05 LHQT bracket analysis

Yes, obviously it's NOT about the kids.. It's about the parents;)

Round 1 results announcement, hopefully round 2 schedule is coming soon

http://assets.ngin.com/attachments/document/0080/0942/QT2015Round1Final.pages.pdf

They are still too busy deciding who's in each bracket. We'll probably end up like last week with every age group except 05's posted.

They did have to wait for the king tut results last week.

How can it possibly be that difficult?! Let's not over analyze this. You should be working with one of two options. Either keep the integrity of week 1 seeds in tact or use the pre-determined bracket placement model. Either one should take about 8 minutes to fill out. Accounting for coaches schedule conflicts should take another 52. 1 hour, done!

We've got a forum full of TD's I see

05girls wrote:How can it possibly be that difficult?! Let's not over analyze this.  You should be working with one of two options.  Either keep the integrity of week 1 seeds in tact or use the pre-determined bracket placement model.   Either one should take about 8 minutes to fill out.  Accounting for coaches schedule conflicts should take another 52.  1 hour, done!

Dont forget water breaks.

Can't wait for the managers' phones to start blowing up...

From what my sources told me earlier today, in keeping with recent history, the brackets look absolutely nothing like anything I posted or discussed yesterday...

It's the speculation and conversation that we love.

It will be interesting to see if they stuck with what I was told earlier today and interesting to see EyeOut's reaction if they did...

Schedules are out

Schedule for Round 2 of LH QT: http://events.gotsport.com/events/schedule.aspx?EventID=47634&GroupID=468426&Gender=Girls&Age=10

bwgophers wrote:It will be interesting to see if they stuck with what I was told earlier today and interesting to see EyeOut's reaction if they did...

Well, I'm going to have to go and shoot my source, because they changed it up from what I was told earlier today.

Looks like they started by re-seeding based on week 1 points, and then shuffled teams in order to avoid both week 1 rematches AND avoid teams from the same club playing each other in week 2.  The shuffling to avoid same club matchups in week 2 is a change from the past.  In the past, they would only avoid same club matchups in week 1.

All-in-all, the final result is a pretty fair set of brackets IMO.

Here is the seeding:

http://events.gotsport.com/events/resultsgrid.aspx?EventID=47634&GroupID=468426

Yeeeaaaaa they listened to me no same clubs playing each other

BW..."pretty fair"?!? Take a look at FWFC's bracket. By LH's own standard they've seeded 9, 34, 41 & 42 together...of course, the points from their bracket play "might" suggest it's fair, but where do those teams rank in the FBR? Fair?

unknowingmom....thats about the dumbest thing I've heard, shuffling to avoid club conflicts....in a couple of years, U11 D1 will consist of 20 teams comprised of Sting, FCD, L'Pool, Texans and 1 D'feeters....Just so those clubs can point and say, "see, look how grand we are...come give us your money and we'll make your dd's in WNT stars..." never mind the fact there are no NTX women in the current squad or pool players....

Actually, it looks like they made sure the lower ranked teams were guaranteed into D1. Rush, Elite, Fever, FWFC all playing teams in the 30's and 40's. No offense, but they didn't bother to give these teams heavy competition, they wanted them guaranteed in. Looks like someone got their way, I guess this is what whining and crying will get you....or is it money that talks.

So Brackets F-H are the ones to watch, since everyone else should be an auto. Should make for an interesting Sunday.

LH seeding for group A: 3, 17, 38, 44
LH seeding for group C: 21, 33, 36, 40
LH seeding for group E: 9, 34, 41, 42

yep, looks pretty legit to me...

maybe they really don't know what they're doing when it comes to seeding, huh? anyone care to argue on LH's behalf?

SJP wrote:BW..."pretty fair"?!? Take a look at FWFC's bracket. By LH's own standard they've seeded 9, 34, 41 & 42 together...of course, the points from their bracket play "might" suggest it's fair, but where do those teams rank in the FBR? Fair?

unknowingmom....thats about the dumbest thing I've heard, shuffling to avoid club conflicts....in a couple of years, U11 D1 will consist of 20 teams comprised of Sting, FCD, L'Pool, Texans and 1 D'feeters....Just so those clubs can point and say, "see, look how grand we are...come give us your money and we'll make your dd's in WMNT stars..." never mind the fact there are no NTX women in the current squad or pool players....

But based on the fact that #41 significantly outplayed their week 1 seeding, including beating the #17 seed, you can make an argument that it's totally fair to reward that team by giving them a #2 bracket seeding in week 2.  

The question is... which will prove out to be more representative in the long run... the performance in week #1 or the initial #41 seeding?

As I've said before, there is no perfect way to do the bracketing, especially when you have several cases of significant under-performance (#3 & #7 seeds losing, #17 and #20 finishing 3rd in their brackets) or over-performance relative to week 1 seeding (#41 finishing 2nd in their bracket).  Someone is always going to feel screwed.

I looked at about 4-5 different options for seeding the week 2 brackets based on some sort of "logical" criteria (initial seeding, week 1 bracket placement, week 1 points, combinations of these...).  They all have imperfections to some degree or another, and in each case, some team will have a legitimate beef about getting screwed by the week 2 seeding.  When you take into consideration both the initial seeding of Week 1 and the actual results from Week 1, I felt that the brackets that came out were about as fair on the whole as any of the options I looked at yesterday.

Why is FCD North Red in and FCD North Black out?

FLGator wrote:Why is FCD North Red in and FCD North Black out?

I was told that FCD North Black withdrew.

SJP wrote:LH seeding for group A: 3, 17, 38, 44
LH seeding for group C: 21, 33, 36, 40
LH seeding for group E: 9, 34, 41, 42

yep, looks pretty legit to me...

maybe they really don't know what they're doing when it comes to seeding, huh? anyone care to argue on LH's behalf?

#17 Sting Sanchez cooked their own goose with a poor performance in week 1.
#21 Dallas Texans were tied for the 3rd most points of all of the 2nd place teams in week 1, and #33 LP Shankly tied for the 3rd most points of all of the 3rd place teams in week 1 (15th overall out of the 34 non-qualifiers), why shouldn't those teams be rewarded for that performance with favorable week 2 seeds?
#41 Sting West finished 2nd in their bracket, ahead of #17 and #32, why shouldn't they be rewarded for that performance with a favorable week 2 seed?

It doesnt matter what they did someone will always be unhappy. All i hope now is for good refs. And remember any given sunday.

bwgophers wrote:

SJP wrote:LH seeding for group A: 3, 17, 38, 44
LH seeding for group C: 21, 33, 36, 40
LH seeding for group E: 9, 34, 41, 42

yep, looks pretty legit to me...

maybe they really don't know what they're doing when it comes to seeding, huh? anyone care to argue on LH's behalf?

#17 Sting Sanchez cooked their own goose with a poor performance in week 1.  
#21 Dallas Texans were tied for the 3rd most points of all of the 2nd place teams in week 1, and #33 LP Shankly tied for the 3rd most points of all of the 3rd place teams in week 1 (15th overall out of the 34 non-qualifiers), why shouldn't those teams be rewarded for that performance with favorable week 2 seeds?
#41 Sting West finished 2nd in their bracket, ahead of #17 and #32, why shouldn't they be rewarded for that performance with a favorable week 2 seed?

Cause BW, it doesn't matter what you did on the field, what matters is these parents who have never seen these teams play and their opinion

Been watching this 05 thread and been watching these kinds of threads since my 00 went through QT. I've always been curious as to why LH had predetermined weekend 2 based on original seeding.

My two cents, weekend 1 is simply a roadmap to how you start, but not necessarily how you should finish. Someone has to be 1 and someone has to be 44 to begin. But you can't start a stage 2 event based on how you assumed teams should've been ranked. I like BWG's FBR as much as any, but it's real value is in giving a starting point, now how how the finish should look.

LH has FINALLY done the right thing people. They've rewarded the performances of every team (by points), not just the bracket winner of week one.