11-04-2022, 02:40 PM
USC is up 2-0 against UCLA right now in the first half. That's good for the Cardinal and the Pac-12 title
Stanford Women’s Soccer
USC is up 2-0 against UCLA right now in the first half. That's good for the Cardinal and the Pac-12 title
11-04-2022, 02:52 PM
I think it was North Carolina I looked at Top drawer but didn't see it today
11-07-2022, 11:33 AM
(11-05-2022, 10:58 AM)Hieronymus Wrote: Hope for a 2 seed, expect a 3 and get pissed for a 4?We are projected as a 2 seed. Its frustrating that Stanford isn't likely to get a 1 seed given that we are Pac 12 Champions and beat both UCLA and Big 10 Champion Penn State. (UCLA, in turn had beaten 2 of the ACC's best teams, including Duke, who beat SEC Champion South Carolina.)
(11-05-2022, 10:58 AM)Hieronymus Wrote: Hope for a 2 seed, expect a 3 and get pissed for a 4?We are projected as a 2 seed. Its frustrating that Stanford isn't likely to get a 1 seed given that we are Pac 12 Champions and beat both UCLA and Big 10 Champion Penn State. (UCLA, in turn had beaten 2 of the ACC's best teams, including Duke, who beat SEC Champion South Carolina.)
11-07-2022, 11:50 AM
(11-07-2022, 11:33 AM)OCcardinal Wrote:The tie vs UCB (instead of a win) probably cost us any chance of a #1 seed, despite giving us the conference championship. And even with a win, our chances were iffy.(11-05-2022, 10:58 AM)Hieronymus Wrote: Hope for a 2 seed, expect a 3 and get pissed for a 4?We are projected as a 2 seed. Its frustrating that Stanford isn't likely to get a 1 seed given that we are Pac 12 Champions and beat both UCLA and Big 10 Champion Penn State. (UCLA, in turn had beaten 2 of the ACC's best teams, including Duke, who beat SEC Champion South Carolina.)
(11-07-2022, 11:33 AM)OCcardinal Wrote:The tie vs UCB (instead of a win) probably cost us any chance of a #1 seed, despite giving us the conference championship. And even with a win, our chances were iffy.(11-05-2022, 10:58 AM)Hieronymus Wrote: Hope for a 2 seed, expect a 3 and get pissed for a 4?We are projected as a 2 seed. Its frustrating that Stanford isn't likely to get a 1 seed given that we are Pac 12 Champions and beat both UCLA and Big 10 Champion Penn State. (UCLA, in turn had beaten 2 of the ACC's best teams, including Duke, who beat SEC Champion South Carolina.)
11-07-2022, 11:53 AM
The ACC will get all 4 #1 seeds, correct? UNC, Florida State, Duke, Notre Dame? Isn't that how it's supposed to be? (he said sarcastically)
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
The ACC will get all 4 #1 seeds, correct? UNC, Florida State, Duke, Notre Dame? Isn't that how it's supposed to be? (he said sarcastically)
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
11-07-2022, 02:14 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-07-2022, 02:27 PM by Hieronymus.)
(11-07-2022, 11:53 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: The ACC will get all 4 #1 seeds, correct? UNC, Florida State, Duke, Notre Dame? Isn't that how it's supposed to be? (he said sarcastically)
Stanford a 3 seed as predicted
(11-07-2022, 02:14 PM)Hieronymus Wrote:(11-07-2022, 11:53 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: The ACC will get all 4 #1 seeds, correct? UNC, Florida State, Duke, Notre Dame? Isn't that how it's supposed to be? (he said sarcastically)
Stanford a 3 seed as predicted
And you weren’t too far off. 2 ones and 2 twos for the ACC. This is where I think RPI goes a bit off the rails.
I also have no idea how say NC state gets seeded with a 39 RPI.
(This post was last modified: 11-07-2022, 02:27 PM by Hieronymus.)
(11-07-2022, 11:53 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: The ACC will get all 4 #1 seeds, correct? UNC, Florida State, Duke, Notre Dame? Isn't that how it's supposed to be? (he said sarcastically)
Stanford a 3 seed as predicted
(11-07-2022, 02:14 PM)Hieronymus Wrote:(11-07-2022, 11:53 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: The ACC will get all 4 #1 seeds, correct? UNC, Florida State, Duke, Notre Dame? Isn't that how it's supposed to be? (he said sarcastically)
Stanford a 3 seed as predicted
And you weren’t too far off. 2 ones and 2 twos for the ACC. This is where I think RPI goes a bit off the rails.
I also have no idea how say NC state gets seeded with a 39 RPI.
11-07-2022, 02:35 PM
(11-07-2022, 02:14 PM)Hieronymus Wrote: Stanford a 3 seed as predictedNot just a 3 seed but we have North Carolina as a 2 seed and an underseeded #6 BYU (last season's runner up) in our quadrant (not to mention Santa Clara on the other side). That tie with Cal really did hurt us, which is surprising given that UCLA losing by 2 goals to USC (and losing the conference title) didn't bump them from a #1 seed.
(11-07-2022, 02:14 PM)Hieronymus Wrote: Stanford a 3 seed as predictedNot just a 3 seed but we have North Carolina as a 2 seed and an underseeded #6 BYU (last season's runner up) in our quadrant (not to mention Santa Clara on the other side). That tie with Cal really did hurt us, which is surprising given that UCLA losing by 2 goals to USC (and losing the conference title) didn't bump them from a #1 seed.
We beat a 1- and a 2-seed at home, lost to two 4-seeds away, and tied an 8-seed and an unseeded tourney team away. I'm thinking Notre Dame was the last 1-seed and we were the first 3-seed? The Cal tie might have made a difference, but impossible to know.
We beat a 1- and a 2-seed at home, lost to two 4-seeds away, and tied an 8-seed and an unseeded tourney team away. I'm thinking Notre Dame was the last 1-seed and we were the first 3-seed? The Cal tie might have made a difference, but impossible to know.
11-07-2022, 03:08 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-07-2022, 04:23 PM by Hieronymus.)
(11-07-2022, 02:47 PM)oldalum Wrote: We beat a 1- and a 2-seed at home, lost to two 4-seeds away, and tied an 8-seed and an unseeded tourney team away. I'm thinking Notre Dame was the last 1-seed and we were the first 3-seed? The Cal tie might have made a difference, but impossible to know.
So I don’t really agree with the seeding committee, but the committee logic is simple. UCLA was carried by their big ACC wins - duke and NC. They are still 3rd in the RPI as a result. But RPI got way too locked into the ACC this year and then it all becomes a big self-fulfilling feedback loop.
For really silly look at NC state agin. They really beat nobody out of conference. A couple of good ties. Lost to Harvard. Lost to VCU. Mostly got destroyed by the good ACC teams - 6 to 0 vs. Duke. Yikes. Their only good win was Clemson. That got them 39 in the RPI and somehow an 8 seed. For reference Massey has them at …. 60. Seems way more accurate.
BTW Massey is also way higher on the pac12. UCLA 1, Stanford 5 and USC 8.
(This post was last modified: 11-07-2022, 04:23 PM by Hieronymus.)
(11-07-2022, 02:47 PM)oldalum Wrote: We beat a 1- and a 2-seed at home, lost to two 4-seeds away, and tied an 8-seed and an unseeded tourney team away. I'm thinking Notre Dame was the last 1-seed and we were the first 3-seed? The Cal tie might have made a difference, but impossible to know.
So I don’t really agree with the seeding committee, but the committee logic is simple. UCLA was carried by their big ACC wins - duke and NC. They are still 3rd in the RPI as a result. But RPI got way too locked into the ACC this year and then it all becomes a big self-fulfilling feedback loop.
For really silly look at NC state agin. They really beat nobody out of conference. A couple of good ties. Lost to Harvard. Lost to VCU. Mostly got destroyed by the good ACC teams - 6 to 0 vs. Duke. Yikes. Their only good win was Clemson. That got them 39 in the RPI and somehow an 8 seed. For reference Massey has them at …. 60. Seems way more accurate.
BTW Massey is also way higher on the pac12. UCLA 1, Stanford 5 and USC 8.
(11-07-2022, 03:08 PM)Hieronymus Wrote:my comment was meant to be explanatory of the Committee's seeding, not what I think the seeds should have been. Sorry I wasn't clear. I agree about the RPI; in fact I earlier posted a comment criticizing its use in the W Volleyball thread!(11-07-2022, 02:47 PM)oldalum Wrote: I'm thinking Notre Dame was the last 1-seed and we were the first 3-seed?So I don’t really agree,
(11-07-2022, 03:08 PM)Hieronymus Wrote:my comment was meant to be explanatory of the Committee's seeding, not what I think the seeds should have been. Sorry I wasn't clear. I agree about the RPI; in fact I earlier posted a comment criticizing its use in the W Volleyball thread!(11-07-2022, 02:47 PM)oldalum Wrote: I'm thinking Notre Dame was the last 1-seed and we were the first 3-seed?So I don’t really agree,
11-07-2022, 04:15 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-07-2022, 04:24 PM by Hieronymus.)
(11-07-2022, 03:36 PM)oldalum Wrote:(11-07-2022, 03:08 PM)Hieronymus Wrote:my comment was meant to be explanatory of the Committee's seeding, not what I think the seeds should have been. Sorry I wasn't clear. I agree about the RPI; in fact I earlier posted a comment criticizing its use in the W Volleyball thread!(11-07-2022, 02:47 PM)oldalum Wrote: I'm thinking Notre Dame was the last 1-seed and we were the first 3-seed?So I don’t really agree,
Peace. I wasn’t meaning to disagree with you and I responded a post off anyway. I was disagreeing with the committee’s slavish devotion to RPI. So we are on the same page here.
Updated my previous post to be clear what I was disagreeing with.
(This post was last modified: 11-07-2022, 04:24 PM by Hieronymus.)
(11-07-2022, 03:36 PM)oldalum Wrote:(11-07-2022, 03:08 PM)Hieronymus Wrote:my comment was meant to be explanatory of the Committee's seeding, not what I think the seeds should have been. Sorry I wasn't clear. I agree about the RPI; in fact I earlier posted a comment criticizing its use in the W Volleyball thread!(11-07-2022, 02:47 PM)oldalum Wrote: I'm thinking Notre Dame was the last 1-seed and we were the first 3-seed?So I don’t really agree,
Peace. I wasn’t meaning to disagree with you and I responded a post off anyway. I was disagreeing with the committee’s slavish devotion to RPI. So we are on the same page here.
Updated my previous post to be clear what I was disagreeing with.
11-07-2022, 07:05 PM
(11-07-2022, 02:47 PM)oldalum Wrote: We beat a 1- and a 2-seed at home, lost to two 4-seeds away, and tied an 8-seed and an unseeded tourney team away. The Cal tie might have made a difference, but impossible to know.Compare Stanford's record against a couple of the two seeds:
Penn State:
Tournament Team Results
Lost to: a 3 seed (Stanford) away, a 4 seed (Michigan State) at home, and a 6 seed (Ohio State) away
Tied: 5 seed (Georgetown) at home
Beat: a 4 seed (Michigan State) at a neutral site
Didn't play Northwestern
Nontournament Team Losses and Ties
Lost to: Nebraska away
Tied: Iowa away and Indiana away
St. Louis:
Tournament Team Results
Lost to: a 1 seed (Notre Dame) at home
Beat: a 3 seed (Arkansas) at home
Nontournament Team Losses and Ties
None (same as Stanford)
In addition to what you mention above, Stanford has an away win over unseeded Arizona State. So it's 3-2-2 against tournament teams (including wins vs a #1 and #2) compared to Penn State's 1-3-1 (1 win vs a #4) and St. Louis' 1-1 (1 win vs a #3).
You are right we can't know how much the Cal tie hurt, but that was our only moderately adverse result against any team that was so much as unseeded. With the tie we dropped from #9 in the RPI to #11 (from 1 spot behind St. Louis to 3 spots behind) and I'm assuming that the larger gap was too much for the committee to overcome using judgment. In fact, with RPI #5 North Carolina as the #2 seed in our group, I don't think the committee moved us up at all. RPI #9 Arkansas got St. Louis as the #2 seed in their group and RPI #10 Virginia got Penn State as their #2. So it looks like Stanford is at least the 3rd lowest #3.
(11-07-2022, 02:47 PM)oldalum Wrote: We beat a 1- and a 2-seed at home, lost to two 4-seeds away, and tied an 8-seed and an unseeded tourney team away. The Cal tie might have made a difference, but impossible to know.Compare Stanford's record against a couple of the two seeds:
Penn State:
Tournament Team Results
Lost to: a 3 seed (Stanford) away, a 4 seed (Michigan State) at home, and a 6 seed (Ohio State) away
Tied: 5 seed (Georgetown) at home
Beat: a 4 seed (Michigan State) at a neutral site
Didn't play Northwestern
Nontournament Team Losses and Ties
Lost to: Nebraska away
Tied: Iowa away and Indiana away
St. Louis:
Tournament Team Results
Lost to: a 1 seed (Notre Dame) at home
Beat: a 3 seed (Arkansas) at home
Nontournament Team Losses and Ties
None (same as Stanford)
In addition to what you mention above, Stanford has an away win over unseeded Arizona State. So it's 3-2-2 against tournament teams (including wins vs a #1 and #2) compared to Penn State's 1-3-1 (1 win vs a #4) and St. Louis' 1-1 (1 win vs a #3).
You are right we can't know how much the Cal tie hurt, but that was our only moderately adverse result against any team that was so much as unseeded. With the tie we dropped from #9 in the RPI to #11 (from 1 spot behind St. Louis to 3 spots behind) and I'm assuming that the larger gap was too much for the committee to overcome using judgment. In fact, with RPI #5 North Carolina as the #2 seed in our group, I don't think the committee moved us up at all. RPI #9 Arkansas got St. Louis as the #2 seed in their group and RPI #10 Virginia got Penn State as their #2. So it looks like Stanford is at least the 3rd lowest #3.
(11-07-2022, 07:05 PM)OCcardinal Wrote:Thanks for the detailed, convincing analysis. I would emphasize re: Penn State that we beat them head-to-head! Not specifically taken into account by RPI but definitely weighted by judgment rankings. And how can you earn a 2-seed when your best win is against a 4-seed, and that is your only win against a tournament team vs. losses to 3, 4, and 6 seeds????(11-07-2022, 02:47 PM)oldalum Wrote: We beat a 1- and a 2-seed at home, lost to two 4-seeds away, and tied an 8-seed and an unseeded tourney team away. The Cal tie might have made a difference, but impossible to know.Compare Stanford's record against a couple of the two seeds:
Penn State:
Tournament Team Results
Lost to: a 3 seed (Stanford) away, a 4 seed (Michigan State) at home, and a 6 seed (Ohio State) away
Tied: 5 seed (Georgetown) at home
Beat: a 4 seed (Michigan State) at a neutral site
Didn't play Northwestern
Nontournament Team Losses and Ties
Lost to: Nebraska away
Tied: Iowa away and Indiana away
St. Louis:
Tournament Team Results
Lost to: a 1 seed (Notre Dame) at home
Beat: a 3 seed (Arkansas) at home
Nontournament Team Losses and Ties
None (same as Stanford)
In addition to what you mention above, Stanford has an away win over unseeded Arizona State. So it's 3-2-2 against tournament teams (including wins vs a #1 and #2) compared to Penn State's 1-3-1 (1 win vs a #4) and St. Louis' 1-1 (1 win vs a #3).
You are right we can't know how much the Cal tie hurt, but that was our only moderately adverse result against any team that was so much as unseeded. With the tie we dropped from #9 in the RPI to #11 (from 1 spot behind St. Louis to 3 spots behind) and I'm assuming that the larger gap was too much for the committee to overcome using judgment. In fact, with RPI #5 North Carolina as the #2 seed in our group, I don't think the committee moved us up at all. RPI #9 Arkansas got St. Louis as the #2 seed in their group and RPI #10 Virginia got Penn State as their #2. So it looks like Stanford is at least the 3rd lowest #3.
(11-07-2022, 07:05 PM)OCcardinal Wrote:Thanks for the detailed, convincing analysis. I would emphasize re: Penn State that we beat them head-to-head! Not specifically taken into account by RPI but definitely weighted by judgment rankings. And how can you earn a 2-seed when your best win is against a 4-seed, and that is your only win against a tournament team vs. losses to 3, 4, and 6 seeds????(11-07-2022, 02:47 PM)oldalum Wrote: We beat a 1- and a 2-seed at home, lost to two 4-seeds away, and tied an 8-seed and an unseeded tourney team away. The Cal tie might have made a difference, but impossible to know.Compare Stanford's record against a couple of the two seeds:
Penn State:
Tournament Team Results
Lost to: a 3 seed (Stanford) away, a 4 seed (Michigan State) at home, and a 6 seed (Ohio State) away
Tied: 5 seed (Georgetown) at home
Beat: a 4 seed (Michigan State) at a neutral site
Didn't play Northwestern
Nontournament Team Losses and Ties
Lost to: Nebraska away
Tied: Iowa away and Indiana away
St. Louis:
Tournament Team Results
Lost to: a 1 seed (Notre Dame) at home
Beat: a 3 seed (Arkansas) at home
Nontournament Team Losses and Ties
None (same as Stanford)
In addition to what you mention above, Stanford has an away win over unseeded Arizona State. So it's 3-2-2 against tournament teams (including wins vs a #1 and #2) compared to Penn State's 1-3-1 (1 win vs a #4) and St. Louis' 1-1 (1 win vs a #3).
You are right we can't know how much the Cal tie hurt, but that was our only moderately adverse result against any team that was so much as unseeded. With the tie we dropped from #9 in the RPI to #11 (from 1 spot behind St. Louis to 3 spots behind) and I'm assuming that the larger gap was too much for the committee to overcome using judgment. In fact, with RPI #5 North Carolina as the #2 seed in our group, I don't think the committee moved us up at all. RPI #9 Arkansas got St. Louis as the #2 seed in their group and RPI #10 Virginia got Penn State as their #2. So it looks like Stanford is at least the 3rd lowest #3.
Quote:Oops! Thought that was a lifetime achievement ballot...
Hah! Although one would expect Stanford to also score "lifetime achievement" points.
In 1938 Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace in our time", Superman first appeared in Action Comics, Seabiscuit beat War Admiral ....... and C.a.l last won the Rose Bowl.
(This post was last modified: 11-08-2022, 07:56 PM by CompSci87.)
Quote:Oops! Thought that was a lifetime achievement ballot...
Hah! Although one would expect Stanford to also score "lifetime achievement" points.
In 1938 Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace in our time", Superman first appeared in Action Comics, Seabiscuit beat War Admiral ....... and C.a.l last won the Rose Bowl.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »