2022 D3 Men's Soccer National Perspective

[soccerpapa]

I think that stats (offensive and keeper) are often subjective/open to interpretation and only as good as those "taking' them.  There is no standardization.   Obviously a goal is a goal.  Offensively I think the assist is variable and some schools/scorers are more lenient than others.  Some schools routinely count a hockey assist (two assists) while other schools will credit one player with an assist when in reality another scorer in same situation would give two.  This makes it hard to draw accurate conclusion based on stats/paper.  Just my two cents.   

[blue_jays]

All I need to know about the fraudulent soccer coaches awards is that UChicago's lead striker who scored in the NCAA semis and title game did not even get All-Region. Which is fine, Yeti would rather be a national champion anyway.

[blooter442]

All I need to know about the fraudulent soccer coaches awards is that UChicago's lead striker who scored in the NCAA semis and title game did not even get All-Region. Which is fine, Yeti would rather be a national champion anyway.

Yeah, that was ludicrous. They aren't quite Max Lopez numbers but 13G, 1A with 7 game winners and goals in 4 of 6 tournament games was more than enough to be All-Region and I would have had him AA.

On the subject of the empty-netter — which I didn't have any issue with, considering if he missed Diffley was nowhere near getting back to take a goal kick with ~20 seconds on the clock — The Chicago Maroon had a quote from the player:

“Honestly, I felt that before I scored the game was already over. Our defense was exceptional today… I was happy to score, but I was more excited for the team.”

[Flying Weasel]

All I need to know about the fraudulent soccer coaches awards is that UChicago's lead striker who scored in the NCAA semis and title game did not even get All-Region. Which is fine, Yeti would rather be a national champion anyway.

Yeah, that was ludicrous. They aren't quite Max Lopez numbers but 13G, 1A with 7 game winners and goals in 4 of 6 tournament games was more than enough to be All-Region and I would have had him AA.

If I'm not mistaken, the voting for USC All-Region occurs prior to the NCAA Tournament. So his scoring in the tournament wouldn't have been on his resume.  And it's only 1st Team All-Region selections that are considered for All-American.  More important than all of that, unless things have changed again, a coach can only nominate 4 field players and 1 GK from his team for All-Region.  For Chicago's four field players, Gillespie and Wada are givens and looking at the All-Region teams Coach Sitch apparently nominated midfielder Lyndon Hu and defender Nathan Moonesinghe instead of Yetishefsky.  Naz Kabanni is another very good player who probably merits All-Region consideration, but wouldn't have been on the ballot.

I don't know what honors Yetishefsky deserved, but, due to the nomination limits, he wasn't even on the ballot for All-Region. If he had been, he certainly would have be selected as a player for the nation's top team.  But I wouldn't have expected him to have made 1st Team ALl-Region to get into the running for All-American.  His record at the time of voting was 9 goals scored in 17 games (actually 15 games as he missed a pair of games) with no assists.  He had 5 game-winners, but 3 of those came in games won 4-0, 3-0, and 3-0.  And only 2 of his 9 goals were scored in games decided by less than a 3-goal difference.  And one of those, the 2-1 game-winner versus Calvin, came 40 minutes after Calvin was reduced to 10-men.  Besides his hattrick in the 3-0 win over North Park he wasn't really all that impressive on paper.

I'm not fan of the USC awards and agree they always have numerous questionable inclusions and omissions.  But in this case, the main culprit is probably their cap of 4 field players per team, not that ten other forwards from the region were considered better than Yetishefsky by the coaches.  He probably wasn't on the ballot. 

[Hopkins92]

I'm sure folks on here have noticed the national coverage of Coach Sitch. It's really really cool and I'm very happy for her.

I was scrolling Instagram and the Men in Blazers feed had a great blurb, in their usual understated way (ha!)

I also like that, almost the entire season, I kept forgetting this was even a thing. It's not like we ignored it, it was discussed, after all. But it sure didn't really seem like that big of a deal to this board. I don't want to make too big of a deal about it, I just think y'all should reflect on that... That's both a positive for this group of posters, but for the sport in general.

[SimpleCoach]

I'm sure folks on here have noticed the national coverage of Coach Sitch. It's really really cool and I'm very happy for her.

I was scrolling Instagram and the Men in Blazers feed had a great blurb, in their usual understated way (ha!)

I also like that, almost the entire season, I kept forgetting this was even a thing. It's not like we ignored it, it was discussed, after all. But it sure didn't really seem like that big of a deal to this board. I don't want to make too big of a deal about it, I just think y'all should reflect on that... That's both a positive for this group of posters, but for the sport in general.

I think those of us in the know discussed this when she was first hired.  Then after that, the discussion was about the soccer, and could Chicago play and finally seal the deal.  Think they answered that question.

SC.

[PaulNewman]

I'm sure folks on here have noticed the national coverage of Coach Sitch. It's really really cool and I'm very happy for her.

I was scrolling Instagram and the Men in Blazers feed had a great blurb, in their usual understated way (ha!)

I also like that, almost the entire season, I kept forgetting this was even a thing. It's not like we ignored it, it was discussed, after all. But it sure didn't really seem like that big of a deal to this board. I don't want to make too big of a deal about it, I just think y'all should reflect on that... That's both a positive for this group of posters, but for the sport in general.

Hop92, I'm curious how other posters read your post.  I think you were complimenting the group for not making a big deal out of it as though that is evidence of some kind of progress of acceptance here on the board and in general.  I wasn't 100% sure, though, because of the "I just think y'all should reflect on that."  What exactly are you imploring us to reflect on? 

Having women coach men wasn't something that I'd been conflicted about while also appreciating the historical significance, which did get quite a bit of attention, including via a major piece in the NYT.  Imo the Stich story in concert with the Wyant story is a great story, but I'm not sure how to evaluate what that means in the bigger picture.  I noticed a couple of weeks ago that a NBA game had a full crew of women refereeing.  A few years ago, having the first couple of women reffing was a big deal and now it's commonplace (although the overall ratio is still heavily skewed towards men).  Still, though, really big picture, are we seeing more persons of color as head coaches in D3 or otherwise?

As for Stich, coaching a men's team to a national title is quite an accomplishment (just as it is for ANY coach), but in fairness, she did walk into a pretty awesome situation.  Chicago was going to be a top 2 or 3 favorite to get to the Final 4 and maybe win a title regardless of who was coaching them.  So imo we should be just as focused on Wyant who actually revived and re-built a NYU program that had become fairly mediocre into a nationally competitive team.  At the time and in hindsight it seemed/seems fitting that those two teams tied and indeed that NYU handed Chicago its only blemish.

[Hopkins92]

I'm sure folks on here have noticed the national coverage of Coach Sitch. It's really really cool and I'm very happy for her.

I was scrolling Instagram and the Men in Blazers feed had a great blurb, in their usual understated way (ha!)

I also like that, almost the entire season, I kept forgetting this was even a thing. It's not like we ignored it, it was discussed, after all. But it sure didn't really seem like that big of a deal to this board. I don't want to make too big of a deal about it, I just think y'all should reflect on that... That's both a positive for this group of posters, but for the sport in general.

Hop92, I'm curious how other posters read your post.  I think you were complimenting the group for not making a big deal out of it as though that is evidence of some kind of progress of acceptance here on the board and in general.  I wasn't 100% sure, though, because of the "I just think y'all should reflect on that."  What exactly are you imploring us to reflect on? 

Having women coach men wasn't something that I'd been conflicted about while also appreciating the historical significance, which did get quite a bit of attention, including via a major piece in the NYT.  Imo the Stich story in concert with the Wyant story is a great story, but I'm not sure how to evaluate what that means in the bigger picture.  I noticed a couple of weeks ago that a NBA game had a full crew of women refereeing.  A few years ago, having the first couple of women reffing was a big deal and now it's commonplace (although the overall ratio is still heavily skewed towards men).  Still, though, really big picture, are we seeing more persons of color as head coaches in D3 or otherwise?

As for Stich, coaching a men's team to a national title is quite an accomplishment (just as it is for ANY coach), but in fairness, she did walk into a pretty awesome situation.  Chicago was going to be a top 2 or 3 favorite to get to the Final 4 and maybe win a title regardless of who was coaching them.  So imo we should be just as focused on Wyant who actually revived and re-built a NYU program that had become fairly mediocre into a nationally competitive team.  At the time and in hindsight it seemed/seems fitting that those two teams tied and indeed that NYU handed Chicago its only blemish.

100 percent that this board, in particular, took note but didn't make a huge deal out of it. Sometimes lack of attention shows more progress than everyone shouting and waving their arms around (figuratively).

[blooter442]

I wasn't particularly active at the time Sitch was hired, but I observed the same general trend of people acknowledged it and moved on without making a big fuss. Even before winning the title, I thought it was evident from her press appearances (both the news and NCAA press conferences) that she has a really good relationship with her players, and that bond will only be strengthened by what they have accomplished.

So imo we should be just as focused on Wyant who actually revived and re-built a NYU program that had become fairly mediocre into a nationally competitive team. At the time and in hindsight it seemed/seems fitting that those two teams tied and indeed that NYU handed Chicago its only blemish.

This! She was the first!

[Saint of Old]

Regardless of how ready U Chicago was, they never won before... they were not Messiah or Tufts... bottom line is when you win a national championship... especially an undefeated National Championship, you shut up everyone... even people who want to say something have to stay silent.... Great accomplishment by Chicago and their coach.  Glass ceiling shattered... need to see more women coaching now... we have been disregarding 50% of the talent pool for way too long.