I wasn't watching the game, but surprised to see that Chicago is still scoreless against Birmingham-Southern.  BSU has 7 shots, 4 SOG. There were a lot of unexpectedly close games at halftime today, and a good number that favorites that left.  Certainly expect Chicago to win this.

Unsurprisingly, it didn't take Chicago long after the break to open up the scoring.  1-0 for the Maroons.

Franciscan GK keeping the scoreline respectable.  And Franciscan has had two golden chances against the run of play to pull a goal back and shot just wide both times. The game lost whatever edge it ever did have fairly early once Messiah went up 2-0 and even franciscan's late first half goal didn't really change that. Not really the tune-up match for tomorrow's opponent that the Falcons would have wanted, and they'll need to be a lot sharper tomorrow.

Quote from: Flying Weasel on November 12, 2022, 08:52:31 am

Quote from: Mid-Atlantic Fan on November 12, 2022, 08:18:39 am

Kenyon vs Calvin

Should be an Elite 8 or Final 4 matchup but somehow we get this in the 2nd round. Cruel for both teams to get this draw.

And last year Kenyon and Messiah met in the 2nd Round, and there's plenty of other examples over the years.  Geography plays a big part, but also the ranking/selection criteria which, being too simplistic and formulaic/rigid, results in Calvin being ranked just 4th in their region (which who knows how and what that translates to in overall national seeding).  Theoretically, having the #1 team in one region play the #4 team from another region in the second round (round of 32) really isn't out of line unless the #4 ranked team's region was identified as being stronger/deeper than most other regions in which case a Sweet 16 encounter would be appropriate.  Last year Kenyon, #4 in their region, matched up with Messiah who was #1 in theirs, which means that game should have been a second round, maybe Sweet 16, match-up based on whatever formal or informal seeding that committee develops. Until the regional ranking and selection criteria allows for more subjectivity to recognize that even though a team didn't have the toughest schedule, they still are among the best teams in the nation, these sorts of first weekend match-ups will continue to occur in essence by design, not due to the misfortune of geography/travel considerations.

Does anyone know how long the current format has been in effect?  Because the regional-based format seems like something out of the 70s, when people only saw teams from within their region.  It's time to modernize the format.  I understand that there will still be an interest in minimizing travel expenses, which may cause good teams in some cases to face each other sooner than they otherwise should, but placing the #1 team in one region vs the #4 team in another is just silly.

There is NO pre-established match-ups for the bracketing (e.g. #1 in Region A plays #4 in Region B, #2 in Region A plays . . .).  I didn't mean to imply that with my post.  I'm just saying that as the committee forms the brackets with geography/travel and overall seeding in mind, I think they probably try to keep higher seeds separated until at least the second weekend.  The problem is that very good teams like Calvin this year and Kenyon last years ended up not being among the higher seeds due to the math and the importance of SOS and RvR.  In other words, using the pescribed criteria, Kenyon was probably between a #4 and #8 seed nationally, while Calvin might have only been in the 30's, high 20's at best.  So there would have been no reason to try to avoid a match-up of the two teams in the second round.

No, the bracketing is not based on regions at all anymore beyond the natural factor of geography/limiting travel.  From the 70's through the mid-90's, the brackets were very structured with each region getting is own 4-team pod.  And they would alternate which regions met in the quarterfinals to some extent, but New England would never face the West due to travel.  This is all in the eras of 32-team or less tournament fields with just five rounds when the quarterfinals were a stand-alone match, not part of a 4-team weekend pod/sectional.  Starting in 1997 when the field began expanding and automatic qualifiers (AQ) were introduced, the bracketing gradually became less and less tied to the formal regions and they began to intentionally mix up teams from different regions and to avoid pairing teams from the same conference (the latter recently became a requirement unless all-but impossible to avoid).

So what I am say is that the bracketing format is not the issue here.  It's simply that the criteria and the math for the SOS and the importance of SOS and RvR in the ranking/selection process, with very limited room for subjectivity, means some teams will be under-ranked/under-seeded and others over-ranked/over-seeded, which will result in match-ups in the first weekend/second round that, at the least, should really only be occurring in the Sweet 16 if not the Elite 8.  Sometimes they could even be worthy of the Final Four.

Montclair lost 3-0 in their conference final game.

Thing is, I'm not sure the margin and nature of the loss could technically be considered.  Where does that fit into the criteria?  Now, that doesn't mean it couldn't/wouldn't influence the ranking/selection process.  I guess as a game against a ranked opponent, the criteria "results against ranked opponents" would allow the score to be considered the result.  But, would the score line in a loss to an unranked opponent be unable to be considered, but the score line versus a ranked opponent could be?  Who knows for sure. 

It was a bigger loss than any suffered by any of the other bubble teams that they were up against for an at-large berth.

If the committee watched any of the conference playoffs it would have been clear as day that Montclair was the superior team compared to the others I mention. For as wrong as they were with that miss, they got the other 18 to 19 selections spot on. But that's still not a pass to ignore the blatant miss on Montclair.

The thing is, the ranking and selection criteria doesn't officially provide room for personal, first hand observation of teams to factor in.  Sure, that first hand impression could influence a committee member, but every decision needs to be defensible using the established criteria, so there's only so much wiggle room.  If some committee members believed subjectively that Montclair State should be selected, they would have had to tout their winning pct, and de-emphasize SOS and RvR. Not easy to do when we all know that SOS and RvR are highly valued in the regional rankings and national selection process.  That said, even based on the criteria and having a sense for how the committee applies and weights the criteria, I think Montlcair has a solid case against Pacific Lutheran, Carnegie Mellon, NYU and Middlebury, and it's hard to see how they got beat out by all four of them.  By the numbers, I get Catholic, Vassar and Lynchburg getting selected before Montclair, but losing out to all four of the previously mentioned teams is very tough to understand, and I have no horse in this race and if anything bring a anti-NJAC fan bias to the table.

Not sure where else to put this, but I just stumbled across the fact that the men's and women's head coaches at Cortland State are a husband/wife duo: Steve Axtel coaching the men and Heidi Axtel coaching the women.  Both teams are in this year's NCAA.  It's the first time since 1993 that both of Cortland's teams are in the tournament the same year (something they did 4 straight years from 1990-1993), so obviously it's the first time the couple has been coaching the Red Dragons in the tournament at the same time.

I have known about the husband/wife duo at Scranton: men's head coach Matt Pivirotti, women's head coach Colleen Pivirotti. They've coached the Royals in the NCAA's in the same year in 2012 and 2016 and now for the third time this season.

Does anyone know of any other husband/wife duos coaching soccer in Division III, whether at the same school or different schools?

The other almost case is the Souders at Calvin: Ryan is men's head coach and Kacie is a women's assistant. It's interesting that Ryan played at Wheaton (Ill.) and Kacie was an All-American at Messiah, two Christian colleges with top soccer programs (at least at the time for Wheaton) and now they coach at another Christian college with strong soccer programs.  [WARNING: my D-III soccer history geek-ness is about to go into overdrive!]  I don't know how the two met, but Kacie's twin sister Kari played at Wheaton overlapping two years with Ryan, and Kacie and Ryan both played in the 2006 Final Four when the men's and women's teams from both schools advanced to the final weekend. The Wheaton women won the title that year (Messiah lost to TCNJ in the semifinal). In legendary coach Joe Bean's final game on the sidelines, Messiah defeated Wheaton in the men's final to end the unexpected, improbable tournament run by the Thunder (at one point in the season they were 4-6-2, then 7-6-3 and 10-7-3 entering the CCIW playoffs as the #3 seed before reeling off 7 straight must-win games for a more fitting send-off for the winningest collegiate men's soccer coach at the time). Ryan was the starting goalkeeper for the Thunder and came up huge in their NCAA quarterfinal PK shootout win over undefeated York, one of the favorites for the title (that was the second of three NCAA PK eliminations for the Spartans over a four year period; the other year during that period they won a PK shootout against Amherst, another team that just couldn't manage to reach the Final Four no way, no how at that time).

And that Final Four leads to the incredible story of the Klystra twins: Kacie and Kari.  In the Spring of 2005, they won the Michigan state title their senior year of high school.  They decided to go separate ways for college: Kacie to Messiah, Kari to Wheaton (Ill.). That fall, Kacie was a champion with Messiah when the Falcons won their first national title with an undefeated 22-0-1 mark. The next fall was that aforementioned 2006 Final Four where Kari became a national champion with Wheaton. Then, in 2007, the twins faced off when Wheaton and Messiah met in the national title game with the Thunder winning 1-0 to make it back-to-back championships and their third in four years with a perfect 27-0-0 record. Amazingly, the twins and their teams returned to the championship game again in 2008, but this time Kacie and the Falcons prevailed 5-0 to cap off an undefeated 24-0-2 season. In four years, the twins' teams went a combined 181-14-6 (.915).

So, bringing this back to this year's men's tournament.  Can Ohio Wesleyan be the 2022 version of 2006 Wheaton? Well, I'm probably stretching things to make the comparison, but feel obliged to try to end this rambling post somewhat on the topic of this thread!!! Ohio Wesleyan, a historical powerhouse with a legendary coach (and, no, he's not retiring after this year as far as I know), started the season 0-4-2, then 4-4-4, but went on to win the NCAC tournament which probably was required to make the NCAA tournament (losing to Kenyon in the NCAC Final would have left the Bishops 9-5-4 with a 0-5-2 RvR). Is a Final Four run on the cards for the Bishops like the Thunder pulled off in 2006?

Most if not all conferences limit how many players from one team can be nominated/honored.  Very likely in the MAC it's limited to 6.  Also, with regard to which players get the nod, some conferences (maybe most or all) base the award on conference games, not the full season with non-conference games.

Likewise, there's a limit with how many players from a team can be nominated for the NSCAA All-Region teams.