2023 Surf Cup Seeding Sh!^$how

[RandomSoccerFan]

So, another way of saying this is that data derived from league play doesn't translate (as well) to tournament cross-league play when used as a predictive indicator.

Which to me makes sense, the less data available the less accurate the prediction.

Also, League and tournament rules are very different. As an example in league, you can only sub X number of times + once you're subbed off players are typically out for the half/game. In tournaments you can sub like crazy. Another example is in league you can't put together super teams with players from multiple clubs. In tournaments you can do this. Surf Cup won't let true super teams play in the top flight but 1-2 top players might be guesting with top teams which wouldn't happen in league.

Keep in mind that the ratings data tied to most of these teams (if you're referring to SR data) is already a combination of league and tournament data. If you are instead referring to league standings alone not holding up in tournament standings - that's a defensible position, but I'm not sure it's necessarily accurate. And even though play seems to have been a bit closer to parity in some cases rather than an excessive amount of mismatches that predictions might have implied, the end result is still that the teams picked to win ended up winning their games - at similar percentages as would be expected - even the ones called out here. Perhaps the tournament sub rules do help keep some games closer? I'm not sure why it would, but perhaps it's possible. It seems that the sub rules could advantage or disadvantage any particular team, if other teams/clubs are subject to the same. I thought it would be shorter games that could keep things numerically closer - but it turns out that pool play games are similar length to league games, so there wasn't a difference there.

 

[Carlsbad7]

Perhaps the tournament sub rules do help keep some games closer? I'm not sure why it would, but perhaps it's possible.

There's many reasons sub rules can change the outcome of a game.

Say you have a really hot midfielder that scores, is strong at distributing, and dominates at defense but they get tired 15 min in + need a five min break before they can go back on the field. Coaches could run 2 lines + whenever that mid goes off they switch to a 100% defensive lineup + after the hot mid rests the coach goes back to more of an offensive setup. In a tournament this can happen any time during the game. In league it doesn't work because once you leave the field you're done for the half.

Another popular tournament tactic is to sub all the time to keep all the players fresh. This also happens when teams are up on goals + trying to delay + burn minutes so the other team can't score. Neither of these would happen (with the same effect) in league play with more conservative sub rules.

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

I get what you are saying about how the substitution rule differences can influence different strategies. I see how it can make a team stronger than it would be otherwise. Better teams should utilize the rulebook to their advantage however possible, whenever possible - league or tournament. What I don't see, is how the tournament sub rules would disproportionally help only 1 of the opponents and not the other. I don't yet see how the sub rules would tend to make the game score closer than it would be otherwise.

 

[Carlsbad7]

I get what you are saying about how the substitution rule differences can influence different strategies. I see how it can make a team stronger than it would be otherwise. Better teams should utilize the rulebook to their advantage however possible, whenever possible - league or tournament. What I don't see, is how the tournament sub rules would disproportionally help only 1 of the opponents and not the other. I don't yet see how the sub rules would tend to make the game score closer than it would be otherwise.

If being able to sub all the time wasn't a huge advantage you wouldn't see college coaches subbing every 5 min in a game.

This is one of the big differences between college soccer and pro. It's also one of the biggest issues people that prefer professional soccer have with college soccer.

Here's more detail..

Why Soccer Substitutions Are Important | clubleonen.com

clubleonen.com

But the net of how substitutions effect number of goals scored (which is what you're interested in) is that without subs the game goes faster (less chances to rest on the field) and near the end of the game players are super tired + can't come off. This opens up the game for the "better team" to start running up the score.

 

[Code]

Slammers HB Koge pulled out because of Injuries that's why Surf is playing Seattle United. Looks like SDSC Surf won their bracket and definitely proved they were not mis-seeded.

Any idea why Placer didn't take the Semi-Finals spot? They where 2nd in the HB Koge group?

 

[Code]

Had some time to to a post analysis on the G07 Surf Cup 2023, and the predictions I made. Some have already reviewed them a bit, but here they are in picture format. I made my predictions based on a bracket overview, and the rankings, which is pretty clear when you look at the brackets. I foolishly did not take a closer look at the group alignment before hand, which I added in the post review. I changed the color coding of the seeding analysis because I wanted to sort the team data with the post cup results and didn't want to lose track of which teams I thought were mis-seeded too high or too low. Which will be in my next post. I choose a GD factor of +/- 10 in a three game pool play scenario because I think it is a good indicator of proper bracket/group seeding for reasons explained in an earlier post.

 

[Code]

The Goal Differential results were not as I expected them for many teams; teams I made predictions for, and other I did not. After entering the pool play GD for all the teams, there were many that were +/-10 that didn't seem very logical. So, I sorted the teams within their brackets from highest to lowest GD to see if anything stood out. Nothing really unexpected as far as the order goes. The higher rated teams mostly toward the top, lower rated teams toward the bottom. However, the first thing that stood out was SD Surf ECNL with a +15 GD in the Best of the Best bracket. Are they really that much stronger than all the other BoB teams? They don't dominate those teams in league play that much? Should they make a new bracket for this uber dominate team; the Super-duper Best of the Best? While the teams I expected to have a low GD weren't actually that bad. Then it clicked, I didn't look deep into the group assignments before guessing how each teams would do in the bracket. This is when I decided to sort the brackets into their groups and GD. Surprise, surprise....SD Surf is in a group with two teams that were identified as being seeded too high, and a third team with no ranking (that post play can be identified as being over seeded). I tried to find some sort info on the Louisiana Parish Athletic Club G07 but didn't find anything in any rankings, leagues, or tournaments, anywhere. I also didn't spend too much time searching, but google doesn't pull anything. The clubs website doesn't appear to have any info for their womens//girls teams. If anyone knows where this team plays during the year let us know. I am curious were this wild-card team plays. My next post arranges teams into groups for another perspective.

 

[Code]

Looking at the groups of Bracket 1.

I still think that =/- 10 GD is a good indicator of a team being mis-seeded in a group, but if you get two or more mis-seeded teams in the same group, it may not give you an accurate indication. So while looking at Group D in this bracket, it becomes apparent that one of the teams is significantly stronger than the others. I predicted West Coast FC would do -10 or worse; in my mind they would be playing against three teams stronger than them, and didn't think the low ranked teams would be concentrated into one group. In reality, two of the teams West Coast FC played were relatively equal; so the negative GD wasn't too bad. That also seems to apply to Liverpool and PAC. I thought maybe the Group GD Spread would possibly be a good indicator of a properly seeded group. Not sure where I would draw the line on the GD Spread. Is 15 reasonable or unbalanced? What about 20 or more? We are talking about three games here, not a league season. For me, once that GD spread hits 16 or more, there is something off. A spread of 20 GD or more, the group was not balanced.
Group A: Looks to be a well balanced group. Hawaii Rush on the edge though, likely could have placed one of the under seeded teams here for higher competition.
Group B: Well Balanced. Eastside FC performed well.
Group C: Koge at +9 and Sharks at -8 with a spread of 17. Seems that could have been better, but Placer performed well. Actually Placer came in second in the Group. Oddly, Seattle United went on to Semi's. I find it odd both Koge and Placer couldn't/wouldn't field a team for semi's.
Group D: GD spread of 21. Three teams performed equally, and Surf blew them away. Surf then went into Semi's against the third team from Group C and Lost. I don't think you can convince me this wasn't a manipulated and padded group to ensure Surf went to Semi's.

 

[Code]

Bracket 2 Groups
Group A: Rebels ECNL finished with a 10GD. Group GD spread was 16. Not exactly a great mix of teams, but not horrible. I don't think Rebels was bracketed too low, but the group definitely had some weaker teams. Rebels could have certainly replaced one of the teams in Bracket 1.
Group B: GD Spread of 3. This was an extremally well balanced group. SDSC GA did great in this bracket, went to Semi's.
Group C: GD spread of 15 seems to be creeping up, but still a well balanced group.
Group D: GD Spread of 15. Looking at the scores between play, Fram and Leahi should have been down a bracket, or Pats and Utah Royals AZ should have been up a bracket. Maybe both. There is a clear mismatch between the pairs.

 

[Code]

Bracket 3 Groups:
Group A: Well balanced.
Group B: Northwest should have been down a Bracket, threw off an otherwise balanced group.
Group C: Beach RL should have been in the 1st Bracket, at a minimum the 2nd. RebelsSC-IE Brown should have been in the 6th bracket, no question. the Group GD Spread was 25. The results of this bracket were strongly predictable and preventable. Very unbalanced Group.
Group D: Very Good bracket.

 

[Carlsbad7]

It's funny that after all the analysis the big takeaway is that Surf gave themself a free ride to the finals.

They do this every year + at multiple age groups. Most of the Surf players play futsal at 619 + other futsal clubs in town stopped playing in the 619 league because of all the ridiculous manipulations that always pumped up 619 teams to the top.

Looking at the data something else that stood out to me is that several ECRL, DPL, etc (not GA or ECNL) teams were seeded down when according to your data should have been playing up a level. When players + parents see this happening + realize that it doesn't matter how well they play they'll never get to play against the the top teams they say screw it + try to get on a top ECNL or GA team.

 

[Code]

Bracket 4 Groups:
Group A: Cardiff didn't perform in this bracket. The group appears unbalanced with a Group GD spread of 19, but it seems to fall moslty on Cardiff's -11GD. Seattle Celtic did fine regardless of their Rating.
Group B: Well balanced bracket. Expected Sharks to do much better, had a rough game against Burlingame 0-5. GD Spread of 12 not bad.
Group C: Doesn't seem to be too bad. Future performed almost as expected. They should have been playing in the third bracket. Expected Sac United GA to do worse than they did. SD Force also performed unexpectedly, this is an entirely new team from last year. Looking back at their performance since May, when the team reorganized, it is clear they are over ranked currently. SD Force lack of strength kept both Sac United and Force from a -10 GD.
Group D: Well balanced group. CFA OC could have played up a bracket. Los Gatos I did well.

 

[Code]

Bracket 5 Groups:
Group A: Mustang SC Elite wasn't up to par in this group. Ironically, not in the wrong bracket though. The group has teams that could have been competitive in Bracket 1 (Legends RL, Fusion FC Elite), and Bracket 3 (Seattle United ECRL).
Group B: Ironically, well balanced group, as everyone in the group was seeded too low. South Valley Surf could have been competitive in Bracket 2, and probably Bracket 1.
Group C: Unbalanced group. El Paso Cosmos with a 14 GD, obviously seeded too low. GD Spread of 22.

 

[Code]

Bracket 6 Groups (why not):
This was cross group play: EC Surf E64 should have been up a bracket. Empire Surf Academy didn't do very well.

 

[Code]

It's funny that after all the analysis the big takeaway is that Surf gave themself a free ride to the finals.

They do this every year + at multiple age groups. Most of the Surf players play futsal at 619 + other futsal clubs in town stopped playing in the 619 league because of all the ridiculous manipulations that always pumped up 619 teams to the top.

Looking at the data something else that stood out to me is that several ECRL, DPL, etc (not GA or ECNL) teams were seeded down when according to your data should have been playing up a level. When players + parents see this happening + realize that it doesn't matter how well they play they'll never get to play against the the top teams they say screw it + try to get on a top ECNL or GA team.

Yes, pretty much. But pointing it out clearly is one of the few things we can do about it, besides complaining on the sideline. It does have a cascade effect through all the brackets though, so not just a negative effect for the teams in their Groups. Each bracket gets more and more unbalanced and wonky, because of what they do.

 

[Code]

Was Koge using a small roster? It seems like many of the top club teams roster more than 18 for big tournaments and have to limit themselves to 18 to suit up for each game. (Surf Cup allows 26 to be rostered for the weekend.) How many injuries did they have to decide to pull out?

Did Placer United pull out, too? (Do you know why?)

Seattle U finished 3rd in that bracket. Talk about an easy path to the championship. +15 GD in bracket play and then playing a team in the semis that lost 2 and won 1. None of Surf’s games until the final seem like a good use of anyone’s time.

My predictions were pretty poor. I didn't look at the groups, just the brackets. Soooo, I predicted two teams from the same group would go to semis, which was never going to happen. The bracket seeding analysis wasn't too far off. A few surprises, but overall, the mis-seeded teams performed as expected in the brackets.

 

[Keeperkat]

Yes, pretty much. But pointing it out clearly is one of the few things we can do about it, besides complaining on the sideline. It does have a cascade effect through all the brackets though, so not just a negative effect for the teams in their Groups. Each bracket gets more and more unbalanced and wonky, because of what they do.

I appreciate your deep dive into this. My daughter has a friend on one of the teams you noted as 3 brackets too low and it made no sense to me. While several teams seeding appeared strange to me in other age groups, her seeding appeared to be the worst. I was thinking it was either an honest mistake, a handshake deal of some sort, or someone had bribery pictures of the person responsible for seeding. . At this point in club soccer nothing would surprise me.