2022 D1 Selection Committee

[Jlax92]

- ESPN production was some of the worst I’ve ever seen and it’s been awful over the years. Bad direction, screens weren’t working or on cue, no video packages or wrong video packages.
- Cotter, Quint and Carc were cringe worthy. Jay needs to work out. He is a becoming a huge boob. Would it kill him to wear a loafer or anything but sneakers ?
- ESPN clearly pulls hard for Norte dame and the acc but the committee seems pretty comfortable with their new friends at the Ivy League, whose pockets are deeper, the lax much better and the ivy so much more ivyer than the ACC or anywhere else on the planet for that matter
-Carc on ND was beside himself like telling him that they just sold out of breadsticks at the Bristol Olive Garden
- Maryland will clash with Virginia in the quarters
- was it just me or was it weird that they had a woman from the committee talk about the mens committee and a man talk about the womens tournament?
- can’t believe Harvard is in over ND or Duke Can’t wait for Penn vs Richmond

[Jlax92]

What I don't get is, the straight RPI clearly didn't matter much, otherwise Duke and Notre Dame would have been in over OSU and Harvard. Certainly, Duke at #7 would be in. And yet, in her ESPN interview, the committee chair cited significant wins and losses as major determining factors. But those significant wins and losses are only made "significant" by...the RPI? So the RPI matters a lot when it's being used to decide what is a big win or loss, but not when you're using it as its own metric? Just seems a little confusing. If you're going to say RPI isn't super important then how do you know what's a good win/loss vs. a bad one? I had no dog in this fight whatsoever.

I am confused in the exact same way.

[TheBigIguana]

Justify this all you want. This was a joke and the whole lacrosse world outside of the Ivy knows it. Maybe we can just let the RPI decide the champ from now on. No wonder this sport gets bumped by softball for TV time. Pathetic.

If it was based on RPI alone the ACC would have 3 teams

I didn’t understand his point either since they didn’t go straight RPI this year.

I’m sorry you didn’t understand. The Ivy is seeded where they are because of RPI. Virginia is the only ACC team in the tourney because of RPI. Anything else? Looking forward to that 8/9 game, as I’m sure the Hoos are.

But this blatantly untrue, ND and Duke have higher RPI rankings than Harvard and Ohio State

Ok. You tell what else explains these picks. Big wins and losses? What makes a big win big and bad loss bad? You guessed it ….

Notre Dame went on a six game winning streak where they beat 0 tournament teams and it is being used as evidence that they not only should have made it but that they could win the title. Unfortunately the ACC people are having a tough time coming around to the idea that their league isn't that good this year.

The OOC is telling. Virginia's best win is HP. ND is Michigan. Duke is a respectable Richmond but they have three highly suspect losses. I don't need to look up RPI to tell you that isn't good.

Harvard and Ohio State both have better OOC wins and the Ivy as a whole was dominant OOC which is why Harvard beating Princeton is better than Notre Dame beating Duke. Remember when the ACC had 5 or 6 teams or whatever? This is the same thing but now it is wrong apparently.

[genghiskhanbluejay]

Do seedings for the Ivy teams really matter ?
If all 5 get a home game, a seeding, then they won’t
meet again until the quarterfinals.
But the Ivy teams will have to get past each other for how
ever many to make it to the semi’s.

You mean all 6 Ivy, only Darmouth was left out, easier for Ivy teams to make the NCAA tournament than to make the Ivy tournament.
If ND and Duke made the tournament the Ivy would be lucky to get 1 team into the final 4, they will underperform once again.

[nyjay]

RPI needs to be reworked,

Problem is, every year everyone says this over the last 2 weeks of the season and the first 6 days after selection Sunday, and then the tourney begins and it's all forgotten.

I've never read anyone anywhere defending RPI, especially for a sport like Lacrosse with the small sample size. And yet year after year after year...

Maybe something will change this year. Maybe now that it's hallowed ACC schools on the outside looking in, something will actually happen. But my money's on a thread exactly like this one in the 2023 forum, where people complain about RPI and how unjust it is.

Fair points. But reworking it is hard, given the size of the field, the relatively small number of inter-conference games and the fact that pretty much every year, 2/3 - 3/4 of the top 20 teams in the country are going to come from three conferences, which have a total of 18 members. Usually, RPI benefits the ACC teams (which I think is pretty clearly the best conference), but the sheer number of quality OOC wins by the Ivies this year, combined with the parity within the conference, just caused an anomalous result. I tend to think the way to fix it is to add a factor based on conference ranking. Teams finishing 4th and 5th and 6th in their conference should really have a hard time in getting an at large, but maybe that's too generous to the Ivy, which in most years is a 2 or 3 bid league.

[viho]

A farce...I'd put money on the Notre Dame playing right now to beat any of the Ivy teams. Hell, I'd pick Duke to beat most of them. No disrespect, but this is comical. It's funnier than Scarface trying to do a drug deal with Kermit the Frog.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FukghSV6Ct8

You are correct

[genghiskhanbluejay]

You mean all 6 Ivy, only Dartmouth was left out, easier for Ivy teams to make the NCAA tournament than to make the Ivy tournament.
If ND and Duke made the tournament the Ivy would be lucky to get 1 team into the final 4, they will underperform once again.

[1766]

So, yeah, Dano is a hall of fame coach; but is there a worse coached team than this Duke team? It's criminal how they've underperformed relative to their talent. Zero excuses.

Dino is very highly regarded and he is definitely a players coach. All that talent though and you have start to question his strategic coaching. If his team doesn't make the tournament, with all of that talent, it would be fair to ask some questions. Especially when the acc is having a seemingly down year.

looking like we won't have to ask questions, then.

You think they are a lock for the NCAA bid? That would be an outlier opinion. We will see tomorrow. No doubt they will be sweating it out.

lock? 90+%.
i have duke, you have tosu.

You got my venmo bruh? 1 acc team? Ouch!

[MoralTerpitude]

Woodruff said the discussion came down to four spots for six teams. I think we can safely guess those teams were Cornell, Brown, Harvard, OSU, ND, and Duke.

Cornell’s resume is pretty strong - beat Yale, Princeton, won head-to-heads against OSU, Harvard, worst loss is to Army. No question they get a ticket.
Brown was pretty strong too. Beat Yale, Penn, and Cornell, with only a bad loss to UMass on the resume. So they get in.
Duke has only one top 10 win against #9 UVa, and three bad losses to Syracuse, Loyola, and Jax. They’re out.

Here’s where it gets tricky. OSU has the advantage over ND and Harvard in that they beat both of them. Only loss to a non-top 7 team is Denver (#20). So despite being ranked 14th in the RPI, I think they get selected on head-to-head and lack of bad losses.

So it’s down to Harvard vs. ND. Harvard beat Brown, Princeton, and BU (#13). Their only losses were to seeded tournament teams, and OSU.

Notre Dame only beat Duke. They had zero quality wins besides Duke. If it’s decided that Duke is not tournament caliber, then it’s really tough to argue for Notre Dame. They had four opportunities to get a marquee win, and lost all of them fairly convincingly (except against Maryland at home).

So clearly the committee looked at quality wins (i.e. top-5 and top-10), bad losses, and head-to-head. Which is pretty much exactly what the NCAA criteria says they’re supposed to look at.

[Chousnake]

The Ivies have been screwed in selections and seedings year after year for the past 15 years or more. And the ACC was placing 5 teams in the tourney year after year, with 4 and sometimes 5 of those teams seeded. Teams like Hopkins got in the tourney many times because of SOS and "good" losses while teams that won games were on the outside looking in. Cornell has been underseeded multiple times starting in 06. Getting the 4 seed in 07 after beating Duke, playing SU on the road after beating them in the regular season, missing out in 2019 (and there are more).

So now the Ivy League beats up on the lax world in 2022 (after the lax mafia sounded the death knell for the league for sitting out 2021) and gets justly rewarded by the tournament committee the same way the ACC and other schools (JHU) were rewarded in past seasons and now it's an outrage? Cry me a river Duke and ND. Now you know how it feels.

Want to make the tourney Duke and ND? Win some OOC games against top teams. That's it. Beating each other at the end of the season when most of the ACC lost its key OOC games means nothing. And how can you use the "eye test" when it's ACC vs ACC at the end of the season? The ACC fans complaining about the selection process are hypocrites.

And I give the selection committee tremendous kudos for using head to head for some of the last slots. There is nothing more telling about whether team A or team B should get a bid when the resumes are similar then when team A beat team B.

[suitcase10]

Lots of bravado.
ND is -2.5 againt Harvard or brown
ND is favored against EVERY team in field
Other than Terps . Maybe pickem with Hoyas.

Wishful thinking is great and cheering for your team is great. But Irish are a top 3 team today , anyone betting knows that.

[faircornell]

ACC needs to get its house in order so they can get and AQ. If they had an AQ this year it would be a two bid conference probably knocking out Harvard.

The ACC "invented" the Conference Tournament. Re-institute the ACC Tournament. Add Louisville and they have an AQ. Simple stuff.

[TheBigIguana]

Lots of bravado.
ND is -2.5 againt Harvard or brown
ND is favored against EVERY team in field
Other than Terps . Maybe pickem with Hoyas.

Wishful thinking is great and cheering for your team is great. But Irish are a top 3 team today , anyone betting knows that.

Let bookies set the field is at least an out of the box idea

[Farfromgeneva]

Justify this all you want. This was a joke and the whole lacrosse world outside of the Ivy knows it. Maybe we can just let the RPI decide the champ from now on. No wonder this sport gets bumped by softball for TV time. Pathetic.

If it was based on RPI alone the ACC would have 3 teams

I didn’t understand his point either since they didn’t go straight RPI this year.

I’m sorry you didn’t understand. The Ivy is seeded where they are because of RPI. Virginia is the only ACC team in the tourney because of RPI. Anything else? Looking forward to that 8/9 game, as I’m sure the Hoos are.

But there were multiple at larges who jumped the RPI line over Duke and Nd.

[rolldodge]

Woodruff said the discussion came down to four spots for six teams. I think we can safely guess those teams were Cornell, Brown, Harvard, OSU, ND, and Duke.

Cornell’s resume is pretty strong - beat Yale, Princeton, won head-to-heads against OSU, Harvard, worst loss is to Army. No question they get a ticket.
Brown was pretty strong too. Beat Yale, Penn, and Cornell, with only a bad loss to UMass on the resume. So they get in.
Duke has only one top 10 win against #9 UVa, and three bad losses to Syracuse, Loyola, and Jax. They’re out.

Here’s where it gets tricky. OSU has the advantage over ND and Harvard in that they beat both of them. Only loss to a non-top 7 team is Denver (#20). So despite being ranked 14th in the RPI, I think they get selected on head-to-head and lack of bad losses.

So it’s down to Harvard vs. ND. Harvard beat Brown, Princeton, and BU (#13). Their only losses were to seeded tournament teams, and OSU.

Notre Dame only beat Duke. They had zero quality wins besides Duke. If it’s decided that Duke is not tournament caliber, then it’s really tough to argue for Notre Dame. They had four opportunities to get a marquee win, and lost all of them fairly convincingly (except against Maryland at home).

So clearly the committee looked at quality wins (i.e. top-5 and top-10), bad losses, and head-to-head. Which is pretty much exactly what the NCAA criteria says they’re supposed to look at.

I actually think there is a better case for ND over Ohio State than ND over Harvard. Two top 10 wins to none for OSU.

The fact that NDs top 10 wins were both over a team the committee decided was not going to be part of the tournament plus the head to head killed them.

[nyjay]

So Woodruff said the discussion came down to four spots for six teams. I think we can safely guess those teams were Cornell, Brown, Harvard, OSU, ND, and Duke.

Cornell’s resume is pretty strong - beat Yale, Princeton, won head-to-heads against OSU, Harvard, worst loss is to Army. No question they get a ticket.
Brown was pretty strong too. Beat Yale, Penn, and Cornell, with only a bad loss to UMass on the resume. So they get in.
Duke has only one top 10 win against #9 UVa, and three bad losses to Syracuse, Loyola, and Jax. They’re out.

Here’s where it gets tricky. OSU has the advantage over ND and Harvard in that they beat both of them. Only loss to a non-top 7 team is Denver (#20). So despite being ranked 14th in the RPI, I think they get selected on head-to-head and lack of bad losses.

So it’s down to Harvard vs. ND. Harvard beat Brown, Princeton, and BU (#13). Their only losses were to seeded tournament teams, and OSU.

Notre Dame only beat Duke. They had zero quality wins besides Duke. If it’s decided that Duke is not tournament caliber, then it’s really tough to argue for Notre Dame. They had four opportunities to get a marquee win, and lost all of them fairly convincingly (except against Maryland at home).

So clearly the committee looked at quality wins (i.e. top-5 and top-10), bad losses, and head-to-head. Which is pretty much exactly what the NCAA criteria says they’re supposed to look at.

Again - the problem is that all of the Ivy's good wins and not-bad losses were against each other. The real issue is in determining the quality of the league. All this comes down to (1) Princeton beating Georgetown and Rutgers and (2) Penn beating Duke. As a result of those three wins, every intra-Ivy game became a good win or a not-bad loss. Hence we get six Ivies in the tourney. So Harvard and Cornell can thank Princeton for beating Georgetown and Rutgers, without which the whole field would be different.

[Farfromgeneva]

RPI needs to be reworked,

Problem is, every year everyone says this over the last 2 weeks of the season and the first 6 days after selection Sunday, and then the tourney begins and it's all forgotten.

I've never read anyone anywhere defending RPI, especially for a sport like Lacrosse with the small sample size. And yet year after year after year...

Maybe something will change this year. Maybe now that it's hallowed ACC schools on the outside looking in, something will actually happen. But my money's on a thread exactly like this one in the 2023 forum, where people complain about RPI and how unjust it is.

Fair points. But reworking it is hard, given the size of the field, the relatively small number of inter-conference games and the fact that pretty much every year, 2/3 - 3/4 of the top 20 teams in the country are going to come from three conferences, which have a total of 18 members. Usually, RPI benefits the ACC teams (which I think is pretty clearly the best conference), but the sheer number of quality OOC wins by the Ivies this year, combined with the parity within the conference, just caused an anomalous result. I tend to think the way to fix it is to add a factor based on conference ranking. Teams finishing 4th and 5th and 6th in their conference should really have a hard time in getting an at large, but maybe that's too generous to the Ivy, which in most years is a 2 or 3 bid league.

Massey?

[Farfromgeneva]

So Woodruff said the discussion came down to four spots for six teams. I think we can safely guess those teams were Cornell, Brown, Harvard, OSU, ND, and Duke.

Cornell’s resume is pretty strong - beat Yale, Princeton, won head-to-heads against OSU, Harvard, worst loss is to Army. No question they get a ticket.
Brown was pretty strong too. Beat Yale, Penn, and Cornell, with only a bad loss to UMass on the resume. So they get in.
Duke has only one top 10 win against #9 UVa, and three bad losses to Syracuse, Loyola, and Jax. They’re out.

Here’s where it gets tricky. OSU has the advantage over ND and Harvard in that they beat both of them. Only loss to a non-top 7 team is Denver (#20). So despite being ranked 14th in the RPI, I think they get selected on head-to-head and lack of bad losses.

So it’s down to Harvard vs. ND. Harvard beat Brown, Princeton, and BU (#13). Their only losses were to seeded tournament teams, and OSU.

Notre Dame only beat Duke. They had zero quality wins besides Duke. If it’s decided that Duke is not tournament caliber, then it’s really tough to argue for Notre Dame. They had four opportunities to get a marquee win, and lost all of them fairly convincingly (except against Maryland at home).

So clearly the committee looked at quality wins (i.e. top-5 and top-10), bad losses, and head-to-head. Which is pretty much exactly what the NCAA criteria says they’re supposed to look at.

Again - the problem is that all of the Ivy's good wins and not-bad losses were against each other. The real issue is in determining the quality of the league. All this comes down to (1) Princeton beating Georgetown and Rutgers and (2) Penn beating Duke. As a result of those three wins, every intra-Ivy game became a good win or a not-bad loss. Hence we get six Ivies in the tourney. So Harvard and Cornell can thank Princeton for beating Georgetown and Rutgers, without which the whole field would be different.

And Cornell beating OSU and Harvard beating BU. Probably a few others I’m missing.

[masondixonlax]

Lots of bravado.
ND is -2.5 againt Harvard or brown
ND is favored against EVERY team in field
Other than Terps . Maybe pickem with Hoyas.

Wishful thinking is great and cheering for your team is great. But Irish are a top 3 team today , anyone betting knows that.

TBH ...yes I know ND probably would beat 90% of the teams in the bracket but if you're going to be objective you can only go off the resume not some eye test sh*t. ND didn't beat anyone thats in the tourny. Yea they had a 6 game win streak and they looked fantastic but they didn't beat anyone that matters. You could say the same thing about Jacksonville. They beat Duke, Denver, and Richmond

[Chousnake]

So Woodruff said the discussion came down to four spots for six teams. I think we can safely guess those teams were Cornell, Brown, Harvard, OSU, ND, and Duke.

Cornell’s resume is pretty strong - beat Yale, Princeton, won head-to-heads against OSU, Harvard, worst loss is to Army. No question they get a ticket.
Brown was pretty strong too. Beat Yale, Penn, and Cornell, with only a bad loss to UMass on the resume. So they get in.
Duke has only one top 10 win against #9 UVa, and three bad losses to Syracuse, Loyola, and Jax. They’re out.

Here’s where it gets tricky. OSU has the advantage over ND and Harvard in that they beat both of them. Only loss to a non-top 7 team is Denver (#20). So despite being ranked 14th in the RPI, I think they get selected on head-to-head and lack of bad losses.

So it’s down to Harvard vs. ND. Harvard beat Brown, Princeton, and BU (#13). Their only losses were to seeded tournament teams, and OSU.

Notre Dame only beat Duke. They had zero quality wins besides Duke. If it’s decided that Duke is not tournament caliber, then it’s really tough to argue for Notre Dame. They had four opportunities to get a marquee win, and lost all of them fairly convincingly (except against Maryland at home).

So clearly the committee looked at quality wins (i.e. top-5 and top-10), bad losses, and head-to-head. Which is pretty much exactly what the NCAA criteria says they’re supposed to look at.

Again - the problem is that all of the Ivy's good wins and not-bad losses were against each other. The real issue is in determining the quality of the league. All this comes down to (1) Princeton beating Georgetown and Rutgers and (2) Penn beating Duke. As a result of those three wins, every intra-Ivy game became a good win or a not-bad loss. Hence we get six Ivies in the tourney. So Harvard and Cornell can thank Princeton for beating Georgetown and Rutgers, without which the whole field would be different.

The logic you criticize has been used to give bids and high seeds to ACC teams in recent seasons. And JHU got bids for losing to those same ACC teams, raising its RPI and SOS. So it didn't go your way this year, for the first time in modern lax history, and its a travesty? Just stop.