So Wrong

UPSoccerFanatic wrote:While we're talking about the non-conference schedule, I have an issue with the teams Washington has been scheduling for its tournament. The teams that are getting a lot of games against teams in the top 25, to use the "for the moment" new standard for #1 seeds, are playing two tournaments against top level teams. UW has not been good about scheduling teams at that level. If they're going to keep doing that, then I think we need to find a new tournament exchange partner that will agree to bring in top level teams. Oregon State, for example. (I know they had an exchange with Oregon this year, but I think we should horn in.)

Great thought, UPSF! I have been thinking in recent years about our opponents in the UW Tourney, and I've come to the conclusion that U-Dub is only interested in scheduling wins for their tournament. Not great, competitive futbol.

So...if the #1 seed UCLA...happens to get bounced out of the tourney in the first or second round...Portland will assume host site duty for the 3rd round, correct? Heck...I may be whining about nothing? I should be expending most of that energy in cheering for San Diego State or USD to upset the Bruins and keep us home....C'mon Aztecs and Tereros!!!!

GO PILOTS!!!

Actually we should have home field through rd 3. We wouldn't face UCLA until the Quarterfinals which would be round 4.

GUPhantom wrote:So...if the #1 seed UCLA...happens to get bounced out of the tourney in the first or second round...Portland will assume host site duty for the 3rd round, correct? Heck...I may be whining about nothing? I should be expending most of that energy in cheering for San Diego State or USD to upset the Bruins and keep us home....C'mon Aztecs and Tereros!!!!

I don't think you're going to see either of those teams bouncing UCLA. We can hope for it, as I will, but it's very unlikely.

More likely is that UCLA doesn't get through the next round, when they'll most likely play Virginia or Penn State. If you remember (I know you don't, why would anyone?), over the summer I picked Penn State as a potential College Cup team. They had a slow start to the season but are coming on like gangbusters. I'd say there's a very good chance they knock off UCLA. It would be great to have them come here for the quarters.

The O's Aaron Fentress weighs in. We know most of what he says, but nice to see word is getting around:

http://www.oregonlive.com/pilots/index.ssf/2009/11/post_1.html

the denver coach was another who was surprised.

I'm actually surprised not to see Portland with the number one seed; they had an outstanding season," head coach Jeff Hooker said. "For us, it's a good place to play. It's a great stadium and atmosphere. We look forward to the challenge. Our team is heavy with seniors and freshman in the starting lineup. It's a good experience for seniors to play [Portland] again, and a good opportunity for the freshman to gain some experience on this level."

Dumping the UW tourney for a different early-season event works for me. No matter who is on the schedule, it pays to win road games. With the OSU Beavers on the rise, maybe something good will come of the relationship with OSU's coach.

It would make sense to try to find a non-Pac 10 partner for our tournament. If we are going to get UCLA, USC, Stanford, and Cal to come up here regularly, we need someone else for them to play that is not in their conference. PSU and Gonzaga have not been strong enough recently to be attractive. It would be a geographical stretch, but how about partnering with one of the Bay Area schools or even Utah, BYU, Denver, or Colorado?

As for what teams to try and put on your schedule (As noted UW has not met this standard and since they control 2 of our non-conf maybe we need upgrade. ) The #1 driving force is what conference they are in as far as who we should be scheduling goes.

1. Don't schedule any teams from the weak conferences that get only one NCAA birth every year: WAC, Summit, SWAC, Southland, Patriot, OVC, NE, MVC, Big South, Big Sky, or Atl Sun. This rule would have put Montana off our schedule.

2. There are few top teams that make the tourney regularly that you can schedule but it is tricky because many of these teams are up and down. those conferences are Sunbelt, Sourthern, Mt West, Mid Am, Met Atl, Ivy, Horizon, Big West, Atl 10, and Am East. Pick selectively from these.

3. The top conferences you can play almost anyone except the very bottom and be playing someone with a decent RPI. Those are ACC, Big 12, Big E, Big 10, Colonial, Conf USA, Pac 10, and SEC. Pick any of these pretty much.

Looking at specific teams and conferences i took a look at the brackets from 2002-2009..

ACC: UNC, FSU, VIR, WF have made the tourney every year. BC and Duke made it every year but 2002. MD made it four years. Clemson made it every year up to 2007, but has dropped down. Miami and VT each made it a couple of times the last couple of years. Even NC St which has never made the tourney in that period has an 80 RPI on the latest release by ncaa. Any ACC good choice.

PAC 10: Stanford and UCLA made it every year during that period. USC and Cal missed one year. UW made it 4 years, one to the 3rd round. WSU and ASU three times. AZ made it a couple of times in '04 and '05 back when we played them in the 3rd round. OSU has only this year and UO never. Even lowly AZ has RPI of 107 on ncaa site. Any PAC 10 team good choice

Big East: ND, WV, have been in the tourney every year. Uconn every year but one. Rut, Marq, and Vill each been there 3 or 4 times. You might want to stay away from Seton Hall and Syracuse. Louisville has poor RPI this year, but have made the tourney a couple of times in the period. Everyone else in the conf has a decent RPI even though they are playing 500 ball. Take anyone but Seton Hall and Syracuse is a good bet.

Big 12: Quite a fall off this year. A&M made it every year. Texas and Col were down this year but they made it amost every year before that. OK St been in 5 times, while Mizz, Neb and Kan have been a few times. The Baylor, Tex, OK and Iowa state had poor RPI this year. Normally, any team a good bet to have decent RPI, but we'll have to see if trend continues for this conference.

Big 10: PSU made it every year. Strong programs in OSU, Wis, Ill, and Purdue. MSU, Mich, Ind Minn been there spiratically. Everyone except Iowa has decent RPI this year. Any team a good bet from Big 10.

SEC. Consistent programs are FL, Aub, and Tenn which have only missed one year. GEO, SC, and LSU have been there recently several times. Miss return and was there 3 times early in the period. Almost everyone has decent RPI.

Colonial: You need to stick to the top teams here: JM, W&M, Hofstra, NE, GM. The bottom 6 teams have poor RPI. Stick to the top 5 or 6 well know teams who have tourney experience.

Conf USA> UCF has been the most consistent making it 6 times. Col. College and Memphis have been decent programs. SMU and Rice and UAB have made the tourney before but there RPIs are down this year. Avoid Tulse, S. Miss, and Houston. Vast majority of conf is good bet to schedule as far as their strength.

Am. East. BU very consistent making tourney 7 times. Stay away from rest of conf.

ATL 10: Charlotte and Dayton have made it 3 or 4 times each. Richmond had one strong year and St Louis had a couple. Stay away from the rest.

Big West: The top teams have shifted almost yearly. CS-Fullerton was even a seed one year and hosted. Cal Poly been in as has LB St and UCSB. If you schedule 3 years out that team might be down.

Horizon: MIL been there 5 times or so. Everyone else stay away from.

IVY: Teams like Harvard, Penn, Columbia, Yale, Princeton are not too high rpi but not bad either. Princeton made a run one year several rounds. Most of these ok.

Metro Atl: MD has been the consistent one making tourney 5 times or so.

Mid-Am: A team or two with decent RPI but who that is has varied. Best to stay away I think.

Mt West: BYU has been there 6 times. Utah was thre 5 years early in the period, but not recently. SD st decent RPI this year. Stick to a few of the top teams here.

NE: CCSU and Monmouth have strong programs but RPI still over 100.

Patriot: Navy made the tourney several times.

Southern: UNC-GR and Samford have made the tourney multiple times and compete well.

Sunbelt: Denver been there 5 times. Avoid everyone else.


U of P should schedule only the top 9 or 10 teams from Pac 10, ACC, Big East, SEC, and BIG 10 as good ones on the schedule. This gives you over 50 teams to choose from and then fill in with selected teams from other conferences. You don't have to match UNC or SCU but you can do better then we have done recently.

I think UPSF has RPI for last 3 years. Maybe we can combine and see who ranks high for multiple years. Not sure if NCAA has archived their final RPI results each year?

Here's the thing... Portland is at a bit of a disadvantage because of our location. There just aren't that many teams in the West Coast, and it's not like we have limitless funds to constantly travel to the East and play ACC teams.

I mean... I remember we went to Florida a few years ago, and I know we went to Texas this year... anyone else remember any non-playoff far trips that our team has made? There aren't many.

So while I totally agree with the strategy you pointed out, you have to keep in mind that we'll never be able to schedule simply based on RPI. A lot depends on travel, whether or not teams are willing to do home-and-homes, etc. And our small conference (only 7 WCC games) doesn't help matters... we need to play more non-conference games than nearly every other team in the country.

Portland's best strategy is this: schedule as many Pac-10 teams as possible, especially the elites like UCLA and Stanford (a necessary, I think, as this year proves). Always have top-notch competition at the Nike Invitational, paying out $$$ if necessary for out-of-region opponents (which I believe is helpful and important for the RPI and seeding - it increases the likelihood of common opponents with other top teams). Using whatever leverage they can to ensure Washington has good opponents at the Husky Invitational. And try and get solid West Coast teams like Denver, BYU, UCSB, etc scheduled while avoiding the bottom feeders.

But again, I think we can trust that Garrett and the staff know what needs to be done and try their best to balance everything. Scheduling is a huge pain in the neck in any sport, and is especially difficult for a "non-revenue" sport like soccer. A lot of schools just don't have a big travel budget at all, even big BCS schools.

We went to Penn State and Rutgers last year and have played at UNC and Notre Dame over the years. I think there is usually one lengthy trip per year.

Too bad the NCAA committee is inconsistent on cost. UP would have sold out Merlo for the match vs. UCLA. I suspect the crowd at Drake will be at best 1500, with about 500+ Pilot fans.