1 - BC -- Didn't do anything to lose #1 spot with impressive road wins over #12 Navy (18-5) and #5 Northwestern (22-17)
2 - UNC--Tough 2nd half come from behind win over #5/6/7 Virginia
3 - UMD -- Could easily have lost to SU, (and UNC for that matter [both at home]) so I'm switching up #2 and #3
4 - SU -- Did nothing to lose #4 spot as they played the Terps very tough in Maryland. Could have won with a little luck and the correct call on a critical shooting space violation in OT. https://youtu.be/gJ7WiXE9NS4
5 - UVA -- Went into North Carolina and lost a 1 goal affair to the Tar heels. They had a 1 goal lead with 7 minutes left but let it slip away.
6 - Princeton -- Rallied vs #17/18 Stony Brook by scoring 5 unanswered goals with 10 minutes left.
7 - Penn -- Beat Drexel and #19/20/21 Georgetown to remain in top 10
8 - JMU -- Beat #19 Penn St and Rutgers
9 - Michigan -- Beat Cincinnati, Kent St and #25 Towson to crack my top 10
10 - NU -- Lost to #1 BC
TOPTM?
-
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: TOPTM?
I do think you've got Michigan too high, which I guess is a polite way of saying "let's see how they do against better competition." Michigan's win over Denver was, I agree, a good win against a good team. Northwestern, which you have behind Michigan, has lost to BC, UNC and Syracuse -- the Nos. 1, 2 and 4 teams in the country methinks. NU beat Dartmouth 21-15, a team Michigan beat 11-10 in OT. So I'd certainly flip the two of them.
Re: TOPTM?
Haha – you caught me. Yes, you’re right--this is more of a what-I-would-like-it-to-be ranking. My attempt at a top 10--with a personal twist.seacoaster wrote: ↑Mon Mar 11, 2019 11:42 am I do think you've got Michigan too high, which I guess is a polite way of saying "let's see how they do against better competition." Michigan's win over Denver was, I agree, a good win against a good team. Northwestern, which you have behind Michigan, has lost to BC, UNC and Syracuse -- the Nos. 1, 2 and 4 teams in the country methinks. NU beat Dartmouth 21-15, a team Michigan beat 11-10 in OT. So I'd certainly flip the two of them.
(You got to get up pretty early in the morning to put one over on these eagle eye members!)
-
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: TOPTM?
My recollection is that the Old TOPTM was really good at culling out personal favorites -- except maybe for TL, who constitutionally cannot abide anyone or any team being better than his beloved Terps. It was what made Mondays and Tuesdays so interesting on the old LP board; the pollsters were a bunch of people who were really knowledgeable about the game and had a lot of good insights into the teams and coaches. I learned a lot from those folks. And a bit about tailgating and beer.
-
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: TOPTM?
Fun game for someone with no skin in the game last night in Charlottesville. Loyola played a really nice first half, faceguarding UVA's No. 6 to the point of deep frustration. Loyola led at one point 8-4 and 9-6... and the game ended 12-9 UVA. For some reason, Loyola stopped faceguarding No. 6 in the second half, and she scored three times. I think the good Dr. was in attendance, and maybe he can give us some insight.
Re: TOPTM?
And the Hounds got to 9 goals at the 21 minute mark of the second and then could not score for the last 21 minutes. During that time they also completely lost their advantage at the draw circle and UVA went on something like an 8-1 run to close out the game. It seemed to all fall apart for them, except that they did have a few decent looks at the goal during that period. Their shots just seemed to lack the same conviction that they had earlier in the game when they seemed to be trying to not only score but put a hole in the net. I'm sure the Loyola team is extremely frustrated given that they really seemed in control for most of the game and then suddenly everything they had been doing well just seemed to no longer work. I've been skeptical of UVA all season but I am running out of reasons to be skeptical. The trio of Jackson, Mueller and Shoemaker are quite a force with some other strong contributors around them, and when they clamp down defensively they can play with anyone.seacoaster wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:17 am Fun game for someone with no skin in the game last night in Charlottesville. Loyola played a really nice first half, faceguarding UVA's No. 6 to the point of deep frustration. Loyola led at one point 8-4 and 9-6... and the game ended 12-9 UVA. For some reason, Loyola stopped faceguarding No. 6 in the second half, and she scored three times. I think the good Dr. was in attendance, and maybe he can give us some insight.
[EDIT]: UVA is really lucky to have Zealand Shannon calling games. He's a better play-by-play announcer than many of the full-time ESPN announcers twice his age. The kid is a natural.
Last edited by Badlands on Thu Mar 14, 2019 2:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2019 11:52 am
Re: TOPTM?
Potentially unpopular comment but I am already getting tired of girls falling down all over the place. It is making the game hard to watch. I am not saying they are all dives, and certainly you could argue that the game is much more physical now, but through the power of slow motion replay you can see it is clearly "the strategy". We need more non-calls to clean that crap up or, reluctantly suggested as a long time supporter of the traditions of the beautiful game, put them in pads and end the nonsense.
-
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:30 am
Re: TOPTM?
I watched this one as well. The tale of 2 halves. Loyola was in control of the draw cirlce in first half but couldn't find the ball in the second. The game is such a game of momentum and big plays and moments. I felt like a few of the goals early in the second half were soft. The crease roll non-dom shot #6 and when she forced thru the double team and scored were big. I hate to question calls because I would never want to ref this game but the blind screen on the Loyola girl was questionable and the yellow card at the 12 was extreme-I see 12 y\o check more aggresively. The dives are starting to look like european soccer. None of this was a reason not to get the DC and good teams find a way to win.
Re: TOPTM?
Well, not so fun for one who may have skin in the game....I have to take some time off from commenting. That game has broken (at least temporarily) my love and interest in WLAX.seacoaster wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:17 am Fun game for someone with no skin in the game last night in Charlottesville.....I think the good Dr. was in attendance, and maybe he can give us some insight.
Re: TOPTM?
I don't think it's necessarily an unpopular comment. I think that the lack of enforcement of stick-to-body pushing is more of a problem than players flopping, and I bet that if refs enforced the cross checking rule you'd see fewer players flopping to draw to draw a foul call. Fewer players would be cross checking and when they did, they'd be penalized.shenandoahslammer wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:09 am Potentially unpopular comment but I am already getting tired of girls falling down all over the place. It is making the game hard to watch. I am not saying they are all dives, and certainly you could argue that the game is much more physical now, but through the power of slow motion replay you can see it is clearly "the strategy". We need more non-calls to clean that dump up or, reluctantly suggested as a long time supporter of the traditions of the beautiful game, put them in pads and end the nonsense.
As for the players who routinely grab at their heads to draw to draw a card when they know the defenders stick didn't contact their heads, that's really getting on my nerves especially when replay clearly shows that the stick didn't make contact. Unfortunately it's tough for refs to determine for sure that the stick didn't hit the head and the player is faking so it seems there isn't much that can be done about it. Maybe when replay clearly shows the player is faking, people with nothing better to do who like to visit lacrosse message boards should call out the shenanigans.
Re: TOPTM?
I think a player who fakes she was hit in the head with a stick should get one warning ("do it again and you get a card") and then, if she does it again, a card for unsportsmanlike conduct. The player is not only trying to draw a foul when she wasn't fouled, but she is trying to get her opponent kicked out of the game for two minutes. Bad bad bad.Badlands wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:57 pm As for the players who routinely grab at their heads to draw to draw a card when they know the defenders stick didn't contact their heads, that's really getting on my nerves especially when replay clearly shows that the stick didn't make contact. Unfortunately it's tough for refs to determine for sure that the stick didn't hit the head and the player is faking so it seems there isn't much that can be done about it. Maybe when replay clearly shows the player is faking, people with nothing better to do who like to visit lacrosse message boards should call out the shenanigans.
Re: TOPTM?
Completely agree.njbill wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:11 pm I think a player who fakes she was hit in the head with a stick should get one warning ("do it again and you get a card") and then, if she does it again, a card for unsportsmanlike conduct. The player is not only trying to draw a foul when she wasn't fouled, but she is trying to get her opponent kicked out of the game for two minutes. Bad bad bad.
Re: TOPTM?
Had to break my self-imposed hiatus, as this is one of my pet-peeves.......I would say, don't even give a warning. You get caught faking a head shot, you get a yellow card. That would cut down the excessive bobbing alot...njbill wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:11 pmI think a player who fakes she was hit in the head with a stick should get one warning ("do it again and you get a card") and then, if she does it again, a card for unsportsmanlike conduct. The player is not only trying to draw a foul when she wasn't fouled, but she is trying to get her opponent kicked out of the game for two minutes. Bad bad bad.Badlands wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:57 pm As for the players who routinely grab at their heads to draw to draw a card when they know the defenders stick didn't contact their heads, that's really getting on my nerves especially when replay clearly shows that the stick didn't make contact. Unfortunately it's tough for refs to determine for sure that the stick didn't hit the head and the player is faking so it seems there isn't much that can be done about it. Maybe when replay clearly shows the player is faking, people with nothing better to do who like to visit lacrosse message boards should call out the shenanigans.
Re: TOPTM?
Any of the proposed rules for faking a hit to the head would be tough on Maryland - they'd have to start coaching differently! Credit to wlaxnut
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXcZXhw ... e&index=46
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbMgGz- ... e&index=13
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXcZXhw ... e&index=46
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbMgGz- ... e&index=13
Re: TOPTM?
Thanks for the credit, though I haven’t seen any similar theatrics since Ms. Whittle graduated. The Terps, so far this year, seem like a serious minded team on a mission with no time for nonsense.DAWG2021 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2019 10:50 am Any of the proposed rules for faking a hit to the head would be tough on Maryland - they'd have to start coaching differently! Credit to wlaxnut
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXcZXhw ... e&index=46
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbMgGz- ... e&index=13
Re: TOPTM?
There's actually a great example of it in the MD/UNC game from a few weeks ago.
Re: TOPTM?
Re: TOPTM?
I'll cut her some slack on this one. I looked at it again a few times and the UNC player's stick definitely does not hit the MD player but I think another Maryland player's stick does hit her. When I first saw it I was only looking at the UNC player's stick. So, I think a stick did hit her and she went to the ground because she felt the contact. Early in the game. 26:15 mark of first half.
Re: TOPTM?
I see what you’re saying. When UNC‘s Ortega (3) drove to cage, she hit Maryland defender Shelby Mercer's stick (2) when she fired her shot, then Mercer's stick hit Erica Evans (33) in the face, as she was also defending on the play, and Evans kind of folded to the ground. No call was made as perhaps the refs saw it as incidental contact. It will be interesting to see how things go in that area as the season goes along and the stakes get higher.Badlands wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:19 pmI'll cut her some slack on this one. I looked at it again a few times and the UNC player's stick definitely does not hit the MD player but I think another Maryland player's stick does hit her. When I first saw it I was only looking at the UNC player's stick. So, I think a stick did hit her and she went to the ground because she felt the contact. Early in the game. 26:15 mark of first half.
- BigRedMachine
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2019 6:45 pm
Re: TOPTM?
Whew! Erica doesn't know how close she came to being branded! Hey laxnut you've got to tell me how you do it. Take clips from a game and post them on youtube. What you have is the perfect propaganda tool. Post 5 to 10 second clips of a 3,600 second game to court peoples opinions to your own. The possibilities are endless. Bravo!