2014 Boys EMass Soccer

[Unregistered]

1 GNBVT 16 0 2 0.944
2 Diman 13 2 3 0.805
3 Randolph 13 2 3 0.805
4 Nauset 13 3 2 0.777
5 Pembroke 12 3 3 0.75
6 Duxbury 11 3 4 0.722
7 Walpole 10 4 4 0.666
8 Dartmouth 11 6 1 0.638
9 OA 9 5 2 0.625
10 Canton 9 6 2 0.588
11 South Eastern 9 6 3 0.583
12 CM 9 6 3 0.583
13 Westwood 9 6 3 0.583
14 Stoughton 10 7 1 0.583
15 Medfield 9 8 1 0.527
16 Hingham 8 7 3 0.527
17 Sandwich 9 8 2 0.526
18 WH 6 6 6 0.500
19 Sharon 7 7 4 0.500
20 D-R 7 7 4 0.500
21 Bristol-Plymouth 6 6 6 0.500
22 Bishop Feehan 7 10 1 0.416

7-10 matchups are serious first round games

[Unregistered]

7-10 matchups are serious first round games

I must have seen Canton on bad days. Saw them twice and was not impressed either time. Walpole wins 3 - 1 or 4 -1.

OA is young so I see them losing to Dartmouth

[Unregistered]

It would be helpful to suggest an approach that you think would be a better way to look at it. Tri-valley is sounding like the NEPSACs. They insist that their teams are really good and should be regarded as among the best. Then they stick to playing in the D3 tournament and their own league, so as to avoid any facts getting in the way of the argument. Kudos to Medway and Hopkinton for going outside the bubble.

They play in the divisions based on their school sizes, just like every other team in the state. And in the past few years TVL teams have won out of conference games vs the likes of Wayland, Algonquin, Nipmuc, Wellesley, Weston, and even L-S to go along with a number of sectional titles and state title games.

[Unregistered]

Looking at what? What is the objective here, to try to rank the best teams in the state all in the same bucket? That's improbable and illogical. If every team could play each other, then you would have the basis for a system that could work, but for what? Just so that it can be discussed and bantered about in a soccer forum? Towns are different sizes, great players from one town move to teams from another. Westwood, for example, had 4 high school boys at Revs Academy that are not playing on the high school team. Other towns have similar issues with their top players going to private schools.

The only comparison you can really make is among the teams that you play on your schedule and those in the division that your school happens to be in every four years given the school population. Other than that, the arguments are a waste of time.

The implied objective that was being addressed was the rankings that various sources put forth, including ESPN Boston, Boston Globe and Alex. Each of them take the approach of ranking the best teams in the state all in the same bucket, improbable and illogical as that may be. And yes, it's just so that it can be debated.

It's similar to the rankings that are very popular in other sports, especially the colleges. Maybe the best parallel is college basketball, in which less-reputed leagues, like a Horizon, might have a team with a gaudy record, but few games against teams from highly reputed leagues. So how to decide where to rank such a team? NCAA has approached it by going to an objective system, RPI. RPI is not relied on 100%, but it's relied on more than the human-opinion rankings. State high school soccer will never use something like RPI, but that table of non-conference aggregate records was offered as an indicator that, at least, is 1) objective, and 2) a bigger sample size in many cases, rather than cherry-picking results of a game here and there.

[Unregistered]

1 Needham 14 0 4
2 New Bedford 14 1 3
3 BC 13 1 3 Weymouth 10/30
4 Franklin 12 1 5
5 Silver Lake 13 3 4
6 (tie) Barnstable 11 4 3
6 (tie) Durfee 10 3 5
8 Wellesley 10 4 3
9 Natick 10 5 2
10 Attleboro 10 5 3
11 (tie) Brockton 10 6 2
11 (tie) King Philip 9 5 4
13 Braintree 10 6 4
14 Weymouth 9 7 3 BC 10/30
15 Marshfield 6 7 5

The above standings hold given the BC-Weymouth tie.

There is essentially or functionally no difference between the first three.

[Unregistered]

What about 4 - 10 seeds?

[Unregistered]

What about 4 - 10 seeds?

Franklin plays in a weak league, Dont see them as much of a threat.

Natick has not had s deep tourney run in a while. Same for Wellesley

Silver Lake, without PB, has had a great year and has the deep tourney run last year. They would be the only team outside of the top 3 that I would give a chance to

[Unregistered]

Groupthink?

Below is ESPN Boston's updated 10/30 ranking, with C.Mass. and W.Mass. edited out to compare with Boston Globe and Alex.

Team Name Record Globe, Alex Rank
1. Concord-Carlis (15-0-1) 1, 3
2. Needham (13-0-4) 2, 1
3. St. John's Prep (14-1-3) 3, 2
4. New Bedford (14-1-3) 6, 8
5. Masconomet (18-1-1) 4, 5
6. BC High (13-1-3) 5, 4
7. Medway (17-1-0) 7, 13
8. Acton-Boxboro (12-3-3) 10, 11
9. Framingham (10-2-5) 8, 12
10. Silver Lake (13-3-4) 18, 21
11. Franklin (12-1-5) 12, 14
12. Nauset (13-3-2) 9, 17
13. Scituate (14-1-3) --, --
14. Duxbury (11-3-4) 17, --
Others:
Brockton (10-6-2) 15, 9
East Boston (16-2-0) 20, --
Gr. N. Bedford Voke (16-1-2) 19, 10
Lexington (14-3-1) 14, 6
Malden (16-0-1) 11, 7
Peabody (14-2-2) --, --
Wellesley (10-4-3) --, 18
from Globe &/or Alex:
-- Brookline (8-2-6) 13, 15
-- Martha's Vineyard (13-1-2) 16, 16
-- North Reading (10-1-2) --, 19
-- Braintree (8-4-2) --, 20

[Unregistered]

1 Needham 14 0 4
2 New Bedford 14 1 3
3 BC 13 1 3 Weymouth 10/30
4 Franklin 12 1 5
5 Silver Lake 13 3 4
6 (tie) Barnstable 11 4 3
6 (tie) Durfee 10 3 5
8 Wellesley 10 4 3
9 Natick 10 5 2
10 Attleboro 10 5 3
11 (tie) Brockton 10 6 2
11 (tie) King Philip 9 5 4
13 Braintree 10 6 4
14 Weymouth 9 7 3 BC 10/30
15 Marshfield 6 7 5

There is essentially or functionally no difference between the first three.

A difference to consider is the schedules they've played
Needham - 12 games vs D1 tourney teams, 8-0-4 in those games
New Bedford - 7 games vs D1 tourney teams, 4-1-2 in those games
BC - also 7 games vs D1 tourney teams, 2-1-4 in those games

Using d1 tourney teams as a measure of schedule strength is arbitrary (although MIAA and many clearly thinks it's relevant, otherwise we would hear arguments for fewer divisions, when actually the direction is to add more), because it takes away New Bedford's games vs Nauset, BC's vs Medway, Needham's vs Walpole, etc.

IMO Needham is the favorite on this basis, but obviously they've been tied 4 times, including by BC, so an upset of them will not be a shock.

[Unregistered]

A difference to consider is the schedules they've played
Needham - 12 games vs D1 tourney teams, 8-0-4 in those games
New Bedford - 7 games vs D1 tourney teams, 4-1-2 in those games
BC - also 7 games vs D1 tourney teams, 2-1-4 in those games

Using d1 tourney teams as a measure of schedule strength is arbitrary (although MIAA and many clearly thinks it's relevant, otherwise we would hear arguments for fewer divisions, when actually the direction is to add more), because it takes away New Bedford's games vs Nauset, BC's vs Medway, Needham's vs Walpole, etc.

IMO Needham is the favorite on this basis, but obviously they've been tied 4 times, including by BC, so an upset of them will not be a shock.

Framingham tied Needham twice. There are a number of excellent teams that could go to the finals. I don't think if a top ranked team is beat by another top 7 or 8 team that it would be an upset.

[Unregistered]

Framingham tied Needham twice. There are a number of excellent teams that could go to the finals. I don't think if a top ranked team is beat by another top 7 or 8 team that it would be an upset.

This year, for d1 south, the teams seem to separate into 4 groups:
1. Needham - yes they can be beaten, but it would be an upset
2. New Bedford and BC - similar records against similar strengths of schedule. Teams below them could knock them off, but it would be an upset. One or the other should meet Needham in the south final.
3. The next 6 are similar to each other. Headline record is good, but look beneath it, and there's not consistent success against good teams, and/or there's occasional faltering against modest opposition. They are capable of beating a team above them, but not doing so twice, and are just as likely to be upset victims from teams 10-15.
4. The next 6 look similar to each other as well. Maybe they can point to a certain game or 2 as a sign that "they're just as good as . . . ", but then there are other results in their record that give pause. It will be interesting to see how many of this group win their opener. Probably 2 in my book. If it's more, there should not be a distinction from group 3 after all.

[Unregistered]

D1 South

http://miaa.statebrackets.com/tmenu.cfm?tid=3393

[Unregistered]

D1 North

1. Malden v. 16/17 Lowell v Billerica
8. Framingham v. 9. Madison Park
4. St. Johns Prep v. 13. Revere
5. Lexington v. 12 Westford
2. East Boston v. 15/18 Lincoln Sudbury v Chelmsford
7. Acton Boxboro v. 10 Andover
3. Peabody v. 14 Everett
6. Medford v. 11 Brookline


Let the predictions begin.

[Unregistered]

1. Malden v. 16/17 Lowell v Billerica
8. Framingham v. 9. Madison Park
4. St. Johns Prep v. 13. Revere
5. Lexington v. 12 Westford
2. East Boston v. 15/18 Lincoln Sudbury v Chelmsford
7. Acton Boxboro v. 10 Andover
3. Peabody v. 14 Everett
6. Medford v. 11 Brookline


Let the predictions begin.

Went to MIAA site but do not see link to these brackets. Where did you find them?

[Unregistered]

1. Malden v. 16/17 Lowell v Billerica
8. Framingham v. 9. Madison Park
4. St. Johns Prep v. 13. Revere
5. Lexington v. 12 Westford
2. East Boston v. 15/18 Lincoln Sudbury v Chelmsford
7. Acton Boxboro v. 10 Andover
3. Peabody v. 14 Everett
6. Medford v. 11 Brookline


Let the predictions begin.

Malden
Framingham
SJP
Lex
L-S
Andover
Peabody
Medford