Under and Overrated teams?

[Danny Hogan]

agreed the reason i questioned bc's 3 practices indoors was because usually its an arguement for only 3 practices with regard to getting outside.

Virginia Tech traditionally starts their season a month after the rest of the selc, i can't imagine what its like farther north.

[Hugh Nunn]

That being said, we have a new headache this week, and that's ranking the SELC teams. FSU's big win over V-Tech has this voter confused where to rank these teams now. I had dropped the 'Noles big time after a shocking loss to an unranked team, now I'm not sure how high now to bump FSU back up. Same goes for V-Tech, they've got to drop in my rankings, but I'm not sure how many spots is fair. The other teams I vote for will be impacted by how I ultimately sort this SELC mess out.

I would like to read some opinions from SELC land before I cast my ballot!

Mid-season every year, FSU seems to have a let down in one way or another. Losses to teams like Minnesota this year or Tennessee the previous two years after a good start support the team's M.O.
The issues surrounding the coaching situation IMHO have actually brought the team closer together, and make them more dangerous.

Obviously, with the showing VA Tech had in the WCLL, they deserved their top 10 ranking, but in defeating them convincingly, FSU makes a case as well. I think they both should hover around the 10 spot, with FSU one ahead (say #10 and 11 respectively).

But hey, none of this really matters if the 'Noles repeat last year's sub par performance at the SELC tournament. Here's hoping the possible first round bye won't be a hindrance.[/quote]

[Rad44]

Let's clarify for BC:

The 3 practices were in a HS gym. There were only 3 because the team was origionally promised field time in the schools bubble. It fell through in January and left the team searching for options. There is no way to get outside, so the team was "slightly" hindered by a lack of practices.

In regards to scheduling: It is very difficult to get top 10-15 teams out here. We have a shortened season due to weather and by the time field space is available, no teams are traveling this distance. As most teams are, BC is on a limited budget and cannot afford to take more than a couple trips across the country. Although the team was in California in the spring, Sonoma did not want / have time (not sure) to play BC. USCB as far as I know was away. Chico was a quality win though, especially after no rest and considering they've been playing for a while.

YES- BC's schedule is not very strong, considerably stronger than Lindenwood though. Consider that BC lost to Oregon in the last few mins. last year, in a game where the team was missing 3 legit starters, including the PCLL player of the year (no excuses, they were a good team). Then BC destroyed Texas, and then embaressed Missouri on a running-clock, shortened game. Missouri I believe was ranked #15 at the time and Texas #19 (??). In any event, BC dominated what was percieved to be, good teams. As everyone has come to find out, they were overanked. Is what it is.

Point is this- BC has beaten recognizable teams who have ranked fairly well in the last few years. While it is unfortunate that Lindenwood "aggressively scheduled" for this season and now all those teams are not in the rankins, they DO NOT have an argument for a higher ranking. Furthermore, BC HAS beaten some good teams and has Pitt., UNH and NU still to come. Although neither of those games are blockbusters, they will be fun to watch and each has the possibility of going both ways for a while.

Weak, strong, medicore schedules: Minn. is what is going to matter. Every team has a lopsided schedule, if not for any other reason than because of geographical/financial reasons. Outside of say the top 7 or 8 teams (UM, Sonoma, CSU, etc.), no schedule is stacked. BC is planning a more intense schedule for next year. The team is stoked about a top 10 ranking and to be honest, can play higher, but wants to prove it.

[tulaxcoach06]

well said.

[LaxGuru]

Looking at the schedule for this weekend, if Pittsburgh beats BC, does BC become vastly overrated even though Pitt lost in OT to a much pooped on extremely solid Oakland team. Losing in OT to a top ten then hypothetically beating BC will garner what kind of movement for Pitt? Just asking, not saying they will beat BC. just trying to get a feel for opinions of how polls would adjust.
The reason I'm asking, I watched the Oakland-Pittsburgh game, both teams appeared to play their A games, very entertaining to watch, then I looked at the boards to see people say that Oakland must be overrated or played poorly not thinking that Pitt may be underrated.

[Rad44]

Intertesting question!

Pitt. seems to be pretty good this season and continues to move up the ranks. Would a win vs. BC be an upset- Yes, would be overwhelming- No. Pitt is good! I think it would certainly contribute the idea that BC is overated, but not drastically.

Flip it, if BC wins, is it a "quality" win or just another game. Would it help to solidify BC's ranking and possibly help to move in the ranks?

[LaxGuru]

I doubt BC will get much movement out of the win unless a team 2-3 spots ahead them takes a loss during the poll period. But it should help solidify their argument over their ranking.
Pitt has pretty much locked up the CCLA playoff spot and unless Western Michigan and/or Purdue (both having off years) can pull upsets, Pittsburgh is looking at the #2 seed
While they don't garner much respect outside the CCLA, they hope to change that with a good playoff showing.

[GoldFish7]

This weekend is a great opportunity for BC. Both Pitt and UNH in are this weeks top 25 and with impressive wins, BC would have a case to move ahead of Oakland who struggled with Pitt.

[Cousin17]

Last time I checked, struggled isn't a stat. It was a W for Oakland and wins move you up in polls before "struggles" move you down. Oakland will not move down if BC beats a team that they also beat 3 weeks ago.

[CATLAX MAN]

Last time I checked, struggled isn't a stat. It was a W for Oakland and wins move you up in polls before "struggles" move you down.

That's not necessarily true. Let me give you a hypothetical example. If Michigan plays Stanford, based on their relative rankings this year, they should dominate this team. If they win, but it is close, it will call into question Michigan's ranking. Struggles with teams that should be dominated should affect a team's ranking.

[BClax16]

with no head to head competition between the two teams the next reasonable comparable stat would be goal differential against common opponents

not saying that this would push BC above oakland but it would certianly push them closer

[CATLAX MAN]

IMHO, goal differential is the most meaningless statistic that you can find. Many teams pull their starters very early when it is clear that a team is going to be dominated. Some teams do not do this and run up the score. Sometimes the score gets run up with a team's 2nd & 3rd unit. Alternatively, some teams just don't press as hard in a blowout for fear of injury, not wanting to rub it in, etc.

[the lax]

The Pitt Oakland game went into overtime which is not the same as a one goal victory due to starters watching.

[TMcCourt]

Catlax man you are right to some degree. I dont think there is that much of a difference between a 7 or 8 goal win or a 15 goal win depending on how the team chooses to play the game.

But by NO means in goal differential meaningless! If Michigan only beat stanford by one then of course it should matter because no team wouldn't have their best on the field in a close game. Some teams enjoy leaving starters in and beating teams 22-0, other teams have their best out by halftime and win 12-3.
I remember FSU got a lot of crap for supposedly running up the scores last season early on (no opinion on that I just remember the posts about it) and I think voters will realize that winning 22-0 is no different then 12-3 as long as the teams are winning and winning consistently.

[BClax16]

agreed in the case of a blowout goal differential is meaningless - however for close games i believe that it does have some merit - a team would certainly not rest players in a one goal game

if one team were to win by say one or two goals and another were to win against the same opponent by 5 or 6 i would still stay that the larger goal differential indicates the better team


on the flip side if a team 1 wins by 7 or 8 and team 2 wins by 10 or 12 i would agree that goal differential does not mean as much, if anything