???
Really? Can you point to an example?
I believe this is the first time I have ever posted on this thread, or any NESCAC-related thread for that matter, so please provide an example of what you’re referring to; thanks.
???
Ok; I’ll try to explain ...
Appears Unknown Participant has a serious case of Traumatic Flying Rat Disorder syndrome ... gotta wonder how much space Berkman, his program and all their titles occupy in Unknown Participant’s head??LarumVictoia wrote: ↑Sat Feb 06, 2021 12:06 am Hold on now!! Ya'll need to take it easy on Pretorius !! There's a lot of truth to you Tufts fans being thin-skinned - Unknown-Participant, I can almost hear your voice crack when I read your posts "sniff-sniff"- been up all night scouring the stats...
'16 - "Frankly, none of us have quite recovered from them damn flying rats"
'17 - damn flying rats again! NESCAC???
'18 - "The brackets AREN'T FAIR!! - We need to take a good long look at the rules here... cause my Bo's shoulda been in before them damn flying rats"
'19 - Props to Cabrini - ya'll know in your Jumbo hearts them flying rats would of beat your best NESCAC - your best being Amherst
'20 - Bo's on suicide watch cause they knew "THIS WAS O-U-R Y-E-A-R!!" I mean common damn-it!!! You see the score of them "four" games !?!?! I know them damn flying rats were somehow responsible for this pandemic!!
Now quit your whining and instead of blaming some winged varmint, why don't you go spit some of that vitriol at your elitist administration- Man it feels like old times on Laxpower!
Um, this link leads to old news: 2020 season cancelled. Joke or mistake?ergit wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 10:55 am News out of the NCAA, 2021 lacrosse season cancelled.
https://www.ncaa.com/sports/lacrosse-men/d3
... championship awarded to Tuftsbury...
For all their size, speed and experience Salisbury has weaknesses.Does anyone here really believe that a team other than Salisbury is winning another title this year.
Haha ... wish he was in street clothes in 2017! That young man made a great defensive play - maybe play of the day! That was a great game - even though my Big Red lost, that was a special team that was a lot of fun to watch play together. Arguably the best all round team (to date) ever for Denison.MrLax2U wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 8:46 am Greetings Ned, Those were two great games; could have gone either way. Large crowd, best two coaches in college lax, men played hard and fair with respect for each other and the game, great weather. Emotions on the Sals side of the stands went from "This is going to be a hard win against an excellent opponent" to "We're liable to lose this."
I noticed Aaron Leeds is listed as a Graduate Assistant Coach on the Gull web site. Would make for a real interesting semi.....
When Salisbury matches up with their opponents this year just go down the line player by player for the first 10 starters and see how many players you’d switch out for the oppositions. After you are done doing that look at the next 12 players that get meaning full time and repeat the processs. The talent gap this year will be about as wide as it’s ever been. Not something I’m happy about just the reality. If the Nescac schools shut down for the year( I think they will) the party is over. This is the year I’d love to hear of a Gulls scrimmage w a team ranked 10-20 in D1MrLax2U wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 11:38 am Booyah Dehunt,For all their size, speed and experience Salisbury has weaknesses.Does anyone here really believe that a team other than Salisbury is winning another title this year.
First is in goal. Ellis has been around but hasn't really proven himself at the highest level. Better goal tending these last several years and Gulls might have 13 or 14 rings. Not to take anything away from Cabrini or Wesleyan.
Second, the first midfield line never really jelled. Snyder, Broms, Wongus etc. are superb individual players but when it counted they fell short.
Third is fogo. Malamphy is on the Gull All-Decade Team but the rules have changed and Brett will have to prove he can adapt. Even the best athlete can have an off day or pull a muscle; just hope it isn't during one and done.
Fourth, Defense is big, strong and experienced. They can be vulnerable to a small, quick run and gun attack on a hot day especially since Berkman resists dropping them back into a tight zone. Even just to throw opponents off stride or as a reset during an offensive run. Common in D I.
Last is the unknown.....
Got it. So a 1-0 victory is more impressive than 20-1. I actually also was a history major but can fumble enough through the maths to know that is not how people look at scores, for obvious reasons. I get it, you don't like high scoring games. Some people prefer to watch an 8-2 game, some 25-18. The point of the game though is to score more than the other team. The more goals you win by, the more dominant the win. The absolute number for each team reflects the style of play of the game, not the dominance of the margin. I am not a Tufts fan at all. You want an example of an out of the blue rant, just go re-read your post and try to figure out what that was in response to.Dr. Pretorious wrote: ↑Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:58 pmOk; I’ll try to explain ...
(Excuse you for being a history major, no worries).
As the math majors and seasoned sports fans will understand, there is a significant difference in the relative dominance reflected in the two scores. Let’s refer to the 8-2 score as game A and the 25-18 score as game B.
In game A the winning team scored 400% more than the losing team, whereas in game B the winning team scored 138% more than the losing team. That’s virtually 3 to 1 ratio.
In game A the losing team, assuming it gave up no more goals, would have had to increase its own goal scoring output by 300% just to bring the score even, whereas in game B the losing team would have only needed to increase its own goal scoring output by 38% to bring the game even. That’s almost a 9 to 1 ratio.
In game A the losing team scored 25% as much as the winning team, whereas in game B The losing team scored 72% as much as the winning team. Again, virtually a 3 to 1 ratio.
So, just my humble opinion, but once we check our team/conference allegiances at the door and look at it objectively, I don’t think there can really be much argument as to which is the more dominating victory. Again, just my opinion.
And again, wasn’t taking any shots at your conference and if you look at my post I conceded that most years, in and out, it is the strongest conference. I still don’t understand why you guys are so insecure and go from 0 to 100 anytime anyone suggests anything other than Tufts et al are hands-down, unequivocally and without doubt the best teams in D3 bar none. If you go back and look at the original post in this thread that started this debate, someone had suggested that if Tufts had played Salisbury last year, they would have absolutely dominated the game, hands-down, no doubt about it and Salisbury wouldn’t have had a chance. It was that rather extreme opinion that I and others sought to respond to. No doubt Tufts certainly could have/ would have won the game, but it is silly to suggest that it would’ve been a complete domination and that Salisbury wouldn’t have stood a chance. That’s just an absurd opinion in the eyes of anyone who follows D3 lax.
And again, not a Salisbury fan here per se. So you can save the six grade level name-calling in your anticipated responses ...
Hey Dehunt .....Dehuntshigwa’es wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 12:27 pmWhen Salisbury matches up with their opponents this year just go down the line player by player for the first 10 starters and see how many players you’d switch out for the oppositions. After you are done doing that look at the next 12 players that get meaning full time and repeat the processs. The talent gap this year will be about as wide as it’s ever been. Not something I’m happy about just the reality. If the Nescac schools shut down for the year( I think they will) the party is over. This is the year I’d love to hear of a Gulls scrimmage w a team ranked 10-20 in D1MrLax2U wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 11:38 am Booyah Dehunt,For all their size, speed and experience Salisbury has weaknesses.Does anyone here really believe that a team other than Salisbury is winning another title this year.
First is in goal. Ellis has been around but hasn't really proven himself at the highest level. Better goal tending these last several years and Gulls might have 13 or 14 rings. Not to take anything away from Cabrini or Wesleyan.
Second, the first midfield line never really jelled. Snyder, Broms, Wongus etc. are superb individual players but when it counted they fell short.
Third is fogo. Malamphy is on the Gull All-Decade Team but the rules have changed and Brett will have to prove he can adapt. Even the best athlete can have an off day or pull a muscle; just hope it isn't during one and done.
Fourth, Defense is big, strong and experienced. They can be vulnerable to a small, quick run and gun attack on a hot day especially since Berkman resists dropping them back into a tight zone. Even just to throw opponents off stride or as a reset during an offensive run. Common in D I.
Last is the unknown.....
Agreed; clearly not a math major - can’t use a 1-0 score as a ratio for comparison of any statistic since the denominator (0) has no value (it’s infinite) and therefore can’t be used as a basis of comparison of anything ... You were actually correct to choose it as a score to invalidate the theory, but not for the reason that you thinkpcowlax wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:07 pmGot it. So a 1-0 victory is more impressive than 20-1. I actually also was a history major but can fumble enough through the maths to know that is not how people look at scores, for obvious reasons. I get it, you don't like high scoring games. Some people prefer to watch an 8-2 game, some 25-18. The point of the game though is to score more than the other team. The more goals you win by, the more dominant the win. The absolute number for each team reflects the style of play of the game, not the dominance of the margin. I am not a Tufts fan at all. You want an example of an out of the blue rant, just go re-read your post and try to figure out what that was in response to.Dr. Pretorious wrote: ↑Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:58 pmOk; I’ll try to explain ...
(Excuse you for being a history major, no worries).
As the math majors and seasoned sports fans will understand, there is a significant difference in the relative dominance reflected in the two scores. Let’s refer to the 8-2 score as game A and the 25-18 score as game B.
In game A the winning team scored 400% more than the losing team, whereas in game B the winning team scored 138% more than the losing team. That’s virtually 3 to 1 ratio.
In game A the losing team, assuming it gave up no more goals, would have had to increase its own goal scoring output by 300% just to bring the score even, whereas in game B the losing team would have only needed to increase its own goal scoring output by 38% to bring the game even. That’s almost a 9 to 1 ratio.
In game A the losing team scored 25% as much as the winning team, whereas in game B The losing team scored 72% as much as the winning team. Again, virtually a 3 to 1 ratio.
So, just my humble opinion, but once we check our team/conference allegiances at the door and look at it objectively, I don’t think there can really be much argument as to which is the more dominating victory. Again, just my opinion.
And again, wasn’t taking any shots at your conference and if you look at my post I conceded that most years, in and out, it is the strongest conference. I still don’t understand why you guys are so insecure and go from 0 to 100 anytime anyone suggests anything other than Tufts et al are hands-down, unequivocally and without doubt the best teams in D3 bar none. If you go back and look at the original post in this thread that started this debate, someone had suggested that if Tufts had played Salisbury last year, they would have absolutely dominated the game, hands-down, no doubt about it and Salisbury wouldn’t have had a chance. It was that rather extreme opinion that I and others sought to respond to. No doubt Tufts certainly could have/ would have won the game, but it is silly to suggest that it would’ve been a complete domination and that Salisbury wouldn’t have stood a chance. That’s just an absurd opinion in the eyes of anyone who follows D3 lax.
And again, not a Salisbury fan here per se. So you can save the six grade level name-calling in your anticipated responses ...
The math is wrong.Dr. Pretorious wrote: ↑Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:58 pm FXLax wrote: ↑Fri Feb 05, 2021 9:08 pm
Isn’t 25-18 a 7 goal win and 8-2 only a 6 goal win? Not sure - I was a history major
Ok; I’ll try to explain ...
(Excuse you for being a history major, no worries).
As the math majors and seasoned sports fans will understand, there is a significant difference in the relative dominance reflected in the two scores. Let’s refer to the 8-2 score as game A and the 25-18 score as game B.
In game A the winning team scored 400% more than the losing team, whereas in game B the winning team scored 138% more than the losing team. That’s virtually 3 to 1 ratio.
In game A the losing team, assuming it gave up no more goals, would have had to increase its own goal scoring output by 300% just to bring the score even, whereas in game B the losing team would have only needed to increase its own goal scoring output by 38% to bring the game even. That’s almost a 9 to 1 ratio.
In game A the losing team scored 25% as much as the winning team, whereas in game B The losing team scored 72% as much as the winning team. Again, virtually a 3 to 1 ratio.
So, just my humble opinion, but once we check our team/conference allegiances at the door and look at it objectively, I don’t think there can really be much argument as to which is the more dominating victory. Again, just my opinion.
And again, wasn’t taking any shots at your conference and if you look at my post I conceded that most years, in and out, it is the strongest conference. I still don’t understand why you guys are so insecure and go from 0 to 100 anytime anyone suggests anything other than Tufts et al are hands-down, unequivocally and without doubt the best teams in D3 bar none. If you go back and look at the original post in this thread that started this debate, someone had suggested that if Tufts had played Salisbury last year, they would have absolutely dominated the game, hands-down, no doubt about it and Salisbury wouldn’t have had a chance. It was that rather extreme opinion that I and others sought to respond to. No doubt Tufts certainly could have/ would have won the game, but it is silly to suggest that it would’ve been a complete domination and that Salisbury wouldn’t have stood a chance. That’s just an absurd opinion in the eyes of anyone who follows D3 lax.
And again, not a Salisbury fan here per se. So you can save the six grade level name-calling in your anticipated responses ...
Agreed!ColonelFastBreak wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:34 pm
Finally, nobody knows whether Tufts or Salisbury (or someone else) would have won a national championship last year. They didn't get to play and it stunk. Agreed that it would have been a competitive game. The history of the series between the two suggest as much (excepting 2011).