May 2nd Poll

[laxalum16]

Those other teams you listed may all have big wins but look at UCSB for example they only beat BC by 3 goals, lost by 5 to CSU, beat CU by 1, lost to Chapman by 8, lost to BYU by 9, and only beat Poly by 6. UMD only lost to BYU and CSU by 1, and beat Poly by 8. Better scores against the same teams. And for a team that only let in 45 goals(don't quote me on that) in the regular season to be "lucky to hang on the the top 10" seems a little ridiculous don't you think?

[More Cowbell]

and if you take away the 3 quick goals that BYU had while UMD's keeper had the sun in his eyes

Is this honestly your justification for why UMD lost? This is absurd.

Those other teams you listed may all have big wins but look at UCSB for example they only beat BC by 3 goals, lost by 5 to CSU, beat CU by 1, lost to Chapman by 8, lost to BYU by 9, and only beat Poly by 6. UMD only lost to BYU and CSU by 1, and beat Poly by 8. Better scores against the same teams. And for a team that only let in 45 goals(don't quote me on that) in the regular season to be "lucky to hang on the the top 10" seems a little ridiculous don't you think?

are you saying that beating BC, CU and Cal Poly (by "only" 6) should hurt UCSB? I agree with Wingman...a win is a win and a loss is a loss. A 1 goal loss to CSU or BYU should not be seen as better than a 1 goal win over CU.

Also, close losses to top 5 teams doesnt mean you would necessarily beat teams in the 10-15 range. Look at Lindenwood. They played CSU to a 1 goal game. They also lost to Cal Poly, Arizona, and Michigan. Just because you can play tight with the top teams doesnt mean you can pull out wins against teams in the next tier down.

[laxalum16]

a win is a win and a loss is a loss unless you are trying to pick the top 16 teams in the nation. I'm not saying that UCSB should be punished at all, but when UMD posted better scores against the same teams why should they be punished?

[More Cowbell]

Because they didnt also get 5 wins vs other ranked opponents, like UCSB did

[laxalum16]

and the big loss to chapman?

[More Cowbell]

That loss should hurt them a little, but I dont see it as a huge loss. If Chapman were allowed to be ranked, they would probably be in the top 15. And UCSB came right back after that loss and won the WCLL, which is no small feat

[scooter]

UCSB got whooped by 3 teams....1 of whom wouldn't even crack top 10. There is no way they deserve to be ranked as high as they are

[More Cowbell]

Yeah...but they also beat 2 teams that are in the top 10 (UA, CU) and 1 team that might be in it tomorrow (BC)...UMD hasnt beat any teams in the top 10. It doesnt make any sense to me to argue that, because they played close to 2 top teams, they should be ahead of a team that has proven that they can BEAT top 10 teams.

[scooter]

yeah, fine, got that....but top 5?
There has been 1 team not named BYU or CSU to beat either of those teams and that is Oregon. These teams are obviously the top 3. UMD played them closer than everyone else.

The next question should be who is in the next tier down from these 3, and there is no way that UMD shouldn't be there.

[Ravaging Beast]

UCSB got whooped by 3 teams....1 of whom wouldn't even crack top 10. There is no way they deserve to be ranked as high as they are

You continue to push this fact. Chapman is a great team. They have been playing without some of their top players throughout their season. It also had to have been quite demoralizing to have their season taken away, and the only chance at redemption for their season was to beat the Gauchos and win the LA division. They did it and it made their season. But look who went on to win the WCLL. Says something about Chapman.
Very few teams make it out of Utah with a win. Two years ago, UCSB lost to BYU and came very close to losing to CU, but went on to win the National Championship. The point I'm trying to make is "wake up calls." Many of the top teams have had surprising losses this year and in years past, but the best teams have turned that around and done something about it. UMD deserves to be at the top. UCSB deserves to be at the top. Arizona deserves to be at the top. At this point in the season, there are no excuses for fatigue, inexperience, etc. The best teams are winning at the end of the season.

[Ranger86]

I think scooter asks a great question. BYU, CSU, and Oregon seem secure, but I don't see any reason 4,5,6 Michigan, CU, and Sonoma, couldnt just as easily be 8,9,10 or lower.

[scooter]

it just seems as if certain teams are riding their reputation, and not letting others deserving into their club.

[Ravaging Beast]

it just seems as if certain teams are riding their reputation, and not letting others deserving into their club.

Not to take anything from UMD (should be 4-5), but reputation has proven to be a good measure of teams. Look who has played well at Nationals over the past ten years. They continue to do so.

[Rudyfan]

Yeah...but they also beat 2 teams that are in the top 10 (UA, CU) and 1 team that might be in it tomorrow (BC)...UMD hasnt beat any teams in the top 10. It doesnt make any sense to me to argue that, because they played close to 2 top teams, they should be ahead of a team that has proven that they can BEAT top 10 teams.

Actually, 3 teams: UA, CU and ASU. And BC.

Why do certain posters have such a hate thing against the Gauchos?

UCSB just won a very tough WCLL tourney without their Frosh middie sensation Ryan Sanders who tore his ACL in the ASU game. They made arguably the toughest 2 road trips in the country going to BYU/Utah and Colorado St./CU and beat CU at CU. They've played the whole season without Luke Shaw, their leading scorer last year, and George Granelli, their highest scoring middie, both with 2-3 years of eligibilty left. They played only 4 home games all year. (pre-tourney) They beat ranked Cal Poly rather handily at Poly, routed a hot (at the time) LMU team at LMU, beat CU right after CU swept AZ, ASU and Oregon on their fabulous AZ road trip. Nobody wanted to go the pit this year so UCSB donned their visiting jerseys and went 14-4. Sure they lost to Chapman. At Chapman when the Gauchos had already clinched the division #1. Chapman played a great game, but I would have liked to see the match if it had had some significance and wasn't Chapman's "season."

I don't know how the Gauchos will fare in Dallas. They could lose their first game, or they could make the finals. But certainly they deserve to be there, and the Championship team of the WCLL should be a 4 or 5 seed. Nuff said.

[Woda]

Yeah...but they also beat 2 teams that are in the top 10 (UA, CU) and 1 team that might be in it tomorrow (BC)...UMD hasnt beat any teams in the top 10. It doesnt make any sense to me to argue that, because they played close to 2 top teams, they should be ahead of a team that has proven that they can BEAT top 10 teams.

UMD
0-2 vs. Top 5 (#1-Loss by 1, #2-Loss by 1) Avg. Goal Diff. -1
0-0 vs. 6-10 (no games)
1-0 vs. 11-15 (#13-Win by 6) Avg. Goal Diff. +6
1-1 vs. 16-20 (#18-Loss by 1, #20-Win by 8 ) Avg. Goal Diff. +3.5
0-0 vs. 20-25 (no games)

2-3 vs. Top 25 --------- Avg. Goal Diff. +2.2

UCSB
1-2 vs. Top 5 (#1-Loss by 11, #2 Loss by 5, #5-Win by 1) Avg Goal Diff. -5
2-0 vs. 6-10 (#8-Win by 2, #10-Win by 5) Avg. Goal Diff. +3.5
1-0 vs. 11-15 (#15-Win by 3) Avg. Goal Diff. +3
1-1 vs. 16-20 (#18-Loss by 3, #20-Win by 6) Avg. Goal Diff. +1.5
1-0 vs. 20-25 (#25-Win by 5) Avg. Goal Diff. +5

6-3 vs. Top 25 --------- Avg. Goal Diff. +.1666
Does not include Chapman Loss - not top 25 eligible, tough to judge this game, similar to NCAA because you don't know what the teams are playing for, like a consolation game in nationals.

The thing that really hurts UMD is that they haven't played enough teams in the top 10, they only played #1 and #2 and have done better against those teams than anyone outside the top three. When you look at similar opponents, UMD has done much better than UCSB. It's too bad UMD didn't play in a stronger conference, it is tough to judge them.