I was supposed to write an extensive preview for the Elite 8, but couldn’t find the time and saw all the other bloggers doing a great job. Instead, I will provide some brief reflections on this week and the 8 teams that competed. I’m sure there will be a season recap in the near future so that all the other top 30 teams get a mention as well.
Case Western – Despite turning in a lackluster quarterfinal performance, Case has a lot to be proud of this year. They have improved their ranking each of the past several years and are now consistently in the conversation when you talk about elite teams. Their budding rivalry with Carnegie has the potential to become one of the best in D3 as that Sweet 16 match was the best of the entire tournament. I don’t know if Coach Todd has won National Coach of the Year honors recently, but if he hasn’t, he should. As I showed in my previous article, he has taken this team from a joke to the Final 8 within 6 years. The looming question in my mind is where do they go from here? We’ve seen a meteoric rise before from a combo of recruiting and hard work, but 2015 will be telling for Case because my gut says that they have hit close to their ceiling. They will finish 8 in the country this year and to become a top 5 program is a huge step – just ask Trinity. Case suffered from the Elite 8 jitters this year as is common for first timers and I’m sure they will draw on that experience going forward. They return 4 of 6 starters and the future looks bright for the Spartans. The keys for them going forward are to keep recruiting at a high level and to keep Coach Todd in Cleveland, because I’m sure D1 has taken notice at what he’s done with this program.
Wash U – Wash U unfortunately ran into a buzzsaw in Trinity and their streak of 6 consecutive Final 4s is now over. They were beaten up with illness heading into the tournament and that was unfortunate to see. Wash U really has nothing to worry about because this program defines consistency and class. I think what they need to focus on is recruiting, and getting enough good players to compete with CMS and others consistently. Remember, between ’09 and ’13, they lost in 5 consecutive semifinals, meaning there have been 2-3 teams better than them every year. They got over the hump this year and finally won an Indoors title after coming close on multiple occasions. This was arguably their strongest regular season ever but their NCAA result is certainly not what they were hoping for. I am 100% sure that the Bears will be back in full force next year with 5 of 6 starters back and a great senior leader in Ross Putterman. Everyone is allowed to have a day when they don’t bring their best stuff, and unfortunately for Wash U that was the quarterfinal this year after they had proven to be a very solid #2 in the nation for the whole regular season. It was another great season for the Bears, they just need to find a way to finish again so they can bring back the glory of 2008.
Johns Hopkins – I don’t have much to say about JHU besides they had their best year in program history and gave CMS a serious run in the quarters. The Jays made the final of Indoors and their lone poor result this year was a 7-2 loss against Emory. The upside for Hopkins is that they return their entire starting lineup and have another strong recruiting class to go with it. They could potentially have 4 seniors in their starting singles lineup next year, so JHU will be a force to be reckoned with. They’ve now made their 2nd Elite 8 in 3 years and have the tools to take the next step next year. This program is headed in the right direction and I think the top of the national scene is more interesting with Hopkins floating around because they are such a wildcard. I expect them to be one of the favorites at Indoors next year and there’s no reason they can’t make a run at the top 3-4 in the nation next year. They have a top player in Michael Buxbaum and complementary depth. If the Jays can refine their doubles, this is a potential national champion in 2015.
Emory – Something is a little bit off in Atlanta and a disappointing season for the Eagles culminated in a beatdown from the eventual national champions. Emory will finish outside the top 5 for the 2nd consecutive season and as I’ve said many times, anything but a national title doesn’t cut it for this team. The Halpern/Ruderman/Wagner class that made their debut in 2012 was supposed to deliver the Eagles another national title by the time they left, but Emory looks far from that heading into next year. Amherst owns these guys, as they’ve beaten them 4 of the past 5 years in NCAAs, with the lone exception being Emory’s national title in 2012. The Eagles are undersized right now and frankly play terrible doubles, so there’s definitely going to be an offseason focus. Their singles lineup should be able to compete with anyone in the country next year, but to me the thing that’s missing is the mental toughness and “clutchness” that we have seen from past Emory teams. Maybe this is just not a good bunch or maybe D3 is catching up talent wise, but I think it’s an undeniable fact that the past 2 years are not what Emory has been used to for Browning’s entire tenure.
Middlebury – From a distance, it looks like Hansen is doing his job at Midd. They have taken a step forward in each of his first three seasons, and much like Case, there’s not much further to go. 2015 will be telling for Midd as well, as they’ve gone from Sweet 16 to Elite 8 to Final 4, even posting a win over the eventual national champions during the 2014 regular season. Brantner Jones ends a very good career which probably didn’t get enough attention, and Midd also loses their 1 doubles team of Johnston and Lebovitz. 2015 will be a real challenge for Hansen, so we will see if he can keep this team moving forward in what I expect to be a very winnable NESCAC. Despite the results, I just don’t get the feeling that Midd has that edge right now that is needed to win a national title. They had numerous chances against CMS and came up short, and then faltered again in the 3rd place match. From wire to wire this year I was not that high on Midd when a lot of people were, and despite a 4th place finish, I think they were very far from 1st place. I’ll be interested to see if Hansen can develop what he has left into a top 3 team next year.
Trinity TX – The Tigers were challenged to rise to the occasion this year. They surpassed all expectations and turned in a remarkable performance that will be with the program for a long time. I think they had their 2 best wins of the past 6 years this week and the beating they put on Wash U really stands out to me, avenging their semifinal loss from Indoors. Trinity really wanted it this year and the resolve they showed in the 3rd place match is something to be admired. It’s a testament to the team’s hard work and the ability of National Coach of the Year Russell McMindes, who truly took these guys to the next level this year. I was so happy to see them perform after years of coming up just short against the top dogs. I know the Amherst loss hurts and I think they would be national champions if they won, but they have to hold their heads high after this season. Trinity is often a mystery because they don’t play anyone good the last 6 weeks of the season in D3, but I’ll remember to not doubt the level they are going to bring to NCAAs next time. It looks to me like a finish of 3 in the nation and the top seed at next year’s Indoors is likely. Despite losing their 2 and 3, the future is very bright for the Tigers and I hope to see them in the top 5 again next year.
CMS – Everyone really should have seen this coming. I’m glad the individual tournament played out like it has, because it proves that it’s not about tennis for the Stags – they are the best team. What they are able to do during the regular season is amazing, and I think a lot of people forgot they were almost as dominant last year and ended up losing to Williams. I’m trying to find excuses for these late-season losses and am having trouble doing so. My only finger-pointing is really toward the coach, who has been the constant in meltdown after meltdown. He has to rethink how he’s approaching the program and preparation of his players, because the truth is they should be winning easily. You could just see the shakiness starting as soon as we got into NCAAs, starting with R32 against Cruz all the way through Amherst. I have little doubt in my mind that if Trinity had hung on against Amherst, they would have beaten CMS as well. The Stags just didn’t want it as much as the other 7 teams there and that’s hard to explain. The good news is their top 3 are all seniors next year and they will most likely be the heavy favorite again. CMS needs to stop thinking so much – proof is that they went undefeated for the entire season with the same lineup and then switched it for the final. That makes no sense to me, and neither do all of their NCAA losses.
Amherst – Joey Fritz finally became the player everyone expected him to be, and along with other seniors Chris Dale and Justin Reindel, led this Amherst team to their 2nd title in 4 years. I’m really happy to see Fritz peaking at the end of his career because it means he worked hard during college tennis despite entering with high junior rankings. He was very good for his entire career, but he was not dominant until these past couple weeks. Amherst is often an enigma for the rest of the country. This team reminded me a lot of their ’10 and ’11 teams who went through the motions during the regular season and then raised their game as soon as NCAAs started – call them the anti-CMS. We knew they were good in singles, but I don’t think anyone expected the dominance that we saw in their last 3 matches, particularly from the 2-4 spots which had been shaky at times. Their match with Trinity was the best of the week in my opinion and you could see the fire in the Jeffs, starting with their seniors. Looking at the big picture, this is a truly elite program that probably doesn’t get enough credit. They will finish in the top 5 for the 6th consecutive year and I’m sure they will be back next year competing for another NESCAC and national title. Their path to the title was very difficult, but it’s a well deserved national title and congratulations to Amherst.
If you read what D3Tennis said, CMS has been favored to win in the tournament in the last 5 years, and they lost each time. Assume they were not heavy favorites and they had a 60% chance of winning each of these matches. If you work the numbers, you will find that there is a 1% chance that they lose all these matches, all other things being equal. So while this is statistically possible, it is highly improbable. This leads you to conclude that something, whatever it is, is causing them to lose.
But the question is how accurate is CMS being the favorite every year? Who decides the odds/favorites? That kind of stuff goes out the window when it comes to the tournament. That’s why this whole debate is so surprising to me. It seems like people talking about CMS losing to Amherst is such a big deal, seeing as they were the 1 seed and had the best regular season. Many people on this blog have said (although i doubt any of them actually stated prior/put in predictions), that Amherst looked like they would beat CMS. And what they saw in Amherst is what they saw in Williams last year. Amherst’s grit and fight under Garner’s tutelage is not something to be dropped from the equation when looking into these “odds/favorites.” Plus Amherst had 3 seniors in their 1-6. To make all this fuss about CMS losing to Amherst because of CMS’s talent/skill/ability is insulting to Amherst. I mean do you really think CMS is that much more talented than Amherst??? CMS has a bunch of studs, particularly at 1-4 but Amherst had top juniors at 1 and 5 (better junior careers than CMS’s 1 and 2), left-handed ripping captains at 2 and 6, and undefeated guys at 3 and 5. Sounds like a pretty talented/skillful team to me.
As a player of Paul Settles, I felt the need to chime in. Although I have only had one college coach in my career, I have worked with many coaches in juniors. From what I can tell, Settles is on the of the best coaches I have ever had the pleasure of working with and I have worked with some relatively famous coaches from my region. Settles builds a relationship with his players that I would bet my future life savings no other coach in D3 does. This guy goes through such effort to become close with his guys and it is so apparent how much he cares about us. Also, the man wants to win a National Championship so badly. He desires it more than anything. Because of the relationships he builds with his players, even if one of his players did not want the national championship, you would want to win it just for him. Also, Settles not being a great motivator is a joke. He has a way of making you want it so bad that it becomes one of your life goals. He just wants us to do it with class and morals.
As far as the championship match this year, I really do not think enough credit is given to Amherst. Sure, we have a talented team, but they have a damn good team to. Yaraghi playing 5???? Are you serious? That kid was an amazing junior. This was one match where I truly do not believe that we played that poorly. While we might not have played to our full potential, Amherst played incredible. I believe that both of our teams were relatively equally matched and they just had a better day. I did not see any sort of choke this season. We wanted it bad and I am sure they did too, but I dont think that saying that they wanted it more was the reason they won. They just showed up playing amazing and peaked at the right moment in their season.
My only point with this response is to try to get people away from blaming Settles for the players performances. He did a fantastic job motivating and training us. We just got outplayed on the one day that mattered most. I am hoping that next year we can return and win it all to get everyone to finally shut up.
I love this comment. That’s really all I’ll say. I think this is great discussion.
I wanted to toss some thoughts into the ring about this as someone who watched both the match and Settles’ interview afterwards. In his interview Settles said that he said to his team the “same speech, they could probably recite it by heart…keep the blinders on and stay on your court and focus on what we have to do individually” What I personally witnessed at the match was Amherst guys getting much more fired up and spreading that to their teammates. They would get a service break and get loud and shout to their teammates. CMS never really does that, they stay quiet and take care of business on their respective court.
If you watch Wash U, or Case, or Trinity, or other like teams, they are extremely vocally supportive of their teammates and it shows in their matches. They get really fired up. CMS has never seemed to have that x-factor if you will. The mentality of putting on blinders and not looking at other courts may be better, worse or just flat out different but it seems to me that it hurts them come the semis/finals of NCAA’s when other teams are so much more vocal.
Also may help explain why CMS players tend to do so well in individual tournaments, if they just put on the blinders and focus on their court they may not feel as deflated as others do when they are no longer playing for the cause of their team. Just my thoughts.
I have nothing but respect for how Settles coaches his team. What some people call the “x-factor” others see as gamesmanship. I was at the one of the junior USTA national tournaments this weekend and was talking with some college bound juniors and their parents about the differences between junior and college tennis. One of the things I mentioned is that things get loud and cheering on errors is commonplace.
Imagine a junior USTA or pro match where someone yelled “there’s a break” every time they broke their opponent. The first one would earn them a warning, the second a code violation, a few more and the match would be over. Yet some teams do it all the time. Others, with coaches who appreciate the life skills from D3 tennis extend way past their time with these players, think it’s a very poor practice. This is not just Settles. There are quite a few coaches who believe it reflects poorly on the character of a team. These are college guys, if there weren’t coaches who believed “the racket should do the talking”, the energy in these matches would lead many players to take even more negative digs at the psyche of their opponent and their opponent’s team.
Firing yourself up… sure. Keeping the vocal energy positive… absolutely. There are teams that can, and do use it to great advantage. But this is the sport of tennis and ultimately what happens on college courts should more resemble the game played by pros than what went on in the arenas of ancient Rome.
I’m going to have to disagree, respectfully, of course. I never thought of yelling “there’s a break” as a way to attack your opponent. It’s supposed to be something to uplift your teammates. You would never yell it at an individual match because there is nobody who can benefit from the information that you just broke your opponent. In a team match, however, it can be helpful to know that your teammates are doing well, especially if you’re playing poorly.
Personally, I sometimes start to feel pretty helpless when I’m playing poorly and losing badly. Hearing my teammates yell “there’s a break” has helped me remember that I’m not alone out there. It has helped me try to stave off defeat for just a couple more games even just to keep the opposing team from putting a point on the board, and helped me get back into a match that seemed lost. Not all facilities have scoreboards, and sometimes it’s hard to tell if your teammates are up or down based on those scoreboards anyways. Either way, it was emotionally helpful to hear your teammates yell when things are going poorly.
As far as cheering on an opponents error. I’m not generally for it, with two exceptions: if I’ve played a really long point and hit a bunch of good shots to induce an error, I’m gonna be pumped about that. My opponent should know that I’m not really cheering their error, just trying to get pumped up. Also, if a bad error has resulted in a break, I will turn around and yell it to my teammates after a few seconds just so they know what’s going on. Most players try not to yell it in their opponents face.
Anticipating any counters, if you honestly believe that yelling that doesn’t help your teammates, you have never seen one of the college matches where a team can get on a role by getting back-to-back-to-back breaks on multiple courts. The most potent example this year came from the Amherst/TU semifinal match. When ‘Herst started taking over after the first sets, you could see them gaining confidence as a team, while TU started looking around, grasping for something positive. It’s not about gamesmanship or taking negative digs at the psyche of anybody. It’s all positive, and it helps.
I appreciate that the conversation has turned to this subject, because I think that there has been some debate about it, and it merits further analysis.
I’ve heard the position mentioned above that yelling, “that’s a break”, “that’s a set”, etc. is specifically to pump up ones teammates, and I can certainly see the value in that. At the same time, as a coach, I find it very important to stress the process that leads to success, and such yelling celebrates and draws attention to something not yet accomplished. Imagine what John Wooden would think watching players celebrate something they’re supposed to do. I am all for cheering and pumping up your teammates, but there is a line, and I think celebrating breaks and sets crosses that line. I am not a proponent of any look-at-me behavior, and I think that as coaches, part of our job is to help guide student-athletes and counsel them how to represent themselves, their schools, teammates, and families with respect, dedication, integrity, and passion.
There is also another side to this as well. The yelling can be overwhelming, and a shot in the arm to teammates. But, what happens when there’s no yelling? What happens when someone yells, “that’s a break” but then it’s quite after that? It can create an energy vacuum as well. In my experience, any celebration that takes place before the match is over provides an advantage to the opponent.
As I said, I know that there are differing opinions on this, and I am certainly not coming from a righteous place, but I feel very strongly that such celebration goes against what we are attempting to teach.
Sincerely,
Coach Belletto
Good points. My only counter to the Wooden comparison is that basketball teammates are all on the same court together. They can encourage each other with a pat on the butt or a quick high five. I also like to think that when I shouted “that’s a break,” the intent was not to draw attention to myself, but to provide a boost to teammates.
I would agree that many celebrations “cross the line.” I’ve always hated when someone celebrates in their opponents face (which is illegal but rarely enforced), but never had a problem with someone doing it with their back to their opponent as long as they didn’t go too crazy with it.
I would also agree with what Coach Belletto said about the vacuum the lack of cheering can create. I’ve played a match where all six courts went silent for extended periods of time, and it felt like my dog had died or something. I would say, however, that the team generally derives more benefit. I have no evidence to support this assertion, though it may or may not be relevant that the last several championship teams have been pretty fiery.
So I guess my stance is that cheering for breaks and sets, when done right, can be a very good thing for a team. I think it gets close to the line without crossing it, but that allowing someone to get so close to the line makes it very easy to cross it.
Lastly, I think differences in opinion or fine (or even good) to have, but that it’s important for people not to ascribe negative characteristics to something they don’t fully understand. Coach Belletto, you did not, but the original commenter said that the goal of celebration was to take shots at the opponents psyche, which it certainly is not (in my opinion). I’m sure some players out there would say, “hey, if they don’t have the mental game to deal with that, then I’ll beat them that way,” but that’s not where I’m coming from.
Why are we having this conversation about this excessive cheering anyways? The Jeffs may not be as quiet as the Stags on the court, but they are certainly not obnoxious. There are much louder teams.
Nothing about ‘Herst. One person said he didn’t think CMS was loud enough. A coach responded to say that he doesn’t think that sort of cheering should be part of college tennis. Then, I responded because I like loud cheering. Coach Belletto threw his hat into the ring. All in all, it was a pleasant conversation that had almost nothing to do with the point of the original article
I did not mean to open up a can of worms about the whole “that’s a break on 3” sort of cheering argument. Here’s a more accurate example of what I was thinking, the Amherst players would play a great point or a great game and win it, then shout “let’s go Amherst” or “LETS GOO” or something of that sort, and it clearly boosted up their teammates.
Professional tennis players like Djoko sometimes talk about the power of the crowd and how when the crowd sways one direction it can help alter the course of a match or provide life to a tired competitor. Even when Amherst players would lose a game or a point they were still exhibiting a lot of positive emotion and energy. That seemed huge to me watching because it could have been easy for the CMS crowd to get very loud and help move the momentum in CMS’ favor. Instead, I felt like I heard more even cheering from both sides even though the match was played at CMS.
It makes sense to me why a coach would dislike the heavy cheering and want players to focus only on their own court b/c that would help minimize energy “vacuums” or swings in the match. But it is definitely palpable when that energy is used in a positive way like it was in the finals.
I would just like to add a couple of things to this debate since I feel as if a number of arguments are getting a bit twisted here:
a.) MJ didn’t win a ring until his 7th year in the league. Coming from a region that had been dominated by the Slugs for years, CMS is still relatively new on the scene. You all love this Michael Jordan argument – just go far enough back and it’s pretty easy to spin it in CMS’ favor.
b.) Senior leadership wins you championships. All winning teams since 2009 had terrific senior leadership. This is not to say that CMS hasn’t had great leaders, but they just didn’t match up with the desire that other captains were able to kindle within their teams.
c.) Amherst, Midd, and Williams play these guys on their spring breaks…before even hitting a single ball outside. You can’t compare March results to nationals. It’s just crazy.
d.) D3 suffers from what I’d like to call “home court disadvantage”. I’d like to see the stats, but I’d argue that teams do better on the road. These guys have high expectations in themselves and sometimes crumble when the pressure they put on themselves gets too much. This hasn’t particularly played in CMS’ favor.
e.) A truly great team combines the elements of exceptional leadership, relentless fight, and raw talent with a coach that knows how to best prepare his players. These attributes are developed over a number of years. Teams that develop such characteristics are teams that should be considered to be the GOAT. CMS just wasn’t there yet and no one should have called them the best team of all time before they had an opportunity to prove themselves.
That being said, I think Paul Settles is a tremendous coach and I personally believe that CMS will win it all in 2015 (even though I doubt they’ll have the best team ever). And even if they don’t – year after year he brings in some of the best D3 players in the country and is the key component in what I can imagine to be a life changing experience for all of them. Greatness in coaching college sports isn’t only measured in titles, but in the experience that a coach is able to provide and the character that a coach is able to develop in his/her players.
Woah, this got out of hand pretty fast. One of the commenters out there mentioned that it would be interesting to take a step back and really analyze what has gone on with CMS in each of the past several years, so I’ll do that.
2010: Did one player choke against Amherst? Absolutely. It was terrible. You kinda had to squirm in your shoes watching the dude try to close that out. Does that make him a bad person? No. Does that make him a bad tennis player? Certainly not. Like Bernhardt said, a lot goes into a tennis match. For whatever reason, sometimes the pressure brings out the best in you, and sometimes it paralyzes you. Personally, I once experienced a day when I totally choked away a match for my team in the morning then saved match points in a victory in the evening in the same day. I will never know why I responded so differently to those two matches, but I know for a fact that this particular played had risen to some big occasions in the past for his team. For one reason or another (maybe his girlfriend had just broken up with him and then showed up in the stands. We have no idea), he didn’t play his best that time out. It’s nothing to be ashamed of.
Frankly, I don’t really like calling one player or one team a “choke” because it feels like the most emasculating insult their is. There’s nothing wrong with failing to play your best in a big moment. It happens to literally everybody. Jordan may have gone 6-0 in NBA finals, but he also lost some big playoff series early in his career, and it’s not like he played great in every single NBA finals game. He laid some eggs. Also, CMS was barely even favored against Amherst. I remember thinking that Amherst was going to win, and this was before any sort of “pattern” had emerged for the Stags.
2011: Were they favored against Williams? Yes, but only by a little. Did they choke? Well, one player choked a little bit, but that didn’t decide the match. They lost 4 other matches, obviously, so it can’t all be on one player. It’s not like they were a slam dunk to beat Williams anyways.
2012: This, in my opinion, was the worst of CMS’ losses, but, ultimately, it shouldn’t have been that surprising. This was the same team that had lost to Swarthmore and Cruz (easily) earlier in the year, so they were clearly flawed. They were also incredibly reliant on their doubles play, and it was obvious that they would have a hard time if they got off to a bad start on the doubles court. It was still a perplexing loss.
2013: They played Williams in the finals, who they had barely beaten (5-4) on their home courts a couple months earlier. When they played them at nationals, they played them indoors without their #1 singles player. I don’t think many people even thought CMS was going to win at that point.
2014: They played Amherst in the finals. People may have been talking about CMS as the GOAT, but they had a pretty tough match with the Jeffs earlier in the year. Moreover, the Jeffs team that they played in March was not the same as the one they played in May. Amherst switched up their doubles team, and got Solimano back in the singles lineup. That proved to be huge, as Solimano won both of his matches, where they had been beaten at #3 doubles and #3 singles easily before. By moving Yaraghi down, they also won at #5, where they had been beaten previously. Moreover, in their previous match, Fritz got tuned by Wood, but he was clearly playing the best tennis of his life this weekend. Can we really blame CMS because the other team’s best player morphed into the best player in the country? (I know someone out there is going to say: well, why didn’t one of CMS’ players morph into one of the best players in the country? I would say Dorn played pretty fucking good in that finals match). CMS might have been favored, but they really weren’t favored by that much. I, too, am a little perplexed by the coaching decision, but since we weren’t in the huddle, we really can’t say that much about it.
In the end, I think that Bernhardt was right about almost everything. There’s a lot that goes into whether or not you play your best in a tennis match. You often see players in post-match interviews saying, “I just had the will to win.” Just like that? If you just believe hard enough your gonna win the tennis match? I guess everyone could just win any competition at any given moment, then. At the same time, there’s one thing that I do disagree with Bernhardt on: desire does play a huge role in things.
Experience isn’t the only reason senior-laden teams tend to win these championships. Seniors tend to have a little more desire than their underclassmen counterparts because they know that it will be the last time they play a meaningful tennis match in their life. Big Z’s extra desire helped him clinch the match for his team in both the quarters and the semis. Fritz, Dale, and Reindel’s desire certainly helped the Jeffs win this championship. Make no mistake, the Stags wanted this championship as much as they could want it, but the Jeffs wanted it just a little bit more simply because Fritz, Dale, and Reindel knew they were lacing them up for the last time. Obviously, desire isn’t the only determinant, but when everything is so close in terms of pure tennis ability, that little extra desperation can make the difference. I think it made the difference for Amherst this year, especially for Fritz. Next year, Wood, Dorn, and Marino will know that desperation, and I’m confident that it will push them over the edge. I can only hope that Bernhardt will join them too (get well).
Thanks for taking the time to write that out. Spot on.
Im not sure why so many people are making a big deal about the coach pulling mork and what kind of message it sends. The reality is yaraghi and reindel were the best 5’s and 6’s in the country. Mork and ZP3 didn’t stand a chance for the start. Switching it up wasn’t a bad move. I’m sure if things went CMS’s way with the switch, everyone would be praising the move as genius and blah blah. The matter of the fact is: yaraghi and reindel are both way better than mork and zp3.
Im not sure why so many people are making a big deal about the coach pulling mork and what kind of message it sends. The reality is yaraghi and reindel were the best 5’s and 6’s in the country. Mork and ZP3 didn’t stand a chance for the start. Switching it up wasn’t a bad move. I’m sure if things went CMS’s way with the switch, everyone would be praising the move as genius and blah blah. The matter of the fact is: yaraghi and reindel are both way better than mork and zp3.
What kind of statement did Settles make to his team when he changed the line-up for the final? How about: let’s do what we need to do to give ourselves the best chance of winning. First, was the the change made out of necessity (Morkovine ill or hurt) or as strategy? As strategy, it showed a coach much more in tune with his team than those who knighted them the GOAT. 5 and 6 were not locks for the Stags although their capabilities were masked by excellent regular season records in a weaker than usual SCIAC and West Region. Going into the Amherst final, Morkovine had struggled in his previous two matches, and Pereverzin had been lit up by Reindel when they played a month earlier. So, why not mix things up, push Pereverzin to 5 and move up the next guy on the depth chart / line-up card (Hull) to 6? If it was a strategic move, it was a well-calculated roll of the dice. Unfortunately, it didn’t yield a positive result.
Browning needs to step it up. His players need to work on doubles. What was with their 2 doubles team in the lineup? Seemed very weak in Isaacs/Bajoria….
If this was a one-time occurrence, I would agree with you, but how can you not look at the last 5 years? They blew 7 match points 2 years in a row, lost 5-0 in 2012 to a team they should beat, and the past two years they were beaten by a team that they beat in the regular season. Explain to me how that is not underachieving/choking?
Yes, Amherst is talented. But CMS is far more talented. They just had 3 of the 4 semifinalists in the individual tournament! Joey Fritz won, but he’s only one player.
WashU is celebrated because they step up when it matters and they have done this consistently. They do a lot with a location that is not as attractive and recruits that aren’t as highly ranked. They have also won a national title in recent memory.
I feel bad for the kids and I know they want to win, but if they truly wanted it as much as everyone else, they would have won 3 matches comfortably this week because that is what they did for the entire regular season. Everyone, including Amherst, knows that CMS should be winning on paper, but their intangibles are awful. If you are denying that, then you’re just not being rational.
D3tennis you are absolutely right, it starts from the top. First, you have a lineup that has dominated all year. Why change it for the finals? That literally makes no sense unless there is something we do not know. Stick with what works, and claremont decides to switch their lineup in the finals?? C’mon. You don’t win national titles by trying to pull fast ones and trick the opponents. You stick to your guns and lean on whats gotten you there. Then, not only do they pull morkovine, but at 6 they stick in an untested freshman!?! I could have told you from the beginning that reindel would take that one. Meanwhile, you have kotrappa on the bench, who has an ITA singles title, national championship experience, AND A DIRECT STRAIGHT SET WIN OVER REINDEL THE YEAR BEFORE. Why not play him?? Unless there is something we don’t know, that is horrific coaching.
Look at every team, and their persona reflects that of their coach. Take amherst and garner. From what I can see, garner is an absolute class act, but he is competitive as hell and loves to win. His team reflects that class and competitive spirit. Coach Wo at case, is a fiery, emotional guy, and his team certainly reflects that on the court. Claremont, coach settles is very calm, down to earth and relaxed from what I can tell. He seems like a great guy, but he doesnt exactly seem like a motivator. He doesnt seem like that guy with that competitive edge, who is going to get his team fired up. He does not seem like he is the guy who will run through a brick wall to win (like garner or Wo). As a result, his team reflects that. All super nice guys, but not guys that seem like they are going to run through a brick wall to win. This is a reflection on the leadership. Things are too relaxed there. As a player, I have seen this team come out flat in the NCAA tournament multiple times. If you come out flat in the NCAA tournament, you don’t deserve to win, and you wont win. To come out flat in the NCAA tournament is just poor coaching, with no sense of urgency or sense of working toward a task or ultimate goal. Its like they are there to have fun and I guess the chips will fall where they fall, and whatever happens happens. Someone needs to come in and light a fire under their asses. There is no other way to explain the consistent debacles they have had come NCAA time. Its not like its the same batch of kids who keep underachieving at the tournament every year, so you cant say o its just an unmotivated group, and its not on the coach. This has cycled through multiple groups of players, and the one constant element is the coach. As stated earlier, this team was far and above the most talented team in the country, and in the end they just could not get it done. They played with fear in their eyes, and they played not to lose, instead of playing to win. Coach settles is a great guy, but if you put that talent into the hands of say roger follmer, cms has multiple national titles at this point. It sounds to me that there needs to be a change in the culture of the program. Here’s to claremont shaking their demons, because as critical as this has been (perhaps over critical), coach settles is a good guy, and his team is a group of gentlemen, and they deserve all the best.
CMS did not choke this year or any other year. I would define choking as when the pressure or importance of an event or moment alters one’s game. For example, Kobe Bryant taking and missing a last second shot to win a game is not choking. LeBron James suddenly passing up shots and giving up the ball in the 4th qtr. of a close playoff game, as he did one time a few years back, was choking. What the Stags failed to do was acknowledge or accept that the stage they were playing on was larger, and the stakes were higher. The playoffs are not “business as usual.” The Stags weren’t burdened by the pressure, but they didn’t embrace it. Instead of using the pressure to amp up their will to win, they spent considerable energy trying to ignore it. Therefore, in an extraordinary match, CMS was ordinary.
While I agree with some of your points, I would like to call attention a few things you are missing. Losing 7 total match points two years in a row to send you to the next round in NCAAs is choking. I was at the match against Amherst where Koenig won it despite being down 7 match points to win. That was a choke. I’m fairly convinced. But, that wasn’t this team currently, so moot point. But to say they’ve never choked is not entirely true.
Secondly, I think you’re focusing on the wrong thing here and you touched on it in your second point. Not recognizing the stakes were higher is basically in agreement with what D3Tennis was saying about “desire.” Being ordinary is not going to win championships as we’ve mentioned so many times before. The fact of the matter is that Amherst went out there in the moment and took a championship from CMS. Back when we were saying CMS could be the “GOAT” no one was complaining. Now, people are saying “hey championships are tough to win, it’s not their fault.” You gotta pick a side! The fact this team didn’t win is baffling to me. D3Tennis is correct in saying that they underachieved in NCAAs, and have done so in recent years. I’m sure they will admit that as well. They want championships and so far they have not been able to get 1. You won’t hear the best teams in professional sports saying “well a championship is tough so 2nd place is okay.” The best teams want the best, and CMS is up there. That being said, I’m looking forward to next year. Things could change, and like we always say… “Let the rackets do the talking!”
All of the speculation around CMS’s loss, as D3 tennis observer pointed out below, I find absolutely ridiculous. Paul Settles and the guys knew they would have as tough a time as anyone else winning the championship, tried their best to win it, and came up just short. It is absolutely ignorant to “point your finger at Paul Settles”, say that “CMS should have won on paper”, or that Coach Follmer, whom I do not know but am sure is a great coach, would be winning national titles with our team.
Paul built this program into what it is today, and having personally been a part of CMS’s team, practices, and matches, as well as worked with the best coaches in Southern California, I can say that he is doing an incredible job. Any speculation toward the job he is doing, or the job the team he is doing, like Coaching Issues just made, is ignorant. If you are going to say that “coming out flat” in matches is a result of not wanting a title, or being “fired up”, then you do not understand sports. There are a dozen emotions that are going through the minds of everyone competing in the national championship match, and I can speak for the fact that “coming out flat” has a lot to do with pressure and luck as well. It is a given that every team will not always play their best, and even more true that every player will not play their best. CMS did not play their best in the NCAA final, and lost to a deserving Amherst team. They may have “come out flat”, but for you to guess as to why is just speculation and nothing more.
If titles are won solely by determination and having a will to “run through brick walls”, Rafael Nadal should never lose. Honestly I don’t think a comment like yours should be posted unless you have really thought about what you are going to say. “To come out flat in the NCAA tournament is just poor coaching, with no sense of urgency or sense of working toward a task or ultimate goal” suggests you do not understand the emotions and day-to-day battles that players deal with.
Congratulations, Amherst, and sorry to my guys at CMS. Hopefully I will be out there with you next year.
A lot of the things you say are true: Settles has done a great job recruiting and developing at CMS over the 10+ years he has been coaching. And I am sure that everyone there really, really wants to win a championship. There is no doubt that the coaches, the players and the school want the title. However 0-7 is not a fluke. Especially this year, with this team, that beat the same Amherst team 6-3 earlier in the year. There definitely is something very real about “desire” or “wanting it” in sports. I call it the “it” factor. Michael Jordan was 6-0 in NBA finals. Coincidence? I think not. There are some players/teams that perform better under pressure and some that don’t. You guys at CMS just don’t — that’s a fact. This is all psychological and it has to come from the top; from the leader. What kind of signal was Settles sending to the team when he pulled Morkovine? What kind of signal was that for Amherst? Settles is no doubt successful on many levels, seems like a great guy and has won several national USTA titles himself. But he needs to figure out how to get you guys confident and how to play your games when the chips are down. You yourself allude to that in your post. In fact, when I read your post, here is how I describe it “we tried hard, we should have won, but we lost; that happens, oh well”, which I think really reflects the whole CMS attitude. You guys need to step it up one more notch; you can get there, but you do need to change your attitude and approach to winning. So at CMS you have a choice: you can be defensive and not listen to what others say, and most probably you will continue to get the same results. Or, you can realize that you need to change something, make some adjustments and bring home the hardware. Best of luck in 2015; we are all rooting for you.
Congrats to Amherst for assembling an extremely talented group and playing amazing tennis this year, especially during nationals.
I’m not sure how many people who watched CMS regularly actually thought they were hands down superior to Amherst. These were both highly talented teams that played at a high level throughout this past week. It should not be a surprise that Amherst won what was a fiercely contested match.
I’m also not sure why anyone needs to find an excuse for CMS’ late season losses. Plenty of teams lose at nationals. Amherst lost in two straight finals. WashU is celebrated for consistently making the semis. Winning championships is hard. CMS absolutely came to play and got beat by a team that was really good. Implying that they didn’t want it enough is insulting (to both them and to Amherst). It’s also obviously not true. I hope we can celebrate Amherst’s excellence without denigrating a CMS team that had a great season and played a great match (if not their best) in the finals.
I didn’t mean to start a firestorm with my comment. My point is simply that Amherst is really good and that anybody who was actually at nationals would not think that CMS lost because they didn’t want it enough. As D3West, the only blogger who was actually there, said after the match:
“As for the Stags, that’s another tough break, and they’ll have to deal with another year of people talking about them not being able to win the big one. For those who say that, get bent. You can’t take a national championship for granted. The Stags didn’t. The knew they would have to fight tooth and nail for every match, and they did. Amherst was simply better today.”
Does CMS need to find a way to play their best match when they are in they are in the finals next? Absolutely. Is it fair to analyze CMS’s results and try to find patterns explaining their many tough losses? Sure, though I think a thorough analysis would lead to more interesting conclusions than “CMS doesn’t try hard enough” or “Coach Settles doesn’t motivate his guys well sometimes.” But implying that they lost to Amherst because they didn’t care enough is extremely insulting to Amherst. It’s also insulting to CMS and every team CMS beat to get to the finals, all of whom brought fire and played great tennis last week.
I think a lot of people are missing my point…or choosing to ignore it. I’m not criticizing CMS only for 3 days this week. If you look at just this week, the Stags didn’t do a bad job. Obviously, Amherst is very good, as was 2013 Williams, 2012 Kenyon, 2011 Williams and 2010 Amherst.
I’m criticizing CMS for not stepping up when it matters…and doing so consistently. “They didn’t want it” might be a harsh statement, but we have hard evidence that they do not come through when they are challenged in the most important matches. Why does that happen? It’s not just bad luck…there have to be reasons behind it.
If you look at the past 5 years, the Stags have had the best team in at least 2 of those years, and you could probably make an argument for more. They should have at least 1 national title to their name, especially since they were being touted as the greatest D3 team of all time 2 months ago. If you need a comparison, look at what UVA went through for several years in D1. They finally got the monkey off their back last year and I would assume that CMS will do the same in the near future. But until this happens, they are going to be doubted and criticized and it will all be deserved. If they want to stop hearing about it, they should win a title.
Doubt and criticize all you want. The Stags haven’t stepped up when it matters — that’s a totally fair critique and much of what you say adds to the discussion. Was CMS really the best team this year? Could it not just be luck that CMS hasn’t won a championship despite having really good teams? Good questions for debate?
But when you throw out an comment like “The Stags just didn’t want it as much as the other 7 teams there and that’s hard to explain” I think you open yourself up to criticism because the logic behind the comment is silly and and the implications of the comment are insulting to the other teams at nationals. I’m sure you didn’t mean to insult Midd by implying that CMS could still beat them without wanting it as much. I’m sure you don’t mean to insult Amherst by implying that they only won because CMS didn’t play their best match. But that’s how it comes off to me.
Well said D3 Tennis Observer.
So many of these comments disregard how well Amherst played at nationals. However little recognition the Jeffs are getting in this discussion, it’s a fact of sports that the victor is often the team or player who has that 5th gear when their opponent is stuck in 4th.
Why aren’t the Jeffs getting any respect for the way they fought as a team, rather than lamenting the lack of the same from CMS? This is like Kanye running up on stage because of course Beyonce is better than Taylor Swift and anyone who thinks otherwise is just wrong. Maybe if these teams had played the day before, CMS might’ve won. Maybe if they played tomorrow, Amherst would win. The FACT is that the Jeffs won. They were down in a few matches, they found a way to win, they got fired up, and why do they get less mention than CMS.? What I see is ‘Oh, the Jeffs won because CMS has x,yz, problems.’ Why isn’t it ‘The Jeffs did an amazing job of harnessing their momentum from the season and from each other and it peaked at the right time and they won?’ Isn’t that the thing to be admired? Where is the talk about the fantastic job Coach Garner did with his boys all season?
I don’t get it.
I think the reason the comments are centered on this one thing is because the negative comments in the article are more likely to generate a reaction than the positive. I think if you read the actual article, you’ll find that it praises Amherst more than it lambasts CMS. CMS supporters rightfully rush to the defense of their coach. Amherst supporters don’t really feel the need to say anything. The fact of the matter is that they did win. They were very, very impressive and have established themselves as the best program of this decade. 2010 – finals. 2011- championship. 2012 – quarters. 2013 – 3rd place. 2014 – championship. Coach Garner’s record speaks for itself