Lehigh-Rutgers

[Houndfan73]

If you wanted to check my posts you’ll find a few comments personally where I’ve stated “I think they are good” but we have zero evidence. (and consequently it’s inconsistent to not press the “who’d you beat” comparison with other teams as that would be the standard applied to Bucknell, UVM, UMBC, RoMo, Bryant (who has a first round playoff win on their resume in a less than 15yr history), Richmond, HPU, etc)

There’s been a lot of thin skins and misdirected anguish (from in house administrative decisions) around all of this but if we wanted to be both consistent, not just with the rule set as I’ll throw up if another person regurgitates how they said their tossing the criteria this year which I’m well aware but that doesn’t mean their dumping the conceptual weight of “who’d you play” (we couldn’t say for conference only folks this year with zero data points) and “who’d you beat” (except in some years with respect to Hopkins if the first part was satisfied as a singular outlier). What if there was Bryant and SJU sitting in NEC finals undefeated (and a few half decent OOC wins would have been require like UDel and SBU, Boston U) vs an 8-3 Rutgers with this years schedule. A 10-1 loser who’s only loss was to an undefeated team with a proven coach and playoff history. Would Rutgers still have deserved to get in on the body of tangible literal evidence?

Hoyaboy made a correct and great case back in LP in the year that for Urick pushes out when ND made the playoffs over GT. The fact that ND made the finals (2010 if I recall correctly) didn’t negate the fact that GTown still deserves to get in over them and he was right.

Again, way too much deference to pretty records built on lesser competition.

Since the formation of the B1G lacrosse conference in 2015, the B1G has consistently been among the best conferences in Division I lacrosse. Why did you think this year was any different.

Let’s say there were no AQs and the choice was between an undefeated NEC champion and an 8-3 Rutgers team that had lost only to Maryland and a late-surging Hopkins team. Should we take the NEC champs over Rutgers if there were no AQs?

NO WAY.

It’s not the pretty records that matter. Anyone who has watched the B1G this year knows it is a strong conference from top to bottom. I think all the B1G teams were among the 25 best in the nation. Every single one of them.

I never got too upset by all the Hopkins losses this season, mainly because the Jays were improving each week and I knew how good every team in the conference was.

Rutgers won 8 B1G conference games this season. That was really tough.

Lehigh was a very good team, but they weren’t winning their matchups on offense. Lehigh’s D could compete in the B1G, but not their offense.

Just how good was the B1G this season? Hopkins finished 4-9 and just over a week ago our middies were routinely winning their matchups with Rutgers’ defenders, something Lehigh wasn’t able to do.

Just sayin’....

DocBarrister

the absurd '21 b1g takes just continue and get bigger.

and i think michigan just made the top 25 for the first time in their history after going 3 and 9. hop's in at 4 and 9. but top 10!!!

sad, really.

Actually they cracked the top 20 in 2018 after playing the non-conference portion of their schedule and beating cupcakes like ND....then fell out quickly after getting beat up by the weak BigTen teams.

[wgdsr]

If you wanted to check my posts you’ll find a few comments personally where I’ve stated “I think they are good” but we have zero evidence. (and consequently it’s inconsistent to not press the “who’d you beat” comparison with other teams as that would be the standard applied to Bucknell, UVM, UMBC, RoMo, Bryant (who has a first round playoff win on their resume in a less than 15yr history), Richmond, HPU, etc)

There’s been a lot of thin skins and misdirected anguish (from in house administrative decisions) around all of this but if we wanted to be both consistent, not just with the rule set as I’ll throw up if another person regurgitates how they said their tossing the criteria this year which I’m well aware but that doesn’t mean their dumping the conceptual weight of “who’d you play” (we couldn’t say for conference only folks this year with zero data points) and “who’d you beat” (except in some years with respect to Hopkins if the first part was satisfied as a singular outlier). What if there was Bryant and SJU sitting in NEC finals undefeated (and a few half decent OOC wins would have been require like UDel and SBU, Boston U) vs an 8-3 Rutgers with this years schedule. A 10-1 loser who’s only loss was to an undefeated team with a proven coach and playoff history. Would Rutgers still have deserved to get in on the body of tangible literal evidence?

Hoyaboy made a correct and great case back in LP in the year that for Urick pushes out when ND made the playoffs over GT. The fact that ND made the finals (2010 if I recall correctly) didn’t negate the fact that GTown still deserves to get in over them and he was right.

Again, way too much deference to pretty records built on lesser competition.

Since the formation of the B1G lacrosse conference in 2015, the B1G has consistently been among the best conferences in Division I lacrosse. Why did you think this year was any different.

Let’s say there were no AQs and the choice was between an undefeated NEC champion and an 8-3 Rutgers team that had lost only to Maryland and a late-surging Hopkins team. Should we take the NEC champs over Rutgers if there were no AQs?

NO WAY.

It’s not the pretty records that matter. Anyone who has watched the B1G this year knows it is a strong conference from top to bottom. I think all the B1G teams were among the 25 best in the nation. Every single one of them.

I never got too upset by all the Hopkins losses this season, mainly because the Jays were improving each week and I knew how good every team in the conference was.

Rutgers won 8 B1G conference games this season. That was really tough.

Lehigh was a very good team, but they weren’t winning their matchups on offense. Lehigh’s D could compete in the B1G, but not their offense.

Just how good was the B1G this season? Hopkins finished 4-9 and just over a week ago our middies were routinely winning their matchups with Rutgers’ defenders, something Lehigh wasn’t able to do.

Just sayin’....

DocBarrister

the absurd '21 b1g takes just continue and get bigger.

and i think michigan just made the top 25 for the first time in their history after going 3 and 9. hop's in at 4 and 9. but top 10!!!

sad, really.

Actually they cracked the top 20 in 2018 after playing the non-conference portion of their schedule and beating cupcakes like ND....then fell out quickly after getting beat up by the weak BigTen teams.

yeah... speaking year end. i've seen the michigan beat notre dame thing like 20 times this year. threatening to take over drexel vs uva if this keeps up.

[Houndfan73]

Just pointing out your lack of knowledge. You changed subjects in response.

[wgdsr]

Just pointing out your lack of knowledge. You changed subjects in response.

what's top 20? for practical purposes, it's numbers. there's a bunch of polls. and they don't really count. that was doc's poll i commented on. which one, which week were you citing?

you sound like a troll, though. so i'd watch out. new sheriff is coming to town.

[Mr3Putt]

People talk about Syracuse not being in the tournament. Lehigh is right there w them. They looked they were going to the electrical chair . Played tight, boring lacrosse. Pulled out on any chance of a transition opportunity. They shot ball stick side all day . Cirst is a nice goalie but they made his job way to easy. How bout mixing up your planes a little . Zero creativity. Ok one player didn’t play, get over it. They were unimpressive.

[livelovelax]

The NCAA needs to expand the field to 24. Syracuse making the tournament was wrong cause they were not worthy, got beat down in four games. Any team that finishes last in their league should not make the dance, very simple.

[10stone5]

We’d need about 100 DI lacrosse programs.
The math doesn’t work for a field of 24.

[RURICK]

I know in comparison to other sports the argument of expansion appears not to make sense. However, the primary reason to expand the tourney field it would seem would be to gather fan interest in the sport itself around the country. Most college sports fans know 2 sports, football and basketball, and know little about how lacrosse is even played let alone the nuances of the game. Why not expand to one other round with 16 more teams and reward the perceived better teams with the higher seeds? I will tell you why. The blue bloods from the ACC are against it and they can't risk being upset by a much lesser, inferior opponent. That would destroy their narrative as the best teams in the very small lacrosse world. In my opinion, the lacrosse will never grow nationally until more teams/ schools are included in the tourney. Hell, why not have 2 more rounds and have play in round as well. The only argument against my suggestion is the ACC wants to maintain their dominance and their ability to get the best high school ballers who want a guarantee that they will play in the tourney.

[wgdsr]

jiminy xmas, and here i thought i was upset with sec football.

[DMac]

Yeah, gotta love that. Another conspiracy theory.

[RURICK]

What part of my assessment and suggestion do the last 2 posters disagree with to suggest that it is a conspiracy theory? The bias in favor of the ACC is mind boggling and obvious. I would guess that supporters for my positions would come from any conference NOT ACC. Just sayin'.

[wgdsr]

What part of my assessment and suggestion do the last 2 posters disagree with to suggest that it is a conspiracy theory? The bias in favor of the ACC is mind boggling and obvious. I would guess that supporters for my positions would come from any conference NOT ACC. Just sayin'.

you say "the only argument against". you've been helpfully informed now probably dozens of times, including just above your post, that the nc$$ sets up their tournaments for mid-high teens to low 20's % of total teams. for all sports.

what would be really crazy is if non-revenue lacrosse got some special dispensation. please provide receipt that you read the paragraph above and understand it.

it would also be wild if and when someone discovers the acc has more pull with the nc$$ than the b1g. that'd be quite the story.

if i can think of any other reasons other than nc$$ tourney why a recruit would want to go to chapel hill instead of marquette, or new brunswick for that matter, i'll post.

[RURICK]

I received my education from Rutgers. What do i know. I will leave the remedies of the system to the more cerebral ACC posters, lol. Now, go back and play with your fraternity brothers.

[RURICK]

I am surprised farfromgeneva is not already posting on here to denigrate my comments. Perhaps he can provide some comments with some more phallic refernces for us all to read. and you people have a problem with my posts with veiled suggestions that my intelligence level is inferior to yours? You are a joke.

[wgdsr]

I am surprised farfromgeneva is not already posting on here to denigrate my comments. Perhaps he can provide some comments with some more phallic refernces for us all to read. and you people have a problem with my posts with veiled suggestions that my intelligence level is inferior to yours? You are a joke.

i don't have any estimate of your intelligence level. i think you're either blinded, frustrated or being willfully ignorant. everyone's told you that it's an impossibility.
it's not a bad idea, just not doable. and yet you take that fact and run out on an acc rant. i mean, free country and all.

we'd all like to see more teams in. then we wouldn't have any more debates on the last team in. my hoos wouldn't have to go to the trouble of scheduling a marginal mid-major as a tuneup post acc tourney to come to charlottesville. the nc$$ would do it for them.

[RURICK]

Sorry, you wim.

[DMac]

I never said anything about your intelligence level but your theory is nonsense. To think the ACC doesn't welcome competition and is afraid of facing "inferior competition" in early rounds proves that. Just ridiculous. The game continues to grow pretty much nationwide like wildfire creating more and more places to recruit good lacrosse players from. You really think the ACC is afraid of this and wants to keep it all for themselves? C'mon, you claim to be smarter than that with your Rutgers education but the sound of your post doesn't much prove that.

[wgdsr]

rurick,
an expanded tournament given the paucity of at larges vs what could be considered some deserving teams at the margin has been suggested lots in the past.

the numbers game precludes that some still, but the nc$$ has finagled vernacular in the last 10+ years to believe it could be doable. with lacrosse, hoops. done in different ways but to "conform" to some of the written and unspoken rules.

that is, call them play ins. (aq's for lax. but see -- ucla during madness and their run as an at large play in). add another at large or 2, and have "play ins" there, too. we've lost a couple? lax teams recently and there's covid hangover still to be seen, but net net have added teams since the tourney went to 16.

hopefully, the ivy still has sports.

[twb2020]

Finally was getting a chance to add my opinion to the game. As a Lehigh fan, they came up real short. They have been fading since the Army game. I know they did not have 22, but I don't think that would have made a difference. They don't have shooters or breakdown players. They rely on ball movement and the inside game. Take that away, and you have the games vs. RU and Nova.

The defense can only hold down the fort for so long before it breaks. With that said, I thought the zone worked against a team like RU. I believed they only scored 5 goals - 6V6. The 7 others were on transition or end of the game tactics. The NASCAR offense worked. It is a shame that Lehigh has a slow-the-game down approach. It was not fun to watch.

Also, I love the Rutgers fan base and how they feel that they are one of the best teams this year. They are having a great season, in part because of the Kirst brothers. Where would they be without them!!!! I do recall they were 2-6 with the same roster in 2020. The year before (2019), a .500 team. Without either, they would be .500 in the Big 10 this year. So it would help if you thanked the NCAA for giving players the extra year and the Kirst brothers the opportunity to play where their father played his collegiate career. The story was a great storyline to the game. NCAA did the smart thing to get Lehigh and Cole Kirst involved.

[RURICK]

What upper echelon team did not take advantage of the transfer portal? The ACC took the lion's share of good transfers as they guarantee they will get to the tourney. Just sayin'. Obviously, Rutgers was measurably better with the addition of the Kirst brothers.