First and foremost, I want to express my gratitude to everyone who has helped me through my soccer career and got me this far, I am beyond blessed!I am excited to announce that I will start the next chapter of my life at St. Louis University. I can't wait to be a Billiken! pic.twitter.com/nTXejMDAyq— Patrick Weah (@weah526) May 18, 2020 St. Louis just picked up a pretty good commit.
Billikens win the A10 Tournament. Remain undefeated. Should have a first round bye and a second round home game.
10 is actually pretty good. 14 RPI with zero Top 25 wins and zero Top 25 opponents. Four Top 50 wins helped them.
I'd agree if we had losses. We can only play the teams they put in front of us. We didn't lose to any of them. A 7 or 8 is more realistic
You keep saying "a 7 or 8"....you realize they aren't "a" 10, right? They're "the" 10-seed. For the whole tournament. There's only one. That's pretty good all things considered. Two home draws to UIC and SIU-E did not help their case for a higher seed (but I'll grant you, they really did a nice job getting mostly high caliber teams on the schedule for non-conference). That being said, in the men's tournament I don't think there's much of a difference between most seeds (outside of the top 2-3 and bottom 2-3). Once you're into the 2nd round, you're not getting anyone who shouldn't be there - unlike the women's tournament that will likely see some really ugly scores in the 2nd round. SLU gets the winner of Maryland/LIU. I'd probably take that over the winner of UCLA/UCSB, which is what the Duke gets as the 7 seed. So again, not much difference in who is seeded where with these middle seeds.
Ask Billikens if they now understand the difference between #10 seed and #8 seed. The difference is more significant than merely 2 slots. Difference between #8 and #6 is insignificant. Difference between #8 and #9 is a big deal.
Sure, but pretty hard (IMO) to rank them above either #8 seed Clemson or #9 seed Kentucky: http://rpiupdatemenssoccer.blogspot.com/2021/07/clemson.html http://rpiupdatemenssoccer.blogspot.com/2021/07/kentucky.html http://rpiupdatemenssoccer.blogspot.com/2021/07/saint-louis.html
Then you'd be a fool. Duke gets the home match. I fully expect Duke to beat SLU at Duke. SLU would beat them at Herman Stadium. But my problem is not Duke. It's the Notre Dames of the world. They lost to Michigan St. and Virginia Tech. They tied BC. They are 13-5-3 = that's a 61% winning percentage and they some how get a 4 seed? I watched play them play NC and they were awful. The fact that Kentucky has to play Clemson in Clemson is criminal.
Kentucky, I'll give you. But Clemson? RPI is kind of ridiculous in that it gives SOS such importance. SOS is not important when you lose the tough games as Clemson did. They lost 5 games that's 26% of their games.
Why would I be a fool? SLU smashed LIU and Duke needed a late-game deflection to get by a 10-man UCLA (9-man but that came after the goal). Doesn't take an analyst to see that SLU had the more favorable draw, even as a lower seed. I get the 3rd round home game argument but you can't look ahead to that when the draw comes out. Just have to worry about what's right in front of you.
Notre Dame won the ACC. When you're the champs of the deepest (not necessarily best) conference in college soccer, the committee is gonna put a lot of stock in that.
Playing creampuffs does not prepare you for the tough competition in the tournament. There is no perfect ranking system. RPI is decent enough, somewhat overweighting SOS. Getting fancier (eg Massey) doesn't seem to add much value. IMO, the selection committee doesn't add value either. It's simply impossible for a human being to hold all the stats (even if it's just wins-losses-ties) for all the teams in contention. Just pick a formula and use it. That's what's been done in hockey for at least a decade, and it works fine.
The Massey system uses game scores as an important element in producing its ratings. That pretty much falls apart in a sport where the most common game score is 1-0.
Yes, but losing to the teams that give you a strong SOS does not mean you're good. I don't care how strong of a schedule ND has. They still didn't win nearly 40% of their games. Do you really think they are the fourth best team in the country? I'd love to have someone explain to me how losing to good teams somehow means you're good also. That's craziness.
Notre Dame played 10 Top 25 teams with a 5-4-1 record. SLU played ZERO teams in the top 25. SLU is a good team, they did not lose a game, but they are seeded VERY fairly based on who they played. Their big wins are over a 9-8-2 Creighton team and one-and-done bubble team in Louisville. With a 14 RPI and no Top 25 wins to get a #10 seed is actually quite a reward from the NCAA.
My point is that it doesn’t matter how many Top 25 teams you play if you lose to them. Losing to a good team is no indication of quality. If both a number 30 team and a 60 team lose to a 5, we have zero indication of either’s quality. No team should be award for losing even to good teams. Especially ND who lost or tied a lot of them.
What 4 top 25 teams did ND beat? And are we going to look at the loses to Michigan St and Virginia Tech? Don’t those count?