FanLax Forum Poll

[ah23]

In defense of my poll this week...."CNU 9th,Dickinson 10th, Rhodes 18, Colorado College 19, and Muhlenberg 20. Most won’t be top 20 teams except for CNU, but in the 9 hole?"

CNU is undefeated, has beaten three tradition powers - one by 9 goals and the other by 12. Maybe they won't be there in two weeks, but based on the early body of work they are deserving. Dickinson got that rank based on early win over Stevens (loss to E-Town this week will drop them significantly). As for the last three -- I decided to reward teams that were undefeated and had wins over solid teams instead of loading up my poll with other NESCAC and northern squads that haven't played yet. Again, once they hit the field and have a resume -- I will be glad to add them in.

A few things:

1. Very generous to consider Hampden-Sydney or Washington College "traditional powers" in 2020. H-S has made one NCAA tournament in the last decade and a half. One! I get that WC used to be a perennially strong program, but they haven't even made their own conference tournament since 2015.

2. Why would anyone's history matter for how we view them this year? Isn't it more relevant that WC has been annihilated in both their games this year (and has struggled for the past five) than that they made the semis in 2014? Aren't Roanoke's (relative) struggles in recent seasons more relevant than accomplishments from many years, if not decades ago?

3. Have CC/Muhlenberg actually beaten anyone solid? (this is kind of a rhetorical question)

FWIW, as I said in an earlier comment I don't disagree at all that CNU or Dickinson merit top twenty consideration. Just poking at some of the logic here.

[ah23]

Mini rant: just tried to tune into stream of the Rhodes - Ohio Northern game to give the Lynx a chance to pass the eye test...only to see that you have to pay $8 to watch a stream (or pay $40 for the "Rhodes Men's Lacrosse Pass", in case I wanted to watch subpar lacrosse games all year long). Completely bizarre, and something I don't think I've ever seen in D-III.

How in the world does a program like Rhodes - from a non-traditional region, playing mostly irrelevant games all year - think they can paywall their games and expect anyone to actually watch? The best programs in the country (or more accurately every program in the country) all broadcast for free, even though there is infinitely more demand to watch a NESCAC/CAC/Centennial/LL/ODAC matchup than there is to watch some random school from Tennessee beating up on a bunch of relative nobodies. I feel like it's about as JV as a program can get in terms of branding/exposure. The NCAA already wastes a bunch of AQ spots on bad conferences to help "grow the game" in new regions - you'd imagine that teams from those conferences/regions would have an interest in growing the game as well. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Rant over.

[richard]

Not the same as Rhoads but Stevenson broadcast wanted my credit card info for a free broadcast. Not going to happen.

[oldtimelax]

I saw the $8 fee to watch Rhodes....are they kidding? I guess not....can't be making that much money....

[Nosey Ned]

Don’t some of the NESCAC schools charge to view the game stream? I remember trying to watch a game last year but it wasn’t free ... I wasn’t that interested to be honest so I moved on. So if I’m not paying to watch that, I certainly am not paying to watch Rhodes. I’m also annoyed that schools password protect replays of games that just finished ... give us 24 hours to watch before slapping a password on the replay. And what is the purpose of protecting the replay anyway? Those aren’t the game films that coaching staffs use so what’s to protect?

[ah23]

Don’t some of the NESCAC schools charge to view the game stream? I remember trying to watch a game last year but it wasn’t free ... I wasn’t that interested to be honest so I moved on. So if I’m not paying to watch that, I certainly am not paying to watch Rhodes. I’m also annoyed that schools password protect replays of games that just finished ... give us 24 hours to watch before slapping a password on the replay. And what is the purpose of protecting the replay anyway? Those aren’t the game films that coaching staffs use so what’s to protect?

Hmm, I don't remember ever having to pay or enter information or anything to watch a NESCAC game. Hopefully I never run into that!

Totally agree about the replays. Every WatchESPN game sits up there forever - it pretty clearly doesn't provide a competitive advantage in any way. I wonder if the issue is storage space or availability.

[Unknown Participant]

Don’t some of the NESCAC schools charge to view the game stream? I

Pretty sure that's a "no" because the out-of-state dads and alums would have a fit, which the ADs, capital-raising staffs, etc. do not want.

Also, last playoff season, on the same day I watched the Liberty League and NESCAC championship games for free, while Florida wanted to charge me $9 to watch the state championship game FFS. I took a hard pass on that.

[pcowlax]

Never had to pay to stream a NESCAC game, not saying it has never happened but I’ve never seen it for any of their sports

[ICGrad]

How in the world does a program like Rhodes - from a non-traditional region, playing mostly irrelevant games all year - think they can paywall their games and expect anyone to actually watch?

Rant over.

Parents. Alumni. Possibly rival programs/interested students.

I mean, if I were a parent, I wouldn't think twice about shelling out $40 to watch my son play.

But does seem like a very small revenue pool.

ETA: With the caveat that if I'm paying, I expect significantly better quality than I get when I watch, say, IC's streams online. I expect announcers who know something about the game, I expect more than one camera. From that perspective, I doubt it would be a financial winner for any school.

[Dr. Pretorious]

How in the world does a program like Rhodes - from a non-traditional region, playing mostly irrelevant games all year - think they can paywall their games and expect anyone to actually watch?

Rant over.

Parents. Alumni. Possibly rival programs/interested students.

I mean, if I were a parent, I wouldn't think twice about shelling out $40 to watch my son play.

But does seem like a very small revenue pool.

ETA: With the caveat that if I'm paying, I expect significantly better quality than I get when I watch, say, IC's streams online. I expect announcers who know something about the game, I expect more than one camera. From that perspective, I doubt it would be a financial winner for any school.

Geez, if you were a parent, wouldn’t you actually go to the games to see your son play?

[Dehuntshigwa’es]

Those mid week games can be tough to get to, work, travel long distances for a 3 hour visit, or you do go and you want to watch your other kid playing at the same time some place else. I like that most the schools now have replay. Gives you a chance to look at D3 schools you don’t get a chance to see. Some of the announcers are very very good. Some are so horrific it’s like a bad stand up comedy routine.

[Matnum PI]

Polls due at midnight.

[ICGrad]

How in the world does a program like Rhodes - from a non-traditional region, playing mostly irrelevant games all year - think they can paywall their games and expect anyone to actually watch?

Rant over.

Parents. Alumni. Possibly rival programs/interested students.

I mean, if I were a parent, I wouldn't think twice about shelling out $40 to watch my son play.

But does seem like a very small revenue pool.

ETA: With the caveat that if I'm paying, I expect significantly better quality than I get when I watch, say, IC's streams online. I expect announcers who know something about the game, I expect more than one camera. From that perspective, I doubt it would be a financial winner for any school.

Geez, if you were a parent, wouldn’t you actually go to the games to see your son play?

If feasible, yes. It does happen sometimes, though, that kids choose to attend university away from home.

[formerD3coach]

1.Salisbury
2.Cabrini
3.RIT
4.Amherst
5.Williams
6.Tufts
7.Wesleyan
8.Denison
9.York
10.Gettysburg
11.Union
12.Ursinus
13.St. Lawrence
14.St. John Fisher
15.Stevenson
16.Lynchburg
17.Cortland
18.Middlebury
19.Christopher Newport
20.Franklin and Marshall
21.Colorado College
22.Dickinson
23.Stevens Tech
24.Muhlenburg
25.Stockton
HM: Rhodes, Montclair State, Babson, Bates, RPI, WNE

[Matnum PI]

1.Salisbury
2.Cabrini
3.RIT
4.Amherst
5.Williams
6.Tufts
7.Wesleyan
8.Denison
9.York
10.Gettysburg
11.Union
12.Ursinus
13.St. Lawrence
14.St. John Fisher
15.Stevenson
16.Lynchburg
17.Cortland
18.Middlebury
19.Christopher Newport
20.Franklin and Marshall
21.Colorado College
22.Dickinson
23.Stevens Tech
24.Muhlenburg
25.Stockton
HM: Rhodes, Montclair State, Babson, Bates, RPI, WNE

formerd3, you should join our Forum Poll. Be a Poll-er.

[Unknown Participant]

formerd3, you should join our Forum Poll. Be a Poll-er.

Except that he clearly undervalues NESCAC

[ah23]

If any of you ever feel unsure of your picks or worry about getting made fun of for a silly ranking, chin up: no matter what you do or how little you pay attention, you will never be worse than the D-III coaches who voted for Maine Maritime in this week's USILA poll.

[Unknown Participant]

If any of you ever feel unsure of your picks or worry about getting made fun of for a silly ranking, chin up: no matter what you do or how little you pay attention, you will never be worse than the D-III coaches who voted for Maine Maritime in this week's USILA poll.

They are 2-0 after all ... that G** D*** computer would respect it

[FanLax Computer]

They are 2-0 after all ... that G** D*** computer would respect it

Their 2 Ws are over teams that are currently ranked #186 and #188. No respect from this computer.

[overandback]

How does Stevenson (1-1) go up 5 spots while Gettysburg(1-0), the team Stevenson lost to, at home, by a 10-5 score, drops from #10 to #12. Ain’t right.