MWP: Stanford 17 Cal 11 - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: MWP: Stanford 17 Cal 11 (/thread-18597.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: MWP: Stanford 17 Cal 11 (/thread-18597.html)
MWP: Stanford 17 Cal 11 - Viking_Guy - 11-24-2019
Wanted to separate this into its own thread, for discussion.
Watched the whole game, and it felt for a lot of it that the pool was a bit tilted. The ejection of Ben Hallock, for slapping the water, as a Cal defender acted as if he'd been hit. He may have caught the other arm, as Hallock was trying to wrench it free after being fouled, but it felt like the official bought it. Exclusion after exclusion in favor of da Bears. THREE penalty shots, later counterbalanced, after Cal had cut a 7 goal lead to 3 at 14-11 by two for Stanford that helped push out the final margin.
In any case, they managed to overcome that, behind strong games from the Woodheads and Abramson, and a very nice feel good goal at the end from Spencer Hanson.
So Stanford #1. USC, UCLA, UCSB, maybe (host) Pacific vying for 2 at-large spots. UC Davis, Pepperdine, Harvard, and one more qualifier already in (Bucknell?)
Back to men's soccer.
Congratulations to the team, and Go Card!
VG
RE: MWP: Stanford 17 Cal 11 - cardcrimson - 11-24-2019
Congrats to the Cards!
Unequal officiating in water polo?!? You can't be serious. . . .
Out of curiosity, the scores seem really high of late. I know there are new rules coming to help scoring, are they already in place?
RE: MWP: Stanford 17 Cal 11 - Canalejas - 11-24-2019
Bracket appears to be out.
https://www.ncaa.com/brackets/waterpolo-men/nc/2019
Only one at-large bid to the MPSF this year, and USC got it. So UCLA stays home.
Stanford and USC are on the same side of the bracket, so the final will feature at least one team from outside the MPSF.
It looks like UCSB's 15-10 win over Pacific in the GCC 3rd place game wasn't enough to move them ahead of the Tigers.
RE: MWP: Stanford 17 Cal 11 - Viking_Guy - 11-24-2019
They really want a non-MPSF team in the final, don't they? SC and UCLA gave them the excuse, but damn, I don't think Pacific deserves the #2 overall seed. Hell, they lost the only two games they played in their conference tournament, to #8 Long Beach State and #6 Pepperdine. Pepperdine was the AQ from the GCC.
I can see Pacific as an at-large team, but not the #2 seed. And I don't know, don't you think they'll get enough of a boost out of hosting?
Well, if Stanford can win this, they'll have earned it.
VG
RE: MWP: Stanford 17 Cal 11 - Canalejas - 11-24-2019
Maybe Pacific got the nod both on the at-large bid and the 2-seed because they are hosting.
RE: MWP: Stanford 17 Cal 11 - M T - 11-25-2019
(11-24-2019, 11:12 PM)Canalejas Wrote: Maybe Pacific got the nod both on the at-large bid and the 2-seed because they are hosting.
Giving one advantage to a team isn't enough? (Yes, the tournament has to be hosted somewhere, and the host team does wind up with advantages, if they're playing. But also bumping them up in seeding seems too much!)
One of Pacific (16-5), Pepperdine(24-7), or UCDavis (16-7) is guaranteed to get to the finals. UCLA (17-5) is guaranteed not to.
During the MPSF championship game, criteria for choosing at-large teams was shown. One of them was how they had done in the last 10 games.
Pacific is 6-4 in its last 10, with loses to Stanford, UCLA, LBSU, UCSB (but does have a win over USC). It lost BOTH of its last 2 games in its conference tournament. How such a team is seeded #2 is beyond me.
Quite possibly, each of the two semi-finals will be intra-conference games (MPSF: Stanford-USC; GCC: Pacific-Pepperdine), rather than setting them up as inter-conference games. Kinda makes you wonder why there are conference tournaments if the committee is going to set it up this way. ("Yeah, we know you had a tournament, but we're going to make it almost meaningless as we're going to make you play yet another game against a conference opponent")
Clearly there is a lot more parity in water polo this year than there has ever been before. Water polo is very strong in some other parts of the world. A few scholarships can quickly improve a team.
P.S. The NCAA has hit UCSB's water polo and track teams with level II violations. For the WP team's competition, the penalties are in the past (including vacating records, which may not yet be adjusted). There are recruiting restrictions in the future plus a fine. For the WP head coach (Wolf Wigo, Stanford BA '96) and an assistant coach, and the Track & Field head coach(es), there are future restrictions.
RE: MWP: Stanford 17 Cal 11 - CTcard - 11-25-2019
(11-25-2019, 05:59 AM)M T Wrote:(11-24-2019, 11:12 PM)Canalejas Wrote: Maybe Pacific got the nod both on the at-large bid and the 2-seed because they are hosting....
During the MPSF championship game, criteria for choosing at-large teams was shown. One of them was how they had done in the last 10 games.
Pacific is 6-4 in its last 10, with loses to Stanford, UCLA, LBSU, UCSB (but does have a win over USC). It lost BOTH of its last 2 games in its conference tournament. How such a team is seeded #2 is beyond me.
Quite possibly, each of the two semi-finals will be intra-conference games (MPSF: Stanford-USC; GCC: Pacific-Pepperdine), rather than setting them up as inter-conference games. Kinda makes you wonder why there are conference tournaments if the committee is going to set it up this way. ("Yeah, we know you had a tournament, but we're going to make it almost meaningless as we're going to make you play yet another game against a conference opponent")
This is a quite strange tournament, and the official NCAA announcement of the bracket is itself opaque.
https://www.ncaa.com/news/waterpolo-men/article/2019-11-24/2019-national-collegiate-mens-water-polo-championship
First off, seven teams is weird. Last year there were eight. I guess this is associated with the Southern California Conference moving to a Division III tournament, though it's not clear to me why they couldn't have added another at-large. (Perhaps something to do with the total number of colleges playing Div. 1 water polo?)
Next, while the top two seeds are specified in the article, it is only specified that they are the top two (Stanford and Pacific) with no further breakdown. Beyond that, no seeding is specified though clearly took place given the various extra games different teams have to play.
Simply from the bracket and using standard setup procedure, it would appear that the underlying seeding is,
#7 - Bucknell
#6 - Harvard (hosting 6-7 game)
#5/4 - Davis
#4/5 - Pepperdine
#3 - $C
#2 - Stanford
#1 - Pacific
While one would think, of course Stanford is the #1 seed - is that true?
RE: MWP: Stanford 17 Cal 11 - martyup - 12-01-2019
Just win, Cardinal!