2009 NESCAC

[Becks]

Predictions for NESCAC tourney quarterfinals:

These predictions are pretty predictable.

Colby #8 @ Williams #1 - In league play Sept 26, Williams beat Colby 3-0 at Colby.  Is Williams' offense in the tank? Colby's D is pretty good, but look for Williams' O to bounce back at home. Prediction: Williams 3-0 Colby.

Wesleyan #7 @ Amherst #2 - In league play last week, Amherst beat Wesleyan 2-0 at Amherst.  No reason to expect a different outcome this time.  Prediction: Amherst 2-0 Wesleyan.

Bowdoin #6 @ Middlebury #3 - In league play Sept 26, Middlebury beat Bowdoin 2-0 at Bowdoin.  Middlebury outplayed Williams on Friday while Bowdoin was outplayed by Tufts. Look for Middlebury to repeat its early season win.  Prediction: Middlebury 2-0 Bowdoin.

Trinity #5 @ Tufts #4 - In league play Oct 17, the teams tied 1-1 at Tufts.  Should be a good defensive battle and 1 goal (or pks) could win it.  Trinity had the better performance on Friday, so I'll go with them in a mild upset.  Prediction: Trinity 1-0 Tufts.

[northshore]

Tuft 2, Trinity 1 @ Tufts... Tufts seemed to hold play through-out..

On to Williams

[Dfense1]

In Williams v. Colby 4-0 win, the Ephs carried play handily with 2 other near misses for goal and liberal substitutions throughout for the hosts.

[northshore]

One of the strangest goals i had ever seen (or didn't see) happend during the Tufts-Trinity game. Tufts just scored their 2nd goal with about one minute left in the game which created lots of excitment on the field and along the Tufts bench.  While that was occuring, Trinity smartly set up their offense and waltzed down the field against no opposition-- and apparently scored. It appeared that no one on the Tufts side knew the game was still on!!
 

[Becks]

Comments on NESCAC quarterfinals results:

3 for 4, consistent with season-long prediction average.

Williams 4-0 Colby. Prediction was Williams 3-0. Comfortable win for Williams, 3 goals in first 20 minutes and then coast in the rest of the way.  Offense bounced back from surprisingly weak performance in the Middlebury game. Williams-Colby: shots: 23-7; shots on goal: 9-2; corners: 0-0(?).

Middlebury 1-0 Bowdoin (OT). Prediction was Middlebury 2-0.  Scoreline was closer than the stats-line.  Stats and writeup indicate that Middlebury had clearly the better of the play but had a hard time converting.  Middlebury-Bowdoin: shots: 27-8; shots on goal: 13-4; corners: 8-5.

Amherst 2-1 Wesleyan (OT). Prediction was Amherst 2-0.  Stats, writeup and player observations suggest that this may have been the most even game of the day, and that Wes was a bit unlucky to not to win it. Amherst-Wesleyan: shots: 15-12; shots on goal: 10-6; corners: 5-3.

Tufts 2-1 Trinity. Prediction was Trinity 1-0.  Tufts gets one in 69th and insurance goal in 90th, then Trinity scores just 21 seconds later on a quick restart as Tufts is apparently still celebrating.  Cal-Stanford "Band" game recommended viewing for Tufts team. Tufts-Trinity: shots: 17-12; shots on goal: 7-4; corners: 2-1.

[Gerrs]

Does anyone know why NESCAC soccer standings are based on awarding just 2 points for a win rather than 3 points?

I believe all of the major professional soccer leagues (e.g. England, Spain, Italy, Germanyand U.S.) and most of the major D1 conferences (e.g. ACC, Big East, Big 10, Big 12, SEC) use the 3-point system. Why shouldn't NESCAC align

[Becks]

The 2-1-0 systems was the original system.  The 3-1-0 system was apparently adopted in England in 1981 to try to encourage teams to go for a win instead of playing for a tie, in order to make games more entertaining for spectators.  The 3-1-0 system did not become commonplace worldwide until after it was for the World Cup in 1994 and was not adopted by MLS until 2000. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_points_for_a_win

Personally, I think the 2-1-0 system does a much better job of ranking teams based on their relative strengths.  It seems pretty obvious that a tie is halfway between a win and a loss, and it is odd to not treat it as such. I would say that a team that ties all of its games is better than a team that loses 2/3ds of its games, but with a 3-1-0 system they are viewed as the same.

The inequity of a 3-1-0 system really comes up when teams play unequal numbers of games and you have to use winning percentage rather than points to rank teams.  For example, with a 3-1-0 system, Team A that goes 4-6-0 would be ranked above Team B that goes 4-6-1, when common sense would suggest that a tie would be a better-than-average result for Team A.  Perhaps for this reason, when comparing teams that play an unequal number of games and winning percentages are used, the 2-1-0 system is generally still used.  From what I can tell, the NCAA still uses 2-1-0 in determining winning percentages when calculating the RPIs that are used to selected teams for the tournament.  Also note that even leagues that use a 3-1-0 pts system, still seem to use 2-1-0 in calculating the winning percentages in the league tables (which seems kind of odd).  See, eg, the Big East table, where UConn is 5-5-1, 16 pts, but a .500 win percentage (with a 3-1-0 system, it would have a .485 winning percentage).

Note that NESCAC ranks by winning percentage rather than points. One reason may be that the league does not seem to require that teams play their full schedule if, because of bad weather or other problems, it would be difficult to do so.  Thus some teams may end up playing a different number of games than others.  This happened back in 2006, when the last league games of the season were scheduled for the day before the first day of the league playoffs (bad idea). There was heavy rain on Saturday and 2 of the games (Williams-Amherst and Colby-Bates) were cancelled. That meant Bowdoin finished 4-4-1 and Bates finished 4-4-0.  In a 3-1-0 system, Bates would have been the 6th seed and Bowdoin the 7th seed.  However, since the 2-1-0 system was used, they both finished with a 500 winning percentage, which meant that Bowdoin was seeded 6th and Bates 7th as a result of Bowdoin's head to head win over Bates. (Turned out not to help Bowdoin, however, as they lost to Middlebury in the 1st round, while Bates upset Tufts.)

[2xfaux]

If there is a Mrs. Becks I hope she appreciates you as much as we do.  Great job!

[Becks]

Yes and I hope so, but for some reason she would prefer it if I repainted our bedroom instead of doing D3soccer postings. 

[Becks]

New (Nov 4) NCAA New England rankings:

1. Williams 15-0-0 15-0-0
2. Amherst 12-2-1 12-2-1
3. Wheaton (Massachusetts) 17-2-2 17-2-2
4. Middlebury 11-2-2 11-2-2
5. Endicott 15-2-0 15-4-0
6. Wellesley 9-5-2 9-5-3
7. Springfield 11-4-3 11-4-3
8. Babson 11-6-1 11-8-1
9. Tufts 8-6-1 8-6-1
10. Westfield State 14-1-2 14-1-2
11. Keene State 13-5-2 13-5-2
12. Emmanuel (Massachusetts) 13-5-1 13-5-1

Wheaton jumped ahead of Middlebury, but I don't think it will make a difference. First, I think the top 4 will probably go anyway. Second, if Wheaton wins NEWMAC, it doesn't matter and, if they lose NEWMAC, they will be losing to a lower ranked team and will probably drop back below Middlebury (which can only lose to higher ranked Williams or Amherst).  So I still think Middlebury is good for a slot.

[Becks]

Predictions for NESCAC semi-finals:

Tufts v Williams - In their regular season game on Oct 24, Williams beat Tufts 1-0 at Williams in heavy rain.  Stats were comfortably in Williams' favor, however.  Based on league stats, Williams O is more than 2x as potent as Tufts and their D is also significantly stingier. Plus game is at Williams. Not much to support Tufts in this one.  Prediction: Williams 2-0 Tufts.

Middlebury v Amherst - In their regular season game on Oct 10, Amherst blew out Middlebury 6-1 at Amherst. Game stats, however, were much closer and, in fact, suggested a very even game.  Based on overall league stats, Middlebury and Amherst have similarly strong O's but Amherst has a better D.  I expect the score to be a lot closer this time, particularly on neutral ground, but expect Amherst to prevail again.  Prediction: Amherst 2-1 Middlebury.

[machine54]

Throw out the regular season it means nothing at this point - everybody is stepping up their game - Wesleyan almost took Amherst out and Midd while controlling the game v. Bowdoin almost lost on a set play in the last 30 seconds.  How you can say that Amherst has a better D than Midd is beyond me - Midd has 3 seniors in the back and the stats are skewed by the Amherst loss - in any event - Midd completely and I mean completely outplayed and dominated Williams last Friday and that effort more than anything has fueled the players - I have no idea who will win but hopefully the field conditions will be decent,  both teams will bring their A games and the game will be decided by a good goal rather than PKs.   

[jellybelly]

I have been wondering how Amherst beat Middlebury 6-1.  Did Middlebury have players out that day with illness or injury?  The score just isn't in line with any other game they have played this season.  And certainly the stats from the Willilams v. Middlebury game indicate that Middlebury was the stronger team.

It is going to be a fun weekend for anyone who loves the game of soccer!

[nescac1]

I have a feeling that the Williams women would LOVE to play Midd again ... hard to get up for every single game, especially one on the road, when you kind of get used to playing on cruise control.  I think that performance was a bit of an aberration (even if the result was not), and that the Ephs would come out with a different level of fire if they met Midd in the finals ...

[machine54]

not sure I agree with the "cruise control" statement - understand that if Williams had lost  Midd would be hosting the tournament (Amherst and Trinity played to a 0-0 tie) - not as if Williams was playing Conn -  as far as the 6-1 result - after 10 hours of driving I was able to witness firsthand the drubbing - Midd actually had the better of the play for the first 25 minutes or so and only a spectacular save from Amherst kept the game scoreless - before half Amherst scored on a crazy deflection then had a nice goal with time winding down - early in the second half Amherst scored again on a set piece (in total Amherst scored on five set pieces - just one of those days where everything seemed to go in) and though I hate to admit it, it appeared to me that Midd basically quit at that point and many of the starters came out -   for what it is worth Midd's top freshman was injured and did not play - she will likely start on Saturday - I expect a tremendous game especially if Midd can do a better job of defending the set pieces - both games and the finals will be webcast