FanLax Forum Poll

[Matnum PI]

there it IS again......the "weaker teams" claim. Basing this, on what, exactly?

Basing this on the FanLax Forum Rankings. Based on a relatively agreed upon top to bottom ranking.

[Farfromgeneva]

there it IS again......the "weaker teams" claim. Basing this, on what, exactly?

Basing this on the FanLax Forum Rankings. Based on a relatively agreed upon top to bottom ranking.

Relatively seems to be the key word.

[Matnum PI]

Relatively seems to be the key word.

A democracy seems to be the best we can do...

[Typical Lax Dad]

...inability to win against better-ranked teams...

Yep. I made this point about a team last season…. But some may argue that if they manage to beat Cornell twice then they should play for the National Title.

People die and the relevant people's families decide not to have funerals. In each case, the reason why is "s/he was not kind towards the end of her/his lives". Which I find odd. This may be true but... What about the 84 years they lived before those less-than-kind 1-2 years at the end of their life? A real-life recency bias. And, also, an inability to recognize the importance of a person's entire body of work. I'm not suggesting that someone's Great Aunt, cousin, or otherwise are wrong. To each their own. But I am suggesting that how people evaluate people, more relevant for us, how people evaluate teams, varies. In the play-offs, I get it. Win, move on. Lose, go home. That I get. But during the regular season, the entirety of each team's regular season is what is being evaluated. Ws, Ls, high-points, low-points. No conjecture about how they barely lost, could've won, so it should almost count as a W. No conjecture about how they barely won, could've lost, so it should almost count as an L. Whether this is after 6 or 16 games, just Ws and Ls for every game for the entirety of the season.

I agree. I also agree that you need to win games against good teams. Is “Goal Differential” ever a metric used to separate teams to break ties?…..BTW, what’s even crazier is “away goals” in Champions League. It took me a while to wrap my head around that.

[ICGrad]

5 and 6 games into the season is very much enough games for a team to prove themselves with this system.

That's too bad since, as I said, sometimes an algorithm spits out a result so ridiculous that it invalidates the entire algorithm.

[Matnum PI]

That's too bad since, as I said, sometimes an algorithm spits out a result so ridiculous that it invalidates the entire algorithm.

Yale being ranked higher than Cornell is not "so ridiculous"...

[wgdsr]

...inability to win against better-ranked teams...

Yep. I made this point about a team last season…. But some may argue that if they manage to beat Cornell twice then they should play for the National Title.

People die and the relevant people's families decide not to have funerals. In each case, the reason why is "s/he was not kind towards the end of her/his lives". Which I find odd. This may be true but... What about the 84 years they lived before those less-than-kind 1-2 years at the end of their life? A real-life recency bias. And, also, an inability to recognize the importance of a person's entire body of work. I'm not suggesting that someone's Great Aunt, cousin, or otherwise are wrong. To each their own. But I am suggesting that how people evaluate people, more relevant for us, how people evaluate teams, varies. In the play-offs, I get it. Win, move on. Lose, go home. That I get. But during the regular season, the entirety of each team's regular season is what is being evaluated. Ws, Ls, high-points, low-points. No conjecture about how they barely lost, could've won, so it should almost count as a W. No conjecture about how they barely won, could've lost, so it should almost count as an L. Whether this is after 6 or 16 games, just Ws and Ls for every game for the entirety of the season.

every year, people want to talk about all of those things. blowouts vs. close games, coulda shoulda, early season vs. late season.
ruppel was just throwing his stick up there, hit the bottom of it, probably outside of his head... lucky and uva *shoulda* won. sure. if only if.... there is only a result, w or l. and all games have the same result. that's at least what is supposed to matter.

[wgdsr]

...inability to win against better-ranked teams...

Yep. I made this point about a team last season…. But some may argue that if they manage to beat Cornell twice then they should play for the National Title.

People die and the relevant people's families decide not to have funerals. In each case, the reason why is "s/he was not kind towards the end of her/his lives". Which I find odd. This may be true but... What about the 84 years they lived before those less-than-kind 1-2 years at the end of their life? A real-life recency bias. And, also, an inability to recognize the importance of a person's entire body of work. I'm not suggesting that someone's Great Aunt, cousin, or otherwise are wrong. To each their own. But I am suggesting that how people evaluate people, more relevant for us, how people evaluate teams, varies. In the play-offs, I get it. Win, move on. Lose, go home. That I get. But during the regular season, the entirety of each team's regular season is what is being evaluated. Ws, Ls, high-points, low-points. No conjecture about how they barely lost, could've won, so it should almost count as a W. No conjecture about how they barely won, could've lost, so it should almost count as an L. Whether this is after 6 or 16 games, just Ws and Ls for every game for the entirety of the season.

I agree. I also agree that you need to win games against good teams. Is “Goal Differential” ever a metric used to separate teams to break ties?…..BTW, what’s even crazier is “away goals” in Champions League. It took me a while to wrap my head around that.

don't recall it ever being referred to. doesn't mean it hasn't. everything's on the table.

[Matnum PI]

I agree. I also agree that you need to win games against good teams. Is “Goal Differential” ever a metric used to separate teams to break ties?…..BTW, what’s even crazier is “away goals” in Champions League. It took me a while to wrap my head around that.

Soccer is a strange animal. First of all, there are ties. And they're ok with ties. Until they're not OK and then... They manage Ws and Ls when two teams are "tied" poorly. Away goals, cumulative scores (not so awful), penalty kicks (pretty awful). I love soccer but I definitely do not love how they manage ties. But back to lacrosse. I'm with you. Wins (and losses) and who those wins are against is big. That anyone would hedge on this reality is baffling for me.

[Typical Lax Dad]

I agree. I also agree that you need to win games against good teams. Is “Goal Differential” ever a metric used to separate teams to break ties?…..BTW, what’s even crazier is “away goals” in Champions League. It took me a while to wrap my head around that.

Soccer is a strange animal. First of all, there are ties. And they're ok with ties. Until they're not OK and then... They manage Ws and Ls when two teams are "tied" poorly. Away goals, cumulative scores (not so awful), penalty kicks (pretty awful). I love soccer but I definitely do not love how they manage ties. But back to lacrosse. I'm with you. Wins (and losses) and who those wins are against is big. That anyone would hedge on this reality is baffling for me.

I understand PKs but I don’t like watching them. I turn the station when the game ends in a tie and goes to PKs.

[wgdsr]

I agree. I also agree that you need to win games against good teams. Is “Goal Differential” ever a metric used to separate teams to break ties?…..BTW, what’s even crazier is “away goals” in Champions League. It took me a while to wrap my head around that.

Soccer is a strange animal. First of all, there are ties. And they're ok with ties. Until they're not OK and then... They manage Ws and Ls when two teams are "tied" poorly. Away goals, cumulative scores (not so awful), penalty kicks (pretty awful). I love soccer but I definitely do not love how they manage ties. But back to lacrosse. I'm with you. Wins (and losses) and who those wins are against is big. That anyone would hedge on this reality is baffling for me.

start one man down in ot, and take a guy off every 5 minutes.

[Matnum PI]

I understand PKs but I don’t like watching them. I turn the station when the game ends in a tie and goes to PKs.

The goal is to have the better team win. Winning a PK contest is not indicative of Brasil being better than Italy. No more than Brasil playing Italy in darts or otherwise is indicative. Alternatively, what if after the regular time, both teams went into OT but, every 1-2 minutes, each team had to remove one player from the field. 11 v. 11. 10 v. 10. 9 v. 9. etc.. 1-There'd be a goal and a winner before the OT time period is concluded. All but guaranteed. And, 2-The winning team would've won a soccer game. Maybe a small-sided soccer game. But at least it was soccer. A game based on skill, endurance, speed, strategy, etc. I ran a soccer league for 20 years and that's how we handled ties and... It's awesome. Just awesome. Players and coaches love it. Fans love it. When I'm made president of FIFA, that'll be the first thing I'll change.

[Matnum PI]

start one man down in ot, and take a guy off every 5 minutes.

[Matnum PI]

What if... PSU starts playing up to their potential and finishes their season amongst the tippy-top of the rankings. Wins over Yale and Cornell and more and no terrible losses except... That ugly one to Marquette in mid-March. I mean, it was two months ago! And it's their only bad loss! And, and, and! And let's say that Marquette got worse, not better, as the season progressed. This bad L starts looking really bad. The question is, Do you discount this loss? Do you say, Listen, it was one loss and a long time ago and it was by 1 goal and we can't erase the loss but... Should a team be punished so severely for one close loss so long ago? My question is, Do you discount this loss?

[Typical Lax Dad]

I understand PKs but I don’t like watching them. I turn the station when the game ends in a tie and goes to PKs.

The goal is to have the better team win. Winning a PK contest is not indicative of Brasil being better than Italy. No more than Brasil playing Italy in darts or otherwise is indicative. Alternatively, what if after the regular time, both teams went into OT but, every 1-2 minutes, each team had to remove one player from the field. 11 v. 11. 10 v. 10. 9 v. 9. etc.. 1-There'd be a goal and a winner before the OT time period is concluded. All but guaranteed. And, 2-The winning team would've won a soccer game. Maybe a small-sided soccer game. But at least it was soccer. A game based on skill, endurance, speed, strategy, etc. I ran a soccer league for 20 years and that's how we handled ties and... It's awesome. Just awesome. Players and coaches love it. Fans love it. When I'm made president of FIFA, that'll be the first thing I'll change.

I agree. I just don’t believe a PK shootout is reflective of the game. Take a player off and when you get down to 7 v 7 at least move the goals in. I wouldn’t like all that space but that’s just me.

[Matnum PI]

I agree. I just don’t believe a PK shootout is reflective of the game. Take a player off and when you get down to 7 v 7 at least move the goals in. I wouldn’t like all that space but that’s just me.

Space is what creates goals. And 7 v. 7 won't guarantee a goal. More space, less players, and... There'll be a winner.

[Typical Lax Dad]

I agree. I just don’t believe a PK shootout is reflective of the game. Take a player off and when you get down to 7 v 7 at least move the goals in. I wouldn’t like all that space but that’s just me.

Space is what creates goals. And 7 v. 7 won't guarantee a goal. More space, less players, and... There'll be a winner.

Yes. But 7 v 7 on a full field isn’t soccer either. I don’t want it to become “sixies” which is just awful. I can’t watch it….. Just bring the goals in maybe 20 yards….. You still have the width.

[JustOneTime]

Eliminate offsides in soccer. It would open up the game and create more goals.
For lacrosse I think the rules committee needs to address the face off. I have seen so many face offs be decided by a referee this year. The rules are taking away a very exciting part of the game and just handing the ball to a team. I've seen guys stand up and say what did I do wrong alot. Perhaps they should just drop the ball like in hockey. If a player tries to gain an edge like they do in hockey the ref could move the player out of the draw just like in hockey. A new guy that is on the field would have to come in and take the draw but at least there would still be a draw.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Eliminate offsides in soccer. It would open up the game and create more goals.
For lacrosse I think the rules committee needs to address the face off. I have seen so many face offs be decided by a referee this year. The rules are taking away a very exciting part of the game and just handing the ball to a team. I've seen guys stand up and say what did I do wrong alot. Perhaps they should just drop the ball like in hockey. If a player tries to gain an edge like they do in hockey the ref could move the player out of the draw just like in hockey. A new guy that is on the field would have to come in and take the draw but at least there would still be a draw.

You should also be able to use your hands, pick up the ball and run with it and throw it forward.... they should also allow timeouts and sub through the box.

[Laxallday]

What if... PSU starts playing up to their potential and finishes their season amongst the tippy-top of the rankings. Wins over Yale and Cornell and more and no terrible losses except... That ugly one to Marquette in mid-March. I mean, it was two months ago! And it's their only bad loss! And, and, and! And let's say that Marquette got worse, not better, as the season progressed. This bad L starts looking really bad. The question is, Do you discount this loss? Do you say, Listen, it was one loss and a long time ago and it was by 1 goal and we can't erase the loss but... Should a team be punished so severely for one close loss so long ago? My question is, Do you discount this loss?

Assuming they don't win Big10 tourney, they likely have to win all but one in Big10 and advance to second round of Big tourney. The Marquette loss is a bad loss and maybe a little worse than RU's Army loss, but its all mute of they don't hold serve in the Big season. I give them UM and JHU as wins, OSU and RU as likely must wins and they can likely lose to UMd and still make a strong case. But lose to OSU/RU and UMd and they are likely done.