|
Post by Antimatter on Apr 22, 2015 13:22:34 GMT -6
I look forward to everyone playing LCSL next season and eliminating the current seeding that is created when you drop teams into a division into which they have not played all season.
I will use u15g C2 as an example. Half of the C2 teams were in C1 during the LCSL season.
PRESIDENTS CUP SEEDING 1. CSC RAGE 00
2. BATON ROUGE BR 00 G RED
3. CABOSA SHREVEPORT UNITED 00G
4. GONZALES SC 00G DYNAMO
5. SLIDELL YOUTH SC SWAT
6. LOUISIANA FIRE JUNIORS 00G WHITE
7. DYNAMO JUNIORS 99/00
8. NELSA FLAME '01
Gonzales Dynamo scored 1 goal and won zero games yet received a 4 seed. Cabosa Shreveport's only win is over the Dynamo and they receive a 3 seed. Slidell Swat loses zero games only allows two goals with one draw and has to be seeded behind those other teams. Their outstanding league finish gets them a 5 seed. THis gets them bracketed with the one seed in State Cup.
I have read 312.7.8.5 of the LSA policy manual and know what it says. However, it seems as if you take away something by allowing the team that won the LCSL at their level to be seeded at the bottom half of the state cup at that level.
|
|
|
Post by laffysoccermom on Apr 22, 2015 14:02:56 GMT -6
Will everyone playing help this? I don't know. If they are still moving comp 1 teams down and giving them top seeds, it will likely be the same scenario.
I actually wish they would do promotion and relegation after Stare Cup. Interesting side note- last years Comp 2 finalist and champ were the lowest 2 seeds if my memory serves me.
I understand they are wanting to put best possible team forward to Presidents Cup but think they could figure out something else.
|
|
|
Post by Timbertwin on Apr 22, 2015 14:09:46 GMT -6
Promotion and relegation has been approved by the member clubs for 2015-2016. It will NOT take place after this year's events, however, as the new policy doesn't take effect until September 1.
|
|
|
Post by laffysoccermom on Apr 22, 2015 14:36:36 GMT -6
Another related question. If team is listed but do not have a number indicating their seeding, does that mean they are subject to a play in?
|
|
|
Post by Steven Gerrard on Apr 22, 2015 14:49:49 GMT -6
A few years ago, in the U15 Girls bracket, a team played in the C1 division all year long and did not win a game. They were bumped down to C2 for the state cup and won it. So, perhaps the teams from C1 should get the higher seeds?
|
|
|
Post by Antimatter on Apr 22, 2015 14:51:57 GMT -6
I believe the season should mean something. I have no connection to the Slidell team I mentioned earlier. I do not think it is right that they go undefeated and end up seeded in the bottom half.
|
|
|
Post by laffysoccermom on Apr 22, 2015 15:31:41 GMT -6
It happens all the time. It's difficult when you are combining teams that didn't play each other. Would Slidell or any other team in their situation have had the same record had they played the 4 comp 1 teams that are dropping. Possibly but maybe not.
I totally get what you are saying however.
|
|
|
Post by copakid14 on Apr 22, 2015 21:03:10 GMT -6
I look forward to everyone playing LCSL next season and eliminating the current seeding that is created when you drop teams into a division into which they have not played all season. I will use u15g C2 as an example. Half of the C2 teams were in C1 during the LCSL season. PRESIDENTS CUP SEEDING 1. CSC RAGE 00 2. BATON ROUGE BR 00 G RED 3. CABOSA SHREVEPORT UNITED 00G 4. GONZALES SC 00G DYNAMO 5. SLIDELL YOUTH SC SWAT 6. LOUISIANA FIRE JUNIORS 00G WHITE 7. DYNAMO JUNIORS 99/00 8. NELSA FLAME '01 Gonzales Dynamo scored 1 goal and won zero games yet received a 4 seed. Cabosa Shreveport's only win is over the Dynamo and they receive a 3 seed. Slidell Swat loses zero games only allows two goals with one draw and has to be seeded behind those other teams. Their outstanding league finish gets them a 5 seed. THis gets them bracketed with the one seed in State Cup. I have read 312.7.8.5 of the LSA policy manual and know what it says. However, it seems as if you take away something by allowing the team that won the LCSL at their level to be seeded at the bottom half of the state cup at that level. The 3 seed also tied the 1 seed and lost 1-0 to the 2 seed with a late goal in a very competitive game. The 5 seed also tied the 6 seed and blah blah blah. There is no distributive property of soccer and that is why we play the games. If you are the best team you are probably going to win whether you are a 1, 3, or 5 seed. Everyone playing LCSL still doesn't solve your issue if teams still drop that haven't played each other. Just means the C1 teams get their shot at a better seed against the regional teams.
|
|
|
Post by laffysoccermom on Apr 22, 2015 21:45:11 GMT -6
If teams are listed without a seeding number, does that mean they are doing a play in game? I noticed a few.
|
|
|
Post by cajunfit on Apr 23, 2015 6:43:12 GMT -6
Myarsenal, I have read a lot of your posts and have found myself agreeing with you on quite a few occasions, but your logic here boggles the mind. The seeding is such a no-brainer. Comp 1 team records are derived from playing other C1 teams. Slidell did have a fantastic season, and they could end up winning State, but their record is against C2 teams. If Slidell had played other C1 teams in league play (which would have completely broken the concept of Competitive 1 and 2 distinction), then you could see a better rating of how they would be seeded out of the total 8 teams. That was not the case, nor the design of LCSL, so the four 4 competitive 1 teams are naturally seeded above the top 4 comp 2 teams. I honestly cannot think anyone from a Comp 2 team would have expected to get a seed higher than the Comp 1 teams.
Don't hold it against Gonzales and Shreveport that they didn't have a lot of wins or score a lot of goals. They were all in the C1 league playing (theoretically) stronger competition. It is a logical penalty for seeding if you were in a lower league.
|
|
|
Post by Antimatter on Apr 23, 2015 7:51:00 GMT -6
cajunfit, I guess part of my annoyance is making half of a bracket relegated teams. If only two teams were relegated it would make more sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by cajunfit on Apr 23, 2015 8:03:00 GMT -6
cajunfit, I guess part of my annoyance is making half of a bracket relegated teams. If only two teams were relegated it would make more sense to me. Ok I can see that too. We honestly didn't think they would only keep the top 2 teams from Comp 1 and add them to the RPL two. That basically eliminated their (C1) preliminary phase. I agree that what would have been probably a better thing for close games would have been to drop bottom two C1 teams.
|
|
|
Post by Antimatter on Apr 23, 2015 8:22:35 GMT -6
u15b looks even stranger with 15 teams in C2 with no C3 after dropping 3 from C1. Are they trying to save the price of medals and extra games with a c3?
|
|
|
Post by britspub on Apr 23, 2015 8:41:08 GMT -6
One thing the drop down provisions do not account for is the situation where a low C1 team chooses not to play state cup. In that case a stronger C1 team than what might have been intended drops to C2 state cup.
|
|
|
Post by Rabid Monkey on Apr 23, 2015 8:52:56 GMT -6
One thing the drop down provisions do not account for is the situation where a low C1 team chooses not to play state cup. In that case a stronger C1 team than what might have been intended drops to C2 state cup. Are there really C1 teams that decline to play in State Cup?
|
|
|
Post by britspub on Apr 23, 2015 9:38:24 GMT -6
Yes, happens every year. Not frequently but happens sometimes in older age groups due to lack of commitment, exams, act, etc. It is happening in U17G where a team that was promoted with a stronger team last year, became a mixed aged team this year and did not do well record wise in C1. They did not register for state cup. As a result, a team that would not have dropped to C2, a team with a good record in a mixed C1 league of U18/17 dropped to C2. I don't think that situation was considered by the clubs or LSA. I am not saying I have a better idea, just pointing out that as an example.
|
|
|
Post by copakid14 on Apr 23, 2015 14:13:59 GMT -6
cajunfit, I guess part of my annoyance is making half of a bracket relegated teams. If only two teams were relegated it would make more sense to me. This I agree with. If you have a C1 league of 6 teams or more, you should have a state cup of no less than 6 when adding the Regional teams back in.
|
|
|
Post by Antimatter on Apr 23, 2015 14:36:25 GMT -6
cajunfit, I guess part of my annoyance is making half of a bracket relegated teams. If only two teams were relegated it would make more sense to me. This I agree with. If you have a C1 league of 6 teams or more, you should have a state cup of no less than 6 when adding the Regional teams back in. Or it may make sense if you also dropped enough teams to have a C3 bracket. When you have only two brackets and drop four teams you are creating a single bracket where you probably have C!, C2 and C3 teams. Not the biggest problem in the world but just noting.
|
|
|
Post by dme1214 on Apr 24, 2015 0:17:36 GMT -6
If teams are listed without a seeding number, does that mean they are doing a play in game? I noticed a few. Yea
|
|
|
Post by laffysoccermom on Apr 24, 2015 1:01:11 GMT -6
One thing I don't get is things like at the u15 boys level (going from memory), there are 15 Comp 2 teams with the bottom 6 in playins. Why not do a 8 team Comp 2 and 6 team Comp 3 and only have one playin.
I think it's better to allow as many teams as possible to actually compete for state.
|
|