D3 All Americans 2021

[ah23]

So by that logic if a great player was injured or suspended in the second or third game of the season and has “ All American” caliber they should be voted in.

No. I addressed this exact situation in my previous comment.

"If this were a normal year and a player was limited to six games because of injury then you'd be right. But this is not a normal year, and players were limited by circumstances out of their control. They (people like Bredahl or Keating) played every game they could and lit it up in every game to lead undefeated teams to high seeds in the NCAA tournament. What more can they possibly do?"

Elections have consequences

...what? Exactly what say did the players have in any of this?

AA should be earned over longer period / # of games then just 5 or 6.. Injuries could slow a player, key plays in big game or end of game situations factor in as does leadership, sportsmanship become evident (or hotheaded, cheap shots) and #’s over time.. Sure, not their fault that woke NESCAC Presidents didn't support athletics but.. that how the cookie crumbled.

1. In a normal season I agree. In a pandemic-shortened year I do not. The players in question played every game they could on their schedule. If anyone is confused about whether Mac Bredahl/Luke Keating/Hakan Attilasoy/etc. are All-Americans, that's on them.
2. I do not understand why people in these forums insist on making political digs in conversations about lacrosse. I think what the Centennial and NESCAC presidents did was wildly unnecessary and needlessly excessive. I'm not sure how being "woke" has anything to do with that.

Jared Nelson for example has help rebuild the Pheiffer helping established culture with his work ethic, made teammates better, and they made NCAAs 1st time.. Yes, he’s played weaker competition but so have others. His #’s are eye popping and deserves 1st team IMO

This is like arguing that Luc Swedlund deserved the Tewaaraton in 2019. Competition matters.

[ah23]

Also, for the love of god people the tournament hasn’t even started yet! Tufts and Salisbury have have to actually get to the finals before everyone can start yelling about each other.

[ah23]

(and Tufts fan please do not cite your Amherst win in ‘20) - that was a shell of the team it had been the year befor and soon to be embroiled in controversy.)

Couldn’t resist. This is not accurate.

• Amherst had six All-Americans on the 2019 team and returned five of them in 2020.

• Four appeared on Inside Lacrosse’s preseason All-America First Team (the other was on the Third Team). Two teams had four players on the First Team: Amherst and Salisbury. Interesting company for a team that was a shell of itself.

• They were ranked #2 in the country for multiple weeks and #7 even after the Tufts loss. They won their early season OOC games against WNEU and Endicott by noticeably larger margins in 2020 than they did in 2019.

Facts > narratives. Come on.

[DeepPocket]

At this point I’m not sure who’s arguing with who here, however..

Fact- Swedlund and Nelson have no control over who their teams play, or how many games either.

Fact- One set of rules should be used to determine candidates for honors. Not “some schedule strength issues are dismissed due to COVID and some aren’t.”

Fact- Swedlund and Nelson DESERVE to be honored for their achievements.


There are PLENTY of scenarios where people had a great year followed by a not so great year. Past performances have NOTHING to do with this year’s body of work. You play the team/game in front of you, and you’ll be judged by that. At least that’s how I see it.


These young men knew what the potential season or lack thereof was coming into the year. Plenty of guys took the year off, plenty transferred to a “more sure”scenario, and plenty stuck around to deal with the situation as it developed. That was their choice.

**insert this year’s retort of “a degree from school xyz is more valuable than lacrosse,” and insert my response of “when the players individually decided that, didn’t they also decided it’s more valuable than a lacrosse accolade?”

[COGULL]

In terms of lacrosse, I don't think the Gulls care much about anything other than winning the national championship.

[ergit]

In terms of lacrosse, I don't think the Gulls care much about anything other than winning the national championship.

Demonstrably not true...

[ah23]

At this point I’m not sure who’s arguing with who here, however..
Fact- Swedlund and Nelson DESERVE to be honored for their achievements.

They should be…and they have been. Swedlund and Nelson were both Honorable Mention All-Americans in 2019. Being an All-American of any type is an honor.

Literally every single year players put up gaudy numbers in bad conferences. I don’t know why this has to be pointed out. In 2018, Matt Richard had 133 points (led the nation), broke the NCAA single season assists record, and capped off his career at New England College (a tournament team ) by breaking the 400 point mark. Was anyone clamoring for him to be a First Team All-American over Wolf (Amherst), Killen (RIT), Pfeiffer (York) or Witherell (W&L)? Of course not.

Competition matters. First Team All-American is not a participation trophy, a quick glance at the stat sheets, or a career achievement medal. It is a collection of the absolute best lacrosse players in the country. It’s no disrespect to anyone to say that they aren’t a 1T AA.

These young men knew what the potential season or lack thereof was coming into the year. Plenty of guys took the year off, plenty transferred to a “more sure”scenario, and plenty stuck around to deal with the situation as it developed. That was their choice.

I don’t think anyone expected the amount of nonsense that some university presidents pulled this year, and I also don’t think it’s reasonable to expect college kids to transfer or defer a year when they fully thought they would be playing this season.

**insert this year’s retort of “a degree from school xyz is more valuable than lacrosse,” and insert my response of “when the players individually decided that, didn’t they also decided it’s more valuable than a lacrosse accolade?”

Isn’t this a false choice? The players in question specifically chose these schools because of the value of the degree and the high level of lacrosse/ability to have individual + team postseason success. It was never an either/or proposition. That doesn’t just flip in a pandemic; the schools and lacrosse programs remain just as high-level as when players chose them in the first place.

[DeepPocket]

Any response to these parts?

.....Fact- One set of rules should be used to determine candidates for honors. Not “some schedule strength issues are dismissed due to COVID and some aren’t.”
.....
There are PLENTY of scenarios where people had a great year followed by a not so great year. Past performances have NOTHING to do with this year’s body of work. You play the team/game in front of you, and you’ll be judged by that. At least that’s how I see it.

As for this...

**insert this year’s retort of “a degree from school xyz is more valuable than lacrosse,” and insert my response of “when the players individually decided that, didn’t they also decided it’s more valuable than a lacrosse accolade?”

Isn’t this a false choice? The players in question specifically chose these schools because of the value of the degree and the high level of lacrosse/ability to have individual + team postseason success. It was never an either/or proposition. That doesn’t just flip in a pandemic; the schools and lacrosse programs remain just as high-level as when players chose them in the first place.

I’m not talking about their choice when they applied for school. The weird unpredictable pandemic hit, and plenty of people chose other paths (even non athletes took the year off). I’m not saying I’m in the camp of putting life on hold for a sport. But the choice wasn’t mine to make, IT WAS THEIRS. This POSSIBILITY or that possibility, no absolutes. Tufts could’ve made a great decision, and had a better season. Or they could’ve made a worse decision and had no season at all. The choice was NEVER this or that. But the possibilities of this or that was part of the choice.

This part I like.

...Competition matters...

Not all schedules put forth the same level of competition to warrant the same level of recognition. You feel that way for some players but not for others. That is odd.

[thescottharris]

No way on Earth does Jared Nelson deserve FIrst Team AA. Based on this performance today, Pfeiffer would have at best been a #6 seed in the ODAC, and they were clearly better than every team in the USA South. The rest of that conference would be a bottom feeder in the ODAC.

Competition matters. Swap out Nelson for a guy like Kyle Lewis from Lynchburg, who has a similar type role as Nelson (as in distributor first, goal scorer second), and he has 150+ points this year.

[Nothinbutthelax]

Yeah.. I’m starting to see that Scott..
He’s been kept in check.
Still rooting for him. Great Lax story from great lax family.

[COGULL]

In terms of lacrosse, I don't think the Gulls care much about anything other than winning the national championship.

Demonstrably not true...

Okay, What matters most by far to the Gulls team is winning the NC. So what say you now you little ball of sunshine?

[ah23]

.....Fact- One set of rules should be used to determine candidates for honors. Not “some schedule strength issues are dismissed due to COVID and some aren’t.”
.....
There are PLENTY of scenarios where people had a great year followed by a not so great year. Past performances have NOTHING to do with this year’s body of work. You play the team/game in front of you, and you’ll be judged by that. At least that’s how I see it.

I'm glad we agree that the best players from the best conferences excelling against the best competition should be recognized as such. For a minute it seemed like you were saying we should reward people who beat up on cupcakes while ignoring the best players in the country.

Tufts could’ve made a great decision, and had a better season. Or they could’ve made a worse decision and had no season at all. The choice was NEVER this or that. But the possibilities of this or that was part of the choice.

What exactly could Tufts (or any team) have done differently? If it were up to the teams, they would have been playing. Tufts literally went and played a D-I team and scheduled a last-minute Sunday game with Wesleyan to add games to their schedule. I have no idea what this is even referring to.

Not all schedules put forth the same level of competition to warrant the same level of recognition.

Very true! Some teams play garbage competition all year, while others play legitimate opponents.

You feel that way for some players but not for others. That is odd.

I feel that the best players from the best conferences excelling against the best competition should be recognized as such.

[DeepPocket]

I'm glad we agree that the best players from the best conferences excelling against the best competition should be recognized as such. For a minute it seemed like you were saying we should reward people who beat up on cupcakes while ignoring the best players in the country.

Your right. I do agree, I’ll reiterate that I’m not sure who is arguing here, as you were deep into this conversation when I decided to post.

But where we disagree is I think you’re basing you “best competition/conference/players” criteria on last years data if you’re thinking NESCAC for the above items.

What exactly could Tufts (or any team) have done differently? If it were up to the teams, they would have been playing. Tufts literally went and played a D-I team and scheduled a last-minute Sunday game with Wesleyan to add games to their schedule. I have no idea what this is even referring to.

See teams like Salisbury, Lynchburg, CNU, Colorado College etc who actually went and scheduled the best competition they could find from the earliest possible moment, not when the season is well underway when anyone (school administration wise) who intended to play has already done their due diligence and the teams have a full slate.

I understand why you wouldn’t get what I was saying, as the quote you selected cut out all pertinent information. Here is the exchange in full. Seems clear to me, but what do I know.

[quote=DeepPocket post_id=260924 time=<a href="tel:1621079668">1621079668</a> user_id=609]
**insert this year’s retort of “a degree from school xyz is more valuable than lacrosse,” and insert my response of “when the players individually decided that, didn’t they also decided it’s more valuable than a lacrosse accolade?”

Isn’t this a false choice? The players in question specifically chose these schools because of the value of the degree and the high level of lacrosse/ability to have individual + team postseason success. It was never an either/or proposition. That doesn’t just flip in a pandemic; the schools and lacrosse programs remain just as high-level as when players chose them in the first place.

I’m not talking about their choice when they applied for school. The weird unpredictable pandemic hit, and plenty of people chose other paths (even non athletes took the year off). I’m not saying I’m in the camp of putting life on hold for a sport. But the choice wasn’t mine to make, IT WAS THEIRS. This POSSIBILITY or that possibility, no absolutes. Tufts could’ve made a great decision, and had a better season. Or they could’ve made a worse decision and had no season at all. The choice was NEVER this or that. But the possibilities of this or that was part of the choice.

[DeepPocket]

Very true! Some teams play garbage competition all year, while others play legitimate opponents.

I don’t know which of these two the 6 games Tufts got in falls under, but I’m thinking somewhere in the middle.

I feel that the best players from the best conferences excelling against the best competition should be recognized as such.

Indeed. Based on THIS YEAR.

[ah23]

But where we disagree is I think you’re basing you “best competition/conference/players” criteria on last years data if you’re thinking NESCAC for the above items.

Fair enough, agree to disagree on that front.

See teams like Salisbury, Lynchburg, CNU, Colorado College etc who actually went and scheduled the best competition they could find from the earliest possible moment, not when the season is well underway when anyone (school administration wise) who intended to play has already done their due diligence and the teams have a full slate.

This is just dishonest/bad faith.

NESCAC teams a) were not allowed to begin play until the conference gave the green light b) were prohibited from playing midweek games c) were given a mandatory weekend conference slate that occupied dates d) were prohibited from overnight travel e) were prohibited from playing schools with less stringent COVID protocols than the NESCAC. Other than that, yeah, I'm sure the school that schedules multiple ranked OOC opponents every year and scheduled a Division I opponent last minute in 2021 was totally dragging its feet and not interested in playing good OOC competition.

Seems clear to me, but what do I know.

Yep.

I don’t know which of these two the 6 games Tufts got in falls under, but I’m thinking somewhere in the middle.

I was today years old when you referred to Dartmouth, Williams, and Wesleyan as less than legitimate competition while pumping up someone who plays in the USA South. I don't know why I bother.

[Laxdds]

Here's a stat for you Gulls fans, it has been 750 days since Tufts lost a lacrosse game and about 59 days since Salisbury has.

Absolutely correct.

Here’s another stat - it’s been 2192 days since Tufts won its’ 3rd NCAA championship. It’s been 1447 days since Salisbury won its 12th.

.

Game /Set/Match! and I hate to support the evil empire that is Salisbury

[Gullible]

Here's a stat for you Gulls fans, it has been 750 days since Tufts lost a lacrosse game and about 59 days since Salisbury has.

Absolutely correct.

Here’s another stat - it’s been 2192 days since Tufts won its’ 3rd NCAA championship. It’s been 1447 days since Salisbury won its 12th.

.

LOL Beauty!!!!!

[DeepPocket]

See teams like Salisbury, Lynchburg, CNU, Colorado College etc who actually went and scheduled the best competition they could find from the earliest possible moment, not when the season is well underway when anyone (school administration wise) who intended to play has already done their due diligence and the teams have a full slate.

This is just dishonest/bad faith.

NESCAC teams a) were not allowed to begin play until the conference gave the green light b) were prohibited from playing midweek games c) were given a mandatory weekend conference slate that occupied dates d) were prohibited from overnight travel e) were prohibited from playing schools with less stringent COVID protocols than the NESCAC. Other than that, yeah, I'm sure the school that schedules multiple ranked OOC opponents every year and scheduled a Division I opponent last minute in 2021 was totally dragging its feet and not interested in playing good OOC competition.

I’m glad they had rules. I don’t think they were doing something nefarious / trying to avoid tough competition (as you seem to imply). They are a great program with great players and great coaching. And CLEARLY the school supports them considerably. I hope that that feels good to hear, because this won’t- they didn’t have a particularly strong schedule THIS YEAR. And that isn’t limited to them BTW, a lot of teams were affected by the this to varying degrees. You just seem to be unwilling to accept that.

I was today years old when you referred to Dartmouth, Williams, and Wesleyan as less than legitimate competition while pumping up someone who plays in the USA South. I don't know why I bother.

I read an article (a positive one covering this year’s adversity) about all the football players Wesleyan grabbed to fill out their roster. This year they weren’t their normal great team. I’m not going to waste my time going through the NESCAC thread to get the quotes on the Williams roster this year. But yea, Tufts beat Dartmouth.

And since now I’m being called dishonest, go back and re-read
my posts. I said those two players deserve to be honored, period, not first team/second etc. I took issue with your stance that NESCAC strength of schedule issues should be overlooked due to Covid (though now you oddly seem to feel like they don’t have any strength of schedule issues), while simultaneously using strength of schedule as a large mark against the other mentioned players.

We don’t need a 1st team AA. Just a Tufts roster. I don’t believe this conversation is going anywhere. If you want to reply put it in the 2019 or 2020 NESCAC thread where it belongs.

[ULLaxLuver]

Anyone with an unbiased opinion on what the teams will actually look like?

[PapaDGee]

Let’s talk about some individual players and the All American conversation. Most in this forum are going to consider Cross Ferrara from Salisbury as a near lock for AA honors. There has been a lot of discussion for the need to evaluate conference strength, overall strength of schedule and even factor in a little bit of history due to the impact of COVID on this season. If the prognosticators are going to do all or even part of that, they have to look at Zach Danneman from Southern Virginia University. SVU played the toughest schedule in Division 3 lacrosse this season (prove me wrong). In the 16 games they played, 10 of them were against teams qualifying for the tournament, including 5 of the final 8 teams. (Add to that games against Hampden Sydney and Washington and Lee-the top seed in the ODAC tournament). Ferrara played his 16th game of his season today, while Danneman played his 16th game in the C2C Conference semis. Here is the stat comparison of 2 players from the same conference:

GP GS G A PTS UP DN GB TO CT FO SH SH% SOG SOG%
16 16 69 23 92 7 0 26 22 6 0-0 176 39.2 115 65.3 -C Ferrara Salisbury
16 16 67 22 89 1 0 50 25 10 7-19 178 37.6 118 66.3. -Z Danneman SVU

To make it easier:
Goals: 69-67 Ferrara
Assists: 23-22 Ferrara
Points: 92-89 Ferrara
GB’s: 50-26 Danneman
TO’s: 22-25 Ferrara
CT’s: 10-6 Danneman
Shot%: 39.2-37.6 Ferrara
SOG%: 66.3-65.3 Danneman

Look at those numbers and then consider Danneman and the Atack line at SVU are one of the most aggressive and successful on the ride in the country. I’m not saying that Ferrara shouldn’t be an AA (I definitely think he should be) but if Ferrara is a lock, Danneman certainly has to be in the conversation...but I doubt he will receive much consideration.

(I apologize for the formatting, I tried to clean it up)