Looking Forward to 2022

[LarryGamLax]

Your standards are your standards, Larry, but in my view you are often times overly critical and overly harsh.
Making it to the FF/NC game is not "nothing to show for it" in my book, it's rather an outstanding season and a level/accomplishment every other other team was unable to attain. A player who plays for four years and never makes it to the end game has plenty to show for it despite not having any hardware to put on their shelf.

There is not a hint of bloviating in statement #4. To say a team played good defense is not bloviating.

bloviate
[ˈblōvēˌāt]
VERB
bloviated (past tense) · bloviated (past participle)
talk at length, especially in an inflated or empty way.

You need to use red, it shows up better and is easier to distinguish your comments from thoise in the original post.

Wait a minute...isn't Red angry?

Did I say making it to the Final Four or the NC game was nothing? Point that one out to me and I'll make the correction. When you have the talent and the rep and the budget and you don't win it more than once or twice, something is not quite right. Princeton has 3 NCs and I know in one of those they beat Maryland(with Cindy and Gary). Maryland should beaten the Nassau Street Tigers like a rug, but they played down to Princeton's level(not a condemnation of Princeton, but Maryland's team was killer all over the field) and lost. Maryland was so angry about that they won the next seven NCs in a row. Haha.

Again, to whom much is given, much is expected.

[LarryGamLax]

Few things: Acacia took over a program that was fairly irrelevant and now is a Top 5 team each year. Part is recruiting and the other is coaching. She has to be Top 5 in the country. Four NC appearances in 9 years (50 percent) is insane. 2 Tewaaraton winners as well. I see BC as a final four team each of the next 2-3 years. The Syracuse goalie transfer Hower is very well thought of. Was the last goalie cut at U-19. Everyone says Spallina is "not going anywhere" but do we know for sure whether or not he applied for the Cuse job. I hear he did so maybe he is not going anywhere despite trying to. Curious if anyone knows for sure if he wanted and applied for that job.

You're assertion that BC was "a fairly irrelevant program" when Acacia took over, just doesn't pass the white glove test. BC was in the top 20 of D1 in 2011 and 2012. That does not seem irrelevant to me and they're in the vaunted ACC. It was a cool story until the facts got involved.
Always speak the truth and shame the devil!

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Few things: Acacia took over a program that was fairly irrelevant and now is a Top 5 team each year. Part is recruiting and the other is coaching. She has to be Top 5 in the country. Four NC appearances in 9 years (50 percent) is insane. 2 Tewaaraton winners as well. I see BC as a final four team each of the next 2-3 years. The Syracuse goalie transfer Hower is very well thought of. Was the last goalie cut at U-19. Everyone says Spallina is "not going anywhere" but do we know for sure whether or not he applied for the Cuse job. I hear he did so maybe he is not going anywhere despite trying to. Curious if anyone knows for sure if he wanted and applied for that job.

You're assertion that BC was "a fairly irrelevant program" when Acacia took over, just doesn't pass the white glove test. BC was in the top 20 of D1 in 2011 and 2012. That does not seem irrelevant to me and they're in the vaunted ACC. It was a cool story until the facts got involved.
Always speak the truth and shame the devil!

BC before Acacia



BC since Acacia



All-Time Post Season Results

[Lax101]

Somebody has too much time on their hands. You can check my math since I looked at your numbers for about 5 minutes. Looks like the team was 7-28 under Holden in the ACC. By my standards that is not relevant. Closer to embarrassing. Perhaps that is why a coaching change was made. Compared to 38-19 under AW. Winning percentage in the ACC went from 20% to 66% and you sprinkle in 4 straight NC appearances.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Somebody has too much time on their hands. You can check my math since I looked at your numbers for about 5 minutes. Looks like the team was 7-28 under Holden in the ACC. By my standards that is not relevant. Closer to embarrassing. Perhaps that is why a coaching change was made. Compared to 38-19 under AW. Winning percentage in the ACC went from 20% to 66% and you sprinkle in 4 straight NC appearances.

I think you're addressing this toward Larry as I posted these stats in full support of your original post, Lax101.
The "winner" in the clip is referring to you.

[wlaxphan20]

I guess it depends on your definition of "irrelevant" because Larry and Lax101/ONW are both speaking the truth. 7 out of the 8 ACC teams can almost always be found in the top 20-25, so while the ACC record on it's own doesn't look pretty, it's the ACC. Finishing 4th, 5th, or 6th does put you in the top 20. At the end of 2011 BC was ranked 13th and at the end of 2012 they were ranked 19th (IWLCA). If ranking 10-20 are what you consider irrelevant, then you're perfectly entitled to do so. I personally wouldn't consider them irrelevant, but I wouldn't really consider them title contenders either.

And it's not like AWW inherited the Bad News Bears. Bowen Holden had scored Stanwick (2011 recruiting class), Rix (2011), Mannelly (2012), & Margolis (2012) as recruits who really helped put the team in the national conversation. Holden had gotten them to buy in to the idea that BC could be a top team. Did AWW lead those players and make decisions on how to best use them along with her coaching staff? Yes. I just think the program was left in a better state than just the ACC record suggests when AWW took over.

Also, the NCAA tournament expanded from 16 teams to 26 in 2013. So not only was it much harder to even make the tournament, the chances of meeting a very good team in the first round of the tournament were imminent, especially if you were an at-large bid like BC was. edit: If we're measuring by today's standards and the 29-team tournament - BC would've had a lot more tournament appearances.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Your standards are your standards, Larry, but in my view you are often times overly critical and overly harsh.
Making it to the FF/NC game is not "nothing to show for it" in my book, it's rather an outstanding season and a level/accomplishment every other other team was unable to attain. A player who plays for four years and never makes it to the end game has plenty to show for it despite not having any hardware to put on their shelf.

There is not a hint of bloviating in statement #4. To say a team played good defense is not bloviating.

bloviate
[ˈblōvēˌāt]
VERB
bloviated (past tense) · bloviated (past participle)
talk at length, especially in an inflated or empty way.

Did I say making it to the Final Four or the NC game was nothing? Point that one out to me and I'll make the correction.

Regarding Syracuse you wrote:

“Another always talented team with nothing to show for all of that talent.”

[LarryGamLax]

I guess it depends on your definition of "irrelevant" because Larry and Lax101/ONW are both speaking the truth. 7 out of the 8 ACC teams can almost always be found in the top 20-25, so while the ACC record on it's own doesn't look pretty, it's the ACC. Finishing 4th, 5th, or 6th does put you in the top 20. At the end of 2011 BC was ranked 13th and at the end of 2012 they were ranked 19th (IWLCA). If ranking 10-20 are what you consider irrelevant, then you're perfectly entitled to do so. I personally wouldn't consider them irrelevant, but I wouldn't really consider them title contenders either.

And it's not like AWW inherited the Bad News Bears. Bowen Holden had scored Stanwick (2011 recruiting class), Rix (2011), Mannelly (2012), & Margolis (2012) as recruits who really helped put the team in the national conversation. Holden had gotten them to buy in to the idea that BC could be a top team. Did AWW lead those players and make decisions on how to best use them along with her coaching staff? Yes. I just think the program was left in a better state than just the ACC record suggests when AWW took over.

Also, the NCAA tournament expanded from 16 teams to 26 in 2013. So not only was it much harder to even make the tournament, the chances of meeting a very good team in the first round of the tournament were imminent, especially if you were an at-large bid like BC was.

A bit of history...when I got involved in Women's Lacrosse, there were about 50 programs. If you were not in the top 10 to 15, then your program was considered to be not very good. There was no Power 5 conferences or anything like that. I can remember when programs like Lafayette and UNH were in the top 10 and in the NCAA tournament, believe it or not.
Flash Forward to the 21st Century and there are now 117 D1 Women's Lacrosse Programs. Things are different now because of numbers. When Joe Spallina became HC of Stony Brook, they were irrelevant. In the previous 9 years of the program they only had 4 seasons of .500 or better. That's definitely irrelevant. They are the opposite of that now. My point is when you have 117 programs, you have to go below the half margin before you talk about a team being irrelevant. So in 2011 & 2012, when Bowen Holden had BC in the top 20, there was nothing at all irrelevant about it.

wlaxphan20...thanks for trying to reasonable about this, but it's not going to work. If Lax101 wants to consider a program that was in the top 20 irrelevant , then yes he can have his opinion. That doesn't mean he/she are right...and they're not! I know a couple of players from those BC teams and if Lax101 was to tell them they were an irrelevant program, I would love to record the players throwing that hard check into Lax101's ribs. Haha

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Lax101 wrote “fairly irrelevant”. I think it’s only fair to ask what was meant by “fairly”. I don’t have the same history invested as others here but after looking at the stats, I didn’t have a problem with the description. But what do I know.

[hmmm]

Lax101 wrote “fairly irrelevant”. I think it’s only fair to ask what was meant by “fairly”. I don’t have the same history invested as others here but after looking at the stats, I didn’t have a problem with the description. But what do I know.

In my humble opinion making 1 NCAA tournament in the 20 years prior to AW makes the program "fairly irrelevant".

[wlaxphan20]

I guess it depends on your definition of "irrelevant" because Larry and Lax101/ONW are both speaking the truth. 7 out of the 8 ACC teams can almost always be found in the top 20-25, so while the ACC record on it's own doesn't look pretty, it's the ACC. Finishing 4th, 5th, or 6th does put you in the top 20. At the end of 2011 BC was ranked 13th and at the end of 2012 they were ranked 19th (IWLCA). If ranking 10-20 are what you consider irrelevant, then you're perfectly entitled to do so. I personally wouldn't consider them irrelevant, but I wouldn't really consider them title contenders either.

And it's not like AWW inherited the Bad News Bears. Bowen Holden had scored Stanwick (2011 recruiting class), Rix (2011), Mannelly (2012), & Margolis (2012) as recruits who really helped put the team in the national conversation. Holden had gotten them to buy in to the idea that BC could be a top team. Did AWW lead those players and make decisions on how to best use them along with her coaching staff? Yes. I just think the program was left in a better state than just the ACC record suggests when AWW took over.

Also, the NCAA tournament expanded from 16 teams to 26 in 2013. So not only was it much harder to even make the tournament, the chances of meeting a very good team in the first round of the tournament were imminent, especially if you were an at-large bid like BC was.

A bit of history...when I got involved in Women's Lacrosse, there were about 50 programs. If you were not in the top 10 to 15, then your program was considered to be not very good. There was no Power 5 conferences or anything like that. I can remember when programs like Lafayette and UNH were in the top 10 and in the NCAA tournament, believe it or not.
Flash Forward to the 21st Century and there are now 117 D1 Women's Lacrosse Programs. Things are different now because of numbers. When Joe Spallina became HC of Stony Brook, they were irrelevant. In the previous 9 years of the program they only had 4 seasons of .500 or better. That's definitely irrelevant. They are the opposite of that now. My point is when you have 117 programs, you have to go below the half margin before you talk about a team being irrelevant. So in 2011 & 2012, when Bowen Holden had BC in the top 20, there was nothing at all irrelevant about it.

wlaxphan20...thanks for trying to reasonable about this, but it's not going to work. If Lax101 wants to consider a program that was in the top 20 irrelevant , then yes he can have his opinion. That doesn't mean he/she are right...and they're not! I know a couple of players from those BC teams and if Lax101 was to tell them they were an irrelevant program, I would love to record the players throwing that hard check into Lax101's ribs. Haha

Lol I tried. Thanks for take the time to expand on your background. I know a girl who was on the team 13-16 (HS class of 2012), and I think she'd say/do the same

[Lax101]

I'll stand by my irrelevant comment. Winning 20 percent of your conference games over an extended period of time makes you irrelevant and will cost your coach her job in the long run. Nothing personal with BC - I know several girls from past teams and the current team. I bet most of the ACC coaches during the Holden era would have considered BC irrelevant as well -: ). Would you turn on the TV to watch the old BC team for most of the years under the prior head coach. I certainly wouldn't. Let's be honest, their is a huge drop off in team talent once you get beyond the Top 10. In my opinion there are irrelevant teams in the Top 20 each year. For example if you would lose by running clock to most Top 5 teams and you can not compete for a conference championship you are irrelevant to most college lax fans.

[Bart]

I'll stand by my irrelevant comment. Winning 20 percent of your conference games over an extended period of time makes you irrelevant and will cost your coach her job in the long run. Nothing personal with BC - I know several girls from past teams and the current team. I bet most of the ACC coaches during the Holden era would have considered BC irrelevant as well -: ). Would you turn on the TV to watch the old BC team for most of the years under the prior head coach. I certainly wouldn't. Let's be honest, their is a huge drop off in team talent once you get beyond the Top 10. In my opinion there are irrelevant teams in the Top 20 each year. For example if you would lose by running clock to most Top 5 teams and you can not compete for a conference championship you are irrelevant to most college lax fans.

Must not have enough LI Grit and determination below the top 10

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Being ranked means nothing. The RPI is more accurate, yet even that can be skewed by all the mashugana good losses and bad wins farkakte. Sometimes it just comes down to common sense and judging what is seen, which is subjective and not able to be proven scientifically, if you will.

For instance, and I go back to this often because it’s a good example, which is one of the beauties of sports—the history, and all those juicy stats to pore over. But back to 2018, when Stony Brook was ranked #1 pretty much all year. I remember Seawolves fans grousing because their team was given a 5 seed in the NCAA’s instead of a 1 seed. Yet they did get bounced, albeit just by the hair of their collective chinny-chin-chin, in the quarters, thus justifying their 5 seed in a way.

So back to this current debate—I think it all comes down to opinion, whether or not BC was “fairly irrelevant” before Acacia took over. I would have used the adjective “relatively” as a qualifier, but I’m not the author of the original post. It is not outrageous to say BC was “fairly irrelevant” after the 2012 season, regardless of where they were ranked in the frivolous polls. Here are some more stats to flesh out the discussion:

2011 Results



Their place in The Tournament with RPI



And the 2011 Tournament results



2012 Results



Their final 2012 RPI ranking the year they did not make The Dance



Interesting to note--BC's RPI in the 1st three years of Acacia's tenure 2013--9; 2014--6; 2015--6. Up from 14 and 20 the two years before she took over.

[seacoaster]

ONW writes, among other things: "Yet [SBU] did get bounced, albeit just by the hair of their collective chinny-chin-chin, in the quarters, thus justifying their 5 seed in a way."

It is true that they lost in the QFs, 12-11 to a very, very good BC team, in Newton. My impression of that game and that loss suggested that SBU was an absolutely elite team, probably the third or fourth best team in the country that year.

On the "was BC irrelevant" under Coach Holden, the answer really has to be "no." She was a decent coach. I watched them play UNH in 2011 and 2012, and my recollection is that they were a pretty good team (Brooke Blue, Kristen Igoe) and that those teams gave Holden the traction she needed to bring in Stanwick and Rix. Parenthetically, I still think Rix was one of the best players I've seen -- great skills, intelligence and just over the top grit and determination. Building blocks are not irrelevant, and my guess is AWW would tell us the same thing.

[watcherinthewoods]

While we are looking at BC history, I am waiting for someone to comment on the the "transition" from Holden to Walker. Anyone? Anyone?

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

ONW writes, among other things: "Yet [SBU] did get bounced, albeit just by the hair of their collective chinny-chin-chin, in the quarters, thus justifying their 5 seed in a way."

It is true that they lost in the QFs, 12-11 to a very, very good BC team, in Newton. My impression of that game and that loss suggested that SBU was an absolutely elite team, probably the third or fourth best team in the country that year.

On the "was BC irrelevant" under Coach Holden, the answer really has to be "no." She was a decent coach. I watched them play UNH in 2011 and 2012, and my recollection is that they were a pretty good team (Brooke Blue, Kristen Igoe) and that those teams gave Holden the traction she needed to bring in Stanwick and Rix. Parenthetically, I still think Rix was one of the best players I've seen -- great skills, intelligence and just over the top grit and determination. Building blocks are not irrelevant, and my guess is AWW would tell us the same thing.

Great points, all.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

While we are looking at BC history, I am waiting for someone to comment on the the "transition" from Holden to Walker. Anyone? Anyone?

I believe that would be a cue for Larry to weigh in…

[Cagekeeper]

Has anyone heard who Spallina is bringing in to replace hiller?

[wlaxphan20]

On the "was BC irrelevant" under Coach Holden, the answer really has to be "no." She was a decent coach. I watched them play UNH in 2011 and 2012, and my recollection is that they were a pretty good team (Brooke Blue, Kristen Igoe) and that those teams gave Holden the traction she needed to bring in Stanwick and Rix. Parenthetically, I still think Rix was one of the best players I've seen -- great skills, intelligence and just over the top grit and determination. Building blocks are not irrelevant, and my guess is AWW would tell us the same thing.

Very true. And since AWW took over the program in May 2012, Holden was likely responsible for the recruiting the players in the class of 2013 as well - Kate Weeks, Mary-Kate O'Neill, Tess Chandler, & Zoe Ochoa among them.

I loved watching Rix play. It was such a shame her senior season was hampered by a serious concussion.