ESPN SoccerNet Article

[UAZipster0305]

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/columns/story...caa&cc=5901Stanford vs. No. 1 AkronThe Zips shut out South Florida 2-0 to easily advance in their quest for a national championship. Now a perfect 21-0, Akron is focused on continuing its march toward solidifying its place in college soccer history. Stanford (12-5-2) has turned around its program at almost warp speed. A year ago, the Cardinal went 4-11-3. Now they're in the Sweet Sixteen. Common sense dictates that Stanford's season ends here, but logic doesn't dictate game outcomes. "...logic doesn't dictate game outcomes..."...but the AK-Rowdies do. That Stanford goalie has never experienced anything like this. Best home field advantage in college soccer plus cold weather.Zips 3-0!

[meatwad]

I can't even figure out what she is saying here...."The first two rounds of the NCAA tournament weren't exactly marked by a rash of upsets -- eight seeded teams remain and no team seeded worse than 10th advanced, so none of the opening results were jaw-dropping."What does she mean no team seeded worse than 10th advanced? Drake is unseeded, Stanford is unseeded, Indiana is unseeded, Duke is unseeded, UCSB is unseeded, and Portland is unseeded. They are all by definition worse than the 10 seed. This woman is absolutely clueless.

[zen]

I can't even figure out what she is saying here...."The first two rounds of the NCAA tournament weren't exactly marked by a rash of upsets -- eight seeded teams remain and no team seeded worse than 10th advanced, so none of the opening results were jaw-dropping."What does she mean no team seeded worse than 10th advanced? Drake is unseeded, Stanford is unseeded, Indiana is unseeded, Duke is unseeded, UCSB is unseeded, and Portland is unseeded. They are all by definition worse than the 10 seed. This woman is absolutely clueless.

How many sports articles have you read in your time?There is almost always a sense of catering to the hopes of both sides in any article written before a game or match, even if it demonstrates a disconnect with reality. This is just how they do it. ESPN isn't in the business of slamming Stanford. The article is a mere hype piece. It is to be expected.You'll find this is the rule, while there may be exceptions, writers never want to be the one who dogged a bad team who ended up winning, and their publishers never want to receive hate mail for disrespecting a sports organization too highly.

[UAZipster0305]

I can't even figure out what she is saying here...."The first two rounds of the NCAA tournament weren't exactly marked by a rash of upsets -- eight seeded teams remain and no team seeded worse than 10th advanced, so none of the opening results were jaw-dropping."What does she mean no team seeded worse than 10th advanced? Drake is unseeded, Stanford is unseeded, Indiana is unseeded, Duke is unseeded, UCSB is unseeded, and Portland is unseeded. They are all by definition worse than the 10 seed. This woman is absolutely clueless.

How many sports articles have you read in your time?There is almost always a sense of catering to the hopes of both sides in any article written before a game or match, even if it demonstrates a disconnect with reality. This is just how they do it. ESPN isn't in the business of slamming Stanford. The article is a mere hype piece. It is to be expected.

Then consider me hyped!