|
Post by vbsetter2012 on Jun 6, 2015 22:07:25 GMT -5
SCVA Junior Boys Classic starts 2 weeks from yesterday. According to AES, there are only 39 teams registered for 17's (7 non-Cali); last year 16's had 89 teams (7 non-Cali). Any thoughts/reasons for the big drop-off? Interestingly, 18's went from 37 to 68 as well as 16's going from 29 to 70...
|
|
|
Post by vbinca on Jun 6, 2015 23:14:43 GMT -5
The 18's and 16's always have a much larger field than the 17's and 15's. Just compare last year and this year: 18's in 2014=69, in 2015=68; 17's in 2014=37, in 2015= 39; 16's in 2014=89, in 2015=70; 15's in 2014= 29, in 2015=35. A lot of clubs combine their 17/18 and their 15/16 players into single teams if they don't have enough players to field teams at all levels. Players can play up an age but they can't play down.
|
|
|
Post by vbc1 on Jun 8, 2015 7:06:19 GMT -5
yeah, it doesn't mean much. That weekend also coincides with graduation weekend for a lot of schools, so teams tend to mix up squads in order to have a full roster.
|
|
|
Post by vbsetter2012 on Jun 15, 2015 20:05:28 GMT -5
According to SCVA website, pools will be posted on their site by Tuesday, and uploaded to AES by Thursday.
|
|
|
Post by HawaiiVB0630 on Jun 16, 2015 3:21:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gr8hands on Jun 16, 2015 6:15:09 GMT -5
Interested to see HBC and Pac Rim duke it out in the 18s 1v4 semis. I think somebody has it out for roger...pac rim has lost to them in the quarters at the holiday classic and the invitational. I'm pretty they are the best 2 teams in the tournament...too bad scva can't figure that out and put them 1 & 2. I think that's going to screw up the seeds at nationals as well.
|
|
|
Post by vbinca on Jun 16, 2015 10:03:25 GMT -5
You are correct that there is a lot of power behind seeding. The HBC and Pac Rim might be the top two teams but what have they both done so far this year? The HBC were seeded #1 in both the Holiday Classic and the Invitational, they held their position and won both tournaments. Pac Rim were seeded 9th in both tournaments, ending up 7th overall at the Holiday Classic and 8th at the Invitational. True they lost to the HBC in both tournaments and if Pac Rim had been seeded #2 at the start of both tournaments they might have made it to the finals before losing and would have ended up in second, but that is the fate of a lot of teams in tournaments. Plenty of teams in major tournaments only have one loss, losing to the eventual champion. What we do know right now is that the HBC is seeded correctly at #1, Pac Rim still has some proving to do with their new and improved (?) line-up. If Pac Rim wants to be National Champions again, the road goes through the HBC, if they can't beat them in the semi-finals at the Boys Classic they will not get a top four seeding at Nationals, making their road a lot harder to repeat as champions.
|
|
|
Post by aroundtheblock on Jun 16, 2015 12:51:00 GMT -5
Prediction...HBC vs. Balboa in 18's final! Similar to the CIFSS D1 Final this year.
|
|
|
Post by vbinca on Jun 16, 2015 13:15:14 GMT -5
HBC v. Balboa Bay in the finals would be hard, Balboa is the 8 seed and will run into the HBC in the quarters unless Balboa loses to someone earlier and ends up on the other side of the bracket.
This is how the gold bracket is currently built if all of the top 12 teams hold their positions (which they wont): on one half you have the HBC (#1), Pacific Rim (#4), MVC (#5), Balboa Bay (#8), Ocean Bay (#9), and Vortex (#12); and on the other half you have SCVC (#2), Seaside (#3), 949 (#6), Hawaii Elite (#7), Bones (#10) and Diablo (#11).
So as long as the HBC does not get upset on their half, it should be an all SoCal final (with 4 SoCal teams in the other half of the bracket I would think it would be a SoCal team moving into the finals). It looks like SCVA built a good bracket for SoCal teams to get seeded well at Nationals. Of course teams now have to play and hold their seeds to earn their spots, an upset here or there can change everything.
|
|
|
Post by aroundtheblock on Jun 16, 2015 14:23:32 GMT -5
HBC v. Balboa Bay in the finals would be hard, Balboa is the 8 seed and will run into the HBC in the quarters unless Balboa loses to someone earlier and ends up on the other side of the bracket. This is how the gold bracket is currently built if all of the top 12 teams hold their positions (which they wont): on one half you have the HBC (#1), Pacific Rim (#4), MVC (#5), Balboa Bay (#8), Ocean Bay (#9), and Vortex (#12); and on the other half you have SCVC (#2), Seaside (#3), 949 (#6), Hawaii Elite (#7), Bones (#10) and Diablo (#11). So as long as the HBC does not get upset on their half, it should be an all SoCal final (with 4 SoCal teams in the other half of the bracket I would think it would be a SoCal team moving into the finals). It looks like SCVA built a good bracket for SoCal teams to get seeded well at Nationals. Of course teams now have to play and hold their seeds to earn their spots, an upset here or there can change everything. Not too hard. They have to beat sixth seeded 949 which is doable being that the team has lost a few key players. That places Balboa on the other side of the gold bracket.
|
|
|
Post by vbinca on Jun 16, 2015 15:47:00 GMT -5
Not too hard. They have to beat sixth seeded 949 which is doable being that the team has lost a few key players. That places Balboa on the other side of the gold bracket. And then all they have to do is beat Diablo then Seaside then SCVC to get to the finals with the HBC. But I do agree with you, that is the path for Balboa Bay to get onto the other side of the bracket. What do you think of the new 949 opposite? It seemed like they have been going to him a lot during the last two points days. 6'11'' lefties can be a problem for some teams, I wonder how Balboa Bay will handle him.
|
|
|
Post by aroundtheblock on Jun 16, 2015 17:25:26 GMT -5
I did a double take on their new opposite because he reminded me of their old opposite but I didn't watch any points. i only assume 949 isn't as strong because of the multi starter loss and then the results of Saturday's pool play. It's all a guess. Please don't take offense to my prediction, it's all in good fun!!
|
|
|
Post by gr8hands on Jun 16, 2015 17:59:52 GMT -5
You are correct that there is a lot of power behind seeding. The HBC and Pac Rim might be the top two teams but what have they both done so far this year? The HBC were seeded #1 in both the Holiday Classic and the Invitational, they held their position and won both tournaments. Pac Rim were seeded 9th in both tournaments, ending up 7th overall at the Holiday Classic and 8th at the Invitational. True they lost to the HBC in both tournaments and if Pac Rim had been seeded #2 at the start of both tournaments they might have made it to the finals before losing and would have ended up in second, but that is the fate of a lot of teams in tournaments. Plenty of teams in major tournaments only have one loss, losing to the eventual champion. What we do know right now is that the HBC is seeded correctly at #1, Pac Rim still has some proving to do with their new and improved (?) line-up. If Pac Rim wants to be National Champions again, the road goes through the HBC, if they can't beat them in the semi-finals at the Boys Classic they will not get a top four seeding at Nationals, making their road a lot harder to repeat as champions. So if pac rim won u17 bjnc, why were they seeded 8th at the holiday classic? If they were on the other side of the bracket, they would have played hbc in the finals. But they lose to hbc in 3 in the quarters and finish 8th and then get the 8th seed at the invitational. BTW they lost in 3 to hbc in that one also finishing 8th. Then add a potential MVP player and they are still on the same side as hbc...would have been better to be seeded 6th. Like I said, I think the scva is making a point.
|
|
|
Post by gr8hands on Jun 16, 2015 18:07:07 GMT -5
You are correct that there is a lot of power behind seeding. The HBC and Pac Rim might be the top two teams but what have they both done so far this year? The HBC were seeded #1 in both the Holiday Classic and the Invitational, they held their position and won both tournaments. Pac Rim were seeded 9th in both tournaments, ending up 7th overall at the Holiday Classic and 8th at the Invitational. True they lost to the HBC in both tournaments and if Pac Rim had been seeded #2 at the start of both tournaments they might have made it to the finals before losing and would have ended up in second, but that is the fate of a lot of teams in tournaments. Plenty of teams in major tournaments only have one loss, losing to the eventual champion. What we do know right now is that the HBC is seeded correctly at #1, Pac Rim still has some proving to do with their new and improved (?) line-up. If Pac Rim wants to be National Champions again, the road goes through the HBC, if they can't beat them in the semi-finals at the Boys Classic they will not get a top four seeding at Nationals, making their road a lot harder to repeat as champions. So if pac rim won u17 bjnc, why were they seeded 8th at the holiday classic? If they were on the other side of the bracket, they would have played hbc in the finals. But they lose to hbc in 3 in the quarters and finish 8th and then get the 8th seed at the invitational. BTW they lost in 3 to hbc in that one also finishing 8th. Then add a potential MVP player and they are still on the same side as hbc...would have been better to be seeded 6th. Like I said, I think the scva is making a point. I haven't looked at the flow but I bet you a $1 someone is considering manipulating the bracket.
|
|
|
Post by vbinca on Jun 16, 2015 22:05:47 GMT -5
So if pac rim won u17 bjnc, why were they seeded 8th at the holiday classic? If they were on the other side of the bracket, they would have played hbc in the finals. But they lose to hbc in 3 in the quarters and finish 8th and then get the 8th seed at the invitational. BTW they lost in 3 to hbc in that one also finishing 8th. Then add a potential MVP player and they are still on the same side as hbc...would have been better to be seeded 6th. Like I said, I think the scva is making a point. I think Pac Rim's original placement at the Holiday Classic was not based on the team they had in Houston (which looked amazing) but based on the team they were going to bring to Anaheim (which really did not look amazing at all). If you look at the results Pac Rim looked like a lot of the other top 10 teams, but didn't look as good as the top five or so teams. I think it helped Pac Rim to lose to the HBC in the quarters, then they could still tell people they lost to the eventual champions and in their minds being equal to 2nd place. I think if they ran into Baja or Seaside or SCVC at the Holiday Classic they would have lost not just the game but a little of their luster. www.advancedeventsystems.com/EventResults/(S(fpdmfjufqsqitxvuanwpmwrv))/Standings.aspx?e=PTAwMDAwMDYyNjY90&d=26898It was the HBC that had to really play through the field to win - quarters Pac Rim, semis Seaside, finals Baja. They only dropped one set to Seaside. So there wasn't a lot of justification to place Pac Rim any higher at the Invitational (at which they looked much better, this is the one they took a set but still couldn't beat the HBC). Then again, Pac Rim was the 4 seed at last years Boys Classic and it ended up ok for them, maybe it is their lucky number.
|
|