Can anyone give me the lowdown on what the playoff format is? I thought the Sockers had a bye into the 2nd round then I thought they had a Wildcard and had to play the first round.
The following information is from http://www.sandiego.com/sports/san-diego-sockers-enter-two-postseasons .... "The Sockers first game of the playoffs will be a semifinals match on March 12 at either 5:30 or 7 p.m. The championship game will be on March 13 at 6:15 p.m."
LMFR (2 spots) - La Raza de Guadalajara (not Monterrey) as Champions, Sidekicks del Estado de Mexico as runners up. CMISL (1 spot) - Saskatoon or Calgary. Calgary has 2 games vs Winnipeg this weekend. From what I understand they only need to win one. If they lose both, Saskatoon is in. PASL (3 spots) - San Diego as West Division Champions, Cincinnati as East Division Champions, and California as the Wild Card (next best overall record) Here is where it gets confusing. Syd made a post about a week ago stating that regardless of how they qualified, teams would be seeded 1-6 based on their winning percentage. So even though the way teams qualified is basically the same as last year, how they are seeded is not. If you throw who won divsions vs. wild cards out the window, PASL teams would be ranked this way: 1.San Diego 2.California 3.Cincinnati If Calgary splits with Winnipeg they would be 4th. If they swept Winnipeg they would jump to second over California and Cincinnati. If they lost both, they would be out and Saskatoon would be 4th. Now to make it more confusing, the two Mexican teams have not been included yet. I (nor anyone else I suspect) knows exactly what "winning percentage" these teams have, and where they rank vs. PASL/CMISL teams under this format. At least 2 articles from San Diego have stated that the Sockers will get a bye, so we know they are no worse than the #2 seed. So at the most, only 1 (if any) Mexican team is in the top two. Personally I think they should just go back to last year's format: 1.PASL Div Winner #1 (San Diego) 2.PASL Div Winner #2 (Cincinnati) 3.CMISL Champ (Calgary or Saskatoon) 4.LMFR #1 (La Raza de Guadalajara) 5.PASL Wild Card (California) 6.LMFR #2 (Sidekicks del Estado de Mexico) Only problem is that this puts SD and Cali on the same side of the bracket (#1 would play 4/5, 2 would play 3/6), which I don't think they want to do. But if they stick with this winning percentage as the sole determination of ranking, I think figuring out the Mexican teams will be tough.
Syd....Will the Liga Mexicana de Futbol Rapido be playing any regular season games with PASL-Pro teams next season? It would be great to be able to see those teams during the regular season, similar to the current PASL-Pro/CMISL arrangement. It has been easy to follow the CMISL up to the playoffs the past two seasons, but not the LMFR. Seeing those teams in the LMFR on webcasts, or getting an idea of those teams' strengths through common opponents, would be great going into the playoffs.
Yeah that would make too much sense, actually playing a team in the regular season that has an opportunity to be a champion in the league finals.
Well that's a problem I have because there IS no PASL-Pro final per se. Technically the PASL-Pro champions the last two years would be Cincinnati and San Diego. Financially it doesn't make any sense to play games deep into Mexico. Tijuana is one thing. Flying to Guadalajara or Mexico City is totally different.
Not currently. It kind of makes sense to call Stockton 2008/09 PASL-Pro Champions, but what if La Cabana or Edmonton had won? And even if we did call Cincinnati the PASL-Pro champion, how can Stockton be the best team in North America if they didn't win their own league? It's definitely something I am putting a lot of thought into to come up with practical solutions.
Calgary swept Winnipeg yesterday. Based on the order we know the US & Canadian teams should be in, and based on the bracket, here is what I believe are the seedings are: 1.La Raza de Guadalajara 2.San Diego 3.Sidekicks del Estado de Mexico 4.Calgary 5.California 6.Cincinnati
You have 3 and 6 backwards, but the bracket won't change according to seeding after the quarterfinals. It's a straight bracket.
So Cincy got the higher seed based on the fact that they won their division? I guess the seeds don't really matter as it's a straight bracket, but I was curious how the league did it. I am glad that California and San Diego are on other sides of the bracket. California-Calgary will be a great first round matchup!
I was wondering why the top two seeds don't just go to the Eastern and Western division winners? If this is the PASL-Pro playoffs then I think the 2 teams that should get a bye should be the division winners. The Mexican and Canadian teams are not directly involed in the PASL, they are more affiliated with the PASL. They should be in the quarter finals. Just a suggestion.
Wow - what a great game! Nelson Santana scores in sudden death OT to give the Cougars an 8-7 win over Calgary. The Cougars were down 6-3 and used the 6th attacker to get it back to 6-6. They decided to keep the 6th attacker only to go down 7-6. I didn't see the tying goal but they were back using the 6th attacker in OT! Talk about gutsy! California will play La Raza de Guadalajara in the Semis. Cincinnati-Sidekicks del Estado de Mexico is next, the winner to play San Diego.
That was friggin' crazy! The Cougars had Santana in as the sixth attacker for most of the forth quarter, and just stuck with it all the way through overtime. I've never seen such a bonzo move in indoor soccer. Santana had some outstanding long distance shots. He's actually a good goal keeper too. I saw him put in an excellent performance replacing Molina (red carded) in an Arena Open Cup match earlier this season. He was hands down the man of the match today.
It was unreal because it was tied and then it was overtime, but also because Santana essentially played 18 straight minutes as a field player, too.
The only thing that was a joke about that game was how the Cougars won. Calgary should have won that game. Santana pulled the legs out from under the Calgary player when he had an open goal and the refs did not call it. The Cougars are a dirty team and have been playing that way all season long. Calgary should be in the semi finals not the Cougars.
You're not the first person to make such a claim. As the new acting PASL president, I will be looking into this.
LOL!!! You really should add to your list that the PASL-Pro refs are a joke. Always missing bad calls esp in favor of the Cougars. That team is a joke.
That was a great game between Calgary-Cougars. I was there (one of the 100-200 fans), and thought that it was fairly well referee'd. There always is a lot of contact. I don't know about the Calgary "should have won" opinion, as they had at least two good looks from midfield at an empty goal and missed both times. Howeer, IMO, I thought that the cougar keeper did foul the Calgary attacker in OT.
Also ... Craig Elston does a greeat job on 619sports.com for any of you who want to follow the game via the internet. (Craig can fill in the gaps of the questionable video quality, using his eloquent dialogue ).
My only problem is the Cougars play a dirty game. The reason I feel the Calgary team should have won is because the 6th attacker, Santana, pulled out the legs from under the Calgary player in the box which would have resulted in a shoot out. If the shoot out was missed then there would have been a 2 minute penalty. The refs did not want to make that call and have the OT decided that way for what ever reason. The Cougars always play dirty ball and until the refs start making those calls they will continue to play that way. U are right about Craig. He does so a great job with the broadcast.