The newest registered user is Karly
Our users have posted a total of 205242 messages in 32019 subjects
QT Old v. New rule
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
QT Old v. New rule
And, no, I'm not speaking as a parent on a team that is "not doing as well as I think they should have."
futbolfreak- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 105
Points : 4833
Join date : 2011-12-30
Re: QT Old v. New rule
If you are having a challenge with this I'd say that you are at the lower side of the 20. LH doesn't look into the past they look at the teams after July 1st. If your team is good enough they will move on.
turftoe9- TxSoccer Sponsor
- Posts : 742
Points : 6448
Join date : 2009-05-07
Re: QT Old v. New rule
And my dd's team is doing just fine
futbolfreak- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 105
Points : 4833
Join date : 2011-12-30
Re: QT Old v. New rule
The more teams that qualify the first weekend, the less come back and play next weekend.
Heck the 98's and 01's had multi game days and no water breaks. This weekend, even with one game/day, the 04's are playing 25 min halves and water breaks.
Maybe LHGCL is trying to lessen their potential liability?
SoccerDad4- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 357
Points : 5706
Join date : 2010-05-12
Re: QT Old v. New rule
SoccerDad4 wrote:I'm guessing the new rule is as much an effort by LHGCL to be "politically correct" regarding the heat.
The more teams that qualify the first weekend, the less come back and play next weekend.
Heck the 98's and 01's had multi game days and no water breaks. This weekend, even with one game/day, the 04's are playing 25 min halves and water breaks.
Maybe LHGCL is trying to lessen their potential liability?
Under the "new" rule, 32 U11 teams will advance to week 2...
Under the "old" rule, 28 U11 teams advanced to week 2...
I think the new rule has more to do with avoiding a situation like last year where Sting '02 Goodman didn't lose a game either weekend, (2 Wins and 1 Draw each weekend), yet failed to make D1.
As I see it, the new rule is meant to avoid a situation like that, but the downside is that one slip up in week 1 can cost you a spot in D1, where in the past if you slipped up week 1, you still had a chance to recover in week 2 (see D'Feeters '01 and D'Feeters '02 - who both would have been in D3 at U11 under the new rule).
Guest- Guest
Re: QT Old v. New rule
Sting 02? Possibly a Sting 03 team, you meant? I think this thread is more focused on the initial year of qualifying.
Seems strange to me for a League to change a format, because of a situation that affected a single team. But, in today's world, it would not be surprising.
SoccerDad4- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 357
Points : 5706
Join date : 2010-05-12
Re: QT Old v. New rule
I was giving one glaring example. I think there have been others as well.
Guest- Guest
Re: QT Old v. New rule
futbolfreak- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 105
Points : 4833
Join date : 2011-12-30
Re: QT Old v. New rule
turftoe9 wrote:That is why they changed from only 10 teams to make D1 to 20.
If you are having a challenge with this I'd say that you are at the lower side of the 20. LH doesn't look into the past they look at the teams after July 1st. If your team is good enough they will move on.
Clearly NOT the case.
Some teams have not played since July 1. How did they get their seed?
The LH seeding matched FBR almost exactly, swapping only a handful of teams. Gophers could confirm, but the final FBR took games played back to mid-spring. As a result, FBR (and LH seeding) was impacted by spring games and May / June tournaments with guess players.
soccerisfun- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 190
Points : 4377
Join date : 2013-06-17
Re: QT Old v. New rule
turftoe9- TxSoccer Sponsor
- Posts : 742
Points : 6448
Join date : 2009-05-07
Re: QT Old v. New rule
futbolfreak wrote:That makes sense about the 20 teams, turftoe, I'd forgotten about that part. I just thought it was interesting with the rule THIS year as previous years. It seems like the new rule is more in line with giving more opportunity to teams that are trying to get into LH at all rather than teams who are trying for D1 as opposed to D3 because there are teams playing this weekend who, in the past, would have only played 1 W and been out, right?
And my dd's team is doing just fine
yes the rules have always been stacked against the new teams trying to get in. now it is fair. don't have an off weekend
ONLYASOCCERDAD- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 187
Points : 3971
Join date : 2014-07-24
Re: QT Old v. New rule
turftoe9 wrote:They could care less about fbr. It just happeneds that he is correct most of the time. They look at the teams after the rosters are set. Then they do the seeding. And it's guest players not guess.
Yes. You are correct. They don't use FBR at all, right? Not even as an estimate? RASE has played how many games since the roster has been set? Zero. So, using your logic, how did they come look at the team after the roster was set?
jsullivan81- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 419
Points : 4809
Join date : 2012-11-18
Re: QT Old v. New rule
turftoe9- TxSoccer Sponsor
- Posts : 742
Points : 6448
Join date : 2009-05-07
Re: QT Old v. New rule
turftoe9 wrote:They could care less about fbr. It just happeneds that he is correct most of the time. They look at the teams after the rosters are set. Then they do the seeding. And it's guest players not guess.
never looked at FBR? So you are telling me they watched every game since July 1 to assess the comparable skill level of each team, also caught the Lady Aztecs, LP Elite and LP Premier non-games against 04G competition, and ended with a seeding almost identical to FBR, give or take a few up or down a spot?
Please tell me you are on vacation in Colorado this weekend!
soccerisfun- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 190
Points : 4377
Join date : 2013-06-17
Re: QT Old v. New rule
I just can't stop!
soccerisfun- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 190
Points : 4377
Join date : 2013-06-17
Re: QT Old v. New rule
turftoe9- TxSoccer Sponsor
- Posts : 742
Points : 6448
Join date : 2009-05-07
Re: QT Old v. New rule
jsullivan81- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 419
Points : 4809
Join date : 2012-11-18
Re: QT Old v. New rule
turftoe9- TxSoccer Sponsor
- Posts : 742
Points : 6448
Join date : 2009-05-07
Re: QT Old v. New rule
turftoe9 wrote:. And it's guest players not guess.
I thought we were allowed to use "guess players" as an accepted phrase on this board. Has that changed?
Next thing you know they will change the QT format for the U11s.
Guest- Guest
Re: QT Old v. New rule
turftoe9 wrote: I have friends that do the seeding. I've been around this since my 96 came through.
Your friends should be in Vegas. Seriously.
Never having seen the post-signing LP Elite team play, placed them #2. FBR #2
Never having seen the post-signing LP Premier team play, placed them #7. FBR #10
Never having seen the post-signing Lady Aztecs team play, placed them #25. FBR #23
Never having seen the post-signing DT South team play 04G, placed them #3. FBR #3
Nailed the EXACT same seed as FBR on 25 of 52 placements, and within one spot on 16 more.
If they did not, at any point, look at or refer to the FBR, then they should be gambling in Vegas, because the odds of getting that close are astoundingly low.
You are free to continue believing that fairy tale if you wish, but I would be surprised if anyone else here does.
soccerisfun- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 190
Points : 4377
Join date : 2013-06-17
Re: QT Old v. New rule
soccerisfun wrote:turftoe9 wrote: I have friends that do the seeding. I've been around this since my 96 came through.
Your friends should be in Vegas. Seriously.
Never having seen the post-signing LP Elite team play, placed them #2. FBR #2
Never having seen the post-signing LP Premier team play, placed them #7. FBR #10
Never having seen the post-signing Lady Aztecs team play, placed them #25. FBR #23
Never having seen the post-signing DT South team play 04G, placed them #3. FBR #3
Nailed the EXACT same seed as FBR on 25 of 52 placements, and within one spot on 16 more.
If they did not, at any point, look at or refer to the FBR, then they should be gambling in Vegas, because the odds of getting that close are astoundingly low.
You are free to continue believing that fairy tale if you wish, but I would be surprised if anyone else here does.
I figure next year, just to mess with the seeding committee, I'm not going to post my final FBR until AFTER they post the brackets...
Guest- Guest
Re: QT Old v. New rule
turftoe9- TxSoccer Sponsor
- Posts : 742
Points : 6448
Join date : 2009-05-07
Re: QT Old v. New rule
turftoe9 wrote:Wow I guess you are a genius. Since you know more than anyone else. Like I said before if you have any concerns contact LH's, you sir have no idea on how the seeding is set. But keep on showing how brilliant you are!
Not one person is implying they have issues with the seedings. And.... it's great that you have friends. I am proud of you. I just saved a ton on my car insurance.
Now, I will spell this out for you. Using your statement / logic, which was they seed them based on how they look after the roster is set and do not use not FBR. (Just want to ensure you are on the same page as everyone else here) If a team has not played in any games after the roster is set, how then are they seeded?
Does LH go visit them in the land of unicorns and fairy dust?
Also, just for the record... again.... No one has mentioned being bothered by where any team was ranked. Only your logic.
jsullivan81- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 419
Points : 4809
Join date : 2012-11-18
Re: QT Old v. New rule
As jsullivan noted - turftoe is the only one mentioning seeding placement concerns.
And so we have it clear -
I propose no FBR seedings after May 1 - that way no one can impact them by the use of guest players in tournaments, and the LH seeding committee can do its thing without anyone questioning whether they, at any time, look at the FBR.
But to claim that their powers of observation, combined with their use of a magic 8 ball, fairy dust, and unicorns, and unaided by the FBR, miraculously resulted in these seedings . . .
is pure horsesh!t.
BrianWilliams- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 142
Points : 4075
Join date : 2014-02-12
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
» MORE LH rule changes to
» where is this in the rule book
» Rule about trying out for ECNL?
» CPP Rule Change