It’s time for another Pool C Update. Despite me being on a work trip (again) in the sunny state of California, I must get an article out for you clamoring fans. It’s been tough when American Airlines decides they are going to put society back eight years and not offer internet or outlets on their cross-country flight, but that’s what I get for trusting American Airlines, right? Gone goes 6 hours and that means I have to sit in my hotel room late night to get this article out. Stupid airline carriers always messing things up.
WEEKLY POOL C PSA BELOW:
If you’re looking for NCAA Rules, but slightly outdated, please click the link in BLOGROLL to the top left of the site. While your arrow is hovering around there, feel free to press the Paypal Donation box too. I hear it brings good luck to all those who click on it.
Reminder: There are 5 Pool C Spots this year, with 2 Pool B spots.
The previous Pool C article is below, as well as the Bracketology that was posted last week. And here we go again.
What Happened Last Weekend
Coachella Weekend Two
Wesleyan def. Amherst, 5-4
A huge, huge win for Wesleyan as they basically have made my prediction that they are a LOCK into the playoffs come true. With the win against Amherst, they have two big NESCAC wins along with a win over Wash U and Case Western. They have the NESCAC championships coming up, where they will be hoping to win at least one match if not the whole damn thing. You’ll see I have them as the Pool A recipient in the table below based on their power ranking, considering the NESCAC is just a big clusterf*ck at this point. Anyone can win it, except Tufts. They can’t win it.
Middlebury def. Bowdoin, 5-4
A not-so-surprising and surprising result at the same time. Bowdoin was riding high a couple of weeks ago when they beat Wesleyan, but now they have lost to both Amherst and Middlebury which is a little bit concerning. Another loss to Williams and a poor showing in the NESCAC Tournament could really put a dent in their playoff chances, let alone championship chances. I am going to give Bowdoin the benefit of the doubt, but honestly this team hasn’t done much so far this year after two tight losses.
Amherst def. Williams, 5-4
Another 5-4 match and one that locks Amherst into the playoffs in my eyes. Of course, the NCAA could see things differently, but this team has way too many quality wins to keep them out. If they do get kept out, that’d be the wrong decision for sure.
Kenyon def. CMU, 5-4
https://twitter.com/d3AtlanticSouth/status/1119698452072534016
This is all you really need to know about the match between Kenyon and CMU, which now essentially requires CMU to pull three upsets off in a row. Reminder, they have won no big matches so far this year, so this is quite unlikely.
These were the key results from this past weekend, so let’s take a look at each team’s overall body of work this year. I’d also love to direct you to SLAM Tennis’s bracketology section on their site, which gives similar information in a better and more detailed way. Call me a Microsoft Excel homer.
My Thoughts
This Pool C picture continues to be quite a conversation, but I am again coming to the same conclusion this week. Williams is the first team out, with Wash U the last team in. Wash U’s case got even stronger this weekend when Williams lost to Amherst, who Wash U has already beaten on the year. However, Williams did beat Wesleyan, of course. When it all comes down to it, don’t forget that Wash U historically has gotten the favor of the NCAA and also resides in a region where we need a #1 seed. Should it come down to that? No. But, I keep it real on this blog and that’s the truth of the situation. Wash U has the last nod with a similar resume to Williams but a geographical advantage.
Here’s how I would rank the teams vying for Pool C right now:
Locks
Emory
Amherst
Strong Argument
Middlebury
Slightly Weaker Argument
Bowdoin
Bubble Teams
Wash U
Williams
Brandeis
Basically Out
Case Western
Needs a Pool A Miracle
Carnegie Mellon
Pomona-Pitzer
Tufts
This whole thing is essentially coming down to an argument between Wash U and Williams. However, don’t look now, but Bowdoin has looked extremely vulnerable as of late. If Bowdoin loses their remaining match against Williams (god forbid they lose to Tufts), Williams may leap-frog the Polar Bears and snatch their spot. I think Wash U also leaps Bowdoin in this scenario. Let’s not forget that Wash U has a match against CMU at UAAs this weekend and potentially a match against Brandeis in the 3rd place match if they don’t pull the upset on Emory. Those are two solid resume boosters that negate some of Bowdoin’s resume wins as well. We have a decent amount of tennis still to play, but everyone should have eyes on the Bowdoin/Williams match. It’s two teams that have one big win to their name and not much else. Whoever wins that match goes into the NESCAC Tournament basically needing a first round win to lock themselves into the playoffs.
For those of you asking about Brandeis, I do think that they could pass either Wash U or Williams/Bowdoin with a win in the 1-4 match against Chicago. This would mean Deis gets wins over both Case (solid top 15 win) and Chicago (top 5 win)that would essentially make their resume identical to Bowdoin’s current resume. With late season play factored into that, Deis could theoretically pass the above teams. They do, however, need a bit of help.
Final Thoughts
Every match at this juncture is important. All of you should know that by now. I’ll catch you in the next article and I hope the above is informative in how you determine who should be in Pool C.
ASouth, OUT. Thank you to NE for posting this for me.
Luther College has the greatest difference. Indoor rec center courts for one are 3 courts with doubles alleys and 3 courts with only singles lines. Second, the courts are easily the fastest courts in the world, as they are not glossy and smooth, shots hit with slice just continue going through the court. Court has no effect no matter what shot you hit.
What do you guys think about matches that have real implications being played on indoor surfaces like those found at Bates, Tufts, or Wesleyan? For example, Bowdoin survived Bates indoors yesterday, but things could have been pretty close. If they lost that match, Bowdoin could very well have moved to the wrong side of the Pool C discussion. Yet, Bowdoin is a much better team than Bates and I would expect Bowdoin to win that match 8-1 or 9-0 outside or on a normal indoor hardcourt (like those found at Maine Pines). Bates was a better team in 2016, but I remember they beat Bowdoin indoors then and Bowdoin went on to win the title that year. Fortunately, Bowdoin had done enough in the regular season to still earn a Pool C bid that year. Another good example is the Wesleyan/Amherst match this past weekend played indoors at Wesleyan. How can it possibly be fair for certain programs to rely on homecourt advantage so much when other programs make arrangements to play on real indoor courts as a backup for rain. Bowdoin, for example, has a field house but plays their indoor matches at Maine Pines. There are certainly enough indoor clubs around Tufts or Wesleyan for them to schedule real indoor backup. Bates could even utilize Maine Pines, as well. It just does not seem right to me that matches that could potentially decide who gets to play in the postseason or not can be played on not “real” tennis courts, and ones that give the home team so much of an advantage.
It’s a fair point to bring up, for sure. There’s certainly an argument to be made for these matches to be played on “real” indoor courts, but there are also some issues. First of all, indoor back ain’t cheap, and requiring everyone to secure it would be a big ask financially. Consider Hamilton, in particular. They’re way out in the middle of nowhere. No idea where the closest indoors courts are and whether getting there/reserving them is even viable. Additionally, while it’s less than ideal for “big” matches to be played on not true tennis surfaces, if you require teams to schedule these big matches with real indoor backup, you would have to make all conference matches like that. You couldn’t just require Bates, for example, to play Bowdoin at Maine Pines but then allow them to play Trinity or Conn College on their home surface. For better or for worse, the wonky court surfaces in the NESCAC are a hallmark of the conference, and until everyone has legit indoor courts on campus like Middlebury, I don’t think anything is going to change.
Thank you for bringing up this topic. It’s funny that the NESCAC schools uniformly have great outdoor courts, and yet–between cold and April showers–the majority of the matches unfold in irregular fieldhouses.
Is there any greater variance in D3 than that between Bates’s indoor and outdoor courts?
Also, re: Hamilton–given that the NESCAC nominally refers to New England, how did they manage to get gerrymandered into the conference? (No disrespect to Hamilton, which seems like a fantastic school.)
I get what you mean when you bring up Hamilton, and the same logic could be applied to a school like Colby. No offense to these schools, though, but my question is really about matches that have real playoff implications. Unfortunately for schools like Hamilton and Colby, it is not so much of an issue for an Amherst//Bowdoin/Williams/Wesleyan/Midd to play inside there because the skill gap is so large the court does not really matter at all. Until those schools can consistently compete with the top of the NESCAC (which would be great for D3 tennis overall – other than making the limited Pool C spots relatively more scarce) than I don’t think they should be included in a counter-argument here.
To address the financial argument – schools like Amherst and Bowdoin must spend money on their indoor backup. Amherst has a 3 court field house on campus that they frequently practice in, but always have indoor backup on real courts somewhere else. Same thing with Bowdoin, and I don’t think either school gets those courts for free. I assume Bates, Wesleyan, and Tufts have enough money in their athletic department to make that happen.
It is further interesting that the NESCAC is the only major conference to have such concerns. No school in the UAA ever plays matches on “wonky” indoor surfaces. To go back to my original point, with so few Pool C spots every match matters so much. I do not believe the NCAA selection committee takes into account what surface a match was played on when determining who gets one of the precious Pool C bids. Further, many of the very schools that are disadvantaged by the current Pool – C process also have to deal with matches on “wonky” surfaces. So, with such a small margin for error for these teams, the current system really does not seem fair to teams like Amherst, Bowdoin, and Williams (occasionally plays an indoor home match in VT instead of the hockey rink) who do pay for real indoor courts, have to compete for far too few Pool C spots, and also have to play matches on surfaces that create undue home-court advantages in matches that could end up determining whether one of those schools will be left out of the postseason.
Quick correction, Wesleyan beat Amherst 6-1 (match didn’t finish). Not sure if that really matters for anything, but figured it was worth pointing out
Also Wesleyan did not play Case Western. They beat Carnegie and WashU over Spring Break.
Also, Skid is listed as a W for Midd and Bowdoin but not for Amherst – who beat them in the fall.