NESCAC

[Hopkins92]

The save on the St. Louis free kick in the semi against Midd was pretty ridiculous.

Ridiculous.

[SlideTackle]

I am a little biased but I really think Wesleyan deserved a bid. I became a passionate watcher of their games this season. I had seen them give Williams a real game 1-1 in Williamstown early on. I liked the passing, unselfishness, work rate, organization, use of width and improved team speed. I also think Coach Wheeler brought in some pretty good talent recruiting wise. Anyway from then on I tried to catch their games anytime Williams was not playing. Wesleyan could have slid into where Swat is and played Stevens at Tufts. It was not to be and their Seniors must be crushed.

I have to guess that the Last 4 teams off the board were Oneonta, Swat, Hopkins and Calvin. I also think St.Olaf was close to missing and sitting there for a long time before getting plucked. That said I caught their Conference Tournament game last week and was really impressed with the facilities. If they draw well it will be a fantastic venue and atmosphere. Also a shout out to Lynchburg who must have had about 2,000 fans at their Conference Tournament Final. Lastly, I have no idea why two Texas teams are traveling to Tacoma, Washington but other than Wesleyan missing out you cannot really complain about what the committee put together.

Agree with you wholeheartedly about Wesleyan.  I will admit that I am not nearly as familiar with the other 4 teams you mention, but looking at the schedules and results of both Oneonta and Swath I just don't see what distinguished them. I get the strength of schedule, but the qualifty of their opponents up and down doesn't compare imho.  Besides Trinity, virtually every NESCAC team can beat the other on any given day.  Every game is very hard fought.  Wesleyan was 5-0 against NEWMAC teams and didn't give up a single goal outside of NESCAC play.  Wes had a big turnaround season compared to where they've been the past several years and were eliminated in the NESCAC tournament on PKs.  They did not get rewarded yet Oneonta, with the same record as Wesleyan and a loss to non-NESCAC tournament qualifier Hamilton (who Wesleyan beat easily 3-1 after the Oneonta loss to them) gets in yet another year.  I guess I'll eat my crow if Oneonta gets by Middlebury.  We shall see.  And yes, I am a biased and very disappointed Wesleyan supporter. 

[PaulNewman]

I am a little biased but I really think Wesleyan deserved a bid. I became a passionate watcher of their games this season. I had seen them give Williams a real game 1-1 in Williamstown early on. I liked the passing, unselfishness, work rate, organization, use of width and improved team speed. I also think Coach Wheeler brought in some pretty good talent recruiting wise. Anyway from then on I tried to catch their games anytime Williams was not playing. Wesleyan could have slid into where Swat is and played Stevens at Tufts. It was not to be and their Seniors must be crushed.

I have to guess that the Last 4 teams off the board were Oneonta, Swat, Hopkins and Calvin. I also think St.Olaf was close to missing and sitting there for a long time before getting plucked. That said I caught their Conference Tournament game last week and was really impressed with the facilities. If they draw well it will be a fantastic venue and atmosphere. Also a shout out to Lynchburg who must have had about 2,000 fans at their Conference Tournament Final. Lastly, I have no idea why two Texas teams are traveling to Tacoma, Washington but other than Wesleyan missing out you cannot really complain about what the committee put together.

Agree with you wholeheartedly about Wesleyan.  I will admit that I am not nearly as familiar with the other 4 teams you mention, but looking at the schedules and results of both Oneonta and Swath I just don't see what distinguished them. I get the strength of schedule, but the qualifty of their opponents up and down doesn't compare imho.  Besides Trinity, virtually every NESCAC team can beat the other on any given day.  Every game is very hard fought.  Wesleyan was 5-0 against NEWMAC teams and didn't give up a single goal outside of NESCAC play.  Wes had a big turnaround season compared to where they've been the past several years and were eliminated in the NESCAC tournament on PKs.  They did not get rewarded yet Oneonta, with the same record as Wesleyan and a loss to non-NESCAC tournament qualifier Hamilton (who Wesleyan beat easily 3-1 after the Oneonta loss to them) gets in yet another year.  I guess I'll eat my crow if Oneonta gets by Middlebury.  We shall see.  And yes, I am a biased and very disappointed Wesleyan supporter.

I totally agree as well.  Hard not to conclude that the Region 5 chair cleaned everyone's clock and the Region 1 chair was asleep at the wheel.  Region 2 chair won't win any honors either with the entire NEWMAC getting shut out.

[SlideTackle]

I am a little biased but I really think Wesleyan deserved a bid. I became a passionate watcher of their games this season. I had seen them give Williams a real game 1-1 in Williamstown early on. I liked the passing, unselfishness, work rate, organization, use of width and improved team speed. I also think Coach Wheeler brought in some pretty good talent recruiting wise. Anyway from then on I tried to catch their games anytime Williams was not playing. Wesleyan could have slid into where Swat is and played Stevens at Tufts. It was not to be and their Seniors must be crushed.

I have to guess that the Last 4 teams off the board were Oneonta, Swat, Hopkins and Calvin. I also think St.Olaf was close to missing and sitting there for a long time before getting plucked. That said I caught their Conference Tournament game last week and was really impressed with the facilities. If they draw well it will be a fantastic venue and atmosphere. Also a shout out to Lynchburg who must have had about 2,000 fans at their Conference Tournament Final. Lastly, I have no idea why two Texas teams are traveling to Tacoma, Washington but other than Wesleyan missing out you cannot really complain about what the committee put together.

Agree with you wholeheartedly about Wesleyan.  I will admit that I am not nearly as familiar with the other 4 teams you mention, but looking at the schedules and results of both Oneonta and Swath I just don't see what distinguished them. I get the strength of schedule, but the qualifty of their opponents up and down doesn't compare imho.  Besides Trinity, virtually every NESCAC team can beat the other on any given day.  Every game is very hard fought.  Wesleyan was 5-0 against NEWMAC teams and didn't give up a single goal outside of NESCAC play.  Wes had a big turnaround season compared to where they've been the past several years and were eliminated in the NESCAC tournament on PKs.  They did not get rewarded yet Oneonta, with the same record as Wesleyan and a loss to non-NESCAC tournament qualifier Hamilton (who Wesleyan beat easily 3-1 after the Oneonta loss to them) gets in yet another year.  I guess I'll eat my crow if Oneonta gets by Middlebury.  We shall see.  And yes, I am a biased and very disappointed Wesleyan supporter.

I totally agree as well.  Hard not to conclude that the Region 5 chair cleaned everyone's clock and the Region 1 chair was asleep at the wheel.  Region 2 chair won't win any honors either with the entire NEWMAC getting shut out.

I just don't get it.  Digging a bit deeper, Wes' 3 losses are all to NCAA tournament NESCAC qualifiers as are 2 of their 3 ties with Williams being the other tie.  Oneonta lost to Hamilton (9th in NESCAC), Corland and New Paltz (I think only ranked team New Paltz beat) and tied Oswego, RPI and Buffalo State.  The Region 1 chair did a damn poor job not highlighting these issues and going behind the numbers.  Or maybe the Committee just didn't want 5 NESCACs.  Feels very unfair, especially in light of such a breakthrough season for Wes.  Not easy to get 10 wins in a year out of the NESCAC.

[PaulNewman]

I am a little biased but I really think Wesleyan deserved a bid. I became a passionate watcher of their games this season. I had seen them give Williams a real game 1-1 in Williamstown early on. I liked the passing, unselfishness, work rate, organization, use of width and improved team speed. I also think Coach Wheeler brought in some pretty good talent recruiting wise. Anyway from then on I tried to catch their games anytime Williams was not playing. Wesleyan could have slid into where Swat is and played Stevens at Tufts. It was not to be and their Seniors must be crushed.

I have to guess that the Last 4 teams off the board were Oneonta, Swat, Hopkins and Calvin. I also think St.Olaf was close to missing and sitting there for a long time before getting plucked. That said I caught their Conference Tournament game last week and was really impressed with the facilities. If they draw well it will be a fantastic venue and atmosphere. Also a shout out to Lynchburg who must have had about 2,000 fans at their Conference Tournament Final. Lastly, I have no idea why two Texas teams are traveling to Tacoma, Washington but other than Wesleyan missing out you cannot really complain about what the committee put together.

Agree with you wholeheartedly about Wesleyan.  I will admit that I am not nearly as familiar with the other 4 teams you mention, but looking at the schedules and results of both Oneonta and Swath I just don't see what distinguished them. I get the strength of schedule, but the qualifty of their opponents up and down doesn't compare imho.  Besides Trinity, virtually every NESCAC team can beat the other on any given day.  Every game is very hard fought.  Wesleyan was 5-0 against NEWMAC teams and didn't give up a single goal outside of NESCAC play.  Wes had a big turnaround season compared to where they've been the past several years and were eliminated in the NESCAC tournament on PKs.  They did not get rewarded yet Oneonta, with the same record as Wesleyan and a loss to non-NESCAC tournament qualifier Hamilton (who Wesleyan beat easily 3-1 after the Oneonta loss to them) gets in yet another year.  I guess I'll eat my crow if Oneonta gets by Middlebury.  We shall see.  And yes, I am a biased and very disappointed Wesleyan supporter.

I totally agree as well.  Hard not to conclude that the Region 5 chair cleaned everyone's clock and the Region 1 chair was asleep at the wheel.  Region 2 chair won't win any honors either with the entire NEWMAC getting shut out.

I just don't get it.  Digging a bit deeper, Wes' 3 losses are all to NCAA tournament NESCAC qualifiers as are 2 of their 3 ties with Williams being the other tie.  Oneonta lost to Hamilton (9th in NESCAC), Corland and New Paltz (I think only ranked team New Paltz beat) and tied Oswego, RPI and Buffalo State.  The Region 1 chair did a damn poor job not highlighting these issues and going behind the numbers.  Or maybe the Committee just didn't want 5 NESCACs.  Feels very unfair, especially in light of such a breakthrough season for Wes.  Not easy to get 10 wins in a year out of the NESCAC.

Yeah, the five teams thing doesn't hold water because both the Centennial and UAA got five.  I don't know if it came down to Oneonta or not...I'm more focused on Swat...but Oneonta certainly has the brand in terms of NCAA bids, maybe even more so than Rochester.

[Futbol is Life]

First time caller, longtime listener.   I'm a former college player (not in NESCAC, fwiw).

I agree that it's hard to figure out what some of these Regional chairs were doing, in particular the Region 2 chair.  In that region, all 6 ranked teams were from the NEWMAC.   The regular season NEWMAC outright winner, MIT, lost in the finals of the conference tournament.  Yet somehow WPI, the 5th place team in the league, who lost in the tourney play-in game to the 4th place team, ended up ranked as the highest at large seed in Region 2, ahead of MIT and also ahead of Coast Guard (the aforementioned 4th place team in the league that beat WPI twice).  Seriously, how in the world does that happen.

That's what has me motivated to post.  When it gets down to figuring out who to reward with at-large bids and you're getting down to the end, you're dealing with teams of lots of equal ability that likely would all play each other close if they played head to head.  For me, the at large picks should be rewards for having a standout season,  and I'd argue that you need to focus on these two measurements to determine a season worthy of that reward:
•   conference performance, and
•   performance against ranked teams, including conference tourney

In fact, the most beneficial aspect of the regional rankings being done at all was to compare each school's "Record vs Ranked" teams, as this lets you see performance vs the best teams, regardless of what conference the opponent belonged to.

As you would expect, every team (16 in total) with at least 5 ranked wins are in the tourney.   Here are the six teams with 4 wins vs ranked teams that did not get an at-large, and where they stood in their own league :

Wesleyan  (4-3-2 vs ranked teams) – Tied for 4th in NESCAC
Rutgers-Newark (4-2-1 vs ranked teams) – Tied for 2nd in NJAC
MIT (4-3-1 vs ranked teams) – Outright winner of NEWMAC
Vassar (4-2 vs ranked teams) – Fourth in Liberty League
Mary Washington (4-4-1 vs ranked teams) – went 1-1-1 in C2C
Wisconsin Whitewater (4-5-0 vs ranked teams) – went 0-0 in CTC

I feel it's clear that Wesleyan, Rutgers-Newark, and MIT all should have been rewarded for their season over each of the following:
Rowan (3-3-1 vs ranked teams) – Tied for 4th in NJAC
Gettysburg (3-4-2 vs ranked teams) – 5th place in Centennial
Oneonta (3-3-2 vs ranked teams) -   3rd in the SUNYAC
Rochester  (3-3-1 vs ranked teams) – 6th place in UAA

The NESCAC not only in recent history is a different story than the UAA and Centennial conferences, but this year is so strong at the top that Wesleyan and Middlebury both had standout seasons even while tying for 4th place. There was only one out-of-conference loss among the top 5 teams.  They deserve 5 bids, this year.  The same cannot be said for the UAA and Centennial conferences.  Those boys from Wesleyan, MIT, and Rutgers-Newark got wronged.

And that's all I have to say.

[PaulNewman]

Great post...even if there are legit counter-arguments.  And hopefully that will not be all you have to say.

[PaulNewman]

I thought Cubeddu for Amherst had been out injured but I checked and saw he only missed last Colby game and had a few yellow cards in the games before that.  Was he out on yellow card accumulation or injury?  He didn't start in the Tufts game that I saw live but based on just that game I thought he was one of Amherst's most effective offensive players and potentially a set-up man for GG.

[Futbol is Life]

Great post...even if there are legit counter-arguments.  And hopefully that will not be all you have to say.

Since you insist 

I'm not really big at looking at one result and making broad statements about conferences or even teams.  Especially since there is lots of parity and lots of close one-goal games.   There often are hidden issues that no one outside of the team knows are going on that would make it irresponsible to put too much weight on one game.

But since Brandeis sits in Region 2 and plays many games vs New England opponents, their results do offer some defense to the quality of NE in general and, in particular, the top half of the NEWMAC this year, as it relates to the UAA.  Brandeis lost 3 close games to 3 of the top teams in the NEWMAC (MIT, Babson, and WPI), and were outshot significantly in each of those games.   They also won a close game vs Clark (7th in the NEWMAC).    In a season of close games, they ended up 5th in the UAA ahead of sixth place Rochester, with whom they tied on Halloween despite enjoying a 27-12 shot advantage.   Against the top half of the UAA, Brandeis went 3-1 (being outshot in 3 of those games).

I'm not trying to convince anyone that Emory, Chicago, and NYU are not impressive teams deserving to be in the tournament since they lost to Brandeis.  And I'm not disparaging Brandeis whatsoever, as their resiliency to keep plugging away after losing tight match after tight match is admirable.  My point is that the top teams in the NEWMAC certainly could compete with anyone (as also shown in close head-to-head matches with Tufts and Amherst), and that the outright regular season winner of that league, MIT (who also advanced to the conf tourney final), deserved far better treatment than the tourney committee offered. 

Did someone on these boards mention that the Brandeis coach was, in fact, on the committee? 

[PaulNewman]

Great post...even if there are legit counter-arguments.  And hopefully that will not be all you have to say.

Since you insist 

I'm not really big at looking at one result and making broad statements about conferences or even teams.  Especially since there is lots of parity and lots of close one-goal games.   There often are hidden issues that no one outside of the team knows are going on that would make it irresponsible to put too much weight on one game.

But since Brandeis sits in Region 2 and plays many games vs New England opponents, their results do offer some defense to the quality of NE in general and, in particular, the top half of the NEWMAC this year, as it relates to the UAA.  Brandeis lost 3 close games to 3 of the top teams in the NEWMAC (MIT, Babson, and WPI), and were outshot significantly in each of those games.   They also won a close game vs Clark (7th in the NEWMAC).    In a season of close games, they ended up 5th in the UAA ahead of sixth place Rochester, with whom they tied on Halloween despite enjoying a 27-12 shot advantage.   Against the top half of the UAA, Brandeis went 3-1 (being outshot in 3 of those games).

I'm not trying to convince anyone that Emory, Chicago, and NYU are not impressive teams deserving to be in the tournament since they lost to Brandeis.  And I'm not disparaging Brandeis whatsoever, as their resiliency to keep plugging away after losing tight match after tight match is admirable.  My point is that the top teams in the NEWMAC certainly could compete with anyone (as also shown in close head-to-head matches with Tufts and Amherst), and that the outright regular season winner of that league, MIT (who also advanced to the conf tourney final), deserved far better treatment than the tourney committee offered. 

Did someone on these boards mention that the Brandeis coach was, in fact, on the committee?

Brandeis is tough as a variable to standardize for comparative purposes in part because their own season was so variable...starting out 1-4-1 (when two of the NEWMAC you cited occurred).  There were comments at the time about Brandeis sliping considerably.  And as you noted, Brandeis, even towards the end of the season when they fared so well against top UAA competition was still dominated stats-wise with the exception being the draw with Rochester, and of course Rochester was one of the more debated (contested?) at large selections.

That said, there's no question that the NEWMAC getting shut out of Pool Cs was, in addition to Wesleyan missing out (who went 4-0 versus the bottom half of NEWMAC), one of the biggest surprises (snubs?) of the day.  I was certain that worst case scenario was getting only one at large bid, and I thought most likely they'd get two, and I thought there was a decent chance they'd even get three.  Which is not to day that the resumes of MIT, WPI, and CG didn't have flaws (because they did with CG losing 4 straight mid-season, WPI having too many blemishes despite the very high SoS and losing to CG a second time after getting the back to back wins over UMass-Boston and MIT which I thought would put them in, and then closing with a loss to WPI, draw with CG, and loss to Babson).

[d4_Pace]

Not that they matter at all but All-NESCAC selections are out again and once again they are a joke.

[d4_Pace]

How can the player of the year in the best conference in the country have 2 goals and an assist as an attacking mid/striker? He's 18th in the league in points!

[College Soccer Observer]

@d4_Pace How are they done.  Is this a coaches vote process? 

[Ejay]

N'Golo Kante had 0 goals and 2 assists in 48 games last season, was often the best player on the field, and is arguably the engine that makes the Chelsea train run. He was voted Champions League midfield of the year and came in 3rd in UEFA POTY.

[College Soccer Observer]

Not that they matter at all but All-NESCAC selections are out again and once again they are a joke.

https://nescac.com/news/2021/11/11/nescac-mens-soccer-all-conference-awards-released.aspx
There seems to be a pattern of giving it to the best player on the team that finishes first in the regular season.

For me, I thought Lauta from Tufts got screwed for both Rookie of the Year and a spot on the all-conference teams.  Devanny was 5th in goals against average, 4th in save percentage, and 4th in shutouts.  Lauta was 1st in GAA (.394 to .395 for Grady from Midd), 2nd in save percentage, and second in shutouts.  I thought Grady and Lauta were clearly the top two all year.

Is this a case of credit being given to his defenders, two of whom (Daly and Paoletta) both wound up on the 1st team, while McFarlane from Midd got 2nd team?