Big Dance 2022 - Let's Go!

[MNBob]

I assume most conferences feel that awarding the AQ to the tournament winner increases the chances of getting at leat 2 teams into the tournament. Finishing first in the regular season of a strong conference probably has a team in the rankings already so losing out in the tournament isn't as costly.

UWEC received the Pool b berth. It is only year 2 of the program. Would they have earned a pool C berth? IMO they would have beat out UW-Platville for Pool C.

[jknezek]

Good point!  Pool C

I think the last four in were Vassar, Catholic, Lynchburg, Williams
I think last two out were Montclair St and West Conn State - both in order

Western CT and Montclair St. could not have both been among the first two out. Hamilton remained ahead of Western Ct on the 11/6 Regional Rankings so Hamilton would have been the Region 1 team up for discussion when the final selection was made. Western Ct never made it to the table to be given a chance. Since NYU was chosen, Montclair St would have been at the table when the last selection was made. They would have been left sitting with 8 other unchosen Regional contenders, one of them Hamilton, but not Western Ct.

So assuming Montclair St would have been the next pick, Hamilton would still have needed to be selected before Western Ct even came to the table. Or Hamilton, West Conn could have been the next 2 picks but then Montclair would still be sitting unselected.

I know I'm splitting hairs pointing out that one of those teams could have been no higher than the 3rd left out selection, but it's important to understand the process and understand how the Region 1 reps buried West Conn so they wouldn't even get discussed. Now in the past, the National Committee had the ability to restructure the Regional Rankings if they believed there was a good reason. I don't know if that verbiage remained in the Handbook this year. But in my years of following soccer and football, I can't remember it happening anyway.

[Christan Shirk]

Pool C's only or anyone?  Lots of AQs could be replaced by stronger Pool C's who got left out

Yes and No for me.  Obviously, there are teams that got hot for 2 or 3 games (including through the horrible PK shootout system) and would most likely never be an at-large bid.  There clearly are teams that should have gotten at-large bids. 

However, starting the season every team has the dream of making the NCAAs and not all teams make it into their conf. tourney.  Many of the teams who qualify for the conf. tournament stumble along the way so wouldn't be considered for at-large bid.  This year I believe that there are two teams that never made the NCAAs and they had to win their tournaments to qualify.  I don't know if there are any at-large teams who had not been in the NCAAs most recently (in the last 5 years).

So, IMO this is good thing for D3 soccer and makes their programs as well as soccer in general stronger! Win the tournament and there is chance to make their programs better the next couple of years.

Actually, seven men's team are in the NCAA Tournament for the first time in program history.  Six earned an automatic berth via their conference tournament: Birmingham-Southern, Brevard, Franciscan, Marymount, St. Joseph (Conn.). St. Thomas (Texas).  The seventh is UW-Eau Claire who was the Pool B at-large selection.  On the women's side there are five first-time NCAA participants.

We indicate these teams on D3soccer.com's NCAA Participants pages:
2022 Men's NCAA Tournament Participants
2022 Women's NCAA Tournament Participants
Look for the bold, red 1st in the column for Years Participated.

[regularguy]

hey all - i knew last year someone created a bracket, but haven't seen it yet. i went ahead and created a pool for this season, feel free to join here.

https://www.runyourpool.com/p/j/8da271f5b60243f586c393ea94dc3b62

let me know if you have any thoughts or questions!

[Planters Nuts]

I know NESCAC has its reputation - but given all the ties this year (looking at you Williams) what stops them from trying to win games next year in that conference.  Just continue to play for ties and maybe at some point get a fortunate counter!

The committee setting a standard that ties are more important than winning (as long as your SoS is higher) is a bad message in my opinion.  Not sure who it was that posted here, but they looked at Williams' record as failing to win more than 50% of their games at 6-1-10.  I couldn't agree more with that argument.

[PaulNewman]

I know NESCAC has its reputation - but given all the ties this year (looking at you Williams) what stops them from trying to win games next year in that conference.  Just continue to play for ties and maybe at some point get a fortunate counter!

The committee setting a standard that ties are more important than winning (as long as your SoS is higher) is a bad message in my opinion.  Not sure who it was that posted here, but they looked at Williams' record as failing to win more than 50% of their games at 6-1-10.  I couldn't agree more with that argument.

I'm infrequently a NESCAC apologist, but it seems to me that Williams has gotten singled out as the poster child in a way that's unfair.  Do you know for a fact that Williams wasn't trying to win games?  I understand that on paper they may be one of or even the most egregious example, but as many have noted and complained about, this has been the year for draws.  There are a slew of teams with 5, 6, 7, 8 ties.

[PaulNewman]

I mean, does anyone think Hopkins wanted to tie Muhlenberg...or that W CT wanted to tie UMass-Boston....or Tufts and Bowdoin wanted to tie Williams and Conn?

[Maine Soccer Fan]

I know NESCAC has its reputation - but given all the ties this year (looking at you Williams) what stops them from trying to win games next year in that conference.  Just continue to play for ties and maybe at some point get a fortunate counter!

The committee setting a standard that ties are more important than winning (as long as your SoS is higher) is a bad message in my opinion.  Not sure who it was that posted here, but they looked at Williams' record as failing to win more than 50% of their games at 6-1-10.  I couldn't agree more with that argument.

I agree and I don't think Williams strong defense, weak offense will serve them well this weekend.

[Hopkins92]

Someone just gave me a good idea. Gonna go through the quadrants and look at Massey rankings for each match-up. See where we're at on that front.

REGION 1

UChicago #2 v. Birmingham So. #135
Willamette 40 v. WI Platt 56

St. Thomas 9 v. Chapman 46
M H-B 30 v. Pac Lu 20

=-=-=-=-=

G. Adolphus 26 v. Aurora 119
WI Eu-Claire 12 v. Luther 52

N. Central 10 v. WI Superior 137
St. Olaf 14 v. Lake Forest 212

REGION 2

Stevens 15 v. Worcester St. 211
Rowan 42 v. Middlebury 5

F&M 19 v. St. Joe's (CT) 162
SUNY Cort 23 v. Medaille 165

=-==-=-=-=-

CNU 8 v. Rosemont 224
Lynchburg 36 v. Catholic 37

Hopkins 17 v. Lehman 280
J. Carroll 24 v. Scranton 96

[Kuiper]

Someone just gave me a good idea. Gonna go through the quadrants and look at Massey rankings for each match-up. See where we're at on that front.

REGION 1

UChicago #2 v. Birmingham So. #135
Willamette 40 v. WI Platt 56

St. Thomas 9 v. Chapman 46
M H-B 334 v. Pac Lu 20

=-=-=-=-=

G. Adolphus 26 v. Aurora 119
WI Eu-Claire 12 v. Luther 52

N. Central 10 v. WI Superior 137
St. Olaf 14 v. Lake Forest 212

Mary Hardin-Baylor is 30 in Massey.  Mary Baldwin is 334.

[jknezek]

I mean, does anyone think Hopkins wanted to tie Muhlenberg...or that W CT wanted to tie UMass-Boston....or Tufts and Bowdoin wanted to tie Williams and Conn?

Parking the bus is a very legitimate defensive strategy that is reinforced by the treatment of ties in winning percentage as 50/50 as opposed to 33% in the 3pt/1pt system. I think if you are being outplayed, playing for a tie is over-rewarded especially since we've made ties 50% easier this year.

Of their 10 ties, I'm too lazy to go check and see how often Williams was statistically dominant. But if I'm a coach, and I know my offense is... light, as Williams appeared all season (2 games where they scored more than twice, 6 games where they didn't score), then playing for a tie when equal or overmatched makes sense. As anemic as the #307 scoring offense in the country is, with 1.18 goals per game, I probably am not real interested in throwing players forward looking for a goal I'm unlikely to get even if I am the better team.

[SierraFD3soccer]

I mean, does anyone think Hopkins wanted to tie Muhlenberg...or that W CT wanted to tie UMass-Boston....or Tufts and Bowdoin wanted to tie Williams and Conn?

Or Hopkins wanted to tie Muhlenberg twice?

[Hopkins92]

Someone just gave me a good idea. Gonna go through the quadrants and look at Massey rankings for each match-up. See where we're at on that front.

REGION 1

UChicago #2 v. Birmingham So. #135
Willamette 40 v. WI Platt 56

St. Thomas 9 v. Chapman 46
M H-B 334 v. Pac Lu 20

=-=-=-=-=

G. Adolphus 26 v. Aurora 119
WI Eu-Claire 12 v. Luther 52

N. Central 10 v. WI Superior 137
St. Olaf 14 v. Lake Forest 212

Mary Hardin-Baylor is 30 in Massey.  Mary Baldwin is 334.

Should've double checked, thanks kuiper!

[PaulNewman]

I mean, does anyone think Hopkins wanted to tie Muhlenberg...or that W CT wanted to tie UMass-Boston....or Tufts and Bowdoin wanted to tie Williams and Conn?

Parking the bus is a very legitimate defensive strategy that is reinforced by the treatment of ties in winning percentage as 50/50 as opposed to 33% in the 3pt/1pt system. I think if you are being outplayed, playing for a tie is over-rewarded especially since we've made ties 50% easier this year.

Of their 10 ties, I'm too lazy to go check and see how often Williams was statistically dominant. But if I'm a coach, and I know my offense is... light, as Williams appeared all season (2 games where they scored more than twice, 6 games where they didn't score), then playing for a tie when equal or overmatched makes sense. As anemic as the #307 scoring offense in the country is, with 1.18 goals per game, I probably am not real interested in throwing players forward looking for a goal I'm unlikely to get even if I am the better team.

Fair enough.  I just doubt Williams went into the season saying let's go get 10 draws.  I picked the examples I did because they presumably had little to do with winning pct calculations as they were knockout games and in a couple of cases involved losing AQs, and of course in W Ct's case involved not being in the tournament.  And why do Amherst and SLU have 5 draws, and many others 7 or more?  It's also a pretty high-risk proposition....going for draws if in fact that is true means you're really chancing that you won't give up a fluke goal a few of those 10 times.

[Hopkins92]

REGION 3

Messiah 1 v. Franciscan 227
Williams 27 v. NYU 32

ONU 41 v. Mt. Aloysius 225
North Park 18 v. Rose Hulman 123

=-=-=-=-=-=

W&L 16 v. Brevard 161
Case West 33 v. Muhles 62

Kenyon 4 v. Greenville 220
Calvin 13 v. Carnegie M 38

REGION 4

Amherst 3 v. Husson 204
St. Law. 31 v. Roger W. 111

Mary Wash. 21 v. Marymount 182
OWU 50 v. PSU-H 113

=-=--=-===

SUNY Oneonta 35 v. NE Coll. 284
Tufts 25 v. UMASS-B 82

Bowdoin 6 v. Merch. Marine 149
Babson 7 v. Vassar 60