Strength of Leagues

With the MIAA tournament starting this w/e, there is always talk of which league is the best and strong and who is weak. Regarding the North, historically they say the Middlesex League is always on top. That being said, how are those teams from the Middlesex league in the tournament? How is Winchester, Belmont, Wakefield, Reading this year?

Re: Strength of Leagues

Don't forget Lexington!

Re: Strength of Leagues

Don't forget Lexington!

They're one and done.

Re: Strength of Leagues

What is up with Belmont?

Re: Strength of Leagues

Its hard to really guage the strength of a league until well into the tourney but there have been some traditional patterns. In the E Mass North D1 you have not seen a team from the GBL, NEC or MVC do anything. Teams from those three leagues haven't won a game against teams from the Middlesex, Dual County, Cape Ann (Masco) or Bay State (Framingham) in many years. Unlikely to see any change in that pattern. In D2 North, The Middlesex and Northeastern Conferences have been traditionally strongest. Over the last ten years, Danvers (NEC) has been the most consistent tournament performer. However, Saugus and Swampscott have done pretty well. Belmont and Wakefield have made long runs and Reading has been solid for the Middlesex although I think you would have to go back a few years to see a D2 North champ from the Middlesex. North Andover, Fenwick and Arlington are the other teams that have fared well, but the rest of the DCL, Catholic Central and Cape Ann have struggled to get out of the early rounds. In D3 North it is all about the Cape Ann who should dominate again this year, although St. Mary's is good.

Re: Strength of Leagues

Talk is that the Middlesex league can only score on free kicks & corners and not on the run of play. Belmont scored 2 on corners but had nothing else during the game. can anyone confrim this?

Re: Strength of Leagues

Talk is that the Middlesex league can only score on free kicks & corners and not on the run of play. Belmont scored 2 on corners but had nothing else during the game. can anyone confrim this?

It's true and it is the most amazing phenomena.

I saw an EPL game last weekend where the only score was off a free kick, how bizarre is that?

Re: Strength of Leagues

Talk is that the Middlesex league can only score on free kicks & corners and not on the run of play. Belmont scored 2 on corners but had nothing else during the game. can anyone confrim this?

It's true and it is the most amazing phenomena.

I saw an EPL game last weekend where the only score was off a free kick, how bizarre is that?

I've seen both Belmont and Danvers twice this season. Danvers is a possession oreinted team with lots of speed. They are very young and lost most everything from the team that beat Belmont in last year's regional semi-finals. Belmont plays a more direct style, is agressive through the middle and defense and does depend more on scoring off of set plays. I would say that Belmont is representative of the typical play at the top of the Middlesex. Danvers destroyed their competition in the Northeastern by playing more like a club side. However, the NEC is very weak and Danvers lone loss came against non-leage Fenwick. Fenwick plays a possession style and was beaten 3-1 by Belmont in the first round. Two things to consider, Danvers hasn't played for at least a week and that can spell troubel for a team with little tournament experience. However, three of Belmont's four losses came on the road and on grass. Should be a great game.

Re: Strength of Leagues

Talk is that the Middlesex league can only score on free kicks & corners and not on the run of play. Belmont scored 2 on corners but had nothing else during the game. can anyone confrim this?

It's true and it is the most amazing phenomena.

I saw an EPL game last weekend where the only score was off a free kick, how bizarre is that?

I've seen both Belmont and Danvers twice this season. Danvers is a possession oreinted team with lots of speed. They are very young and lost most everything from the team that beat Belmont in last year's regional semi-finals. Belmont plays a more direct style, is agressive through the middle and defense and does depend more on scoring off of set plays. I would say that Belmont is representative of the typical play at the top of the Middlesex. Danvers destroyed their competition in the Northeastern by playing more like a club side. However, the NEC is very weak and Danvers lone loss came against non-leage Fenwick. Fenwick plays a possession style and was beaten 3-1 by Belmont in the first round. Two things to consider, Danvers hasn't played for at least a week and that can spell troubel for a team with little tournament experience. However, three of Belmont's four losses came on the road and on grass. Should be a great game.

It can't help Danvers' confidence that their loss to Fenwick came in the last regular game of the season, 3-1. Belmont is big and aggressive through the middle and likes to have numbers up the whole game. And yes, they are particularly effective at forcing and scoring off corner kicks. Danvers has the speed and scoring talent to make Belmont pay for its overcommitment, though. Should be a great game.

Re: Strength of Leagues

In another thread a poster mentioned the opinion that in the tourney younger players can tend to play tight. I have found the opposite to be true. Younger players tend to be loose but willing to take chances. That can bring positive results but also result in the type of mistakes that really cost a team. In the tournament the margins are so much smaller. Most later round games (after the prelims and first round) are low scoring and close. Its very difficult for young HS possession teams to avoid mistakes that will result in offensive chances and corners. The direct, territorial or kick and run style (what ever you want to call it) tends to stagnate a game in the middle third but avoids giving up those dangerous offensive threats. A look at Danvers' results shows a team that scored about 90 goals in 18 games. Thats a lot of offense. But they gave up more than 2 on a couple of occassions and that can mean big trouble in the tournament. Same can be said about W/H. In the tournament you win with defense and timely scoring, regardless of the conference.

Re: Strength of Leagues

I see Belmont upset Danvers 2-1. Can anyone comment on the game? How did Belmont score -- off set plays?

Re: Strength of Leagues

I see Belmont upset Danvers 2-1. Can anyone comment on the game? How did Belmont score -- off set plays?

Belmont scored the game winner in the 69th minute on a corner kick. Very good on set plays - lots of height.

Re: Strength of Leagues

I see Belmont upset Danvers 2-1. Can anyone comment on the game? How did Belmont score -- off set plays?

Good game. Direct style won over possesion style. Danvers controlled the first 15 minutes of game with possesion, passing and speed but couldn't crack the Belmont defense. Belmont got stronger and stronger as the game progressed. The ball was in the Danvers end for most of the second half. Belmont got the game winner on a corner kick with 11 minutes remaining. Very strong on corners.

Danvers was playing without their starting keeper and marking back. They were very young with only 3 seniors, but talented. Not enough experience to do well in the tournament though.

Belmont team is composed mostly of seniors and juniors. They have a lot of size and speed and play very physical. Experienced. Lost to Danvers in OT in round 3 last year.

Middlesex has been dominant so far. 4 out of 5 teams have advanced to round 3 - Wakefield, Belmont and Reading in Div. 2 and Winchester from Div. 1. Lexington would have made it a perfect 5 for 5 if they had upset A.B. in overtime.