the knee. It looks like the BEAR procedure may be the future of ACL repair. My daughter elected to have the BEAR procedure in November and is well on her way to full recovery and playing for her team in August.

Since most parents and physicians we have spoken to have had no knowledge of this procedure, I felt it important to share with a community of people that care about college sports and student athletes. Attached are some preliminary studies regarding the procedure.

The Bridge-Enhanced Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair (BEAR) Procedure: An Early Feasibility Cohort Study - PubMed (nih.gov)

Bridge-Enhanced Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair: Two-Year Results of a First-in-Human Study - PubMed (nih.gov)

For those who were unable to watch, the Liberty League represented itself well in the NCAA playoffs.

FIRST ROUND MATCHES:

William Smith had an easy match against SUNY Delhi, winning 12-0. The link to the game summary is:
https://hwsathletics.com/news/2022/11/12/william-smith-soccer-speckhart-herons-race-past-broncos-in-ncaa-1st-round-match.aspx

RIT defeated Johnson & Wales by a score of 3-1. The link to the game summary is:
https://ritathletics.com/news/2022/11/12/womens-soccer-beats-johnson-wales-in-first-round-of-ncaa-tournament.aspx

Ithaca defeated Capital by a score of 1-0. The link to the game summary is:
https://athletics.ithaca.edu/news/2022/11/12/womens-soccer-cascones-first-half-goal-leads-ithaca-past-capital-university.aspx

SECOND ROUND MATCHES:

William Smith won a competitive match against Tufts by a score of 1-0. The link to the game summary is:
https://hwsathletics.com/news/2022/11/13/william-smith-soccer-6-herons-down-22-jumbos-advance-to-sectional-round.aspx

RIT lost a close match to #8 ranked Amherst by a score of 1-0. After giving up a goal in the first half, RIT took over the second half but could not secure the tying goal. The link to the game summary is:
https://ritathletics.com/news/2022/11/13/womens-soccer-loses-to-amherst-in-second-round-of-ncaa-tournament.aspx

Ithaca had the most difficult challenge, losing to undefeated and #4 ranked Case Western Reserve by a score of 6-0. The link to the game summary is:
https://athletics.ithaca.edu/news/2022/11/13/womens-soccer-ithaca-womens-soccer-falls-to-no-4-case-western-reserve-university-in-second-round-of-ncaa-s.aspx

THIRD ROUND MATCH:

William Smith faces off against Amherst on Saturday 11/19 at 1:30pm

From my perspective, there is a significant difference between a home-grown 5 yr senior/grad student and a 5th year transfer from a D-1 school. While there are clearly many D-3 players that have the skills to play D-1 and may have chosen not to for reasons unique to them,  many (not all) D-1 players have size and skill advantages over the usual D-3 player. 

A team like John Hopkins with 9 graduate students has stacked the deck in their favor. 2 of the grad students (1 fwd and 1 defender) are home-grown, having played their entire career at Hopkins with the forward contributing 10 goals and 2 assists. The starting goalie and the backup goalies are both 5th year transfers from D -1 schools. The remaining 5 grad students are all 5th yr transfers from D-1 schools that play significant time and contributed 37 goals and 24 assists.  But most D-3 schools have not followed the path of John Hopkins.

Looking at the top 25 rankings, there are only a few schools that have added D-1 5th yr transfers. Case Western has added 2 forwards who have contributed 15 goals and 10 assists. Emory added 2 transfers that contributed 4 goals and 5 assists. Carnegie Mellon added a goalkeeper who played only 4 games. MIT added a midfielder who contributed 1 goal and 1 assist. Babson added a forward who contributed 7 goals and 7 assists.

There are 4 other teams in the top 25 that have 5th year players on their roster but they are all home-grown, playing their entire carer at their schools. Those teams are Misericordia (4), Montclair State (1), Wartburg (5) and Tufts (1). The rest of the top 25 have no 5th year players.

While I have not gone back to check the 2021 teams, my recollection is that there were a lot more teams with 5th year players that year that seemed to have an impact. This year, John Hopkins seems to be an outlier and I do not foresee many other schools in 2023 getting many D-1 transfers.

The Liberty League playoffs were competitive this year with the majority of games headed into overtime.

In the first semi-final, William Smith controlled possession for the first 15 minutes of the match but the RIT defense offered them few shots. RIT then settled down and began to pressure William Smith. The first half ended in a 0-0 tie with each team mustering 5 shots. However RIT had more shots on goal (3-2) than William Smith. The second half seemed to be a mirror of the first half but William Smith outshot RIT 7-2. Regulation ended in a 0-0 tie. Neither team made any serious threat in the two overtimes and the teams went to penalty kicks. RIT stopped the first PK but misfired their first shot off the crossbar. William Smith advanced on pk's 4-3.

In the second semi-final, Ithaca controlled much of the game, outshooting Clarkson 6-2 in the first half and 10-1 in the second half but could not find the back of the net. Regulation ended in a 0-0 tie. About 3 minutes into the first overtime, Delaney Rutan scored the only goal of the game and Ithaca advanced to the conference finals.

The conference finals started evenly with William Smith outshooting Ithaca 5-3 but only getting 2 shots on goal. In the second half, William Smith put more pressure on Ithaca's goalie, outshooting them 11-4. However Claire Reader made five saves in the second half and three in the overtime periods to force the game to penalty kicks. Ithaca substituted Grace Hickey into goal for the PK's and was rewarded with a save on the second kick of William Smith. Ithaca claimed the Liberty League title 5-3 on PK's.

Ithaca claimed the automatic bid to the NCAA's while William Smith and RIT both claimed at large bids. All three teams have solid defenses with William Smith ranked #5 in goals against average (.325), #3 in shut out % (.778) and #14 in save % (.887). RIT ranked #21 in goals against average (.549), #16 in shut out % (.667) and #99 in save % (.821). Meanwhile, Ithaca was ranked #67 in goals against average (.771), #74 in shut out % (.526) and #42 in save % (.848).

Ithaca received the toughest bracket with a first round match against Capital followed by the possibility of facing undefeated and #4 ranked Case Western Reserve in the second round.

RIT faces Johnson & Wales- Providence in the first round with the possibility of facing #8 ranked Amherst in the second round. RIT gets the advantage of hosting the first and second round matches.

William Smith has an easy first round match against SUNY-Delhi with the possibility of facing #22 Tufts in the second round. William Smith gets the advantage of hosting the first and second round matches.

The quarterfinals are complete.

Clarkson upsets 3rd seed Skidmore and advances to the semi-final match against Ithaca. Clarkson stormed to a 2-0 lead in the first half only to have Skidmore even the match in the second half. Neither team seemed to have any serious threats in the double overtime. Clarkson advanced on PK's 5-4. Summary of the game is below.

https://clarksonathletics.com/news/2022/11/1/womens-soccer-knights-advance-to-liberty-league-semis-on-penalty-kicks-versus-skidmore.aspx

4th seed RIT gets revenge for regular season loss to Vassar and advances to semifinal match against Williams Smith. As noted previously, RIT's 1-0 loss to Vassar in the regular season was the first game following the loss of RIT's lead forward and it took 3 games before their offense re-claimed their footing and returned to scoring goals. RIT was determined to show that the loss was a fluke. Sophomore Sam Halligan assisted the first goal and scored the next 2 goals to lead RIT to a 3-1 victory. Summary of the game is below:

https://ritathletics.com/news/2022/11/1/womens-soccer-beats-vassar-in-liberty-league-quarterfinal.aspx

Looking ahead to the semifinals, I ask the following:

Can RIT defeat William Smith for the first time in their history? Williams Smith has a record of 43-0-2 against RIT. There have been times over the past 3 years that it felt like RIT could go head-to-head against William Smith, only to face defeat. This season William Smith has shown itself to be vulnerable, giving up 3 ties in League play. Yet they defeated RIT in the regular season 4-1 on the success of their counter-attack. Can RIT adjust their play to prevent that from occuring again?

Can Clarkson reverse the trend and defeat Ithaca? Clarkson won its first ever match against Ithaca in 2017 but has lost every match against Ithaca since. Ithaca won 2-0 in the regular season.  The #6 seed Knights pulled the upset against Skidmore. Can they continue the magic?

Your thoughts?

So the playoff picture is set. William Smith and Ithaca with first round byes. RIT hosts Vassar and Skidmore hosts Clarkson. Good luck to all qualifiers.

Been a little while since I posted because I was waiting for the dust to settle a little. Some thoughts on the race for the Liberty League playoffs.

William Smith is currently 6-0-1 in the League and  11-1-2 overall. With 2 remaining matches against Vassar and St. Lawrence, they have essentially locked up the Liberty League regular season title. While their overall record look like years past, this team is not the powerhouse it usually is and is beatable. It will be interesting to see which team claims the fourth seed. Their first playoff game could be a re-match against Skidmore, the only team in the League to tie them this season.   

Ithaca is 4-1-1   in the League and  9-2-3 overall with 3 remaining games against RPI, RIT and Vassar. Ithaca is second in the League for goals scored. Their last 2 games will determine whether they hold on to the second position and secure a playoff bye.   

RIT is 3-2-1 in the League and 9-2-2 overall with 3 remaining matches against Bard, Ithaca and Union.
RIT was looking dominant until they took on William Smith and lost their most dangerous forward for the season with an ACL tear. Although William Smith won 4-1 off of counter-attack goals, RIT looked like the more dangerous team, out-possessing and controlling the game against William Smith. It clearly took a while for RIT to adjust to losing their top forward as RIT did not score a goal in their next 3 matches. Yet they walked away with 2 ties and 1 loss during that period. Since that time, RIT has not lost. The game against Ithaca should determine who holds second place in the League.

Vassar is 3-2-1 in the League and 7-4-3 overall with 3 matches remaining against William Smith, RPI and Ithaca. Vassar has been inconsistent, pulling off ties against NYU and Wesleyan, beating Scranton and West. Conn and RIT. However, the win against RIT can be discounted a little since it was the RIT's first match after losing Cataldo-Smith and RIT just couldn't find the back of the net. Despite these good results, Vassar also had losses against College of Mt St Vincent, Union and Clarkson and a tie against Skidmore. Which team shows up in the League Playofffs will decide how far they advance.

Skidmore is 2-1-3 in the League and 7-2-3 overall with 3 remaining matches against St. Lawrence, Union and Bard. Skidmore is the only League blemish for William Smith (0-0 tie) and also secured ties against both Vassar and Ithaca. Skidmore has a stingy defense and is tied for League lead for fewest goals against. Skidmore should hold on for the fifth spot in the League playoffs.

There is currently a tie for the final position in the League playoffs between Union, Clarkson and St. Lawrence. Clarkson controls their own destiny since they play both Union and St. Lawrence in the upcoming weeks. 

Union is 2-3-1 in the League and 8-4-2 overall with 3 remaining matches against Clarkson, Skidmore and RIT. Union started off strong winning their first 7 games but have only won once since. They have not scored more than 2 goals in any game this season and have given up nearly as many goals as they have scored.   

St. Lawrence is 2-3-1 in the League and 6-4-2 overall with 3 remaining matches against Skidmore, Clarkson and William Smith. IMO, they have the toughest remaining schedule of the three and are unlikely to advance.

Clarkson is 2-3-1 in the League and 7-5-2 overall with 3 remaining matches against Union, St. Lawrence and RPI. Clarkson led the League with the most shots, goals and points through the first seven games of the season but the stats fell off after League play started. With the exception of the 4 goals against Bard, Clarkson has only scored 1 goal in their six other games.

RPI and Bard have no chance of making the playoffs.

Some highlight games involving Liberty League teams this week:

Tuesday, 9/20 @ 7pm: Vassar v #10 Wesleyan:   
https://athletics.wesleyan.edu/sports/2022/8/26/womens-soccer-stream.aspx

Wednesday, 9/21 @ 4:30 pm: #6 William Smith v. RV  Rochester Institute of Technology
https://hwsathletics.com/watch/?Live=1329&type=Live

I'll post the links to Saturday's highlight games later this week.