State Cup Seeding/Brackets

mojo wrote:

Gunners wrote:

mojo wrote:

ontheball wrote:I have recently found out that it did go to a vote. So, seems that the majority did not agree with making any change as the seedings stayed as originally set. Now, it's time to move on. Play hard or go home.

So if it really did go to a vote, I wonder why no changes were made? Looks to me like one particular team stands above the other two. I am just reading the standings and looking at the scores. Did egos get in the way in the voting?
This is really an interesting conversation. I know that nothing can be changed but seedings can really hurt or help a team. OTB, are so set on arguing the point because you know that SR shouldnt be seeded so high? Looking at your record this Spring I wouldnt think so. You just dont seem to want to let go of justifyng your seeding.

Hmm....really? Which team?

I am not speaking for them because they are not my team and I sure dont want to stir up anymore crap but if it were but from my perspective, the 3rd and 5th seed should be swapped. I am sure I will get a pm shortly from someone on that team.

Taking into account all play to date, I think that is probably accurate.

mojo wrote:

Gunners wrote:

mojo wrote:

ontheball wrote:I have recently found out that it did go to a vote. So, seems that the majority did not agree with making any change as the seedings stayed as originally set. Now, it's time to move on. Play hard or go home.

So if it really did go to a vote, I wonder why no changes were made? Looks to me like one particular team stands above the other two. I am just reading the standings and looking at the scores. Did egos get in the way in the voting?
This is really an interesting conversation. I know that nothing can be changed but seedings can really hurt or help a team. OTB, are so set on arguing the point because you know that SR shouldnt be seeded so high? Looking at your record this Spring I wouldnt think so. You just dont seem to want to let go of justifyng your seeding.

Hmm....really? Which team?

I am not speaking for them because they are not my team and I sure dont want to stir up anymore crap but if it were but from my perspective, the 3rd and 5th seed should be swapped. I am sure I will get a pm shortly from someone on that team.

I wont PM you I will tell you now, butt out of this one. Thats not what we are about. Seedings are seedings. I thought the comments made about the Texans last year was right on the money. The team that performs and wants it bad enough will make it through. We dont need the publicity like you are projecting and dont appreciate it.

ontheball wrote:I have recently found out that it did go to a vote. So, seems that the majority did not agree with making any change as the seedings stayed as originally set. Now, it's time to move on. Play hard or go home.

Until you made this post, it seemed the discussion was dying on the vine. Truthfully, I don't even know why I'm qualifying your input with a response. "Play hard or go home"...crybaby emoticon...Really? What are you, 7 years old? If you choose to debate at least do it with some dignity.

FYI, the vote was 6-6. Then your team rep (Solar Red) showed up late (well after the discussion took place) and cast the deciding vote. But take solace in the fact that she acted/voted just as you would have...impulsively, in your team's best interest and without logic.

Whatever

Wow. I saw OTB's post, started a response, got pulled away for some work (hate that) and wham! The thread came to life.
I'll address Gunners first.

This thread is making me all nostalgic...it's like we jumped into a Hot Tub Time Machine back to 2006

I fully expect Northwatcher to chime in soon.

I will wait and see how it all plays out. Seems the top seed in our division has never done well in the past. Sting last year and FC about every other year. But maybe this year! I still say it all depends on which 96 team shows up. Lots are capable, but are they able?

Don't worry about the seedings. Texans will wrap everything up in a month or so anyway. Everything else is a pipedream.

socrocks wrote:Gunners, forget the specific scenario of this age group, this year. My argument now, as it was 4 years ago…when I brought it up in our u11 State Cup meeting, is that the process is not being handled properly. The group's job is to seed fairly…just as we would expect a Tournament Director to do. Some years there is no real change in the seedings from what would be the "starting point" (Fall standings) and the games that have been played through the Spring…but some years there are changes. The group has to look at that fairly and objectively and discuss it openly….that's what we're there for. Otherwise, NTX would make the seedings automatic for us and they wouldn't mandate our group session.

I think part of the problem lies with who shows up for the meeting (as their team's rep) and doesn't understand the process or what is expected of them. The other part of the problem is that certain people are solely concerned with their team's well-being….with no regard given to the purpose of the process.

But IMO the concept is very simple: data from the completion of 7/8 of a season, is more relevant than data from ½ of a season. And add to that…recent results are more relevant than results from 6 months ago. See Texas Longhorn example

Now back to this age group, this year. For the record, my pitch to the group was that Feet did enough in the Spring to be #3 seed. An argument probably could have been made for #2…but I did not take that position. The standings certainly support a #3 seed. Based on my discussions with you, I have to think you would agree.

All valid points, and you're right I do agree with you regarding Feet's seeding.

I'm just of the thinking that, in the end, it's really not that big of a deal. I can see how others would feel differently.

[quote="#2420"]Don't worry about the seedings. Texans will wrap everything up in a month or so anyway. Everything else is a pipedream.[/quote]
2420 Do you even have a kid in the 96s any longer? Texans have what wrapped up in a month? They are playing very well, OTB's darlings are inconsistent, Dfeeters appear to be on a run, FC plays bipolar, Solar is in a slide and who knows which Sting will show up? So I agree that an arguement could be made for Dfeaters at number three pushing Red and Solar lower. This is a moot point as this group will all be in highschool next year and we will be using just the fall results anyway.

Bout time the 96 age group got fired up. I wonder why no one from solar has chimed in? Oh wait, their top bench player quit the team and they are falling apart! It must be true since I read it here.

WOW I go try to get some work done and OTB issues a kick to the crotch of socrocks and like some others have said this takes me back to the days when my dd wasn't a teenager and actually listened to me. Maybe those who were not in attendance should not issue such HSOs against those that were. I think the case has been made for Feet being ranked too low. Now that the dust has settled a short jamaican man once said "winning solves everything" I also heard 96 guru was a sissy

HSO=Hot sports opinion as per the Ticket

bronxdad wrote:WOW I go try to get some work done and OTB issues a kick to the crotch of socrocks and like some others have said this takes me back to the days when my dd wasn't a teenager and actually listened to me. Maybe those who were not in attendance should not issue such HSOs against those that were. I think the case has been made for Feet being ranked too low. Now that the dust has settled a short jamaican man once said "winning solves everything" I also heard 96 guru was a sissy

HSO=Hot sports opinion as per the Ticket

I have not spoken to the seeding order, but to the process involved. No where did I say either way that I agree or disagree with the seeding. I think my point is being misunderstood. I am in support of the process used to determine seeding.
I stated early on if you don't like the process then work to get it changed for next year. For someone, Socrocks, to feel so passionate about the shortcomings of the process, then why didn't you work to change the process in previous years? Do you feel that strongly that being seeded 3rd would have given you a better advantage? Or was it the fact that you received a lower seed and you felt you deserved a higher one based on recent performance?
No doubt things have changed for many teams in the Spring. Sting has hit a rough patch, Feet has done better ( as usual for Spring), FC has proven they can hang, and SR is well...playing ok, Solar Dallas hit a pothole and is working on getting back on the road. Texans has been the most consistent and stable all year.
The fact that it was handled via a vote seems to be fair, although the outcome wasn't what some wanted and was what some wanted. Isn't that the way all votes turn out in the end. Not eveyone can be happy. I would have accepted a different seed - even if it was lower. No one in brackets C &D gets an easy road. All of those teams are capable of beating the others. So, I see no advantage of being seeded differently for those in places 3-6. I guess the only advantage I really see is who would play the bracket winner of A or B. There again, that is anybody's game.
My comment about play hard or go home wasn't meant to be applied directly to Feet, it very much applies to our team. If you knew me better you would know that I don't make excuses for poor results. You either win because you did well, or you don't and you perform better next time. In the end it is about performing well when you need to against top opponents.
I think this is the best discussion we have had in ages.

Gunners wrote:This thread is making me all nostalgic...it's like we jumped into a Hot Tub Time Machine back to 2006

I fully expect Northwatcher to chime in soon.

That is greatness!! Gunners gets the Seinfeld award of the day.

BD - you are just hilarious. . Those crawfish are gonna be all over you tomorrow!!!

96Guru wrote:

96Guru wrote:

ontheball wrote:The way I look at it is that we all know that the fall standings are used in large part to determine seedings. Yes, there is the meeting, but it is my understanding that particularly in our age group the seedings have gone unchanged in years past. So, we all had the same knowledge that they are based on the fall performance. Therefore, I don't really see an issue. Bottom line is that the fall performance should be a high priority for all if they want a top seed. Now it is a matter of winning the games.

You are correct on that. Teams have to be ready to win games and since there are no quarters finals, the teams especially in brackets C and D better max out in points in the games they are expected to win if they want to get out of bracket.

Everyone knows that ties will kill you in tournaments.

This time its not only the battle for State Cup but an entry into Regionals.

Should be quite a showdown.

Just to be a little more clear on my earlier post, I agree that teams need to show up and be ready to play in State Cup but I dont total agree on the seeding part of it. I know its been done that way forever but I think it doesnt quite cover the entire picture that some teams are developing new players that signed in July and it takes some time to gel. Plus add in PL and you have a whole new ball game. Thats additional league games that are played and only the LH teams get counted towards standings.

The travesty in all this is the fact that SR gets FC in their bracket and Feet gets Solar in theirs and only one team will advance in each bracket because of no quarter finals. You are talking about 4 teams that could win State cup. Any mistakes in bracket play (a tie) and their done. Sting and Texans on the other hand are bracketed in a way that they can have a slip and still advance. In my opinion, only let D1 teams in State Cup. Make it very competitve from the start and dont look for total blowouts to give a team the slight points edge.

I dont like the way it is done but we really have no choice. The teams playing their best soccer after the winter will always be penalized in State Cup. To have the representatives from each team get together and decide on any changes to be made is just a joke. What team would honestly sit there and say, "your team is should be seeded higher than ours so lets changes the seeing"?

Sting will coast to the semis and Texans will too. The other two teams will have fought very hard to get there.
Sting will play Solar or Feet and Texans will play Sr or FC.

So what's the beef here. You typically have to win all your games including one against big red or blue to win state cup. If you are the best team it is not a problem as teams do it every year.