|2010 NESCAC Volleyball
|Hosted by Amherst
|Friday, Nov. 5
||Saturday, Nov. 6
||Sunday, Nov. 7
|at No. 1 AMH 3, No. 8 WES 1
||No. 4 TUF 3, at No. 1 AMH 0
||No. 2 MID 3, vs. No. 4 TUF 1
|No. 2 MID 3, vs. No. 7 TRI 0
||No. 2 MID 3, vs. No. 6 WIL 0
|No. 6 WIL 3, vs. No. 3 BOW 0
|No. 4 TUF 3, vs. No. 5 CONN 0
Middlebury Wins First NESCAC Volleyball Title Since 1998
Courtesy Amherst Sports Information
AMHERST, Mass. – Second-seeded Middlebury won its third NESCAC Championship in program history with a 3-1 (25-22, 21-25, 25-21, 26-24) victory against fourth-seeded Tufts on Sunday at Amherst’s LeFrak Gymnasium. The Panthers moved to 24-5 with the win and earn an automatic bid to the upcoming NCAA Tournament, while the Jumbos drop to 22-10 with the loss.
Tufts advanced to the conference championship for the second straight season with wins over Connecticut College and the hosts from Amherst, while Middlebury earned a spot in the final for the first time since 1998 with wins over Trinity and Williams.
The Jumbos jumped out to an early lead, taking a 5-0 advantage to start the first set. After a timeout from Middlebury, the Panthers rallied to tie the score at 12-12. With the momentum in Middlebury's favor, Jane Handel (Evanston, Ill.) put away a kill to open up a 15-12 lead for the Panthers. Middlebury never trailed again in the first set, winning 25-22 on another Handel kill.
The second set started with the two sides splitting the first 10 points. Tufts mounted a four point scoring run capped by a block of Middlebury's Elissa Goeke (Chevy Chase, Md.) by Lexi Nicholas (San Diego, Calif.) and Nancy Shrodes (Manhattan Beach, Calif.). The Jumbos held off a comeback effort in the second from Middlebury, winning 25-21 to tie the set score at 1-1.
In the third frame, Tufts held a lead as late as 14-12, but the Panthers turned the tables for an 18-16 lead. Middlebury held its advantage at 23-20, before closing out the frame 25-22 to move within a set of the championship.
Tufts was the first to 10 points in the fourth and final frame, but a Julia Gibbs (Houston, Texas) kill tied the score 10-10. Tufts pulled away for a 21-17 lead, and looked as though it would tie the match back up. Middlebury was resilient though, taking a 24-23 lead after a handful of long rallies late. Tufts responded with a kill from Caitlin Updike (Manhattan Beach, Calif.) to tie the score 24-24. After a Handel kill set up match point for Middlebury, a Tufts player was called for touching the net on a hitting attempt, giving the Panthers the title.
Updike led all players with 25 kills in the match for Tufts. Shrodes and Cara Spieler (Santa Barbara, Calif.) combined for 20 kills for the Jumbos as well. Kendall Lord (La Jolla, Calif.) had 55 assists for Tufts, while Spieler led five Jumbos in double-digits in digs with 29.
Middlebury was led by 17 kills from Megan Jarchow (Cos Cob, Conn.) and 13 kills from Handel. Caitlin Barrett (Medfield, Mass.) had 47 digs for the Panthers, while Lauren Barrett (Medfield, Mass.) had 44 assists. Jarchow had 28 digs in the win, while Gibbs had 21 digs and 11 kills on the day.
2010 NESCAC VOLLEYBALL CHAMPIONSHIP
Quarterfinals - Friday, November 5 at Amherst
at No. 1 Amherst 3, No. 8 Wesleyan 1
No. 2 Middlebury 3, No. 7 Trinity 0
No. 6 Williams 3, vs. No. 3 Bowdoin 0
No. 4 Tufts 3, vs. No. 5 Connecticut College 0
Championship - Sunday, November 7 at Amherst
No. 2 Middlebury 3, vs. No. 4 Tufts 1
2010 NESCAC VOLLEYBALL CHAMPIONSHIP
Friday, November 5 - Sunday,
at No. 1 Seed
Friday, November 5
No. 8 at No. 1
No. 7 vs. No. 2
No. 6 vs. No. 3
No. 5 vs. No. 4
Semifinals - Saturday,
Winner No. 1/No. 8 vs. Winner No. 4/No. 5 - 1:00 p.m.
Winner No. 2/No. 7 vs. Winner No. 3/No. 6 - 3:30 p.m.
Championship - Sunday,
Semifinal Winners - 12:00 p.m.
The top eight teams in the conference will qualify for the NESCAC Volleyball Championship beginning Friday, November 5 through Sunday, November 7. The tournament champion will receive an automatic bid to the NCAA Division III Championship.
Seeding will be based on final conference standings of round robin play. The highest seeded team will host the Championship.
Pairings will be announced Sunday, October 31.
Tie Breaking Procedures
Ties will be broken as follows:
Head-to-head result (if teams play each other more than once during the regular season, the game that appears on the league schedule will be the game that is counted).
If teams tied during the regular season, or there is a 3-way or more tie, the following tie breaking procedure will be used:
Best match record among tying teams, against one another (head-to-head).
Best set record among tying teams, against one another (head-to-head).
Point differential of matches between tied teams (points scored-points scored against).
Comparison of results of conference games played against top 4 teams (including all teams at the 4th spot).
Comparison of results of conference games played against top 8 teams (including all teams at the 8th spot).
Comparison of results of conference games played against conference teams in rank order. Comparisons shall be made one team at a time starting with the highest ranked team.
If the tie remains after comparing results against the highest ranked team, the results against the next team in rank order shall be used. This process is continued until a winner is determined.
Coin flip (or similar random action involving all tied teams).
Note: In case of ties among three or more schools, the criteria above will be applied in order until a team is (or teams are) separated. At that point, the process begins anew (returning to the first criteria) with the remaining teams. The process is continued until the tie is eventually broken. In cases where only a random action will break the tie of three or more teams, the random action will be applied to all teams involved in the tie. For example, if three teams are tied and only a random action (pulling names out of a hat) will break the tie, each name will be pulled and seeded in order of being pulled. Also, in the event that there are two (or more) groups of teams tied at different spots in the standings and the only criteria left that can be used to break those ties is a coin flip/random action, the coin flip/random action used to break the tie of one group (to put teams in rank order) will not affect the tie breaking procedures of the other group(s) of tied teams.