Here are a few final thoughts on the Callahan before I take a look at the big tourney. I meant to offer a hypothetical ballot and write a few more words of praise for the other top candidates. If I could vote, here's how my ballot would look:
1. Andrea Romano (UCSB)
2. Anne Mercier (Ottawa)
3. Georgia Bosscher (Wisconsin)
4. Emily Baecher (Michigan)
x. Anne 'Bambi' Ohliger (USC) - somewhere between 1 and 5
I forgot who it was that was describing the raw power of Mercier, and it made me think about Lebron James. I think the comparison is fair in terms of the type of player they are for their sport. Mercier brings a size and strength that you rarely see in women's Ultimate. Mercier can handle the disc, control the middle of the field and take players deep in a similar fashion to the way that Lebron can run the point, post up players (starting to) and take the ball to the rack.
This also got me thinking about other NBA comparisons for the top candidates (yes, I know it's patently absurd to compare players across sports, but it's also ridiculously fun to think about). I decided that Dre is Tim Duncan circa his MVP years. As the quiet big man, he wasn't particularly flashy but almost everyone would agree that he was unquestionably the best player in the league at the time. His team just won and he was the primary cog of that team.
I think Georgia is a hybrid of the young Vince Carter (when the sky was the limit) and Kevin Garnett. Both Vince and KG were freakishly athletic and at least in KG's case, he has always been an intense defensive player. I think a small forward would be a more appropriate comparison but the only person that I could think of was Scottie Pippen, who was an outstanding all-around player but was overshadowed by MJ and didn't have the charisma of a superstar. There's no doubt that Georgia is the star of Bella Donna and is very charismatic.
Emily Baecher is a combination of Chauncey Billups and John Stockton. She runs the offense with the same kind of poise and isn't always the flashiest player. She'll generate offense when needed but her biggest contribution is in her ability to make everyone else on the field better.
Anne Ohliger is a lot like Ray Allen (or Reggie Miller if you think Miller is better). Like Ray Allen, Bambi is someone you appreciate more and more when you see her in action. When both are at the top of their games, they are impossible to cover and run all over the court/field. Especially in his youth, Allen's game has been about mixing it up between driving the lane and getting free on set screens to spot up for the three. Bambi similarly switches between acting like a third handler/mid-cutter and running deep for the big huck.
Well, that's enough Callahan talk. We're done with the appetizers. Give me the frickin' steak (writes the pescetarian).
NATIONALS!!! ER, I MEAN THE UPA COLLEGE CHAMPIONSHIPS!!!
I meant to post this shortly after pools came out, but there weren't any real surprises in the seedings and they conform pretty close to what I had expected.
Wisconsin and Ottawa swapped spots which is certainly reasonable. I personally liked Ottawa over Wisconsin because of the Centex win, but this does prevent the intra-regional matchup between Bella Donna and Iowa State (who was a virtual lock at 16). Granted this means Ottawa and UPenn are in the same pool, but they haven't seen each other this season.
UNC ended up at 9 over Colorado and UCLA. Of all the variations between the UPA's seedings and mine, I find this one the most puzzling. If pools A and D hold seed (very strong possibility here), UNC and UNC-Wilmington will be meeting up for the fifth time this season in the pre-quarters. This seems like a mistake to me, especially since this could have been easily avoided by swapping Colorado and UNC.
The next variation occurred with Wash U. and St. Louis getting seeded ahead of USC. I thought we had the more impressive season overall, but I think St. Louis' two wins over Wisconsin in addition to beating us at Centex gave the two South teams a bump ahead of USC. I completely understand that and have no problems with the 15 seed. I was very confident that we would end up at either 13 or 15.
The final variation was putting Illinois over the two New England teams. This seemed a little odd to me because the same logic that bumped the two South teams above us should have been applied to Illinois and the New England teams. Dartmouth beat Illinois at Centex, but like the Hellions, Menace had the tougher strength of schedule. Perhaps I'm missing some other consideration here, but if we're at 15, Menace at 19 makes a lot more sense. Granted, we've played them twice already and it will be a lot of fun playing Dartmouth who we have never seen before.
Alright, that's enough discussion about the hypotheticals. Let's go to the pools.
POOL A - UC Santa Barbara, UNC-Wilmington, Carleton, Washington U., Illinois
I think Pool D is the most likely to go according to seed, but Pool A is a pretty close second. The Burning Skirts should easily win this pool. The only major stumbling block for them is facing Wilmington in their first game. As long as they are focused and ready to play, I think they will win every pool game by four points or more.
Carleton and Wash U. match up against each other immediately and a spot in the pre-quarters is likely at stake. Illinois is a dangerous five seed and have the athleticism to upset both Carleton and Wash U. Though Syzygy demolished Menace at Pres Day (13-1), that game took place in horrible conditions that played to Carleton's strengths and exposed Illinois' weaknesses. I expect the rematch to be considerably closer.
Predictions: UCSB, Carleton, Wilmington, Wash U., Illinois. It's no fun picking pools to simply go to seed. I'll go with Syzygy besting Wilmington after Carleton figures out how to create a microclimate that produces slush and sub-freezing temperatures. Yes, in order to do this, Carleton will likely have to summon the awful Mr. Freeze and brush dangerously close to the failure that is Batman and Robin, but great reward only comes with great risk. Or is that great power and great responsibility? Or great gatsby and great expectations? All these adages are so confusing.
POOL B - Washington, Michigan, UCLA, Saint Louis, Northeastern
I really love this pool. The Washington v. Michigan matchup should be a lot of fun to watch. Expect the game to look like a bombing range featuring Shannon 'the Howitzer' O'Malley and the 'B-23 Bomber' Emily Baecher. I just hope that Element doesn't sport the all-purple uniforms. It gives me a craving for a Happy Meal and those prelapsarian days when I ate mounds of Chicken McNuggets before a few rounds of shock therapy convinced me to become a vegetarian.
UCLA is well-suited to knock off Michigan. They haven't faced each other since UCLA beat them last year, and Flywheel will be eager to exact revenge. Coach Korb has been reportedly watching game footage on Michigan and found some weaknesses in the Flywheel machinery. Design flaws in a Michigan product? Crazy talk, FJR, crazy talk. (Just teasing, Flywheel. More cowbell, please).
I'm excited to see how SLU does against the top three seeds in their pool. I was a bit surprised to see them lose to Wash U. twice after doing so well at Centex. If they can recapture the magic they had in Austin, they will shock one of the top three.
Northeastern looks to be a dangerous five seed now that they are looking more like the team that was hyped in the preseason. They had a great run to 9th place last year in Boulder and having both Courtney Moores and Stephanie Barker healthy is critical for their chances of creating an upset.
Winning this pool is key because finishing 2nd or 3rd presents a potentially very challenging prequarters matchup. Also, the pool winner gets arguably the easiest quarterfinals matchup.
Predictions: Washington, Michigan, UCLA, St. Louis and Northeastern. That's some radical thinking there, FJR. The final standings aren't very exciting, but the way it is produced will be. St. Louis shocks Michigan but loses to UCLA. Going into day two, Element is 2-0, BLU is 2-0, SLU is 1-1, Michigan is 0-2 and Northeastern is 0-2. On day two, Element wins the pool with two close wins over UCLA and St. Louis. Northeastern severely damages St. Louis hopes of advancing to the pre-quarters by beating them in a nailbiter. Michigan needs to beat BLU to advance and does so by winning on double game point.
POOL C - Wisconsin, Oregon, Colorado, USC, Dartmouth
Welcome to the pool of death. Maybe that's self-serving to write since we're in the pool, but anyone who has followed the women's season will likely agree. Both Oregon and Wisconsin are among the handful of teams that have a good shot of winning it all. They will be facing each other for the first time since last year's pre-quarters where Bella Donna triumphed in a comeback win. One of the scheduling quirks is that Oregon will have played a game before this matchup while Bella Donna will be opening up their 2009 Nationals run with this game. I don't think this should really affect either team much, but it will be interesting to see if Wisconsin starts out of the gate well.
Oddly, Colorado and Southern California were both placed into the same pool, and I think both are underrated coming into the tourney. While it's likely that the matchup between the two will decide who advances to the pre-quarters, I really like the chances of one (or both) of these teams upsetting Wisconsin or Oregon. This pool has the makings of last year's Pool C where Texas upset Washington and nearly took out Wisconsin.
Dartmouth also has the look of an underrated team. The New England region is much maligned and has been seeded last in their pools for four straight years. In 2006 and 2008, one of the NE teams far exceeded expectations and finished considerably higher than their seed (Dartmouth was the 15 seed in 2006 and reached the quarterfinals; last year, Northeastern was the 14 seed and finished tied for 9th).
Predictions: There will be upsets. I was going to offer more specific predictions (no, I wasn't) but when I was staring into my crystal ball, all I saw was the haze of the blue, orange, green, red and yellow circles lingering from trying to beat Through the Fire and Flames on expert. Okay, I'm lying. I'm not that good at Guitar Hero. I'm still stuck on getting through Raining Blood. Stupid Slayer.
POOL D - Ottawa, Stanford, North Carolina, Iowa State, UPenn
Pool D is a very strong bet to go according to seed despite the close seeding among Ottawa (4), Stanford (5) and UNC (9). A number of people I've spoken with immediately thought that Ottawa was the biggest beneficiary in the UPA's new format and schedule for Nationals. I completely agree. They were lethal before. Now, they are crazygonuts lethal.
I think Superfly will have a tough time handling the power game offered by the Lady Gee Gees. It seems like a bad matchup for Stanford on paper, but Superfly has been remarkable at proving me completely wrong, so it shouldn't be a shock if Stanford reprises UCSB's role last year in the five seed upsetting the four seed.
Likewise, I think UNC matches up badly with Stanford. The two teams have a number of similarities but Stanford's roster is much deeper with skilled, athletic players. Pleiades should be motivated a little extra by their desire to avoid yet another matchup against UNC-Wilmington; meeting in the pre-quarters would be their 5th meeting of the season and UNC is currently 0-4 against Seaweed. You know the saying... the fifth time is the charm unless you are USC playing UCLA in which case the number might be four as long as the coach doesn't screw things up by writing stupid things on his blog... hey, look at the giant talking robot across the street!
Iowa State is probably the team I know the least about. Melissa Gibbs and Jasmine Draper are the two stars of the team. I think their best chance of moving on to the pre-quarters is getting into an up-and-down huck game against UNC. Give the fans what they want. Huck or die. Huck or die.
UPenn returns to the big show but I think they are going to be overmatched in all of these games. They simply haven't seen enough competition against top-tier teams this season. That said, look for them to upset teams in Sunday's placement games. As they proved during the Metro East Regionals, once they get used to the competition and gain the necessary confidence, they can take down quality teams (Maryland is definitely underrated outside of their region).
Predictions: Ottawa, Stanford, North Carolina, Iowa State, UPenn. Yes, this is a boring way to close out the preview. Yes, my logorrhea has limits. And yes, I need to pack.
I'm planning to write a couple quick posts while I'm in Columbus. If I'm highly motivated, I'll do the Twitter thing (twitter.com/fjrhox).
And now for the show!
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Monday, May 18, 2009
The 2009 Callahan Award - Why You Should Vote for Andrea Romano (Part 2)
Part Two of my look at the 2009 Callahan Award will itself be comprised of three parts: (i) the qualities that define a superior Callahan candidate, (ii) an examination of the pool of the Callahan Award nominees, and (iii) a breakdown of why Andrea Romano emerges as the best candidate.
This is a really detailed look at the candidates and part two whittles the candidates down to three finalists in Survivor-style fashion. Luckily for me, I didn't have to do too much work for this post. I'll simply cut and paste my correspondence with one of this blog's fans.
Dear FJR,
My younger sister has recently made it know that all she wants for Christmas is a Callahan Award winner. I know that Christmas is seven frickin' months away. Last year, she wanted those awesome pink shorts that the USC Hellions wear, but unfortunately, Five Ultimate sold out of them on Black Friday. I got her the plaid shorts instead. She subsequently burned an effigy of me wearing the plaid shorts and wrote 'PINK!' with hot pink nail polish all over my bedroom walls. I'm scared out of my mind. I need to get her a Callahan winner, but I don't know where to start. Can you tell me where I can get one, and for that matter, can you tell me what one looks like? Your biggest fan, Stan
Dear Stan,
Glad to have you as a fan. I'm happy to help you in your search for a Callahan winner. As many people have discovered, finding one is very difficult, and you will find that people all across the US and Canada are seeking this elusive creature. In fact, many claim that they have seen one in their backyard, this despite the fact that people can't even agree on what the Callahan winner even looks like.
If you look at the official Callahan website, you'll find that the general appearance is pretty vague. They are recognizable for the following:
A. overall offensive and defensive abilities
B. dedication to ultimate and leadership ability
C. sportsmanship
At prima facie, these things are kinda difficult to ascertain about anyone. If you need an example of this, check out that guy who played Nordberg in the Naked Gun movies. I thought he was a goofy, fun-loving Heisman Award winner. Whoops! FJR FAIL!
We'll come back to the first characteristic after taking a look at the second one. Dedication to Ultimate and leadership ability seems a bit tough to assess, but I think one way to measure this is simply by looking at the team's success. A little known secret is that Callahan winners have been spotted traveling in the company of a Nationals-qualifying team. Crazy, right? The only exceptions were Jody Dozono (Oregon) in 1999 and Chelsea Dengler (also Oregon) in 2003. I think this has something to do with the fact that there is no sales tax in Oregon and Goonies being filmed in Astoria. We'll call this the Oregon Aberration.
The third aspect is also a bit tough to assess. Sportsmanship is obviously critical and can serve as a tiebreaker when evaluating two or more candidates. Poor sportsmanship is definitely grounds to eliminate a candidate though almost nobody outwardly puts this label on anyone in the women's division (behind closed doors, you'll get a different story).
Going back to the first criterion, this used to be a little more cut and dry. Past Callahan winners had the very clear appearance of being the best player on their team. This changed last year when Courtney Kiesow won the award, and suddenly the look of a Callahan winner was much more open (I think everyone can agree that Courtney is a good player but clearly not the best on her team). Whether last year was an aberration or a complete paradigm shift remains to be seen.
Well, Stan, I hope this helps you in your search for your sister's Christmas gift.
p.s. Keep your sister away from scissors and other sharp objects.
Dear FJR,
Sorry to bug you again but can I just get a list of names? I started reading what you wrote, but I don't read anything longer than what you can fit in a text message. Consider it a generational thing. Hook me up, bro! Also, thanks for the quick response. You must really love your fans! Either that or you have no friends and are desperate to connect with people. Your superfan, Stan
p.s. I just drank a fifth of vodka... dare me to drive?
If we use qualifying for Nationals to separate the Candidates from the candidates, we get the following 17 names:
KC Vampola (UCLA)
Andrea Romano (UCSB)
Heather Waugh (Colorado)
Rohre Titcomb (Dartmouth)
Tania Reitz (Illinois)
Emily Baecher (Michigan)
Kelly Tidwell (UNC-Wilmington)
Stephanie Barker (Northeastern)
Julia Sherwood (Oregon)
Anne Mercier (Ottawa)
Whitney Viets (Pennsylvania)
Kara O'Malley (St. Louis)
Anne Ohliger (Southern California)
Jenny Founds (Stanford)
Claire Suver (University of Washington)
Kate Stambaugh (Wash U.)
Georgia Bosscher (Wisconsin)
If you restrict your shopping list to the names above, I think you'll find what you are looking for. To allay any concerns that you might have overlooked someone, we'll look at those players who were eliminated in the game-to-go or late in Regionals.
Candice Chan (UBC)
Darragh Clancy (California)
Jennifer Jacobsen (UCSD)
Kristen Lamm (Florida)
Lucy Barnes (Harvard)
Charlie Katie Mercer (Maryland)
Liz Hand (Middlebury)
Claire O'Brien (Wake Forest)
All of these are good players, but do any of them stand out above and beyond players on the previous list? I don't think so. The one exception might be Candice Chan, but it can be argued that she wasn't even the most valuable player on her team (Tory Hislop looked a lot like a Callahan contender to me). Kristen Lamm has a big following too but Florida simply hasn't played on a big enough stage during the regular season to garner more consideration. Darragh Clancy is a great player as well but she also has the same issue that Candice Chan does. Speaking of Cal...
The two players that I think could have implemented the Oregon Aberration were Cree Howard and Tory Hislop. Neither were nominated so this is not an issue. Other surprising absences from the Callahan nominee list include Robyn Fennig (UW Eau Claire) and Alyssa Weatherford.
The first means to reduce the pool of 17 nominees who will be playing in Columbus is simply to eliminate those who haven't played enough at the elite tourneys. Personally, I think it is problematic to have the Callahan voting completed before the College Championships because the tourney offers the best opportunity to look closely at the top nominees. Especially this year, voters have more of an opportunity to watch the best of the best and more closely examine each nominee perform when they are on the biggest stage. Since this is not the case, it means that the teams/players who have not travelled to the elite tourneys simply do not have enough attention to be viable contenders for the Callahan Award. Of course, this only really affects Whitney Viets (UPenn) as all of the other nominees attended either Centex or the Stanford Invite.
To further refine the pool, I think you can eliminate all of the nominees whose teams didn't at least qualify for the pre-quarters or quarterfinals at any of the prestige tourneys (Pres Day, Stanford, Centex - apologies to Midwest Throwdown, Trouble in Vegas and Easterns). This is consistent with the past five Callahan winners, all of whose teams advanced to the quarterfinals at the College Championships. Applying this test eliminates Kate Stambaugh (Wash U.), Rohre Titcomb (Dartmouth), Stephanie Barker (Northeastern), and Kelly Tidwell (UNC-Wilmington). Wilmington actually has a solid shot at qualifying for the quarterfinals, and Tidwell has certainly been a major force in Seaweed's resurgence. Each of these players are obviously very good, but the remaining candidates are just simply better qualified.
With one major exception, the remaining twelve players can be further whittled down by eliminating those teams that didn't appear in the quarterfinals of any of the big tourneys. Anne Ohliger (USC), Heather Waugh (Colorado) and Tania Reitz (Illinois) bow out at this level. I love each of their games and each player means so much to their respective squads. I'm of course partial to Ohliger aka Bambi as she has played an important part in the rise of USC Ultimate from a team struggling to get seven to a tourney to one of the top 15 teams in the division. Waugh was tremendous at Regionals and the amount of respect she gets from her teammates is undeniable. Reitz was listed as one of my seven players to watch this year in the UPA magazine and I think she has proven herself as being one of the top 14 players in the division.
The one exception here that should not be eliminated because of the quarterfinals test is Emily Baecher. They lost a tight game to Wisconsin at Centex, but there is no doubt that Flywheel is capable of qualifying for the quarterfinals at Nationals. Baecher has certainly benefitted from quite a bit more exposure than Ohliger, Waugh and Reitz, but her play and leadership skills clearly merit the attention.
In reducing the list from nine to the five finalists, there are more subjective criteria that need to be employed. First, I think we can use what I'll call the Stanford Paradox: this is simply to eliminate those players who are surrounded by other very good players and consequently do not stand out as much as the others. After winning the second and third Callahan Awards, Stanford has become the poster child for this problem, and I think strong players like Enessa Janes, Christina Contreras and Lauren Casey all lost votes because outsiders couldn't agree on who Superfly's best player is. I'm sure that Stanford will gladly take the championships over the individual awards.
In employing this test, I am not suggesting that the remaining nominees aren't surrounded by very good players. I am simply offering my opinion that the disparity between the eliminated players and their teammates is much smaller than those of the other candidates. I guess you can consider this simply another name for the VORP test (Value Over Replacement Player).
The players that fall out of contention when applying the Stanford Paradox / VORP test are Jenny Founds (Stanford, of course), KC Vampola (UCLA) and Julia Sherwood (Oregon). I wish I had statistical data to back this up, but I'm fairly confident that the relative plus/minus of each of these players would be less than the others on the list. I have consistently been impressed by Founds and she deserves a ton of credit for anchoring Superfly' s handling line when Emily Damon was sidelined for a big part of the season. Vampola is underappreciated as a player and I have come to greatly respect her cutting and receiving skills. Sherwood has emerged as a fantastic defender and arguably Fugue's most lethal thrower.
The next player that I would eliminate is Kara O'Malley (St. Louis). SLULU is making their first appearance at Nationals and O'Malley is a big part of the reason why. She fits the profile of that dominant individual who is primarily responsible for a priorly unknown team's success. Similar past candidates include Lucia Derks (Wake Forest), Mia Iseman (NYU), Christina Wirkus (Truman State) and Amy Smith (Emory). When you compare O'Malley to the other candidates, especially Anne Mercier and Emily Baecher (players with the most similar profiles), I think they are simply better all-around players and offer more compelling intangibles than O'Malley. That said, for O'Malley to be on the cusp of being one of the five finalists acknowledged in Columbus would be a tremendous recognition for St. Louis Ultimate and that she is being considered here is a testament to her great contributions.
FJR,
Wow, so many words. Just give me a name. Stan
Andrea Romano. Text message version: Dre. D-R-E.
Of the five finalists (Romano, Bosscher, Mercier, Baecher, Suver), I think she has the best balance of all of the considerations that I have discussed above.
(1) Strong player with high VORP? Absolutely. UCSB was solid last year when Dre was on the sidelines, but they were a quarterfinals, maybe semifinals, team without her. With her? They got to the finals. As mentioned before, with her playing this season, they won two of the big three tourneys, reached the finals of Centex and won Regionals handily. Without her, they lost to UCLA at Sectionals. Kaela and Finney are both very good players but Dre brings an extra something that takes the Burning Skirts to another level.
(2) On-field intangibles? Check. That extra something I mentioned before is poise and confidence. She noticeably makes the other players around her better.
(3) Off-field intangibles? Yes. Dre has quietly contributed behind the scenes. She was part of the organizing force that resulted in the return of Pres Day as a national-caliber tourney and has strongly supported the growth of women's collegiate Ultimate by being part of women's teams' effort to take more control over their own division.
(4) Team success? Yes, on many levels. Over the past 3-4 years, UCSB has become a dominant force on the national level. Their growth from a mid-tier team to the number one seed at Nationals is a pretty big deal. This year, they have been regarded by most as the number one team in the division.
Objectively, if you applied the test of a hypothetical draft and who would be the first player picked, I would likely go with either Anne Mercier or Georgia Bosscher. It is really, really close between those two. I think Bosscher is the better defender and overall athlete, but Mercier has a more potent offensive arsenal and higher Ultimate IQ. If you want to vote for the player that makes the most eye-popping plays, you have to go with one of them.
But clearly, the Callahan Award is not and has never been simply a reflection of the above test. At present, I think Bosscher is the frontrunner because (a) she's very good, (b) she is very recognizable and has been a big name for a number of years, (c) the Wisconsin / Central Region voting bloc is a powerful force and clearly made a big difference last year in a year where Kira Frew was the clear favorite, and (d) she is very likable.
I also think that Kiesow winning the award last year weakens the case for Georgia Bosscher. The argument made for Courtney Kiesow over Kira Frew and the other candidates was that she brought a lot of the intangibles to Bella Donna. Kiesow is still at Wisconsin, but Bosscher's proponents maintain that she is a singular talent who deserves the award more than anyone else, including the teammate who won it last year. I find this a bit puzzling. Another problem I keep running into is that most of the arguments I can think of in favor of Georgia are also valid for Anne Mercier. As I suggested before, it's really close between these two players based purely on a skill set evaluation.
This being the case, I think Romano shines above the other finalists because of the other factors. Also, there are simply more objective reasons to support her candidacy above the others. The simplest one, of course, is that her team has made the greatest leap of all the other top candidates' teams, and there is no doubt that she has played a major role in that leap.
If you want to vote for the person who has made the biggest difference to her team, to her Section, to her Region and to her division as a whole, Andrea Romano is that player.
This is a really detailed look at the candidates and part two whittles the candidates down to three finalists in Survivor-style fashion. Luckily for me, I didn't have to do too much work for this post. I'll simply cut and paste my correspondence with one of this blog's fans.
Dear FJR,
My younger sister has recently made it know that all she wants for Christmas is a Callahan Award winner. I know that Christmas is seven frickin' months away. Last year, she wanted those awesome pink shorts that the USC Hellions wear, but unfortunately, Five Ultimate sold out of them on Black Friday. I got her the plaid shorts instead. She subsequently burned an effigy of me wearing the plaid shorts and wrote 'PINK!' with hot pink nail polish all over my bedroom walls. I'm scared out of my mind. I need to get her a Callahan winner, but I don't know where to start. Can you tell me where I can get one, and for that matter, can you tell me what one looks like? Your biggest fan, Stan
Dear Stan,
Glad to have you as a fan. I'm happy to help you in your search for a Callahan winner. As many people have discovered, finding one is very difficult, and you will find that people all across the US and Canada are seeking this elusive creature. In fact, many claim that they have seen one in their backyard, this despite the fact that people can't even agree on what the Callahan winner even looks like.
If you look at the official Callahan website, you'll find that the general appearance is pretty vague. They are recognizable for the following:
A. overall offensive and defensive abilities
B. dedication to ultimate and leadership ability
C. sportsmanship
At prima facie, these things are kinda difficult to ascertain about anyone. If you need an example of this, check out that guy who played Nordberg in the Naked Gun movies. I thought he was a goofy, fun-loving Heisman Award winner. Whoops! FJR FAIL!
We'll come back to the first characteristic after taking a look at the second one. Dedication to Ultimate and leadership ability seems a bit tough to assess, but I think one way to measure this is simply by looking at the team's success. A little known secret is that Callahan winners have been spotted traveling in the company of a Nationals-qualifying team. Crazy, right? The only exceptions were Jody Dozono (Oregon) in 1999 and Chelsea Dengler (also Oregon) in 2003. I think this has something to do with the fact that there is no sales tax in Oregon and Goonies being filmed in Astoria. We'll call this the Oregon Aberration.
The third aspect is also a bit tough to assess. Sportsmanship is obviously critical and can serve as a tiebreaker when evaluating two or more candidates. Poor sportsmanship is definitely grounds to eliminate a candidate though almost nobody outwardly puts this label on anyone in the women's division (behind closed doors, you'll get a different story).
Going back to the first criterion, this used to be a little more cut and dry. Past Callahan winners had the very clear appearance of being the best player on their team. This changed last year when Courtney Kiesow won the award, and suddenly the look of a Callahan winner was much more open (I think everyone can agree that Courtney is a good player but clearly not the best on her team). Whether last year was an aberration or a complete paradigm shift remains to be seen.
Well, Stan, I hope this helps you in your search for your sister's Christmas gift.
p.s. Keep your sister away from scissors and other sharp objects.
Dear FJR,
Sorry to bug you again but can I just get a list of names? I started reading what you wrote, but I don't read anything longer than what you can fit in a text message. Consider it a generational thing. Hook me up, bro! Also, thanks for the quick response. You must really love your fans! Either that or you have no friends and are desperate to connect with people. Your superfan, Stan
p.s. I just drank a fifth of vodka... dare me to drive?
If we use qualifying for Nationals to separate the Candidates from the candidates, we get the following 17 names:
KC Vampola (UCLA)
Andrea Romano (UCSB)
Heather Waugh (Colorado)
Rohre Titcomb (Dartmouth)
Tania Reitz (Illinois)
Emily Baecher (Michigan)
Kelly Tidwell (UNC-Wilmington)
Stephanie Barker (Northeastern)
Julia Sherwood (Oregon)
Anne Mercier (Ottawa)
Whitney Viets (Pennsylvania)
Kara O'Malley (St. Louis)
Anne Ohliger (Southern California)
Jenny Founds (Stanford)
Claire Suver (University of Washington)
Kate Stambaugh (Wash U.)
Georgia Bosscher (Wisconsin)
If you restrict your shopping list to the names above, I think you'll find what you are looking for. To allay any concerns that you might have overlooked someone, we'll look at those players who were eliminated in the game-to-go or late in Regionals.
Candice Chan (UBC)
Darragh Clancy (California)
Jennifer Jacobsen (UCSD)
Kristen Lamm (Florida)
Lucy Barnes (Harvard)
Charlie Katie Mercer (Maryland)
Liz Hand (Middlebury)
Claire O'Brien (Wake Forest)
All of these are good players, but do any of them stand out above and beyond players on the previous list? I don't think so. The one exception might be Candice Chan, but it can be argued that she wasn't even the most valuable player on her team (Tory Hislop looked a lot like a Callahan contender to me). Kristen Lamm has a big following too but Florida simply hasn't played on a big enough stage during the regular season to garner more consideration. Darragh Clancy is a great player as well but she also has the same issue that Candice Chan does. Speaking of Cal...
The two players that I think could have implemented the Oregon Aberration were Cree Howard and Tory Hislop. Neither were nominated so this is not an issue. Other surprising absences from the Callahan nominee list include Robyn Fennig (UW Eau Claire) and Alyssa Weatherford.
The first means to reduce the pool of 17 nominees who will be playing in Columbus is simply to eliminate those who haven't played enough at the elite tourneys. Personally, I think it is problematic to have the Callahan voting completed before the College Championships because the tourney offers the best opportunity to look closely at the top nominees. Especially this year, voters have more of an opportunity to watch the best of the best and more closely examine each nominee perform when they are on the biggest stage. Since this is not the case, it means that the teams/players who have not travelled to the elite tourneys simply do not have enough attention to be viable contenders for the Callahan Award. Of course, this only really affects Whitney Viets (UPenn) as all of the other nominees attended either Centex or the Stanford Invite.
To further refine the pool, I think you can eliminate all of the nominees whose teams didn't at least qualify for the pre-quarters or quarterfinals at any of the prestige tourneys (Pres Day, Stanford, Centex - apologies to Midwest Throwdown, Trouble in Vegas and Easterns). This is consistent with the past five Callahan winners, all of whose teams advanced to the quarterfinals at the College Championships. Applying this test eliminates Kate Stambaugh (Wash U.), Rohre Titcomb (Dartmouth), Stephanie Barker (Northeastern), and Kelly Tidwell (UNC-Wilmington). Wilmington actually has a solid shot at qualifying for the quarterfinals, and Tidwell has certainly been a major force in Seaweed's resurgence. Each of these players are obviously very good, but the remaining candidates are just simply better qualified.
With one major exception, the remaining twelve players can be further whittled down by eliminating those teams that didn't appear in the quarterfinals of any of the big tourneys. Anne Ohliger (USC), Heather Waugh (Colorado) and Tania Reitz (Illinois) bow out at this level. I love each of their games and each player means so much to their respective squads. I'm of course partial to Ohliger aka Bambi as she has played an important part in the rise of USC Ultimate from a team struggling to get seven to a tourney to one of the top 15 teams in the division. Waugh was tremendous at Regionals and the amount of respect she gets from her teammates is undeniable. Reitz was listed as one of my seven players to watch this year in the UPA magazine and I think she has proven herself as being one of the top 14 players in the division.
The one exception here that should not be eliminated because of the quarterfinals test is Emily Baecher. They lost a tight game to Wisconsin at Centex, but there is no doubt that Flywheel is capable of qualifying for the quarterfinals at Nationals. Baecher has certainly benefitted from quite a bit more exposure than Ohliger, Waugh and Reitz, but her play and leadership skills clearly merit the attention.
In reducing the list from nine to the five finalists, there are more subjective criteria that need to be employed. First, I think we can use what I'll call the Stanford Paradox: this is simply to eliminate those players who are surrounded by other very good players and consequently do not stand out as much as the others. After winning the second and third Callahan Awards, Stanford has become the poster child for this problem, and I think strong players like Enessa Janes, Christina Contreras and Lauren Casey all lost votes because outsiders couldn't agree on who Superfly's best player is. I'm sure that Stanford will gladly take the championships over the individual awards.
In employing this test, I am not suggesting that the remaining nominees aren't surrounded by very good players. I am simply offering my opinion that the disparity between the eliminated players and their teammates is much smaller than those of the other candidates. I guess you can consider this simply another name for the VORP test (Value Over Replacement Player).
The players that fall out of contention when applying the Stanford Paradox / VORP test are Jenny Founds (Stanford, of course), KC Vampola (UCLA) and Julia Sherwood (Oregon). I wish I had statistical data to back this up, but I'm fairly confident that the relative plus/minus of each of these players would be less than the others on the list. I have consistently been impressed by Founds and she deserves a ton of credit for anchoring Superfly' s handling line when Emily Damon was sidelined for a big part of the season. Vampola is underappreciated as a player and I have come to greatly respect her cutting and receiving skills. Sherwood has emerged as a fantastic defender and arguably Fugue's most lethal thrower.
The next player that I would eliminate is Kara O'Malley (St. Louis). SLULU is making their first appearance at Nationals and O'Malley is a big part of the reason why. She fits the profile of that dominant individual who is primarily responsible for a priorly unknown team's success. Similar past candidates include Lucia Derks (Wake Forest), Mia Iseman (NYU), Christina Wirkus (Truman State) and Amy Smith (Emory). When you compare O'Malley to the other candidates, especially Anne Mercier and Emily Baecher (players with the most similar profiles), I think they are simply better all-around players and offer more compelling intangibles than O'Malley. That said, for O'Malley to be on the cusp of being one of the five finalists acknowledged in Columbus would be a tremendous recognition for St. Louis Ultimate and that she is being considered here is a testament to her great contributions.
FJR,
Wow, so many words. Just give me a name. Stan
Andrea Romano. Text message version: Dre. D-R-E.
Of the five finalists (Romano, Bosscher, Mercier, Baecher, Suver), I think she has the best balance of all of the considerations that I have discussed above.
(1) Strong player with high VORP? Absolutely. UCSB was solid last year when Dre was on the sidelines, but they were a quarterfinals, maybe semifinals, team without her. With her? They got to the finals. As mentioned before, with her playing this season, they won two of the big three tourneys, reached the finals of Centex and won Regionals handily. Without her, they lost to UCLA at Sectionals. Kaela and Finney are both very good players but Dre brings an extra something that takes the Burning Skirts to another level.
(2) On-field intangibles? Check. That extra something I mentioned before is poise and confidence. She noticeably makes the other players around her better.
(3) Off-field intangibles? Yes. Dre has quietly contributed behind the scenes. She was part of the organizing force that resulted in the return of Pres Day as a national-caliber tourney and has strongly supported the growth of women's collegiate Ultimate by being part of women's teams' effort to take more control over their own division.
(4) Team success? Yes, on many levels. Over the past 3-4 years, UCSB has become a dominant force on the national level. Their growth from a mid-tier team to the number one seed at Nationals is a pretty big deal. This year, they have been regarded by most as the number one team in the division.
Objectively, if you applied the test of a hypothetical draft and who would be the first player picked, I would likely go with either Anne Mercier or Georgia Bosscher. It is really, really close between those two. I think Bosscher is the better defender and overall athlete, but Mercier has a more potent offensive arsenal and higher Ultimate IQ. If you want to vote for the player that makes the most eye-popping plays, you have to go with one of them.
But clearly, the Callahan Award is not and has never been simply a reflection of the above test. At present, I think Bosscher is the frontrunner because (a) she's very good, (b) she is very recognizable and has been a big name for a number of years, (c) the Wisconsin / Central Region voting bloc is a powerful force and clearly made a big difference last year in a year where Kira Frew was the clear favorite, and (d) she is very likable.
I also think that Kiesow winning the award last year weakens the case for Georgia Bosscher. The argument made for Courtney Kiesow over Kira Frew and the other candidates was that she brought a lot of the intangibles to Bella Donna. Kiesow is still at Wisconsin, but Bosscher's proponents maintain that she is a singular talent who deserves the award more than anyone else, including the teammate who won it last year. I find this a bit puzzling. Another problem I keep running into is that most of the arguments I can think of in favor of Georgia are also valid for Anne Mercier. As I suggested before, it's really close between these two players based purely on a skill set evaluation.
This being the case, I think Romano shines above the other finalists because of the other factors. Also, there are simply more objective reasons to support her candidacy above the others. The simplest one, of course, is that her team has made the greatest leap of all the other top candidates' teams, and there is no doubt that she has played a major role in that leap.
If you want to vote for the person who has made the biggest difference to her team, to her Section, to her Region and to her division as a whole, Andrea Romano is that player.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
The 2009 Callahan Award - Why You Should Vote for Andrea Romano (Part 1)
My original intent was to provide a number of profiles highlighting the top players in the women’s division. I started something similar last year with profiles on Katie Barry and Angie Sanan, but I simply got busy with other things this year. Perhaps one day I'll get paid to write these profiles. While I'm being unrealistic, I might as well dream of getting paid to run an individual's Callahan campaign once I'm done with coaching.
Anyway, I was planning to take a fairly objective stance on this year's Callahan Award, but after sifting through RSD and getting a general sense of the Callahan hype, I felt deeply that a gross injustice was taking place. The current frontrunner, Georgia Bosscher, is a very strong candidate but it is insulting to the entire women's division to think that she is a singular talent that is miles above the rest of the field. I love Bosscher's game and folks in Wisconsin are fully entitled to promote her as much as they can. That said, I think the case for Andrea Romano is more compelling and deserves a lot more consideration from all of the voters.
ANDREA ROMANO
Over the past three years, the UC Santa Barbara Burning Skirts have emerged as one of the dominant programs in women’s Ultimate. This year, they have had a very impressive run, notching tourney wins at Pres Day and the Stanford Invite. After a close loss to Ottawa in the Centex finals, UCSB was just short of winning the equivalent of the women's division's Triple Crown.
Beyond this year, UCSB defied expectations in both 2007 and 2008 by reaching the finals at the College Championships. In 2007, they eliminated UCLA, one of the most talented college women's teams I've ever seen. In 2008, they were up 8-5 in the finals before running out of gas.
The disparity between UCSB's accomplishments and the amount of hype they get on RSD and other blogs is enormous. The fact is that they demand considerably more attention and recognition for their rise to power. When you examine the factors responsible for the Burning Skirt's success, you will see that Andrea Romano has played a gigantic part in their ascent.
Andrea (aka Dre) grew up in San Francisco where basketball was her primary sport. She discovered Ultimate when she got to college and credits Karen Ko and Steve Dugan with her early development as a player. She recalls that Karen would "[stay] after practice and [throw] with me... encouraging me to play club after my rookie season." Her growth as a player took another big jump forward when Steve Dugan recruited her to play with the Gendors in 2006. That team qualified for the Club Championships and made it to the semifinals.
That same club season marks one of the most difficult times in Dre's Ultimate career and life. On the return trip from the Southwest Mixed Regionals tourney, just hours after celebrating their qualification to Nationals, Andrea was involved in a tragic car accident that took the lives of two of her teammates (Doug Baker and Will Wiersma). She spoke about this during CSTV's coverage of the 2007 finals against Stanford, and suffice to say, the accident was a very emotional event in her life.
The accident would also have a lasting physical effect on the field. When the 2007 college season began, the first signs of a mysterious foot injury stemming from the accident showed up and sidelined her early in the season. The same problem would put her on the sidelines for the bulk of the 2008 season. "Spending hours captaining the team and having an injury doctors can’t explain is one of the hardest things I have ever done. It’s hard not to be able to lead by example and be stuck on the sidelines not being able to work hard and run sprints with your team."
Andrea's ability to confront these adversities owes a lot to her work ethic. The Burning Skirts practice four times a week on top of conditioning during the winter and spring quarters. Their tourney schedule was among the most demanding in the women's division, and the fact that they remain highly motivated and perform consistently well is a testament to the team's leadership. Kaela Jorgenson and Carolyn Finney took on the role of captains this year, but Andrea has clearly remained a vital leader both on and off the field.
This year, UCSB has capped off their ascent by entering the College Championships as the number one seed. While she won't assume credit for it, there is a clear correlation between Dre's time on the team and their path to the top. She considers this journey to be one of the highlights of her Ultimate career. "When I started playing on the Skirts, the veterans were ecstatic to just qualify for Stanford Invite. When I was a rookie, we set a goal of making it to Nationals in 2007. Winning Centex in 2007 and transitioning from a team that was not guaranteed an invite to big tournaments to a national spotlight team was definitely one of the highpoints of my career."
Their success during the season was particularly impressive since last year's Callahan nominee Katie Barry had been on the sidelines prior to Regionals. All the while, Andrea has still been dealing with her foot injury (she sat out during their loss to UCLA at Sectionals). As part of this process, I have personally witnessed the evolution in Dre's game. Her nagging injury has at times limited her ability to dominate as a cutter the way she did early in her college career, but she has become a much smarter player and a steady handler that the rest of the team can depend on. Her presence on the field provides a great deal of confidence to her teammates, and her significance becomes more and more noticeable with every game you watch UCSB play.
Romano's confidence and demeanor also have an important impact on her teammates. By the middle of this season, the Burning Skirts looked like an unstoppable mack truck until they hit a few bumps at Centex and Socal Sectionals. Dre's manner of handling those losses provided a great example for her teammates and helped to motivate them to a dominant performance at the Southwest Regionals where they looked like the best team I had seen all season. Romano explains, “I am a very competitive person and I hate losing. However, [losing to Ottawa at Centex and UCLA at Sectionals] motivated our team to step it up at practice and work on our weaknesses."
Going into the College Championships, Dre and the Burning Skirts have their eyes on the prize. "Our goal is to bring the best possible team we can to Columbus and leave it all on the field." While there are a number of championship-caliber teams in the field, UCSB looks like a good bet to end the Northwest's reign. If the Burning Skirts are the ones hoisting the trophy on Memorial Day, let there be no doubt that Andrea Romano will be a major reason why.
------
I will be posting part two of this article tomorrow, and offer a detailed analysis on why I think Andrea Romano is the best candidate for the Callahan.
Anyway, I was planning to take a fairly objective stance on this year's Callahan Award, but after sifting through RSD and getting a general sense of the Callahan hype, I felt deeply that a gross injustice was taking place. The current frontrunner, Georgia Bosscher, is a very strong candidate but it is insulting to the entire women's division to think that she is a singular talent that is miles above the rest of the field. I love Bosscher's game and folks in Wisconsin are fully entitled to promote her as much as they can. That said, I think the case for Andrea Romano is more compelling and deserves a lot more consideration from all of the voters.
ANDREA ROMANO
Over the past three years, the UC Santa Barbara Burning Skirts have emerged as one of the dominant programs in women’s Ultimate. This year, they have had a very impressive run, notching tourney wins at Pres Day and the Stanford Invite. After a close loss to Ottawa in the Centex finals, UCSB was just short of winning the equivalent of the women's division's Triple Crown.
Beyond this year, UCSB defied expectations in both 2007 and 2008 by reaching the finals at the College Championships. In 2007, they eliminated UCLA, one of the most talented college women's teams I've ever seen. In 2008, they were up 8-5 in the finals before running out of gas.
The disparity between UCSB's accomplishments and the amount of hype they get on RSD and other blogs is enormous. The fact is that they demand considerably more attention and recognition for their rise to power. When you examine the factors responsible for the Burning Skirt's success, you will see that Andrea Romano has played a gigantic part in their ascent.
Andrea (aka Dre) grew up in San Francisco where basketball was her primary sport. She discovered Ultimate when she got to college and credits Karen Ko and Steve Dugan with her early development as a player. She recalls that Karen would "[stay] after practice and [throw] with me... encouraging me to play club after my rookie season." Her growth as a player took another big jump forward when Steve Dugan recruited her to play with the Gendors in 2006. That team qualified for the Club Championships and made it to the semifinals.
That same club season marks one of the most difficult times in Dre's Ultimate career and life. On the return trip from the Southwest Mixed Regionals tourney, just hours after celebrating their qualification to Nationals, Andrea was involved in a tragic car accident that took the lives of two of her teammates (Doug Baker and Will Wiersma). She spoke about this during CSTV's coverage of the 2007 finals against Stanford, and suffice to say, the accident was a very emotional event in her life.
The accident would also have a lasting physical effect on the field. When the 2007 college season began, the first signs of a mysterious foot injury stemming from the accident showed up and sidelined her early in the season. The same problem would put her on the sidelines for the bulk of the 2008 season. "Spending hours captaining the team and having an injury doctors can’t explain is one of the hardest things I have ever done. It’s hard not to be able to lead by example and be stuck on the sidelines not being able to work hard and run sprints with your team."
Andrea's ability to confront these adversities owes a lot to her work ethic. The Burning Skirts practice four times a week on top of conditioning during the winter and spring quarters. Their tourney schedule was among the most demanding in the women's division, and the fact that they remain highly motivated and perform consistently well is a testament to the team's leadership. Kaela Jorgenson and Carolyn Finney took on the role of captains this year, but Andrea has clearly remained a vital leader both on and off the field.
This year, UCSB has capped off their ascent by entering the College Championships as the number one seed. While she won't assume credit for it, there is a clear correlation between Dre's time on the team and their path to the top. She considers this journey to be one of the highlights of her Ultimate career. "When I started playing on the Skirts, the veterans were ecstatic to just qualify for Stanford Invite. When I was a rookie, we set a goal of making it to Nationals in 2007. Winning Centex in 2007 and transitioning from a team that was not guaranteed an invite to big tournaments to a national spotlight team was definitely one of the highpoints of my career."
Their success during the season was particularly impressive since last year's Callahan nominee Katie Barry had been on the sidelines prior to Regionals. All the while, Andrea has still been dealing with her foot injury (she sat out during their loss to UCLA at Sectionals). As part of this process, I have personally witnessed the evolution in Dre's game. Her nagging injury has at times limited her ability to dominate as a cutter the way she did early in her college career, but she has become a much smarter player and a steady handler that the rest of the team can depend on. Her presence on the field provides a great deal of confidence to her teammates, and her significance becomes more and more noticeable with every game you watch UCSB play.
Romano's confidence and demeanor also have an important impact on her teammates. By the middle of this season, the Burning Skirts looked like an unstoppable mack truck until they hit a few bumps at Centex and Socal Sectionals. Dre's manner of handling those losses provided a great example for her teammates and helped to motivate them to a dominant performance at the Southwest Regionals where they looked like the best team I had seen all season. Romano explains, “I am a very competitive person and I hate losing. However, [losing to Ottawa at Centex and UCLA at Sectionals] motivated our team to step it up at practice and work on our weaknesses."
Going into the College Championships, Dre and the Burning Skirts have their eyes on the prize. "Our goal is to bring the best possible team we can to Columbus and leave it all on the field." While there are a number of championship-caliber teams in the field, UCSB looks like a good bet to end the Northwest's reign. If the Burning Skirts are the ones hoisting the trophy on Memorial Day, let there be no doubt that Andrea Romano will be a major reason why.
------
I will be posting part two of this article tomorrow, and offer a detailed analysis on why I think Andrea Romano is the best candidate for the Callahan.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
An Open Call for Contributors
In the interest of adding more voices to this blog, I am looking for any writers who are interested in contributing and furthering the discussion on women's collegiate Ultimate. Please contact me at frho@sbcglobal.net. I'll likely want to see some kind of writing sample -- at the very least, send me a good joke or something that gives me a sense of who you are.
Monday, May 11, 2009
The College Championships - An Early Look
Seedings are coming out later today but I want to take a quick look at the teams that comprise the Nationals field. Before I do so, I want to revisit my predictions from last weekend's Regionals. Like a dumbass, I went against the Washington Corollary when I made my Northwest predictions. I desperately wanted to pick one upset in the remaining three regionals, and all three went basically according to what most would have predicted (I think the New England region was a closer call with Dartmouth, Harvard and Northeastern being the favorites).
One thing that this highlights is that qualifying for Nationals for the first time in a school's history is a big hurdle and will only become more and more difficult to do (as long as the field remains at 20 teams). After it was made known that the Southwest would get four bids, I thought it would be really easy for us. This was not the case at all. More established programs have the ability to step up and peak during the series. Both UCSD and Colorado demonstrated this.
Harvard and Middlebury (both men and women) also discovered this the hard way. Harvard had been 2-0 against Northeastern but came up short when all the chips were on the table. Middlebury had beaten Dartmouth earlier in the season but got demolished in their rematch at Regionals.
Another thing is that despite the increase in parity in the women's division this year, a clear pecking order is emerging. I see a number of distinct tiers at Nationals and I'll write about those below.
I've detailed my thoughts on what the seeds should be on RSD [link], but I thought I'd throw some other random thoughts and predictions before the pools come out.
FJR's Proposed Seedings
1. UC Santa Barbara (SW1)
2. Washington (NW1)
3. Ottawa (ME1)
4. Wisconsin (CN1)
5. Stanford (NW2)
6. Oregon (NW3)
7. Michigan (GL1)
8. North Carolina-Wilmington (AC1)
9. Colorado (SW2)
10. UCLA (SW3)
11. North Carolina (AC2)
12. Carleton (CN2)
13. Southern California (SW4)
14. Washington University (SO1)
15. St. Louis (SO2)
16. Iowa State (CN3)
17. Northeastern (NE1)
18. Dartmouth (NE2)
19. Illinois (GL2)
20. Pennsylvania (ME2)
My proposed seedings certainly do not reflect how I would rank the teams overall in terms of quality and predicted finish. I think people get really emotional about seeding and act as though their team is being disrespected. I've already gotten some flak from some folks who feel that Washington is too high (mostly fans of Wisconsin and Ottawa). I also heard from some proponents who felt that Stanford should be higher than Wisconsin. Honestly, I don't think it matters all that much who is seeded 2-7. The 1 and 2 seeds in pools B, C and D will all be very good teams and each of the 2 seeds are capable of beating the 1 seed. The big dropoff will be in pool A where UCSB will have considerably easier time in their game against the 2 seed (likely UNC-Wilmington). The tradeoff is that it means the Burning Skirts will likely have a much tougher quarterfinals opponent.
The big danger in pool play is avoiding the dangerous lower seeds. All of the likely 3 seeds (UCLA, Colorado, UNC, Carleton) are solid teams that will give problems to the top two seeds in the pool. I think the bigger concern for the top seeds comes in who draws the difficult 4 and 5 seeds. Of course, I put USC in this category, but St. Louis and Illinois also stand out as teams that could be capable of a big upset. SLU has already beaten Wisconsin twice and their style of play will give certain teams fits. Illinois is a very talented team that has the athleticism to run with almost everyone I've seen but they haven't been able to put all the pieces together. After a solid showing against Flywheel and a dominant performance in the backdoor game-to-go, the pressure should be off of Menace, and they could live up to the potential that I've seen since I first saw them at Pres Day.
One last note before I go into a look at the tiers -- I wish that the UPA had gone with power pools. The seeding wouldn't matter as much and teams would get a greater number of high-caliber games. I know the UPA is trying to highlight big matchups and allow teams to focus more on single games and enjoy the overall Nationals experience. I'm sure field space is a bit of an issue, but the power pool format is a lot of fun. There's a lot of excitement in seeing who gets to the top power pools and who emerges from the bottom.
Also, I was hoping that they would go with a full bracket of 16 instead of having byes for the top seeds. Adding another round with the potential for upsets would be fun. Granting a bye to the top teams seems unnecessary to me, and I don't think there should be any additional reward for winning a pool other than getting a better draw in bracket play.
TIER OF HEAVEN aka Ready to Play on Memorial Day
UC Santa Barbara
Ottawa
Wisconsin
I don't think there's any doubt that these three teams are primed to make it to Monday's big game. UCSB won Pres Day and Stanford and came in 2nd at Centex. Ottawa won Centex. The one knock on Wisconsin is that they haven't won a big tourney this season but that roster is loaded and ready to go.
TIER OF THE RAZOR'S EDGE aka the Fastest Way to Heaven
Washington
Stanford
Oregon
Northwest, you get a special tier of your own.
I remember some quote about the fastest way to heaven being on the edge of a razor. Whoa, morbid. Or enlightening. I tried to find this adage on the intertubes of webs but I couldn't find it anywhere. I know that Somerset Maugham's Razor's Edge has a quote from the Katha Upanishad that is supposed to help inform the reader about the title's meaning, but it's not quite the same thing that I've heard. I have not tossed out the very likely possibility that I have simply screwed up the quote and made something up that serves my needs.
Anyway, all three of the Northwest teams are no doubt in the title hunt, but it is unclear which team has the best chances in Columbus. Washington served notice at Regionals, Stanford won both previous times the Championship were decided in Columbus, and Oregon was one of the top two or three teams in the division during the regular season. All three have beaten each other once, and all three will be carrying a lot of confidence in Ohio.
I'M ALL ALONE *TIER* aka the Wildcard
Michigan
When you look at Flywheel's season, there's only one day where they lost to anyone not named Wisconsin. On the first day of Centex, they found themselves at the bottom of the A Pool after notching three losses by fairly slim margins to UCSB, Carleton and UNC. Some Flywheel fans declared that they were a juggernaut and should be considered one of the top two or three teams in the division. Fans are apt to write and say crazy things but Michigan is a very talented team. I don't think they are a good bet to rise above the teams in the top two tiers but I wouldn't be surprised to see them take down 1 or 2 of them and make a run to the semifinals.
FRANKLY, MY TIER, I DON'T GIVE A DAMN WHERE YOU PUT US aka Beware These Teams
UCLA
Colorado
USC
UNC-Wilmington
UNC
St. Louis
Carleton
Triple pun!
Of course, I'm putting the other three Southwest teams here. UCLA has the knowhow to peak at Nationals. They are becoming the Stanford of the Southwest (just don't compare the number of championships). Their biggest win this season was over UCSB at Sectionals, and BLU would love nothing more than to exact revenge by taking out the Burning Skirts when it counts the most.
Colorado is the most mercurial of the 20 teams. I think they match up particularly well with a team like Stanford. Kali's style of play is effective at disrupting system-type of offenses, and they will be hungry to prove that their performance at Regionals wasn't just the benefit of homefield advantage. They play with a lot of emotion and if they can harness that emotion and maintain consistency in their games, I think a quarterfinals appearance is within reach.
USC is one of three newcomers to the big show (Iowa State and St. Louis are the other two). I love this team. I can't write enough about them. I love the way that they play. The head coach talks too much and writes some crazy things. Go HoT Pink! Aliens are the new religion for uninspired screenwriters. My mother is a fish.
Of the two Carolina teams, I like UNC's chances of performing better than Wilmington's (despite UNC-W having a 4-0 record over UNC). Having been to the big show last year, UNC will be better accustomed to dealing with the pressure of performing well. Also, Pleiades is built to perform more consistently, and I think Wilmington's power game depends too much on a couple key players. The top West Coast and Midwest teams will know how to handle Wilmington's vertical game.
I would love to see St. Louis end up in a pool with Element, Bella Donna or the Burning Skirts. Wisconsin should be used to their style of play by now, but they do have a losing record against SLULU. I think St. Louis' slow-down offense could be really disruptive to teams that thrive on the deep game.
Somewhat like Colorado, Carleton has had a bit of an up-and-down season. Honestly, I have no idea what to expect from Syzygy. After losing in the quarterfinals the past two years, this year was expected to be a rebuilding year. I would bet on them making the pre-quarters and falling just short of making the next round.
TIERRA DEL FUEGO aka Angry at FJR for Not Ranking Them Higher
Wash U. (WUWU)
Northeastern
Dartmouth
Iowa State
Illinois
UPenn
The only team on this tier that I have seen up close this year is Illinois. I saw Northeastern briefly at Pres Day, and I felt the electric buzz in the air coming from Dartmouth's jerseys at Centex. One might think that this makes my judgment somewhere between unqualified and head-up-my-ass. I am basing these rankings on previous results, word of mouth from my trusted sources and the entrails of the goat that I slaughtered last night. According to the Idiot's Guide to Prognostication and Other Practical Applications of Santeria, these methods are actually superior to witnessing a team's play in person.
All of the teams here are capable of beating the teams on the prior tier, but I don't see them upsetting anyone above that. The one exception might be Wash U. Having clearly gotten the better of St. Louis in their recent matchups, Washington could be this year's Michigan State. [Last year, Michigan State dropped Texas after Melee had upset Washington and nearly taken out Bella Donna. Texas went from potentially winning the pool on point differential to becoming the bottom of the pool and falling completely out of contention.]
The draw means a lot for each of these teams' chances of making it to the pre-quarters, but my best guess is that Washington and Illinois are the most likely to advance past pool play.
Once the pools come out, I'll take a more detailed look at each team and offer my predictions.
One thing that this highlights is that qualifying for Nationals for the first time in a school's history is a big hurdle and will only become more and more difficult to do (as long as the field remains at 20 teams). After it was made known that the Southwest would get four bids, I thought it would be really easy for us. This was not the case at all. More established programs have the ability to step up and peak during the series. Both UCSD and Colorado demonstrated this.
Harvard and Middlebury (both men and women) also discovered this the hard way. Harvard had been 2-0 against Northeastern but came up short when all the chips were on the table. Middlebury had beaten Dartmouth earlier in the season but got demolished in their rematch at Regionals.
Another thing is that despite the increase in parity in the women's division this year, a clear pecking order is emerging. I see a number of distinct tiers at Nationals and I'll write about those below.
I've detailed my thoughts on what the seeds should be on RSD [link], but I thought I'd throw some other random thoughts and predictions before the pools come out.
FJR's Proposed Seedings
1. UC Santa Barbara (SW1)
2. Washington (NW1)
3. Ottawa (ME1)
4. Wisconsin (CN1)
5. Stanford (NW2)
6. Oregon (NW3)
7. Michigan (GL1)
8. North Carolina-Wilmington (AC1)
9. Colorado (SW2)
10. UCLA (SW3)
11. North Carolina (AC2)
12. Carleton (CN2)
13. Southern California (SW4)
14. Washington University (SO1)
15. St. Louis (SO2)
16. Iowa State (CN3)
17. Northeastern (NE1)
18. Dartmouth (NE2)
19. Illinois (GL2)
20. Pennsylvania (ME2)
My proposed seedings certainly do not reflect how I would rank the teams overall in terms of quality and predicted finish. I think people get really emotional about seeding and act as though their team is being disrespected. I've already gotten some flak from some folks who feel that Washington is too high (mostly fans of Wisconsin and Ottawa). I also heard from some proponents who felt that Stanford should be higher than Wisconsin. Honestly, I don't think it matters all that much who is seeded 2-7. The 1 and 2 seeds in pools B, C and D will all be very good teams and each of the 2 seeds are capable of beating the 1 seed. The big dropoff will be in pool A where UCSB will have considerably easier time in their game against the 2 seed (likely UNC-Wilmington). The tradeoff is that it means the Burning Skirts will likely have a much tougher quarterfinals opponent.
The big danger in pool play is avoiding the dangerous lower seeds. All of the likely 3 seeds (UCLA, Colorado, UNC, Carleton) are solid teams that will give problems to the top two seeds in the pool. I think the bigger concern for the top seeds comes in who draws the difficult 4 and 5 seeds. Of course, I put USC in this category, but St. Louis and Illinois also stand out as teams that could be capable of a big upset. SLU has already beaten Wisconsin twice and their style of play will give certain teams fits. Illinois is a very talented team that has the athleticism to run with almost everyone I've seen but they haven't been able to put all the pieces together. After a solid showing against Flywheel and a dominant performance in the backdoor game-to-go, the pressure should be off of Menace, and they could live up to the potential that I've seen since I first saw them at Pres Day.
One last note before I go into a look at the tiers -- I wish that the UPA had gone with power pools. The seeding wouldn't matter as much and teams would get a greater number of high-caliber games. I know the UPA is trying to highlight big matchups and allow teams to focus more on single games and enjoy the overall Nationals experience. I'm sure field space is a bit of an issue, but the power pool format is a lot of fun. There's a lot of excitement in seeing who gets to the top power pools and who emerges from the bottom.
Also, I was hoping that they would go with a full bracket of 16 instead of having byes for the top seeds. Adding another round with the potential for upsets would be fun. Granting a bye to the top teams seems unnecessary to me, and I don't think there should be any additional reward for winning a pool other than getting a better draw in bracket play.
TIER OF HEAVEN aka Ready to Play on Memorial Day
UC Santa Barbara
Ottawa
Wisconsin
I don't think there's any doubt that these three teams are primed to make it to Monday's big game. UCSB won Pres Day and Stanford and came in 2nd at Centex. Ottawa won Centex. The one knock on Wisconsin is that they haven't won a big tourney this season but that roster is loaded and ready to go.
TIER OF THE RAZOR'S EDGE aka the Fastest Way to Heaven
Washington
Stanford
Oregon
Northwest, you get a special tier of your own.
I remember some quote about the fastest way to heaven being on the edge of a razor. Whoa, morbid. Or enlightening. I tried to find this adage on the intertubes of webs but I couldn't find it anywhere. I know that Somerset Maugham's Razor's Edge has a quote from the Katha Upanishad that is supposed to help inform the reader about the title's meaning, but it's not quite the same thing that I've heard. I have not tossed out the very likely possibility that I have simply screwed up the quote and made something up that serves my needs.
Anyway, all three of the Northwest teams are no doubt in the title hunt, but it is unclear which team has the best chances in Columbus. Washington served notice at Regionals, Stanford won both previous times the Championship were decided in Columbus, and Oregon was one of the top two or three teams in the division during the regular season. All three have beaten each other once, and all three will be carrying a lot of confidence in Ohio.
I'M ALL ALONE *TIER* aka the Wildcard
Michigan
When you look at Flywheel's season, there's only one day where they lost to anyone not named Wisconsin. On the first day of Centex, they found themselves at the bottom of the A Pool after notching three losses by fairly slim margins to UCSB, Carleton and UNC. Some Flywheel fans declared that they were a juggernaut and should be considered one of the top two or three teams in the division. Fans are apt to write and say crazy things but Michigan is a very talented team. I don't think they are a good bet to rise above the teams in the top two tiers but I wouldn't be surprised to see them take down 1 or 2 of them and make a run to the semifinals.
FRANKLY, MY TIER, I DON'T GIVE A DAMN WHERE YOU PUT US aka Beware These Teams
UCLA
Colorado
USC
UNC-Wilmington
UNC
St. Louis
Carleton
Triple pun!
Of course, I'm putting the other three Southwest teams here. UCLA has the knowhow to peak at Nationals. They are becoming the Stanford of the Southwest (just don't compare the number of championships). Their biggest win this season was over UCSB at Sectionals, and BLU would love nothing more than to exact revenge by taking out the Burning Skirts when it counts the most.
Colorado is the most mercurial of the 20 teams. I think they match up particularly well with a team like Stanford. Kali's style of play is effective at disrupting system-type of offenses, and they will be hungry to prove that their performance at Regionals wasn't just the benefit of homefield advantage. They play with a lot of emotion and if they can harness that emotion and maintain consistency in their games, I think a quarterfinals appearance is within reach.
USC is one of three newcomers to the big show (Iowa State and St. Louis are the other two). I love this team. I can't write enough about them. I love the way that they play. The head coach talks too much and writes some crazy things. Go HoT Pink! Aliens are the new religion for uninspired screenwriters. My mother is a fish.
Of the two Carolina teams, I like UNC's chances of performing better than Wilmington's (despite UNC-W having a 4-0 record over UNC). Having been to the big show last year, UNC will be better accustomed to dealing with the pressure of performing well. Also, Pleiades is built to perform more consistently, and I think Wilmington's power game depends too much on a couple key players. The top West Coast and Midwest teams will know how to handle Wilmington's vertical game.
I would love to see St. Louis end up in a pool with Element, Bella Donna or the Burning Skirts. Wisconsin should be used to their style of play by now, but they do have a losing record against SLULU. I think St. Louis' slow-down offense could be really disruptive to teams that thrive on the deep game.
Somewhat like Colorado, Carleton has had a bit of an up-and-down season. Honestly, I have no idea what to expect from Syzygy. After losing in the quarterfinals the past two years, this year was expected to be a rebuilding year. I would bet on them making the pre-quarters and falling just short of making the next round.
TIERRA DEL FUEGO aka Angry at FJR for Not Ranking Them Higher
Wash U. (WUWU)
Northeastern
Dartmouth
Iowa State
Illinois
UPenn
The only team on this tier that I have seen up close this year is Illinois. I saw Northeastern briefly at Pres Day, and I felt the electric buzz in the air coming from Dartmouth's jerseys at Centex. One might think that this makes my judgment somewhere between unqualified and head-up-my-ass. I am basing these rankings on previous results, word of mouth from my trusted sources and the entrails of the goat that I slaughtered last night. According to the Idiot's Guide to Prognostication and Other Practical Applications of Santeria, these methods are actually superior to witnessing a team's play in person.
All of the teams here are capable of beating the teams on the prior tier, but I don't see them upsetting anyone above that. The one exception might be Wash U. Having clearly gotten the better of St. Louis in their recent matchups, Washington could be this year's Michigan State. [Last year, Michigan State dropped Texas after Melee had upset Washington and nearly taken out Bella Donna. Texas went from potentially winning the pool on point differential to becoming the bottom of the pool and falling completely out of contention.]
The draw means a lot for each of these teams' chances of making it to the pre-quarters, but my best guess is that Washington and Illinois are the most likely to advance past pool play.
Once the pools come out, I'll take a more detailed look at each team and offer my predictions.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Regionals Update - Northwest
A few wacky upsets in pool play and Washington defeating Oregon has resulted in a really interesting looking quarterfinals round.
UW vs. Humboldt - The Hags gave Cal a run for their money in pool play, but Element should be able to take care of business quickly in this game.
UBC vs. Davis - The Thunderbirds get the benefit of the draw with what should be the most lopsided matchup of the quarters. Both UW and UBC should be well-rested for the almost certain semifinals matchup.
Oregon vs. Cal - The bottom half of the bracket is rough. At least both winners will have had tough games before semifinals. Amazingly, these two teams haven't faced each other this year. Oregon should be the heavy favorite.
Stanford vs. Western Washington - Stanford's reward for winning all their games is a matchup with Chaos. Ouch. Superfly beat them in their one and only matchup this year.
The losers of the bottom half of the quarterfinals will face each other in an elimination game. That seems ridiculous when the other half of the backdoor will feature two considerably weaker teams. I think the reseeding creates unnecessary problems in this particular format and frankly, I'm not sure that the crossover matchups between the 1 seeds is necessary. I'm guessing that it is done to balance out the number of games, but I think it causes more potential problems than whatever benefits it is intended to bring.
The real problem here is that whoever wins the bottom two quarters has a big advantage because even if they lose in the semis, they will have a fairly easy matchup before the backdoor game-to-go. What will likely be a very interesting UW-UBC grudge match in the semis will mean a lot for the winner and loser. Win and you have a bid to Nationals; lose and you have to go through Western Washington or Cal (or if there's an upset, Oregon or Stanford) in order to get to the game-to-go.
The other semis will likely be another grudge match between Oregon and Stanford. If Cal and/or Western Washington has the game of their lives in the quarters, they will create havoc with the bracket and make their path to Nationals considerably easier.
I'm willing to bet a good amount of money that whoever loses the semis in that half of the bracket will still end up winning the game-to-go.
All of this further underscores what a tough, tough region the Northwest is this year. I think the Southwest will look something like this next year, but that's another post for another time.
For those who hated my predictions, it seems only fitting that UW and UBC will face each other with so much riding on the line. Sure, I think Element is favored in that matchup, but I think it'll be an interesting game to follow.
UW vs. Humboldt - The Hags gave Cal a run for their money in pool play, but Element should be able to take care of business quickly in this game.
UBC vs. Davis - The Thunderbirds get the benefit of the draw with what should be the most lopsided matchup of the quarters. Both UW and UBC should be well-rested for the almost certain semifinals matchup.
Oregon vs. Cal - The bottom half of the bracket is rough. At least both winners will have had tough games before semifinals. Amazingly, these two teams haven't faced each other this year. Oregon should be the heavy favorite.
Stanford vs. Western Washington - Stanford's reward for winning all their games is a matchup with Chaos. Ouch. Superfly beat them in their one and only matchup this year.
The losers of the bottom half of the quarterfinals will face each other in an elimination game. That seems ridiculous when the other half of the backdoor will feature two considerably weaker teams. I think the reseeding creates unnecessary problems in this particular format and frankly, I'm not sure that the crossover matchups between the 1 seeds is necessary. I'm guessing that it is done to balance out the number of games, but I think it causes more potential problems than whatever benefits it is intended to bring.
The real problem here is that whoever wins the bottom two quarters has a big advantage because even if they lose in the semis, they will have a fairly easy matchup before the backdoor game-to-go. What will likely be a very interesting UW-UBC grudge match in the semis will mean a lot for the winner and loser. Win and you have a bid to Nationals; lose and you have to go through Western Washington or Cal (or if there's an upset, Oregon or Stanford) in order to get to the game-to-go.
The other semis will likely be another grudge match between Oregon and Stanford. If Cal and/or Western Washington has the game of their lives in the quarters, they will create havoc with the bracket and make their path to Nationals considerably easier.
I'm willing to bet a good amount of money that whoever loses the semis in that half of the bracket will still end up winning the game-to-go.
All of this further underscores what a tough, tough region the Northwest is this year. I think the Southwest will look something like this next year, but that's another post for another time.
For those who hated my predictions, it seems only fitting that UW and UBC will face each other with so much riding on the line. Sure, I think Element is favored in that matchup, but I think it'll be an interesting game to follow.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Regionals Preview - New England
I thought about comparing the New England region to the Corleone family, but I want to save that for another day. I think the most appropriate comparison is to the pilots in Top Gun. Yup, I'm going there.
Of course, the folks in New England would even agree that the region is not the best of the best. In fact, the two bid-winners are likely to end up with 5 seeds at Nationals. Who cares? This region has five contenders and could be the most wide open of all the regions. Last weekend featured very few surprises and few true upsets. In stark contrast, this weekend is very difficult to predict. Close your eyes and let Kenny Loggins rev up your engines. It's time to go to the dan-ja zooooone.
NEW ENGLAND (2 Bids)
Before I start with the analysis of each team, I wanted to mention that the New England region is the only one that will be employing the double elimination format. I grew up with this format, so there's definitely a soft spot there. It's not practical for big regions, and it is heavily dependent on accurate seeding. If RCs would add more consolation games, I think it would be an interesting option for regions like the Metro East, Atlantic Coast and Great Lakes, but again, the seeding issue is a big one.
Anyway, the format is set for New England, and the contending teams will first be looking to ensure that they are playing on Sunday. With five legitimate contenders, the Tufts/New England matchup is going to be a key game with the loser looking at a tough road through the back door. Look for the top five seeds to get to Sunday and either Brandeis or Boston College rounding out the group.
The Model Pilot (aka Iceman played by Val Kilmer) - Harvard. They are the top seed led by Lucy Barnes of Brute Squad. Coached by Jeff Listfield, Blake Spitz and Jessica Blanton, the Quasars (Quasar? the Quasar?) are strong on fundamentals and embody everything you would expect from anything with the Harvard label. Sure, they seem like they do everything by-the-book, and you'd like to see them as more of the 'Top Secret' version of Val Kilmer, but they don't care. They want to win the Region and be Top Gun. Nothing else will suffice.
The Maverick (aka Maverick played by Tom McCain Cruise) - Northeastern. They are just lurking there at number 5. They have gone through their ups and downs and injuries to Courtney Moores and Stephanie Barker certainly account for some of their struggles. Both are expected to be back for this weekend. Laura Cedro has stepped up her game in their absence and could be the difference maker in their run at one of the bids. They will need to forget about Goose (Centex and previous losses to Harvard) and simply engage... Engage... ENGAGE, MAVERICK!!!
The Mentor (aka Viper played by Tom Skerritt) - Dartmouth. Princess Layout had a strong run of four straight appearances at Nationals from 2004-2007 that was broken last year. They are hungry and they will be ready to school all the young ones.
The Stealthy Star (aka Merlin played by Tim Robbins) - Middlebury. The amazing thing about Top Gun is that the best actor in the film, Tim Robbins, is just kind of in the background. Little was known about this Merlin guy. Sure, Tom Cruise was Mr. Bankable after Top Gun, but Tim Robbins is considerably more respected for his acting skills and his choice of causes (liberalism vs. Scientology, you decide). The Lady Pranksters have a win over Dartmouth at Southerns but little else is really know about them.
The Tough-nosed Veteran (aka Jester played by Michael Ironside) - Tufts. The perennial contender coached by Sangwha Hong has been on a steady rise and looks ready to peak at Regionals. Their aggressive offense relies on the Marie Alexander-Kate McCaffrey connection. Maverick was able to get the best of Jester but only after violating the hard top and creating some controversy. Perhaps this predestines a controversial game that should be the best match of the second round.
The Wingman that You Love But You Know is Dead in the Water (aka Goose played by Anthony Edwards) - Brown. Yikes, this sounds harsh, but how bad is it really to be Goose? He gets to shag the considerably hotter-than-Kelly-McGillis Meg Ryan (before she became the Queen of Romantic Comedies), he sports a goofy porn-stache and gets away with it, he was known as the likable and relatively cool Nerd, and he came back from the dead to have a great run on ER when it was a show that people actually watched. Brown has been a strong team in the past, and they are still coming back from the dead. Look for them to have their ER run starting next year. [Side note: I almost forgot that I saw Anthony Edwards on one of my flights. He was with his family and seemed like a great dad. Being in LA, I've seen my fair share of celebrities, but I prefer seeing the lesser knowns who seem like real people.]
The Character Guy that Stands Out (aka Stinger played by James Tolkan) - Brandeis. Who's Stinger? He's that guy on the aircraft carrier that likes to chew out Maverick and Goose and sends them off to Top Gun. Tolkan is one of the great character actors of the 80s and was probably best known for being the principal in the Back to the Future series. Like Stinger, Brandeis isn't going to be the star of New England regionals, but they are looking at a realistic shot at making the second day. If they upset Vermont in the first round, they will have a tough matchup against Dartmouth in the 2nd round. They would likely draw the loser of Brown and Wesleyan, another winnable game. Then they would likely run into Boston College with the winner advancing to Sunday (Brandeis and Boston College are 1-1 vs. each other). I've heard that this Greg Connelly character is kind of a good coach. Team USA, Ironside, Brute Squad, UBC... seeing him on the other sideline must be like how I feel when I have to match wits with Steve Dugan.
Who Makes It to Sunday: Harvard, Dartmouth, Northeastern, Tufts, Middlebury, Brandeis (gotta pick one upset here)
Who Goes to Columbus: Dartmouth, Northeastern
Tough Luck Loser: Harvard
My Take: In the first round, look for Brandeis to upset Vermont in the first round in order to facilitate the eagerly anticipated Dory (Ziperstein) vs. Rohre (Titcomb) matchup happens. If this were the NBA, I guarantee that the RCs would put Bennett Salvatore and Joey Crawford in as observers and make sure that all those close in/out calls went Brandeis' way. Dory vs. Rohre. Make it happen.
Other than the Dory vs. Rohre individual matchup in the second round, look for Tufts vs. Northeastern and Middlebury vs. BC to be the key games. In the semis, I'm picking Harvard over Northeastern and Dartmouth over Middlebury.
In the backdoor, Northeastern crushes Brandeis, Tufts handles Boston College, Northeastern squeaks by Tufts again and faces Harvard after they've had a barnburner in finals. Both teams are exhausted and battle each other to double game point. Jason Adams and Kayla Burnim are ready for this moment and blast Wagner over the sound system. Northeastern is inspired and drops napalm on Harvard for the one point victory. The Valkyries declare that Harvard can be their wingman anytime, hop on their Harleys and ride off into the sunset.
Of course, the folks in New England would even agree that the region is not the best of the best. In fact, the two bid-winners are likely to end up with 5 seeds at Nationals. Who cares? This region has five contenders and could be the most wide open of all the regions. Last weekend featured very few surprises and few true upsets. In stark contrast, this weekend is very difficult to predict. Close your eyes and let Kenny Loggins rev up your engines. It's time to go to the dan-ja zooooone.
NEW ENGLAND (2 Bids)
Before I start with the analysis of each team, I wanted to mention that the New England region is the only one that will be employing the double elimination format. I grew up with this format, so there's definitely a soft spot there. It's not practical for big regions, and it is heavily dependent on accurate seeding. If RCs would add more consolation games, I think it would be an interesting option for regions like the Metro East, Atlantic Coast and Great Lakes, but again, the seeding issue is a big one.
Anyway, the format is set for New England, and the contending teams will first be looking to ensure that they are playing on Sunday. With five legitimate contenders, the Tufts/New England matchup is going to be a key game with the loser looking at a tough road through the back door. Look for the top five seeds to get to Sunday and either Brandeis or Boston College rounding out the group.
The Model Pilot (aka Iceman played by Val Kilmer) - Harvard. They are the top seed led by Lucy Barnes of Brute Squad. Coached by Jeff Listfield, Blake Spitz and Jessica Blanton, the Quasars (Quasar? the Quasar?) are strong on fundamentals and embody everything you would expect from anything with the Harvard label. Sure, they seem like they do everything by-the-book, and you'd like to see them as more of the 'Top Secret' version of Val Kilmer, but they don't care. They want to win the Region and be Top Gun. Nothing else will suffice.
The Maverick (aka Maverick played by Tom McCain Cruise) - Northeastern. They are just lurking there at number 5. They have gone through their ups and downs and injuries to Courtney Moores and Stephanie Barker certainly account for some of their struggles. Both are expected to be back for this weekend. Laura Cedro has stepped up her game in their absence and could be the difference maker in their run at one of the bids. They will need to forget about Goose (Centex and previous losses to Harvard) and simply engage... Engage... ENGAGE, MAVERICK!!!
The Mentor (aka Viper played by Tom Skerritt) - Dartmouth. Princess Layout had a strong run of four straight appearances at Nationals from 2004-2007 that was broken last year. They are hungry and they will be ready to school all the young ones.
The Stealthy Star (aka Merlin played by Tim Robbins) - Middlebury. The amazing thing about Top Gun is that the best actor in the film, Tim Robbins, is just kind of in the background. Little was known about this Merlin guy. Sure, Tom Cruise was Mr. Bankable after Top Gun, but Tim Robbins is considerably more respected for his acting skills and his choice of causes (liberalism vs. Scientology, you decide). The Lady Pranksters have a win over Dartmouth at Southerns but little else is really know about them.
The Tough-nosed Veteran (aka Jester played by Michael Ironside) - Tufts. The perennial contender coached by Sangwha Hong has been on a steady rise and looks ready to peak at Regionals. Their aggressive offense relies on the Marie Alexander-Kate McCaffrey connection. Maverick was able to get the best of Jester but only after violating the hard top and creating some controversy. Perhaps this predestines a controversial game that should be the best match of the second round.
The Wingman that You Love But You Know is Dead in the Water (aka Goose played by Anthony Edwards) - Brown. Yikes, this sounds harsh, but how bad is it really to be Goose? He gets to shag the considerably hotter-than-Kelly-McGillis Meg Ryan (before she became the Queen of Romantic Comedies), he sports a goofy porn-stache and gets away with it, he was known as the likable and relatively cool Nerd, and he came back from the dead to have a great run on ER when it was a show that people actually watched. Brown has been a strong team in the past, and they are still coming back from the dead. Look for them to have their ER run starting next year. [Side note: I almost forgot that I saw Anthony Edwards on one of my flights. He was with his family and seemed like a great dad. Being in LA, I've seen my fair share of celebrities, but I prefer seeing the lesser knowns who seem like real people.]
The Character Guy that Stands Out (aka Stinger played by James Tolkan) - Brandeis. Who's Stinger? He's that guy on the aircraft carrier that likes to chew out Maverick and Goose and sends them off to Top Gun. Tolkan is one of the great character actors of the 80s and was probably best known for being the principal in the Back to the Future series. Like Stinger, Brandeis isn't going to be the star of New England regionals, but they are looking at a realistic shot at making the second day. If they upset Vermont in the first round, they will have a tough matchup against Dartmouth in the 2nd round. They would likely draw the loser of Brown and Wesleyan, another winnable game. Then they would likely run into Boston College with the winner advancing to Sunday (Brandeis and Boston College are 1-1 vs. each other). I've heard that this Greg Connelly character is kind of a good coach. Team USA, Ironside, Brute Squad, UBC... seeing him on the other sideline must be like how I feel when I have to match wits with Steve Dugan.
Who Makes It to Sunday: Harvard, Dartmouth, Northeastern, Tufts, Middlebury, Brandeis (gotta pick one upset here)
Who Goes to Columbus: Dartmouth, Northeastern
Tough Luck Loser: Harvard
My Take: In the first round, look for Brandeis to upset Vermont in the first round in order to facilitate the eagerly anticipated Dory (Ziperstein) vs. Rohre (Titcomb) matchup happens. If this were the NBA, I guarantee that the RCs would put Bennett Salvatore and Joey Crawford in as observers and make sure that all those close in/out calls went Brandeis' way. Dory vs. Rohre. Make it happen.
Other than the Dory vs. Rohre individual matchup in the second round, look for Tufts vs. Northeastern and Middlebury vs. BC to be the key games. In the semis, I'm picking Harvard over Northeastern and Dartmouth over Middlebury.
In the backdoor, Northeastern crushes Brandeis, Tufts handles Boston College, Northeastern squeaks by Tufts again and faces Harvard after they've had a barnburner in finals. Both teams are exhausted and battle each other to double game point. Jason Adams and Kayla Burnim are ready for this moment and blast Wagner over the sound system. Northeastern is inspired and drops napalm on Harvard for the one point victory. The Valkyries declare that Harvard can be their wingman anytime, hop on their Harleys and ride off into the sunset.
Regionals Preview - Great Lakes
Apologies to those interested parties on the East Coast who are interested in checking out my previews before this weekend. I've been trying to get these things out in timely fashion.
GREAT LAKES (2 bids)
When I started writing this preview, the GL region was going to use the double elimination format but it appears that they have switched to pools. Sigh. I think this actually makes sense for them, but it changes things a bit.
I feel reasonably confident in writing that the fight for the region's two bids is a four-team race. Truthfully, Michigan is a lock for the top spot so it is a three-team race for one spot. Apologies to Ohio State, Michigan State and Notre Dame. I wish you the best at Regionals and would love to see some upsets, but this is the way it is.
The Top Dog (aka Alec Baldwin): Michigan. Flywheel is clearly the best and most accomplished of the GL teams. Like Alec, they seem to get better as time goes by.
The Crazy Bro (aka Stephen Baldwin): Illinois. Menace can look awesome (Stephen in 'The Usual Suspects'), they can be embarrassing (Stephen in 'The Flintstones in Viva Rock Vegas') and they can be a guilty pleasure (Stephen as himself in 'Celebrity Mole' and 'Celebrity Apprentice'). With respect to the rest of the region, the second bid will be mainly determined by which Stephen Baldwin Menace decides to be this weekend.
The Once (and Future?) Star (aka Billy Baldwin): Northwestern. I think a lot of people forget that Billy Baldwin had eclipsed Alec for just a little while in the early 90s. He was in Backdraft, Flatliners and what turned out to be the turning point in his career, Sliver. This flick was a key vehicle for both Billy and Sharon Stone who was just coming off of Basic Instinct. The film stunk and the verdict on Billy was that he wasn't leading man material (on a side note, it took a couple more films like Casino and sucktastic films like The Specialist and The Quick and the Dead before people realized that Sharon Stone was worthless as a leading lady). Billy has quietly been making a comeback with solid spots in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, the Squid and the Whale and the TV series Dirty Sexy Money.
Like Billy, Northwestern blew up at Nationals two years ago and had a dream run that almost landed them in the semifinals. Well, Gung Ho was forgotten last year and flew under the radar this year until their victory over Illinois at Sectionals. The addition of Laura Moore from Duke makes a big difference for Gung Ho. She carried Duke on her back last year and is capable of doing the same for Northwestern. Luckily, Moore has GL FOTY candidate Lien Hoffman to ease the burden.
The Femme Fatale (aka Kim Basinger) - Case Western. Alright, this doesn't really work because I don't think anyone has a serious shot of upsetting Michigan. I guess the logic I can apply here is who can be the entity that gets between Alec and his brothers? Well, that would be (or used to be) Kim 'How did I get an Oscar for LA Confidential' Basinger? Kim Basinger's best and most fitting role was that of Memo Paris in The Natural. Her character basically rendered the magical Roy Hobbs into an ordinary guy. As soon as Hobbs dumps Memo, he's back to being... well, the Natural.
Isn't this what happened to Alec Baldwin? Check out his list of movies while the two were married (1993-2002). Most of those flicks are duds. When he signed on to be the narrator for the Royal Tenenbaums (a great and underrated vocal performance by Baldwin), it coincided with his troubles with Kim. Now, he's a frickin' stud again. The Aviator, The Departed and 30 Rock. The man has been let loose! Anyway, the point here is that Case Western might be the anti-Baldwin. Beware.
Another reason to like Case Western is that there is always a surprise team at Nationals. Last year, Michigan State and Northeastern snuck up on everyone and did much better than expected in Boulder. The Fighting Gobies, led by seniors Ashley Gan and Elaine Leung, fit this description. CWRU already put a big scare in Illinois at the Chicago Invite and their only other loss came to St. Louis. They will return everyone next year so look for them to be contenders (and possibly the Alec Baldwins) next year as well.
The Troubled One (aka Danny Baldwin): Oregon Men's Ultimate. I just couldn't bring myself to equate any women's team to Danny Baldwin. It's just didn't work. But with all the stuff going on with the Oregon men's team (the drinking violations, the speeding tickets, the inappropriate nudity), I think they fit the bill pretty well. It sounds like the Oregon sports department gave them multiple chances to be on their best behavior. Now, they are making news for all the wrong reasons. FAIL.
Who Goes to Columbus: Michigan, Case Western
Tough Luck Loser: Illinois
My take: I really wanted to pick Illinois here, but I just have a bad feeling. I thought that their tough loss to Michigan State last year would have ensured that they wouldn't be in the same position again, but as much as I admire this team, they just seem to be a classic underperforming team. Plus, Stephen Baldwin has been on a losing streak lately (backing the McCain/Palin ticket and tattooing Hannah Montana's initials on his shoulder... these are bad, bad signs).
I think Michigan will take out CWRU in the semis and Illinois will avenge their sectionals loss to Northwestern in the other half. Illinois will sub tightly against Michigan and play them fairly closely for a half before losing by a decent margin. In the back door, CWRU will squeak out a tough win against Northwestern and then face Menace in the game-to-go. The Fighting Gobies get to hop on the I-71, hang out with the Mennonites for a bit before showing up for their first Nationals.
The New England Regionals preview will come soon.
GREAT LAKES (2 bids)
When I started writing this preview, the GL region was going to use the double elimination format but it appears that they have switched to pools. Sigh. I think this actually makes sense for them, but it changes things a bit.
I feel reasonably confident in writing that the fight for the region's two bids is a four-team race. Truthfully, Michigan is a lock for the top spot so it is a three-team race for one spot. Apologies to Ohio State, Michigan State and Notre Dame. I wish you the best at Regionals and would love to see some upsets, but this is the way it is.
The Top Dog (aka Alec Baldwin): Michigan. Flywheel is clearly the best and most accomplished of the GL teams. Like Alec, they seem to get better as time goes by.
The Crazy Bro (aka Stephen Baldwin): Illinois. Menace can look awesome (Stephen in 'The Usual Suspects'), they can be embarrassing (Stephen in 'The Flintstones in Viva Rock Vegas') and they can be a guilty pleasure (Stephen as himself in 'Celebrity Mole' and 'Celebrity Apprentice'). With respect to the rest of the region, the second bid will be mainly determined by which Stephen Baldwin Menace decides to be this weekend.
The Once (and Future?) Star (aka Billy Baldwin): Northwestern. I think a lot of people forget that Billy Baldwin had eclipsed Alec for just a little while in the early 90s. He was in Backdraft, Flatliners and what turned out to be the turning point in his career, Sliver. This flick was a key vehicle for both Billy and Sharon Stone who was just coming off of Basic Instinct. The film stunk and the verdict on Billy was that he wasn't leading man material (on a side note, it took a couple more films like Casino and sucktastic films like The Specialist and The Quick and the Dead before people realized that Sharon Stone was worthless as a leading lady). Billy has quietly been making a comeback with solid spots in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, the Squid and the Whale and the TV series Dirty Sexy Money.
Like Billy, Northwestern blew up at Nationals two years ago and had a dream run that almost landed them in the semifinals. Well, Gung Ho was forgotten last year and flew under the radar this year until their victory over Illinois at Sectionals. The addition of Laura Moore from Duke makes a big difference for Gung Ho. She carried Duke on her back last year and is capable of doing the same for Northwestern. Luckily, Moore has GL FOTY candidate Lien Hoffman to ease the burden.
The Femme Fatale (aka Kim Basinger) - Case Western. Alright, this doesn't really work because I don't think anyone has a serious shot of upsetting Michigan. I guess the logic I can apply here is who can be the entity that gets between Alec and his brothers? Well, that would be (or used to be) Kim 'How did I get an Oscar for LA Confidential' Basinger? Kim Basinger's best and most fitting role was that of Memo Paris in The Natural. Her character basically rendered the magical Roy Hobbs into an ordinary guy. As soon as Hobbs dumps Memo, he's back to being... well, the Natural.
Isn't this what happened to Alec Baldwin? Check out his list of movies while the two were married (1993-2002). Most of those flicks are duds. When he signed on to be the narrator for the Royal Tenenbaums (a great and underrated vocal performance by Baldwin), it coincided with his troubles with Kim. Now, he's a frickin' stud again. The Aviator, The Departed and 30 Rock. The man has been let loose! Anyway, the point here is that Case Western might be the anti-Baldwin. Beware.
Another reason to like Case Western is that there is always a surprise team at Nationals. Last year, Michigan State and Northeastern snuck up on everyone and did much better than expected in Boulder. The Fighting Gobies, led by seniors Ashley Gan and Elaine Leung, fit this description. CWRU already put a big scare in Illinois at the Chicago Invite and their only other loss came to St. Louis. They will return everyone next year so look for them to be contenders (and possibly the Alec Baldwins) next year as well.
The Troubled One (aka Danny Baldwin): Oregon Men's Ultimate. I just couldn't bring myself to equate any women's team to Danny Baldwin. It's just didn't work. But with all the stuff going on with the Oregon men's team (the drinking violations, the speeding tickets, the inappropriate nudity), I think they fit the bill pretty well. It sounds like the Oregon sports department gave them multiple chances to be on their best behavior. Now, they are making news for all the wrong reasons. FAIL.
Who Goes to Columbus: Michigan, Case Western
Tough Luck Loser: Illinois
My take: I really wanted to pick Illinois here, but I just have a bad feeling. I thought that their tough loss to Michigan State last year would have ensured that they wouldn't be in the same position again, but as much as I admire this team, they just seem to be a classic underperforming team. Plus, Stephen Baldwin has been on a losing streak lately (backing the McCain/Palin ticket and tattooing Hannah Montana's initials on his shoulder... these are bad, bad signs).
I think Michigan will take out CWRU in the semis and Illinois will avenge their sectionals loss to Northwestern in the other half. Illinois will sub tightly against Michigan and play them fairly closely for a half before losing by a decent margin. In the back door, CWRU will squeak out a tough win against Northwestern and then face Menace in the game-to-go. The Fighting Gobies get to hop on the I-71, hang out with the Mennonites for a bit before showing up for their first Nationals.
The New England Regionals preview will come soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)