2009 Bracket

In anticipation of the playoffs, I did a quick review of last year's bracket and did my own "guessing" as to who will make it this year. Without naming every team, here are my picks as to what conferences will have improved their overall numbers, who will lose and who will stay the same

Winners Losers Same
WCC (3) +1 Big 12 (Big Flop) (3) -3 Pac 10 (6)
Big East (6) +2 Big West (1) -1 ACC (
Big Ten (5) +1 CAA (1) -2 SEC (6)
Conf USA (3) +1 Ivy (1) -1
Mountain West (2) +1
Atlantic 10 (2) +1 *
* assumes Dayton is at large

I haven't gone through your list carefully, but the Pac 10 will have at least 7: Stanford, UCLA, Washington State, Oregon State, Washington, California, and USC. One or both of Arizona State and Oregon still are possibilities. Your ACC got goofed up, but they also will have at least 7.

Sorry for how it got laid out but it got jumbled when sent. I have the ACC getting 8 teams as Duke being near the bottom, still qualifies with their overall record and, of course, we know that we have to have an abundance of ACC teams. I'm going to stick with 6 teams from the Pac 10 and I think that's still genrous. I don't think ASU or U of O have a chance. U of O presently doesn't qualify based upon their overall record (8-9-1 and they will probably, at the very best, split in Ariz. ASU is even, overall and they will most likely split but, come on, 1-7-1 in the Pac 10? That doesn't sit well, regardless of their present RPI.

The big travesty in my opinion will be if the Big 12 get more than 2 at large teams. I understand Missouri, A&M and Nebraska but not the rest. Historically, they have had @ 6 teams represented but that conference is horrible this year, overall. The problem will be where would the other 3 teams come from, so it will be interesting.

Lastly, what will really be interesting is who will the odd man be out for the #1 seed and where will they be placed in the bracket. Depending on the outcome of the ACC Tourn. specifically, if FSU or UNC is eliminated, one of those teams along with UCLA could find themselves fighting an uphill battle, assuming they make it to the Q finals. My guess is that, notwithstanding UNC's #3 seeding in their Tourn.. UNC will win the title. The question will, then, be is it FSU or UCLA as a #1 seed, assuming UCLA can win out in Wash, which might be tough vs. WSU. Anyway, I'll let the expert RPI people hash that out.

The # 1 seeds appear more settled than most of the comparisons.

Stanford is a #1 seed even if they lose to Cal, although a strict reading gives advantage to UP in that comparison should they lose, I don't know if that is enough to overcome the RPI difference, (although I believe it's not any different than the amount Notre Dame was "bumped up" last year.) Both teams beat all 7 other common opponents. At any rate, even if by chance they lose that comparison with UP, they are still a #1 seed. No one else has a chance at a favorable comparison, and they will have the highest RPI regardless the outcome of the CAL game.

If the comparison for a #1 seed is between UCLA and UP, That will be settled tomorrow night. There is no head to head this year, but the two teams had 9 common opponents. UP, if it wins Friday, will have beaten all of them. UCLA tied USD, so even if it wins out, won't have matched UP's record against common opponents. even if UP ties, I think UP's RPI will stay higher than UCLA's We have too many common opponents for much relative fluctuation.

UP and UNC also have the same record against common opponents (1-1) UP lost to TAMU, and UNC lost to Miami. UNC owns the higher RPI, and will probably maintain it even with a loss. They also had the #1 NCRPI. UNC will end up with 2 or 3 losses in its last 8 games if secondary criteria come into play, But I don't think they will.


UP and FSU have two common opponents, and both teams won both games. (Miami & WSU) RPI may settle the ordering of those two. So the outcome probably depends on them being ACC champs. If it went to secondary criteria, FSU has two losses in the last 8 games, and would have 3 if they aren't champs. UP's NCRPI rank was 5, FSU's was 3. The adjusted RPI appears to have a bigger spread then the URPI, and it's now in UP's favor.


UCF has no common opponents with UP, so no basis for passing UP based on common opponents, and with their 3 losses, and lower RPI, I don't see them as #1 seed contenders. They have no games left to bring their RPI up, although their NCRPI was #4.

Notre Dame and UP have one common opponent. ND lost to Santa Clara and UP won it's game with that team, so Notre Dame has no basis for a claim to leap over UP in the seeding. Even if UP loses to USD, the RPI gap is too much here also. Their NCRPI was 26


BC is only slightly lower than ND, but even if they win the ACC, I don't think they will rise enough in the RPI. Like all ACC teams, they played Miami, but since we beat them, they have no other basis to leapfrog us even if their RPI got close. Their NCRPI was 11, so they might leap over ND.

Everyone else has too many losses or too low an RPI.

Barring major upsets (even with some), the four #1 seeds are Stanford, UNC, UP, and either FSU or UCLA, depending on the outcomes of the 1 or 2 games each team has left. The seeding within those four is a bit up in the air.

For UP, that means beating USD. We could still be in contention for a #1 seed with a tie.


Cheifer thinks Oregon is out and Duke in, but that's far from settled. For Oregon, that will mean they have to get a win and a tie this weekend or they can't be considered. If they do that, they close to Duke in the RPI, though perhaps they need both wins. Their non-conference RPI is 20 to Duke's 59. That 8-0 romp against Alabama A&M earlier in the season and playing the Big South's Gardner-Webb probably cost Duke in that RPI race. It may boils down to a comparison with the rest of the tournament field and the last 8 games. Oregon certainly comes in second in that final comparison, Duke in the former. Since NCRPI is part of the primary criteria, that may be the difference.
I think the Blue Devils have become avid Sun Devils.

If they do start making comparisons to the tournament field, both teams may lose out. Missouri's RPI is close to them, for example, and is 13-5-3, Northeastern is 12-3-3 and also close in the RPI, as is Charlotte at 15-2-2.

If the committee views the field as lopsided they will find reasons to include those teams.


It's shaping up to be what it was at the start. Win your games.

up7587 wrote:

Geezaldinho wrote:It's shaping up to be what it was at the start. Win your games.

Reading all these detailed analyses, it seems that bromide applies to everyone except UNC.

Actually, it did apply to them, too. Had they not beaten TAMU, we would have a clear basis to be seeded higher then they.

As it is, we don't have a basis to trump RPI in our comparison.

Just to be clear, when I say #1 seed, I'm speaking of the (4) #1 seeds. I'm assuming Stanford and UP are locks. I understand there may be an underlying placement of those #1's from the real #1 through #4, like BB but for the sake of discussion, I was wondering who would or would not be seeded as a #1. Selfishly, I would love to see UNC get a #2 seeding and have them placed in "your" 16 team bracket and have them come to Portland for the Q finals. Wouldn't that be exciting? I know, you don't want that. If I were placing a bet, I think UCLA is going to get the #2 and be place in the Portland quadrent. If FSU gets a #1, they will be on the same side as Stanford and you get UNC in the semi's. Lot of speculation but we'll see on Monday.

If FSU and UCLA are the "bubble" #1 seeds, competitive fairness would suggest that they should be in the same quadrant. But travel cost would be lower for UCLA to come here for the quarterfinals assuming both get that far. I would think that they might avoid having UCLA and Stanford in the same quadrant and UNC and FSU in the same quadrant because they are in the same conferences. So if UCLA ends up with a #2, I'm betting they either go to FSU (for competitive fairness) or UP (for cost) in the quarterfinals. If FSU gets the #2, they would either have to come to the West Coast or go to UNC, so I'd bet on FSU @ UCLA.

Wow, if FSU somehow wins the ACC and in doing so defeats UNC for a second time, having to defeat them a 3rd time before the College Cup would be brutal. For the record I do not think FSU wins the ACC.

FSUfan wrote:Wow, if FSU somehow wins the ACC and in doing so defeats UNC for a second time, having to defeat them a 3rd time before the College Cup would be brutal. For the record I do not think FSU wins the ACC.

I agree. I think (guessing ahead) that the definite #1's are Stanford, Portland & UNC, in that order. I still think, however, should UCLA win out their last two games, the NCAA, will not allow 3 #1's on the west coast. That's why I believe FSU will get a #1 seed, notwithstanding a potenial loss in the ACC tournament, unless the loss comes vs. VT in the semi-final game. So, Stanford get's as a #2? (I have no idea, could be one of several teams other than who I'm listing for the others) Portland get's UCLA (purley cost, maybe not fair from a ranking standpoint) UNC gets ND, and FSU gets Boston College ( can't be helped too many highly ranked ACC teams plus I'm guessing it's about the money. What do you think?

The #2 seeds look like they will all be on the East coast if UCLA is a #1.

Travel expenses won't be a lot different. I think they'll just pair the Highest #2 with the lowest #1, etc. That probably mens FSU at UCLA.


My guess is that if UCLA is the odd team out, they will come here. and the lowest #2 will go to Stanford.

I don't agree that the NCAA won't give the West coast 3 #1 seeds.
In 2001 they seeded the top 8. four of the first 5 were West Coast schools.

2001Tournament seeds: 1. North Carolina; 2. Santa Clara; 3. UCLA; 4. Portland; 5. Stanford; 6. Florida; 7. Notre Dame; 8. Connecticut.

If they seed them the way they ought, it would be FSU @ UCLA, we would have a chance of getting ND or UCF out here, and BC would play Stanford or UNC.

harryb wrote:If they seed them the way they ought, it would be FSU @ UCLA, we would have a chance of getting ND or UCF out here, and BC would play Stanford or UNC.

Assuming the RPI's stay the same, that's true, but the NCAA does have a history of sending people places to save money.

Mark your calendars.

2009 NCAA® Women's
College Cup®

When: December 4 & 6, 2009
Where: Aggie Soccer Stadium in College Station, Texas
Selection Show: November 9th, 8pm ET on ESPNews
For tickets call: 888-99-AGGIE
Go to NCAA.com to find out more about the 2009 Women's College Cup!

FSU just played Duke in the ACC tournament, and tomorrow they play VTech. Those two teams have 8-8-4 and 14-6-0 records, which should drop FSU well below UCLA in RPI, making it hard to justify a #1 seed for FSU, unless they beat NC. Even if they do beat NC, I don't know if they'll be above them in RPI. But the outrage would be just too flagrant if NC got a #1 seed and FSU did not after beating them twice. That fear-of-outrage factor is the only way I can imagine them getting a #1.

UCLA's RPI will rise this weekend if they win, because both Washington teams are strong enough to enhance UCLA on both Element 2 and Element 3.

I'm still a little worried that UCLA could rise enough to come out on top of us. We've suffered worse ripoffs than that, in the past. UPSF's calculation of adjusted RPI had us above UCLA after last weekend by only .0061, and that margin will shrink considerably if we both win out. So I sure hope one of the Washington teams at least ties them.

They'd be a fun opponent to get here, in the quarters, though the usual bracket fairness logic should give us Boston or Notre Dame. What the heck, any of them would be fun to watch in the quarters.

All through the season I've been thinking about how predictable Div I women's soccer games outcomes are, compared to men's pro or national teams. These teams just aren't all that closely matched. However, remembering past years' tournaments, that all changes when you get to the quarterfinals and beyond: most matchups could go either way.