NCAA Division I Fields Announced; Pick the Champions and Win a TopSpin 4 Video Game
The Division I NCAA team championship fields for the women and men were announced a couple of hours ago, and before I get to the selections, I want to compliment the NCAA on the show, which was streamed on their website. It was a big improvement over past years, when the announcement has been telecast on ESPNews in what can only be described as a haphazard fashion. Today's show was easy to follow, the graphics were clear and easy to understand, and although there wasn't a any informed commentary, the host didn't make any egregious errors (he did refer to Stanford as the "top-ranked" team in the country, rather than the top-seeded, but I don't consider that anything but a technicality). The pace allowed time to write and post the occasional tweet, and I hope this is an innovation that sticks.
As for the selections, well, let's start with Stanford being given the top seed in the tournament. If any more evidence was necessary to show that the current ranking system needs to be fixed, this is it. The NCAA committee could not rely on the ITA rankings to seed the college sport's most significant event. Congratulations to the committee for recognizing that Stanford as the No. 2 seed just wouldn't be right and making the change.
The Top 16 seeds for the women are as follows, with their ranking in parentheses:
1. Stanford (2)
2. Florida (1)
3. Duke (3)
4. North Carolina (4)
5. Baylor (7)
6. UCLA (6)
7. Miami (5)
8. Georgia (8)
9. California (9)
10. Michigan (10)
11. Virginia (11)
12. Florida State (12)
13. Tennessee (13)
14. Georgia Tech (16)
15. Clemson (15)
16. Northwestern(14)
Of the top 16 seeds, only Florida State and Clemson will not be hosting regionals May 13th through May 15th. I do not know if both submitted bids to host, so I don't know the details behind No. 21 Arkansas and No. 31 Texas A&M receiving approval to host.
Florida State, who came within a point of winning the ACC women's conference championship over North Carolina, will be traveling to College Station, while Clemson goes to Arkansas. As for the shuffling of the rankings vis-a-vis the seedings, I thought head-to-head was responsible for some of the changes in the past, but now I don't think so, as Baylor lost to UCLA this year and jumped over them to the No. 5 seeding. It may be related to the geographical restraints that seek to keep as many teams as possible in regions they can drive to, while still maintaining the integrity of the draw.
The first two rounds are usually pretty straightforward for the top 8 seeds, but there are opportunities for some of the 17-32 seeds to earn a trip to Palo Alto. Northwestern will have its hands full with 20th-ranked Notre Dame; the Fighting Irish took a 3-0 lead over the Wildcats in Evanston less than a month ago, before Northwestern stormed back, as they did at Michigan Sunday, to win 4-3. Vanderbilt, ranked 19th, could challenge Tennessee, Southern Cal(18) will have another crack at Cal, and Arizona State, ranked 17th, will challenge Georgia Tech in that regional.
The complete women's bracket is here.
The top 16 men's seeds, with ranking in parentheses.
1. Virginia (1)
2. Southern Cal (2)
3. Tennessee (3)
4. Ohio State (4)
5. Baylor (5)
6. Georgia (6)
7. Florida (8)
8. Stanford (7)
9. Texas A&M (9)
10. Kentucky (10)
11. Duke (12)
12. UCLA (11)
13. Texas (14)
14. California (15)
15. Georgia Tech (16)
16. North Carolina (18)
The two Top 16 seeds not hosting are Texas and North Carolina. Texas will go on the road to No. 20 Oklahoma, who for the second straight year has hosted a regional without being ranked in the Top 16. Last year it was 14th-ranked Texas Tech who had to travel to Norman (is there a pattern there?), and the Red Raiders lost to the Sooners after having beaten them three times during the season. North Carolina will go to Illinois, who at No. 17, is actually ranked one spot above them, but I have no clue to the thought process that went behind seeding North Carolina Top 16, but letting Illinois host. Nor do I know why Florida and Stanford switched places, although Florida does have a win over Stanford this year. Duke and UCLA's switch is not based on that, as they didn't play this year, so again, I don't know the reasoning.
Obviously the Illinois regional will one of the most competitive, with North Carolina and Illinois settling the question on the court. No. 29 Michigan has a split its two matches with Duke this year in Durham, losing 7-0 in January and winning 4-3 in late February. Minnesota(19) could challenge California in Berkeley, and Mississippi State(21) has a very good chance at Georgia Tech.
The complete men's bracket can be found here. The links to the lineups submitted can be found here.
The Tennis Recruiting Network is again hosting a roundtable, so I'll have more comments there next week, but I welcome your comments and predictions.
I'm excited to announce that this year I have received two copies, one XBox 360, the other Playstation3, of the TopSpin4 video game from 2K Sports, to use as a contest prize. The reader who picks the men's and women's champions and finalists this year will have his or her choice of the two formats, with the second place finisher receiving the other copy. The tiebreaker will be the score of the championship match. You may enter here in the comments, or via twitter. You need to use the name option when posting a comment here; for a twitter entry, use an @zootennis reply and the hashtag #topspin4. The contest will end at midnight EDT May 18th, 2011. I ask that you please refrain from entering more than once.
Those of you who do longer, more detailed predictions, which I love to read, will also be entered, but to be considered for the prize, make sure you give at least the men's and women's finalists and scores. For example:
Jupiter State over Mars U 4-2 and University of Saturn over Venus College 4-1.
It's the best time of year in college tennis, so bookmark this entry, check back to see what others think and join the fun.
50 comments:
It really doesn't make sense why Oklahoma is hosting since I'm sure Texas put in a bid to host. They will use the traveling excuse, but I find that lame when you look at how many other teams have to travel long distances and their ranking was clearly higher than Oklahoma.
The Illinois-UNC switch makes absolutely no sense. Why not just make the Illini the 16th seed?
I have three issues with first round matchups:
Wake Forest-VCU: the Demon Deacons by ranking are the worst team expected to make it to the second round, yet instead of playing a team their equal they get to play the second to last at-large team invited. That should be reserved for a team of North Carlina, Miss State, Auburn's caliber.
Notre Dame-ETSU: how on earth did Notre Dame, one of the lowest ranked teams expected to advance to the second round draw this team? ETSU is the highest ranked team that is BEHIND the last at-large team(Florida State). They should be playing a team either a 13-16 seed or one of the top non-seeded teams while ND should be playing Virginia Tech or the like.
Michigan-Maryland: the Terrapins should be playing a 13-16 seed or one of the highest non-seeded teams, not Michigan, a team barely favored to make the second round.
I know this seems like a long rant, but other than this I think the bracket looks well put together.
Possible upsets that jump out at me right away with teams making it to The Farm are:
Oklahoma over Texas: could definitely see this happen, especially with it being played in Norman.
Ole Miss over UCLA: I know UCLA never loses here, but it wouldnt shock me if the Rebels pulled the upset.
Louisville over Kentucky: this looks like the most likely upset in the second round. Teams used to play every year, but soon as Louisville got better than Kentucky after years of getting whipped the series suspiciously stopped. Cardinals have lost 11 matches, 7 of them were to the Top6 teams in the country(USC twice, Tenn, OSU, Bay, UGA twice), 9 against Top13(UCLA and Pepp added). This was a Top10-15 team returning every player, easily could see them make a run if they get hot.
I could see UNC-Ill and GT-Miss State going either way, but I dont think either are an upset.
UVA has a brutal draw, worst nightmare in quarterfinals with Stanford looming. I could see the Cardinal winning the doubles point, taking #1 & #2, then needing Clayton(huge regression throughout college), Lin(as talented as Jenkins his opponent), Hirshman(could grind it out) or Kandath to win to get the victory on their home court. From a matchup perspective I dont think they could have received a worse quarterfinal opponent. With that being said, they should probably still be considered the favorite.
I think Steve Johnson is the best player in college tennis right now. If the Trojans can win the doubles point they have a great shot to win any match. The top teams are all very close together. Here's what I see based on the draws before I know exactly what the lineups look like:
UVA 3-1
USC 5-1
Tenn 5-1
OSU 5-1
Fla 15-1
Stan 15-1
Bay 20-1
UGA 20-1
A&M 30-1
UCLA 40-1
Duke 50-1
UK 50-1
Tex 50-1
Lou 100-1
UNC 100-1
Cal 100-1
Ill 100-1
Okl 100-1
GT 100-1
Truly only think the Top4 teams have a shot at the title, but if some upsets happen I could see Florida or Stanford winning the title. Baylor and Georiga could make a wild run the finals, but ultimately cant see either of them winning it.
I'll say this much though, if a UVA-OSU and Tenn-USC Final Four happens, that will be a FANTASTIC day of tennis. So will the final, whoever were to make it.
One more thing, I'm not a fan of such a long layoff between the end of the regular season and tournament play. I know it's for finals, but for some its three weeks between matches.
Hope it's a great tournament!
p.s.-i just wrote more words in this post than the last nine months combined, haha
Some of my favorite random thoughts from the lineups...
- Illinois putting Hamui at #5 when he hasn't played a match below #4 yet this year, including 10 matches at #1 or #2
- Florida putting Slilam at #2 above Bangoura even though he hasn't played a match above #3 yet this year
- surprised that Georgia is going with Spencer at #1 over Garrapiz
- what is wrong with Joey Burkhardt (4-9 at #4 for UNC)?
- didn't realize that Evan King was 20-3 at #1 in dual match play...wow
- very surprised that Tucker put Rola at #1 over Buchanan
- will the bottom three of Tennessee hold up?
- can't believe that Junior Ore can't crack A&M's singles lineup
- didn't realize Frank Carleton went 4-15 for Wake...yikes
- tough call on Shabaz over Domijan
Should be fun.
@Brent:
Stanford's Burdette has been moved down to 4, after going 12-4 at No. 2.
Cal has put Davis at 6 after she went 6-2 at 4.
Brittany Sanders, with no dual match record, is No. 5 for Notre Dame
Gotta love Alabama. None of their top six have played in any other position all year.
I will go with the following in terms of predictions...
1 Virginia over Sacred Heart
Wake Forest over VCU
16 UNC over E.Kentucky
Illinois over Drake
8 Stanford over Army
Washington over Cal Poly
9 Texas A&M over Alcorn St.
Indiana over LSU
4 Ohio St. over Ball St.
Notre Dame over E.Tennessee St.
13 Texas over UMKC
Oklahoma over Tulsa
5 Baylor over A&M-Corp Christi
Texas Tech over Rice
12 UCLA over Binghamton
Ole Miss over UC Irvine
Michigan over Maryland
11 Duke over George Washington
Auburn over UNC Wilmington
6 Georgia over Samford
Minnesota over Fresno St.
14 Cal over Marist
Vanderbilt over Virginia Tech
3 Tennessee over Radford
Louisville over Cornell
10 Kentucky over Cleveland St.
Miami over Nebraska
7 Florida over S.Carolina St.
Mississippi St. over Florida St.
15 Georgia Tech over Middle Tenn St
San Diego over BYU
2 USC over Sacramento St.
ROUND OF 32
1 Virginia over Wake Forest
Illinois over 16 UNC
8 Stanford over Washington
9 Texas A&M over Indiana
4 Ohio St. over Notre Dame
13 Texas over Oklahoma
5 Baylor over Texas Tech
12 UCLA over Ole Miss
11 Duke over Michigan
6 Georgia over Auburn
14 Cal over Minnesota
3 Tennessee over Vanderbilt
10 Kentucky over Louisville
7 Florida over Miami
Miss St. over 15 Georgia Tech
2 USC over San Diego
ROUND OF 16
1 Virginia over Illinois
8 Stanford over 9 Texas A&M
4 Ohio St. over 13 Texas
12 UCLA over 5 Baylor
11 Duke over 6 Georgia
3 Tennessee over 14 Cal
7 Florida over 10 Kentucky
2 USC over Miss St.
QUARTERS
1 Virginia over 8 Stanford
12 UCLA over 4 Ohio St.
3 Tennessee over 11 Duke
2 USC over 7 Florida
SEMIS
1 Virginia over 12 UCLA
3 Tennessee over 2 USC
MEN'S FINALS
1 Virginia over 3 Tennessee 4-1
WOMEN'S FINALS
2 Florida over 1 Stanford 4-3
Illinois and Oklahoma were going to host, no matter what. They're testing out Illinois for 2013.
I believe Oklahoma is getting great consideration for a future finals site, with their new facility and proximity to a somewhat big city.
Oklahoma hosted last year. Illinois women hosted as a 3 seed, last year or the year before. That was before they picked Champaign as the finals site for 2013.
Some pretty blatant stacking going on. I wonder if/how many protests will be upheld...
Ohio St over USC 4-2 and Stanford over UF 42
Final Four
Virginia
Ohio St
Tennessee
Florida
Virginia over Tennessee 4-0
Colette, obviously there are some surprises with the line-up submissions (some of which have already been noted here). What is the protocol with challenging line-ups? I know coaches must do it fairly soon, but are the challenges and eventual rulings made public (i.e. will we know what team challenged a particular lineup and what the NCAA ruled?)?
USC over Virginia 4-3 . Fight On !
Three in a row for the Trojans !!
@josh
The timetable for challenges is here.
I don't think there is any public trail of challenges/appeals/overturns to follow. Comparing final lineups with those submitted would be the only way.
I don't think Ohio State will make it too far. Their coach has a tendency to come up with excuses for not playing tough matches. Either it's too windy, or too cold, or too early, or too late. What a whinner.
I called the ETSU upstet last year against Alabama I will go out on a limb again and predict a few that I think can happen.
VCU over Wake
LSU over Indiana
UC Irvine over Ole Miss
BYU over San Diego
UNC Wilmington over Auburn
Tulsa over Oklahoma
More great match ups are Cal Poly vs Washington especially outside.
Tulsa Can beat Oklahoma
Virginia Tech over Vanderbilt..
NCAA did a better job with brackets but should go in exact order following the ranking. The 17 should play the 46 and so in in that order.
The Baylor & UCLA women split. Baylor has a better record against top 16 than UCLA and both beat Miami. The other change from the rankings is 14 through 16 and head to supports the NCAA seeding.
Collette,
I can't view the lineups, it's requesting a use id and password. The link worked last night, so not sure what's going on. They wouldn't let me set up my own account either.
Thanks
@BBear
But at least Ty Tucker doesn't swear at the opposing team and have to sit out a match as punishment!!
UVA has this thing all wrapped up already!! Wouldn't be surprised if they took the individual titles as well! I believe they are the only unbeaten team this year.
I think the Final Four will be all chalk, but I wouldn't be surprised if Florida knocked off USC or Baylor took out OSU. Stanford also has a chance, being at home. The QF against UVA will be competitive (4-2 maybe), but Virginia's depth will be too much for them.
UVA-OSU (UVA wins 4-1)
USC-UT (UT wins 4-3)
In the final, UVA over UT 4-3 after UT takes the doubles point.
These top 4 teams are nothing short of awesome: UVA; USC; Tenn; and OSU. These 4 are in a class of their own and I can't see one of them not winning it all. I wouldn't be surprised to see all 4 make it to the semis easily.
Austin: Overall, I liked your analysis except I disagree with one thing. While Stanford will be tough, particularly on their home court, I think you've grossly overrated them. They have zero chance of beating UVA and will be very lucky to even get that far. They have Washington second round who they recently beat by only one point 4-3 so, even though the match was at UW, they were lucky to win that with a doubles point decided by a tie-breaker so they will be lucky to get through that match. Then I think Texas A&M is likely to beat them. Even if they somehow get to face UVA, they should get thrashed.
The obvious part of your UVA vs. Stanford analysis that I disagree with is that you think Stanford could win at Number 2. If this were the juniors two years ago then I would agree that Thatcher could beat just about anyone, but talk about serious regression, have you seen his record lately? He has no chance against Domijan or Shabaz who are arguably the best two players in the nation unless he totally "trees" and there is no evidence that this could happen.
By the way, what is it about the Stanford program since Gould retired that seems to destroy all these formely great players: Clayton, Bruch, Wire, Thatcher, Kandath, etc.? Klahn and Lin appear to be the exceptions as they have done great and seemed to have improved in college.
Men's Final 4
Virgina Tennessee
Oklahoma USC
Men's Championship
Oklahoma USC
Men's Champion
Oklahoma
Women's Final 4
Stanford Duke
Baylor Florida
Women's Championship
Stanford Florida
Women's Champion
Stanford
I second that 5.0 player about Stanford Program .
They need Change ASAP .......
FYI: Not a CHANCE against UVA .... if that even happens ...
Virginia 4-2 over USC
Calm down! Stanford is 8 in the country. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. The motivation has to come from the players to get better. You think McEnroe really listened to Gould's coaching. (or anybody!) But, he was hungry to get better and win! Maybe Clayton, Thatcher, etc are ok with playing college tennis and then stopping. Why does everyone need to want to be a pro??
Predictions: I'm going out on a limb. I got Georgia winning it for the first time outside of Athens. North Carolina women winning it. Both 4-3 in the finals.
Look for Kentucky to make a deep run thru N.C.A.A. Ky. played Ohio State,Tenn. and Texas(when ranked 5) to a 4-3 loss.Split matches with UGA and Florida. Heard it here first !!!!
Andrew...
OU as men's champions? Tap the breaks on the Sooner Schooner, my friend!
I'm going out on a limb myself . With the home court advantage , Clayton will step up and ending his college career with a National Championship !
Stanford 4-3 against Virginia .
....ummmmmmm, I've never heard of a team winning a national championship by only defeating their quarterfinal opponent. Stanford would meet Virginia in the quarterfinals not the finalfinals.
@wi tennis
Georgia won the 2008 title in Tulsa so, if you were thinking that was going to be extra motivation for them to win....
Yea, not-so-much.
Eric, Good call! I forgot. That was the first one. I remember watching that. Texas won the doubles and Georgia rolled in singles. I don't think it's necessarily extra motivation for Georgia. I was just trying to add some extra tidbits to sound smart. I guess that backfired! haha.
I do think Peter Smith is a great coach! I heard him speak at the coaches convention this year! Absolute Genius! They'll always have a shot to win! I just think Georgia will this year. I'm not a fan of them, though.
@ummmm
I meant Stanford 4-3 against Virginia in quarters , 4-3,against OSU and finally , 4-3 against USC in the finals, giving Clayton his long awaited National Championship . That's what I hope happens, when I stop day dreaming , but anything is possible , ha ha
Steve Johnson is the best player in the country . Peter Smith is the best coach in the country . Together, they will lead SC to their third title , and furthermore,Johnson will win his first NCAA title ending his spectacular career as a Trojan!
USC over UVA 4-2
Johnson over ? in 2 sets
@Eric I can agree with calling Johnson the best player in the country right now, but I'd definitely have to say Brian Boland is the best coach in all the land. Not Peter Smith.
I say usc beats the vols 4-3 in a semifinal nailbiter and then UVA bests usc 4-1 in the final.
Then I'd like to see a Johnson-Domijan singles final so we can finally see what Domijan is capable of. But there are no gaurantees in the singles touney.
wi tennis said...
"Calm down! Stanford is 8 in the country. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. The motivation has to come from the players to get better. You think McEnroe really listened to Gould's coaching. (or anybody!) But, he was hungry to get better and win! Maybe Clayton, Thatcher, etc are ok with playing college tennis and then stopping. Why does everyone need to want to be a pro??"
Wi-I agree with your point that the individual motivation of the player is certainly a factor with regard to a player's improvement in college, but one of my questions is why does it appear that a much larger percentage of Stanford players lose motivation after enrolling than at any other school? Part of a successful coach's job is to create an environment which enables the player to enjoy tennis and stay, if not become, motivated by inspiring them rather than killing the passion.
While they may be ranked 8th in the nation, with their great personnel and amazing recruiting classes they should be at least in the top 4. And, even assuming your premise that these players "don't want to be a pro" that shouldn't stop them from trying to be the best college player that they can be.
Finally, I found your "calm down" command to be annoying and innapropriate. I am perfectly calm and there was no evidence to the contrary. I have found that a lot of posters like to say things like "Calm down!" "Chill!" or "Relax!" as a way to reduce the credibility of other posters that they disagree with by implying that the other poster is just emotional and irrational, but usually there is no basis for such accusation.
5.0 Player,
I agree with your Thacher comment. If that kid went pro out of high school I think he wpuld be around 50-100 in the world right now...instead he's barely Rop50 in college.
Yeah, I agree with 5.0 about the "calm down" comment. It's usually completely uncalled for and a way of putting down other posters in an argument. We don't need that on here. When I first read it I honestly said out loud "What's with the 'calm down!'? That's stupid." (p.s. not calling YOU stupid)
And I'm having a hard time thinking of excuses for the detereoration of players at stanford without blaming the coach... Maybe the school is just so fun, it's hard to focus on tennis? ;)
@what's a wahoo,
Easy there, calling Boland the best coach on the country when he has never even made the finals of the NCAAs?! Certainly he is a great recruiter, but I'm not willing to put him up there until he wins the big one (no I'm not talking about national indoors). I think the best coach conversation has to start with Peter Smith and Manny Diaz. Both have multiple national championships to their credit. I think Boland is alone at the top of "best coach to never win it" though.
@Colette
Burdette has returned to #2 for Stanford. I assume the old lineup (with Burdette at #4) was challenged?
@gocard:
yes, it looks like Stanford is $300 poorer. It doesn't appear that any other of the possible challenges mentioned here were made and/or upheld.
Did i say Boland was the very best?? I might've gone a little overboard with that one. haha I forgot about Manny Diaz. I'd definitely give that honor to him. He's been great over the years.
But I'm not sold on Smith. I'm more impressed with Boland creating a championship contender from scratch than I am with Smith taking an already great team and winning.
@gocard how'd you know a challenge against them was upheld? Where can you see their updated lineup?
@what's a wahoo?
The lineups are available here
I think what you meant to say is that Peter Smith coached a storied program to two NCAA titles, not, "taking an already great team and winning". Because even though Peter took over in 2003, the year after Dick Leach won it in 2002, he rebuilt the team into Back2Back champions AFTER an abysmal 2006 where USC ended the season ranked #54!!! That wasn't just because he recruited well, it was hard work.
Besides that example of coaching, Peter made Fresno State into a contender from an anonymous and obscure program, and then followed that up with a five year stint at Pepperdine, where his teams went 118-31. He's won everywhere he's coached.
And....
It's not easier to coach at USC, with it's rich tradition of former Grand Slam champions winning 18 NCAA titles, because the pressure and expectations to win there are unlike anywhere else in the country, with the exception of Stanford. It does help to recruit, but only if the recruits are willing to except the same expectations and pressure as the coach.
But, I'll agree that Brian Boland has done an exemplary job of recruiting of the years, UVA has been the most dominant team for the last 5 years, and UVA continues to outdo themselves with a top to bottom line-up All-Star players, but he still has some work to do before he gets to the promised land that Peter has taken his minions to.... twice.
Ok... I never said Peter Smith was bad. He's a great coach! I understand that. All great coaches have their history that shows their brilliance early in their career and continue that brilliance. Smith is no different, he's done a great job and will continue to do so.
I'm still "more impressed" by Boland. After the next few years, the argument that he hasn't won the big team title yet might be worthless. And he's recruited and coached two top 75 pros in Vahaly and Devvarman. But Peter Smith IS a great coach. No doubt.
p.s. I'm not from uva, a uva fan, or in anyway associated with it. Just a big college tennis fan (that wants to know what a wahoo is...?).
@ what's a wahoo,
I think my response was from a viewpoint where it seemed like you were dismissing Peter's coaching ability altogether, when you said you weren't "sold" on him as a coach, and you weren't as impressed with him "already taking a great team and winning". It just seemed as if you had lofty standards to judge coaches and it made me wonder what more Peter had to do to "sell" you on his ability to make a player better, but I do appreciate you clarifying your point in your last post.
Let me just say that any storied sports program doesn't stay relevant because of it's previous results, it only helps to recruit the quality players that want to live up to the standard that has been previously set, while subjecting themselves to the mental stress of high expectations. It's like the disclaimer in a mutual fund prospectus; prior performance does not necessarily predict future results. (But we take it for granted that it should/could and always hope they do; it's human nature.)
As we all know, sometimes recruits don't achieve the same results that they had in juniors and/or they never reach their potential in college or pros; that's where coaching makes a difference, and Peter is that coach.
And.... as long as we're living in the future, where pre-destined results make present facts less meaningful, I'm calling Steve Johnson as a top 75 player and Robert Farah is already on his way.
@Eric
Yeah, sorry about that. I'm not the best with words when expressing my opinion. I didn't mean to imply he's not a phenomenal coach.
and I was definitely taking for granted the coach's importance in a programs current success. I was putting more weight on the prestige of a program relating to it's success than I should have been.
Farah's a special player. Got all the tools. I hope to see him make another jump in rankings soon enough.
Speaking of top 75 ATP rankings, how bout the fact that recent college guys Isner, Anderson & Devvarman are all currently in the top 75.
Stanford over Florida 4-3 for Women's and Virginia or USC for Men's 4-3.
I filled this out last week, but couldnt post it due to the website malfunctions. I was 28-4 first round and have 12 of the 16 teams in Palo Alto, my worst prediction performance ever. Granted three of the four of the ones I missed were upsets I predicted. I still have all eight Elite Eight teams alive though. Here you go:
First Round
UVA over Sacred Heart 4-0
Wake over VCU 4-1
UNC over EKU 4-0
Illinois over Drake 4-0
Stanford over Army 4-0
Wash over Cal Poly 4-1
A&M over Alcorn 4-0
IU over LSU 4-3
OSU over Ball St 4-0
ND over ETSU 4-1
Texas over UMKC 4-0
Oklahoma over Tulsa 4-2
Baylor over TAMU-CC 4-0
TTech over Rice 4-2
UCLA over Bing 4-0
Ole Miss over UCI 4-1
Mich over Mary 4-2
Duke over GWU 4-0
Auburn over UNCW 4-1
UGA over Samford 4-0
Minnesota over Fresno St 4-1
Cal over Marist 4-0
VTech over Vandy 4-3
Tenn over Radford 4-0
Louisville over Cornell 4-1
UK over Cleveland St 4-0
Miami over Nebraska 4-1
Florida over SCST 4-0
Miss State over Florida St 4-2
GTech over MTSU 4-1
BYU over USD 4-2
USC over Sac St 4-0
Second Round
UVA over Wake 4-0
UNC over Illinois 4-3
Stanford over Wash 4-1
A&M over IU 4-1
OSU over ND 4-0
Texas over Oklahoma 4-2
Baylor over TTech 4-1
UCLA over Ole Miss 4-3
Duke over Mich 4-1
UGA over Aub 4-1
Cal over Minn 4-3
Tenn over VTech 4-0
Louisville over UK 4-3
Florida over Miami 4-1
Miss State over GTech 4-3
USC over BYU 4-0
Round of 16
UVA over UNC 4-1
Stanford over A&M 4-3
OSU over Texas 4-1
UCLA over Baylor 4-3
UGA over Duke 4-3
Tenn over Cal 4-1
Florida over Louisville 4-3
USC over Miss State 4-0
Quarterfinals
UVA over Stanford 4-2
OSU over UCLA 4-1
Tenn over UGA 4-2
USC over Florida 4-2
Final Four
UVA over OSU 4-2
USC over Tenn 4-3
Championship
UVA over USC 4-3
Semis
UVa over OSU
SC over Tennessee
Finals
UVa over SC 4-2
Men's: Virginia over USC 4-2
Women's: Stanford over Florida 4-3
Women: Stanford over Duke 4-1
Men: UVA over USC 4-3
Brent and Socal Fan:
Please post a comment here with your contact info so I can send you your prizes. I won't post it of course.
Post a Comment