NESCAC

[PaulNewman]

Let's remember that many of us said Tufts wouldn't be more than a sweet 16 last year.  NESCAC tends to have a lot of 1-0 and 0-0 games.  They did  put 4 on the board away at Wesleyan. And they are ahead of schedule record-wise compared to last year. They will be a massively tough out for anybody.

[blooter442]

Amherst went 1-0 up on Rutgers-Newark in the first half, but RUN has equalized. 1-1 with 25:10 left. I am curious to see how Amherst deals with losing the momentum of being a goal up -- whether they start to throw things forward to try to win in regulation or pack it in and get a draw against a very good nationally-ranked team. Obviously every team wants to win, but I do know that Serpone said the foundation of Amherst soccer is comprised of working hard and not giving up a lot of goals, so I feel like they could go either way (FWIW RUN has outshot Amherst 14-9).

[SoccerMom_5]

Let's remember that many of us said Tufts wouldn't be more than a sweet 16 last year.  NESCAC tends to have a lot of 1-0 and 0-0 games.  They did  put 4 on the board away at Wesleyan. And they are ahead of schedule record-wise compared to last year. They will be a massively tough out for anybody.

They are ahead record-wise?   I thought they were undefeated last year in the 'CAC til the very end?  And lost twice in a row.... which is back to my point about the problem posed to those offense-oriented teams when the other team is defense-oriented... it comes down to that athletic match-up. (Or set pieces)

[blooter442]

They are ahead record-wise?   I thought they were undefeated last year in the 'CAC til the very end?  And lost twice in a row.... which is back to my point about the problem posed to those offense-oriented teams when the other team is defense-oriented... it comes down to that athletic match-up. (Or set pieces)

They are 7-1-1 (4-1-1 NESCAC) -- at this point last year, they were 4-3-1 (having defeated Amherst 3-0 exactly a year ago). That includes 1-1-1 in the NESCAC, as the Jumbos lost to Wesleyan on 9/27 last year.

[PaulNewman]

Just 3 versus Wes...my bad.

Yes, last year Tufts started the season 0-2-1 (and those weren't against top 20 teams either).
They have a narrow fluke loss AT Amherst...otherwise they haven't scored  ton but have looked physically dominant.  Braun Rojas, Tasker, etc etc will get stronger as year goes on...and they have at least 5-6 other guys who could snare an important goal in any game.

[blooter442]

Falconer,
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying by noting, "Tufts has yet to yield a real goal to an opponent this year." It sounds as if conceding only own goals is a strength. As a player, I always felt that giving up an own goal was worse than getting scored on directly.
Meanwhile, I bet Shapiro and Tufts remain unfazed by the loss and that Amherst responds to the win. Blooter is right to recall that Serpone gets his players up when he convinces them that they're underdogs (even when they're not).

J4J, I agree with your opinion of an OG being worse (and would say it's very "real" as the majority of the time it comes as a result of the other team's incessant pressure). As far as Serpone goes, I had to laugh when -- the year they won the national title -- he called his team the "true underdog" going into the game against Lycoming. Of course, Lycoming was very good that year, but an Amherst side with Bull/NPL/et al was clearly stronger. Hey, evidently it worked!

[blooter442]

Well, I guess we have our answer -- Amherst is throwing the kitchen sink. Outshot RUN 6-0 in the last 15 minutes. On to OT.

[blooter442]

Seems to have been a lengthy stoppage in Amherst-RUN -- both benches got yellows and Ajayi got a red for Amherst. Two feisty teams can sure generate fireworks (to be clear, I said feisty, not dirty).

Update: Amherst wins it with 2:05 left in the first OT. Big weekend for Serpone and his charges.

[SoccerMom_5]

They are ahead record-wise?   I thought they were undefeated last year in the 'CAC til the very end?  And lost twice in a row.... which is back to my point about the problem posed to those offense-oriented teams when the other team is defense-oriented... it comes down to that athletic match-up. (Or set pieces)

They are 7-1-1 (4-1-1 NESCAC) -- at this point last year, they were 4-3-1 (having defeated Amherst 3-0 exactly a year ago). That includes 1-1-1 in the NESCAC, as the Jumbos lost to Wesleyan on 9/27 last year.

I only really started watching last year, and didn't really know which games to watch ... I didn't realize that they had lost to Wesleyan - that is interesting.

[truenorth]

Tufts starting to pin Hamilton in its own half with constant pressure and consecutive corners. Hamilton looks vulnerable on corners and are having a hard time getting the ball now.

I didnt have time today to even look at a game. But...

That is how Amherst looked all game yesterday.  Tufts was really dominating them on posession, and ball control, and Amherst just kept falling deeper and deeper under pressure.   
But...  if you cant score, you can't win.   So, there is the question for Tufts: can they finish?

I understand that they are 3-1-1 but... who have they played.  And... the big games they have played, left me unconvinced.  Based on what matches I have seen, I think they have dependent on their "front men" for the last several years, and now that they don't have quite the same front-man, they have a scoring problem.

And, going back to yesterday's game again: I didn't see anything impressive from Amherst either, that warrants the "credit" they are getting.  Someone on here said Serpone thought Bowdoin outplayed them (I only saw part of that match.)  Tufts certainly outplayed them yesterday. So they "won" but... I am not sure what that means, other than three points.
I mean:  Amherst beat Tufts on a (questionable) throw, and they beat Bowdoin on a (questionable) PK.   So... maybe Amherst is just lucky?  Or ... maybe they bide their time and can capitalize on those quirky situations., and in the NESCAC, that is enoigh.
But... noticed last year that the teams who count on a big "target man" upfront win when their target man has some skill and is more athletic than the defense of their opponent.  And, Tufts and Amherst both had that guy, who was technically acceptable and very strong and fast. 

And I thought that was why they both didn't get by Bowdoin, in the end, because Bowdoin seems to use the opposite strategy, and puts their more technical "fast" guys in the back.  Which, of course, this year seems to have left Bowdoin with a scoring problem.

Based on the games I have seen, there isn't really any team this year who I think is playing great "NESCAC offense"  and if something doesnt change, it is going to come down to beating teams with flawed backlines and on set pieces and/or lucky breaks in teams with solid back lines. 

Unfortunately, that leaves the teams who are playing decent soccer, but don't have a super-star forward or technically strong athletes in the back, but have a solid midfield, and play good team-soccer at the bottom of the pile.  I like the way Colby plays.  I cant imagine that they will beat Bowdoin, or Tufts, or Amherst.  But... I like the way they play soccer.   Is that the kind of team Hamilton is?  Or, is it hard to tell against Tufts?  Did Tufts wear them down, or did they find a weak spot, and then throw everything at it.  (I like Tasker for reading those things.)

I realize we all tend to make early evaluations of individual teams and leagues and then make projections for NCAA playoff prospects.  My experience is that it's generally not fruitful to try and make comparisons from prior seasons to the current season.  The last 10 years tell us that NESCAC teams generally compete well in the NCAA tournament despite what may have happened during the regular season.  Tufts was 10-1-4 in the regular season before losing to Conn College in the NESCAC quarters in 2014 and then marching to the NCAA championship.  Alternatively Amherst was a staggering 14-0-1 in 2015 before losing to Wesleyan in the NESCAC quarters and then marching to the NCAA championship.  Last year, in 2016, Tufts was a pedestrian 9-4-2 before losing to Bowdoin in the NESCAC quarters and then marching to the NCAA championship.

There's a ton of love for U Chicago and their attack right now...but it all comes down to how a team performs in tournament time...and that is determined by a combination of health, momentum and--yes--luck during tournament time.  I would never bet against the current NESCAC halfway through the regular season, no matter how ugly or pretty the style of play of any of the top 5 teams...

[CovensCorner]

Just an observation, as I looked at the Amherst roster after someone mentioned the name Fikayo Ajayi, and noticed his hometown is listed as London, UK.  Does anyone know if there is any relation to Jay Ajayi, the NFL running back for the Dolphins, whom is originally from London as well?

[PaulNewman]

^^^^Exactly....we forget that both years that Tufts won the national title they were on the bubble to even get a bid. A snub either or both of those years wouldn't have been much different than the very real snubs Midd got two of those years. The '15 Tufts team that lost in the sweet 16 had the best resume on paper.  I mean 9-4-2...Lose AGAIN in NESCAC quarters...and win another national title...does take some luck, like UMass going thug and Haverford not beating a 9 man team on home field...and then having home field gifted to you for totally irrelevant reasons.

[blooter442]

^^^^Exactly....we forget that both years that Tufts won the national title they were on the bubble to even get a bid. A snub either or both of those years wouldn't have been much different than the very real snubs Midd got two of those years. The '15 Tufts team that lost in the sweet 16 had the best resume on paper.  I mean 9-4-2...Lose AGAIN in NESCAC quarters...and win another national title...does take some luck, like UMass going thug and Haverford not beating a 9 man team on home field...and then having home field gifted to you for totally irrelevant reasons.

The 2014 side was 10-1-4 in the regular season, while the 2015 side was 9-4-3 (and the 2016 side was 9-4-2). Not sure what you mean by saying the 2015 side had the best resume? Either way, I do agree there was some luck involved in the way things shook out in terms of home field advantage, but Tufts did go on the road and win the whole thing two years prior, so I don't think that was as big of a factor (although it may well have been, as no two teams are the same, and the '16 side may have benefited more from being at home more than the '14 side would have).

[PaulNewman]

^^^^Exactly....we forget that both years that Tufts won the national title they were on the bubble to even get a bid. A snub either or both of those years wouldn't have been much different than the very real snubs Midd got two of those years. The '15 Tufts team that lost in the sweet 16 had the best resume on paper.  I mean 9-4-2...Lose AGAIN in NESCAC quarters...and win another national title...does take some luck, like UMass going thug and Haverford not beating a 9 man team on home field...and then having home field gifted to you for totally irrelevant reasons.

The 2014 side was 10-1-4 in the regular season, while the 2015 side was 9-4-3 (and the 2016 side was 9-4-2). Not sure what you mean by saying the 2015 side had the best resume? Either way, I do agree there was some luck involved in the way things shook out in terms of home field advantage, but Tufts did go on the road and win the whole thing two years prior, so I don't think that was as big of a factor (although it may well have been, as no two teams are the same, and the '16 side may have benefited more from being at home more than the '14 side would have).

Good catch. I thought I remembered the '14 team sweating out whether they would get a bid after the loss to Conn...And yes, a great road team, but who would think a 9-4-2 team would win a national title, and at a  minimum the '14 was not highly seeded as they didn't host either weekend. If memory serves, they played the first weekend at Wheaton.

P.S. I think even Shapiro and many of the players would admit that those two home games were huge for them, which of course is not to say they couldn't have won again on the road. They actually talked about the crowd really helping them and being bigger than anything they had ever seen at home.

[4samuy]

Tufts starting to pin Hamilton in its own half with constant pressure and consecutive corners. Hamilton looks vulnerable on corners and are having a hard time getting the ball now.

I didnt have time today to even look at a game. But...

That is how Amherst looked all game yesterday.  Tufts was really dominating them on posession, and ball control, and Amherst just kept falling deeper and deeper under pressure.   
But...  if you cant score, you can't win.   So, there is the question for Tufts: can they finish?

I understand that they are 3-1-1 but... who have they played.  And... the big games they have played, left me unconvinced.  Based on what matches I have seen, I think they have dependent on their "front men" for the last several years, and now that they don't have quite the same front-man, they have a scoring problem.

And, going back to yesterday's game again: I didn't see anything impressive from Amherst either, that warrants the "credit" they are getting.  Someone on here said Serpone thought Bowdoin outplayed them (I only saw part of that match.)  Tufts certainly outplayed them yesterday. So they "won" but... I am not sure what that means, other than three points.
I mean:  Amherst beat Tufts on a (questionable) throw, and they beat Bowdoin on a (questionable) PK.   So... maybe Amherst is just lucky?  Or ... maybe they bide their time and can capitalize on those quirky situations., and in the NESCAC, that is enoigh.
But... noticed last year that the teams who count on a big "target man" upfront win when their target man has some skill and is more athletic than the defense of their opponent.  And, Tufts and Amherst both had that guy, who was technically acceptable and very strong and fast. 

And I thought that was why they both didn't get by Bowdoin, in the end, because Bowdoin seems to use the opposite strategy, and puts their more technical "fast" guys in the back.  Which, of course, this year seems to have left Bowdoin with a scoring problem.

Based on the games I have seen, there isn't really any team this year who I think is playing great "NESCAC offense"  and if something doesnt change, it is going to come down to beating teams with flawed backlines and on set pieces and/or lucky breaks in teams with solid back lines. 

Unfortunately, that leaves the teams who are playing decent soccer, but don't have a super-star forward or technically strong athletes in the back, but have a solid midfield, and play good team-soccer at the bottom of the pile.  I like the way Colby plays.  I cant imagine that they will beat Bowdoin, or Tufts, or Amherst.  But... I like the way they play soccer.   Is that the kind of team Hamilton is?  Or, is it hard to tell against Tufts?  Did Tufts wear them down, or did they find a weak spot, and then throw everything at it.  (I like Tasker for reading those things.)

I realize we all tend to make early evaluations of individual teams and leagues and then make projections for NCAA playoff prospects.  My experience is that it's generally not fruitful to try and make comparisons from prior seasons to the current season.  The last 10 years tell us that NESCAC teams generally compete well in the NCAA tournament despite what may have happened during the regular season.  Tufts was 10-1-4 in the regular season before losing to Conn College in the NESCAC quarters in 2014 and then marching to the NCAA championship.  Alternatively Amherst was a staggering 14-0-1 in 2015 before losing to Wesleyan in the NESCAC quarters and then marching to the NCAA championship.  Last year, in 2016, Tufts was a pedestrian 9-4-2 before losing to Bowdoin in the NESCAC quarters and then marching to the NCAA championship.

There's a ton of love for U Chicago and their attack right now...but it all comes down to how a team performs in tournament time...and that is determined by a combination of health, momentum and--yes--luck during tournament time.  I would never bet against the current NESCAC halfway through the regular season, no matter how ugly or pretty the style of play of any of the top 5 teams...

TrueNorth,

I agree with you that its not fruitful to make comparisons from prior seasons to current seasons, because yes, each season stands on its own.  But... you then go on to say "there's a ton of love for U Chicago and their attack right now...but it all comes down to how a team performs in tournament time".  IMHO, it almost sounds as if you ARE comparing Chicagos early exit last year with this years team and how they may perform come tournament time.  You are right on saying a combination of health, momentum and luck determine how a team performs come tournament time when all else is equal.