ACC 2019

[Cooter]

I tend to see that ACC to start out the season in much the same order as the Face-off Top 25 has them:
1. Duke
2. Notre Dame
3. Virginia
4. Syracuse
5. North Carolina

Let's add a poll here to spruce things up.
I have selected the option that one can change one's vote.

[HopFan16]

I like UVA over Notre Dame, but otherwise pretty much agree. It'd be hard for UNC to have a year worse than they did in 2018—you'd think there's nowhere to go but up for them. So while I think they improve somewhat I'm not really sure how high they can climb in the conference. Cuse was a young team last year and will probably be better, too. Honestly I wouldn't be shocked if it ultimately ends up being something like: 1. Duke 2. UVA 3. Syracuse 4. North Carolina 5. Notre Dame. ND has got to figure out how to play consistent offense and I don't know if the shot clock is going to help. Losing Sexton hurts—he singlehandedly took over a few games last year including the all-important one against UVA. Including playoffs they've gone 9-6 each of the last two years, finishing in the #8-12 range rankings-wise. Not really sure why IL ranked them so high—they seem to get the benefit of the doubt that other teams get without really proving why they should get it.

[Cooter]

I'm a little higher on Notre Dame then you are. They do seem to have the same main question mark as Hopkins, that is, at Face-offs.
They return their 3 most dynamic offensive players: Garnsey, Costabile and Gleason. They got a decent contribution from Brian Willetts last Spring. Connor Morin and MIkey Drake who were top recruits a year ago and might make more of contribution as sophomores. They bring in 2 top 20 midfielders: #3 Quenton Buchman and #19 Griffin Westlin. So it looks like they have a pretty good group of offensive talent. They did lose their LSM star John Sexton, but return Crance and Cohen on the close defense. They pick up the #15 recruit Jose Boyer at LSM. Matt Schmidt had sort of a middling year getting his feet wet in goal as a freshman, but will probably improve this Spring as a sophomore. So the defense looks like it will probably be strong. At face-offs, they have their #2 man last year, Charles Leonard and incoming freshman JR Almeida.

So in the end, I see that same sort of tough defensive Notre Dame team we have seen over the last 5 years or so.

[dense]

Order seems logical but on Any Given Sunday any team in the ACC including an improved UNC can beat any other in the ACC including Duke.

[HopFan16]

I'm a little higher on Notre Dame then you are. They do seem to have the same main question mark as Hopkins, that is, at Face-offs.
They return their 3 most dynamic offensive players: Garnsey, Costabile and Gleason. They got a decent contribution from Brian Willetts last Spring. Connor Morin and MIkey Drake who were top recruits a year ago and might make more of contribution as sophomores. They bring in 2 top 20 midfielders: #3 Quenton Buchman and #19 Griffin Westlin. So it looks like they have a pretty good group of offensive talent. They did lose their LSM star John Sexton, but return Crance and Cohen on the close defense. They pick up the #15 recruit Jose Boyer at LSM. Matt Schmidt had sort of a middling year getting his feet wet in goal as a freshman, but will probably improve this Spring as a sophomore. So the defense looks like it will probably be strong. At face-offs, they have their #2 man last year, Charles Leonard and incoming freshman JR Almeida.

So in the end, I see that same sort of tough defensive Notre Dame team we have seen over the last 5 years or so.

Having talented kids on offense hasn't really been their issue the last few years though. They've had really highly ranked recruits. Corrigan's scheme on offense has been stale and predictable. I also have no idea why he refused to play Garnsey for much of last year even when it was clear he was their most dynamic playmaker. They've finished 4th, 5th, and 5th in the conference the last three years in offensive efficiency. They've flat out just struggled to score at times and I don't think it has anything to do with the offensive talent.

I'm sure we'll see another tough defensive Notre Dame as always. Byrne is one of the best in the biz. But considering where they've finished the last few years, putting them #6 overall is actually predicting an improvement and I don't really buy that they'll clearly be better in 2019 than they have been recently. The lax media has always loved them, that's no secret. I would argue that love is disproportionate to what they've actually accomplished, but that's just me. They'll still be good, but unless something changes drastically I see another first-round exit type of season.

[Cooter]

Notre Dame's offensive efficiency seemed to be working alright in the ACC tmt final when they beat UVa 17-7, and they beat NCAA semifinalist Duke in the first round of the ACC tournament 14-11.
Of course, ND did lose to Duke 8-2 the first time around but without Costabile and Gleason.

It is a new year with new teams, but still I think UVa needed to win that game in Klockner, if I am to put them in front of ND - and UVa didn't even come close.

[maddog9718]

Order seems logical but on Any Given Sunday any team in the ACC including an improved UNC can beat any other in the ACC including Duke.

2018 felt like a disaster for UNC (largely due to OOC losses), but UNC could/should have beaten both Duke and SU last year. I'm hoping Unterstein is the difference this year that flips these close games to the Heel's favor.

I give Duke the edge in winning the conference, but after that, any order of these teams would not surprise me.

[HooDat]

I give Duke the edge in winning the conference, but after that, any order of these teams would not surprise me.

yep, that ^^

[Hawkeye]

Can't see UNC missing the conference tourney two years in a row.

[Cooter]

Can't see UNC missing the conference tourney two years in a row.

No one is missing the conference tournament this Spring. They are having a 4 versus 5 play-in game.

[Hawkeye]

Can't see UNC missing the conference tourney two years in a row.

No one is missing the conference tournament this Spring. They are having a 4 versus 5 play-in game.

Oh wow, I had missed that part. Good info!

Three games in one weekend for the #4/5 seed would be a tough road to a conference title for sure.

[Cooter]

No, two games one weekend, then the final the next weekend
Apr 25 (Thurs) 4 vs 5 (Chapel Hill)
Apr 27 (Sat) Semifinals (Chapel HIll)
May 4 Final (Highest remaining seed)

[Hawkeye]

Not sure that I'm a fan of that system. It seems like it could end up hurting ACC teams on the bubble, as they could potentially end up with one less game on the schedule. I was thinking that they'd use a tournament structured like the Patriot League's, where the games are Tues/Fri/Sun of the same week.

[HopFan16]

Not sure that I'm a fan of that system. It seems like it could end up hurting ACC teams on the bubble, as they could potentially end up with one less game on the schedule. I was thinking that they'd use a tournament structured like the Patriot League's, where the games are Tues/Fri/Sun of the same week.

They should count their lucky stars that the league still has a meaningless playoff that gives each team more chances at quality wins and improving RPI/SOS despite the league not having an official bid to the NCAA tournament. Highly suspicious of any conference tourney that includes every team from the conference. Makes regular season matchups that much less important. The team that finishes 5th gets rewarded with at least one more matchup against what will likely be a high RPI/SOS opponent? Hmm. We all know the top 2 and probably 3 seeds in the ACC will most likely make the NCAAs regardless, but I feel like this format only helps the 4th and especially 5th teams' chances of making the postseason.

[Hawkeye]

I think the #3 seed is the one that should be concerned, unless I'm not correctly understanding how the tournament is going to work.

All ACC teams will have to leave the last two weekends on their schedule open in case they were to make the ACC finals. In the case of the top 3 seeds, if they don't, they only get one game. If it's a year where the ACC #3 is squarely on the bubble going into the ACC tournament, not having another regular season game after that loss (as they would have last year) to potentially help their resume could end up putting them on the outside looking in.

Just a weird decision to me to have the conference tournament spanning two weekends. And I'm also not a fan at all of conferences including all teams in their tournament. Top four is a good number for pretty much any league in my book.

[Cooter]

I give Duke the edge in winning the conference, but after that, any order of these teams would not surprise me.

Duke does lose some things like 113pt scorer Justin Guterding, and midfielder Peter Conley (4th leading scorer 38pts). On the other end of the field, Duke loses Greg Pelton (56 gbs) and Danny Fowler (.532 sv pct) in goal.
While Duke should be very good, it is not clear how good.

[Cooter]

IL has there little ACC preview up with preseason ranking and preseason All-league team up:
https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/ ... ence/53538
The rankings are
1 Duke
2 Notre Dame
3 Virginia
4 Syracuse
5 UNC
the same as in the initial post here.
Syracuse certainly is flying under the radar this Winter. I thought Dordevic and Curry looked pretty good as freshmen, then you have Reyfus, Solomon and Trimboli back. They only lose 1 of their top 8 scores, and have a top recruit in Cook showing up, along with players like Seebold and Quinn who might contribute more as sophomores. A top d-man in the league in Nick Mellen.

[dense]

Appears on paper that all teams in the ACC besides Duke will be stronger this year. Duke still FF quality but looks to have lost the most of all teams to graduation though always a stock of top talent ready to step up. Lot of preseason accolades being heaped on UVA and ND talent but the proof will be in the pudding. UVA ceiling is high if they put it together given their stars while ND showed how good they can be in ACC tourney when humming at full strength. Syracuse and UNC are afterthoughts at the moment but that is a mistake. UNC has strengthened its D and should be healthier and luckier, will not surprise to see a strong bounce back leading to several "upset' wins. . Not sure why so many are dismissive of Syracuse, perhaps the stench of Albany and Hopkins losses persist but young group did beat every and each team in the ACC last year and should have beat Cornell in NCAA opener.

As far as ACC order, maintain no strong conviction. . Default to Duke being the most balanced and complete team until proven otherwise with ND second but any final order would not shock.

[wgdsr]

Not sure that I'm a fan of that system. It seems like it could end up hurting ACC teams on the bubble, as they could potentially end up with one less game on the schedule. I was thinking that they'd use a tournament structured like the Patriot League's, where the games are Tues/Fri/Sun of the same week.

They should count their lucky stars that the league still has a meaningless playoff that gives each team more chances at quality wins and improving RPI/SOS despite the league not having an official bid to the NCAA tournament. Highly suspicious of any conference tourney that includes every team from the conference. Makes regular season matchups that much less important. The team that finishes 5th gets rewarded with at least one more matchup against what will likely be a high RPI/SOS opponent? Hmm. We all know the top 2 and probably 3 seeds in the ACC will most likely make the NCAAs regardless, but I feel like this format only helps the 4th and especially 5th teams' chances of making the postseason.

I think the #3 seed is the one that should be concerned, unless I'm not correctly understanding how the tournament is going to work.
All ACC teams will have to leave the last two weekends on their schedule open in case they were to make the ACC finals. In the case of the top 3 seeds, if they don't, they only get one game. If it's a year where the ACC #3 is squarely on the bubble going into the ACC tournament, not having another regular season game after that loss (as they would have last year) to potentially help their resume could end up putting them on the outside looking in.
Just a weird decision to me to have the conference tournament spanning two weekends. And I'm also not a fan at all of conferences including all teams in their tournament. Top four is a good number for pretty much any league in my book.

we're talking about a pretty marginal difference here vs any 6 team league that has 4 teams qualifying for a conference tournament. beyond the fact that those conferences in many cases are formed solely in order to secure an autobid for the bare minimum # of teams needed in a conference. pretty often you're going to find the #4 and 5 team (and sometimes 6, or sometimes 3.4.&5) in a 5 or 6 team conference actually tied on record, and then it goes to often quirky tiebreaker rules.

the top conferences are going to have upside for a win (or 2), and minimal downside, usually for all conference seeds across the board. it's worth doing, from a selfish standpoint. i have to agree that doing it over a couple weekends doesn't make as much sense, for reasons given and that the 4 and 5 having a harder road sounds equitable. so play 3 in 4 days to win it (or get a win or 2) and teams playing twice over 3 days/48 hours should be fine. my guess is they've placed it a weekend ahead of most other conferences over the years in order to not be as taxed before the nc$$. that brought on the added problem that other schools were occupied with their conference tourneys the following weekend. i don't like the solution chosen.

all conference tourney results shouldn't be included in post-season at large selection. imo. but that'll never change.

[AreaLax]

From Chris at College Crosse

Notre Dame will be without attackman Ryder Garnsey for the entire 2019 season, multiple sources tell College_Crosse. The senior was ruled academically ineligible. A team spokesperson declined to comment on the situation.