So with all the conferences done and dusted, the teams are now set for the year end NCAA National Team Championships. It is a 64 team draw, the first 2 rounds taking place at sites around the country on 12-13 May before the 'Sweet 16' meet up in Georgia for the remainder of the event. 31 of the teams are there by virtue of being conference champions. The rest of the places are filled by the Ivy League school which finished at the top after their regular season (they don't have a knock out championship), the host school (Georgia) if they don't make it any other way, and NCAA 'at large' selections (usually from the 5 power conferences where the losing teams could be expected to wipe the floor with some of the smaller conference champions...)
So teams with Brits in
Women:
Conference Champions
William & Mary - Cecily Wuenscher
Long Island-Brooklyn - Jennifer Gogova
Furman - Katty Weymouth, Hannah Ferrett
Stanford - Emily Arbuthnott
Massachussetts - Anna Woosley
Texas Tech - Sabrina Federici
DePaul - Flo Abbot
Vanderbilt - Georgina Sellyn, Emily Smith
At Large Selections
Baylor - Jazzi Plews (went in January but hasn't made the team yet so probably won't play)
Duke - Rebecca Smaller
Auburn - Georgie Axon, Alannah Griffin
South Carolina - Brigit Folland
Men:
Conference Champions
Alabama State - Takura Mlambo
Rice - Jamie Malik, Tommy Bennet
Georgia State - Jack MacFarlane
Denver - Alex Gasson
San Diego - Josh Page
Texas Christian - Cameron Norrie (and Alistair Gray but he hasn't made the team yet)
Drake - Vinny Gillespie, Ben Stride, Calum MacGeoch, Tom Hands, Ben Clark, Barnaby Thorold, Ben Wood
North Carolina-Wilmington - Michael Morphy
At Large Selections
Michigan - Jathan Malik
South Carolina - Paul Jubb
Memphis - Shakheel Manji, Ryan Peniston, Matt Story, Andrew Watson
Wisconsin - Josef Dodridge
Washington - Piers Foley
Cornell - Rohan Sikka
Oklahoma State - Julian Cash
Southern Methodist - Samm Butler
-- Edited by The Optimist on Wednesday 3rd of May 2017 10:11:20 AM
The NCAA must have some bizarre ritual for their at large selection process based on choosing institutions from the state of origin of their coffee vendor that morning beginning with W.
Otherwise I cannot understand how Washington (12-11) got selected when the team that beat them in the first round of the PAC 12 tournament Utah who have a better 17-10 record did not.
I always thought that they filled the at large places initially by pulling in the highest ranked teams not to have qualified from conference champs, Ivy League top team and host team and only once they'd used up all the ranked teams did they go to something random like coffee suppliers! I can't find anything on their website to back me up on this but it fits in this case as Wasnington are ranked and Utah is not. Bet Utah is feeling hard done by though. Bit like Harvard....thought they'd won the Ivy League then there was some weird count-back procedure which gave the NCAA place to Columbia instead and then Cornell got the at large place as they are ranked and Harvard is not.
Feel very sorry for Utah, beaten Washington twice, hammered Denver twice only really last in PAC 12 and then not to Arizona or Washington and to Ohio State, the other 3 losses very close 3-4 affairs. Washington also interesting beaten by the British boys at Drake 4-3
Harvard wasn't the sole winner of the Ivy League. It was a three-way tie with Columbia and Cornell, and the highest-ranked team made it in, which wound up being Columbia: www.gocolumbialions.com/ViewArticle.dbml
I tend to look twice at the schools which are both very strong academically and consistently strong in tennis - hence had been looking at the Ivy League race, which was clearly going to be quite close between Columbia and Cornell.
-- Edited by Spectator on Wednesday 3rd of May 2017 05:15:07 PM
Ah...I saw somewhere some congratulations on Harvard winning - there's a Brit, Christopher Morrow on the team - and when they didn't show up in the draw I saw that Columbia had been substituted on 'count-back'. I hadn't realised that Columbia (and indeed Cornell) could also have been celebrating winning the league. They should just have a knock-out tournament like everyone else!!
Edit: actually your link suggests nothing like count-back.....simply the highest ranked of the three getting the automatic place.
-- Edited by The Optimist on Wednesday 3rd of May 2017 06:04:55 PM
I tend to look twice at the schools which are both very strong academically and consistently strong in tennis - hence had been looking at the Ivy League race, which was clearly going to be quite close between Columbia and Cornell.
-- Edited by Spectator on Wednesday 3rd of May 2017 05:15:07 PM
So that would be Cal, Stanford, Universoity of Texas, UCLA, Vanderbiljt, Rice, Northwestern, Florida, Duke and Cal Poly then. Where the degree of academic excellence is matched by the althletic excellence.
I think Arizona States varsity team (and they may well get the chance as due to add a men's tennis team this year!!) would pick off the Ivy league admittedly there are one or two players across the whole league who are decent. Just because schools aren't in the North East it doesn't mean they aren't academically better, equal or close and on top of that vastly superior in terms of their athletic teams. They recruit to win the NCAA not slip in to the tournament through the back door.
Not meaning to be too aggressive here but if you look at the above institutions they have to name a few minor achievements split the atom (Cal), cured a couple of cancers, continue to lead the world of Oncology in many fields (Texas) and developed the home computer, most powerful search engine in the world, pioneered cell sorting, and all sorts of nonsense related to particle physics as a result of playing with one of only two linear accelerators world wide (Stanford)....... what is very interesting is that the UK to a certain extent delivered a lot of the intellectual property that facilitate many of these break throughs
-- Edited by Oakland2002 on Thursday 4th of May 2017 05:39:04 AM
Indeed, Oakland, there are many universities that are centres of excellence. And those like you who have followed this thread for some time will be aware that I have commented on players from Stanford, Texas, Northwestern, (and others). And, for what it's worth, in the UK, it's why I also follow the university tennis here, though with the exception of Colin Fleming and Mark Whitehouse, that rarely leads to following someone on the professional tour. But the question under discussion in this instance happened to be the Ivy League title, hence my failure to mention any others.
-- Edited by Spectator on Thursday 4th of May 2017 05:31:41 AM
Fair point you have mentioned other institutions. I do think the Ivy League gets many more mentions than it deserves, honestly in the US from a sporting perspective it might just as well not exist. You get the occasional Jeremy Linn moment and that's it.
The selections are out for the individual singles and doubles NCAA year end championships which follow on from the team event on 24-29 May. The highest ranked player from each individual conference (assuming they actually have any ranked players) gets in as an automatic selection. The rest of the slots ('At Large' selections) are filled going down the rankings pulling in any which have not been the automatic selection.
Women
No singles selections
Dubs
Automatic:
Emily Smith - Vanderbilt
At Large:
Sabrina Federici - Texas Tech
Emily Arbuthnott - Stanford
Men
Singles
Automatic:
Jack Findel-Hawkins - North Florida
Cameron Norrie - Texas Christian
At Large:
Julian Cash- Oklahoma State
Alternate #8: Jathan Malik - Michigan
Dubs
Automatic:
Jack Findel-Hawkins - North Florida
Tommy Bennett - Rice
Julian Cash - Oklahoma State
Alternate #1: Jathan Malik - Michigan
-- Edited by The Optimist on Thursday 4th of May 2017 09:19:51 AM
"O" Do you understand what the averages are by which the players are ranked.
There are massive drop offs in the top 10 ie.Norrie 69.21 andTorpegaard 67.4 to Borges at 57.98 and the again
Borge to Chrysochos 53.93
Redlicki at 10 being 40.94.
Once you get past 20 it really flattens out. I presume they have all been beating each other fairly regularly
Rybakov at 20, 26.20.
Andrew Harris at 30 21.0