Pool C Amateur Predictions and Prizes

[Falconer]

I also suspect MOST D3 schools do not have separate fields for men’s and women’s soccer, like described at Amherst. In the Midwest it’s pretty common that the two share the same game field.

Messiah's teams share the same large grass field, which most teams regard as being of very high quality. I almost never overhear a complaint about the pitch. I think there was a recent year in which the women got a first-round bye and ended up playing at home along with the men, but I may have some wires crossed in my brain. FW will straighten me out if that's the case. 

Most D3 schools aren't nearly as wealthy as Amherst; they have one single soccer pitch, which might or might not be of high quality. For fairness' sake, I support the current policy, even though it means that most years one of my teams doesn't get to benefit from the higher seeding they earned. It shouldn't be the case that only those schools with enough resources to have two soccer pitches get to have both of their teams play at home the same weekend(s).

On the other hand, I would support a policy that favored top-quality grass fields over turf fields (regardless of quality), and higher quality turf over bad grass or turf. At one point, didn't the NCAA have a policy favoring larger grass surfaces over all others? If so, what happened to that policy--or is it still in effect? Obviously I'm sounding like the homer I am, since Messiah's field is very high quality grass, but lots of other colleges have similar fields. I am just a stickler for playing soccer on grass, and not on a very small field either. As Dick Allen used to say, if a cow can't eat it, I don't want to play on it!

[Hopkins92]

What I don't understand is if a school has multiple fields why men and women can't both host. Amherst men and women play at home on the same weekend all the time with no issue. Each has there own field as well as an additional warmup field. The women hosting would have no impact on the men's games.

The issue is logistics.  You would now need hotels and locker rooms for 6 visiting teams and not just 2.  Also, for many schools, the athletic department staff would be stretched too thin to accommodate hosting both men's and women's simultaneously.  Like many things with the NCAA, flexibility is now out the window in the name of consistent policy  ;-)

Plus, Chicago is also hosting a pod in the D3 women's volleyball tournament next weekend, and hosting a football game.

Well, while we're tooting horns, in addition to MSOC and WSOC (hence Catholic hosting in that pod on the men's side), the volleyball team completed an undefeated season in taking the CC, and the field hockey team will host their second round game on Nov. 16 after beating F&M in the finals on Sunday.

[Gregory Sager]

I also suspect MOST D3 schools do not have separate fields for men's and women's soccer, like described at Amherst. In the Midwest it's pretty common that the two share the same game field.

Messiah's teams share the same large grass field, which most teams regard as being of very high quality. I almost never overhear a complaint about the pitch. I think there was a recent year in which the women got a first-round bye and ended up playing at home along with the men, but I may have some wires crossed in my brain. FW will straighten me out if that's the case. 

Most D3 schools aren't nearly as wealthy as Amherst; they have one single soccer pitch, which might or might not be of high quality. For fairness' sake, I support the current policy, even though it means that most years one of my teams doesn't get to benefit from the higher seeding they earned. It shouldn't be the case that only those schools with enough resources to have two soccer pitches get to have both of their teams play at home the same weekend(s).

On the other hand, I would support a policy that favored top-quality grass fields over turf fields (regardless of quality), and higher quality turf over bad grass or turf. At one point, didn't the NCAA have a policy favoring larger grass surfaces over all others? If so, what happened to that policy--or is it still in effect? Obviously I'm sounding like the homer I am, since Messiah's field is very high quality grass, but lots of other colleges have similar fields. I am just a stickler for playing soccer on grass, and not on a very small field either. As Dick Allen used to say, if a cow can't eat it, I don't want to play on it!

Disagree. Most of the grass pitches I see out here in the Midwest are not in great shape -- especially at this time of year, and especially in a year like this in which there has already been a substantial snowfall and a couple of deep freezes.

Then again, I'm just as much of a homer as you, because NPU's Field Turf surface is only a couple of years old and has an outstanding drainage system. Every bounce that you get on that surface is a true one.

What I don't understand is if a school has multiple fields why men and women can't both host. Amherst men and women play at home on the same weekend all the time with no issue. Each has there own field as well as an additional warmup field. The women hosting would have no impact on the men's games.

The issue is logistics.  You would now need hotels and locker rooms for 6 visiting teams and not just 2.  Also, for many schools, the athletic department staff would be stretched too thin to accommodate hosting both men's and women's simultaneously.  Like many things with the NCAA, flexibility is now out the window in the name of consistent policy  ;-)

Plus, Chicago is also hosting a pod in the D3 women's volleyball tournament next weekend, and hosting a football game.

Well, while we're tooting horns, in addition to MSOC and WSOC (hence Catholic hosting in that pod on the men's side), the volleyball team completed an undefeated season in taking the CC, and the field hockey team will host their second round game on Nov. 16 after beating F&M in the finals on Sunday.

I'm not tooting horns. My school is NPU, not Chicago. I'm simply explaining why it was too difficult for Chicago to host a men's soccer pod this coming weekend.

[Hopkins92]

*toot*

[PaulNewman]

Wealth aside, I don't think I've ever heard anyone say that Amherst has great fields.

[blooter442]

Wealth aside, I don't think I've ever heard anyone say that Amherst has great fields.

Feel like I said it, but I was ill-informed at the time. I will (generally) fess up to being wrong, and this is one of those cases!

[Shooter McGavin]

Messiah's grass field, from the video stream, looked to be in nice shape but many players in multiple games I watched this year were slipping and sliding all over. Even in the most recent match with Lycoming, players from both teams were falling or losing their footing and this was during a daytime game. Not sure how well it has held up without stepping foot onto it but the conditions always look slick at Messiah which isn't a good thing for players. Do any of the Messiah faithful know why it's so slick or seems to be this way from the computer screen?

[Falconer]

Messiah's grass field, from the video stream, looked to be in nice shape but many players in multiple games I watched this year were slipping and sliding all over. Even in the most recent match with Lycoming, players from both teams were falling or losing their footing and this was during a daytime game. Not sure how well it has held up without stepping foot onto it but the conditions always look slick at Messiah which isn't a good thing for players. Do any of the Messiah faithful know why it's so slick or seems to be this way from the computer screen?

Messiah's field gets slick when dew condenses on it in cold weather. Bright sun usually eliminates this, even when very cold. Night games during October and November are the usual times this happens, but last Saturday vs Lycoming it was probably limited sunlight and temperature combined.

[Hopkins92]

Well, I attended last year's second round match and I sure don't remember it being a significant issue. (Pretty sure I would've written about. I sure made note of the field conditions of a game I was watching earlier this season, as the grass was coming out in clumps AND it was WAY too high. Don't remember the game, but the point is that I always look at the quality of the pitch straight away.)

That said, the later you go in the year, the slicker the tight grass fields are going to get in this region. Last year's game was COLD and even in the bright sunlight, the field is going to retain moisture through the entire day. IOW, the dew still forms overnight, but the sun isn't strong enough to turn it back into vapor. This is particularly compounded if over the night time hours preceding you get frost.

/amateur groundskeeper

[Hopkins92]

GEEZ LOUISE. I make one quick edit and Falconer swoops in.

[Hopkins92]

Etown was the field I was taking issue with, FWIW.

[Gregory Sager]

GEEZ LOUISE. I make one quick edit and Falconer swoops in.

Swooping in is what falcons do best.

[LetteroftheLaw]

I must say all the hosts this year with grass fields that I'm aware of have traditionally always been extremely well maintained (CNU, MWU, And W&L) so hopefully field conditions don't have an impact on the results this weekend. Messiahs field is okay, not as nice as the other three which have Short Bermuda grass. I'm just happy there isn't a team like Etown or Muhlenburg hosting whose field could definitely influence a result.

[blooter442]

Swooping in is what falcons do best.

Well played, +K (not that it moves the needle that much  )

[PaulNewman]

Swooping in is what falcons do best.

Well played, +K (not that it moves the needle that much  )

Hopkins92 should get a piece of that +k, since the Hopkins grad knew what he was saying when he used "Falconer swoops in."  At a minimum, a hockey assist.  Or put another way, Mr. Sager tapped in a ball already going in the net.