HooDat wrote: ↑Mon Nov 25, 2019 6:19 pm
you need guys to practice against - 16 don't make for good practices.
those guys need to embrace being part of making a great team better.... in practice.
If that is not a player's cup of tea he can go be a star in a smaller pond.
And I am not judging. I personally would probably rather play for a less good team than be meat for the grinder on a world beater where I was the last guy on the team.
Point is, many good players are doing just that, playing for a "less good team". Not everyone wants to suffer PC wokeness at a Duke type academic, some guys just wanna ball and become fire fighters or addition builders. Not everyone wants to be a wallstreet bankster........somebody has to be the stooge and loose it all. (investments )
There are good players in many places. Pushing back the recruiting timetable will help the “power” schools. Heninburg ended up at Rutgers because by the end of his sophomore year in HS, the “brand name” schools were supposedly full... Cal Dearth was outstanding. Ended up at BU to play right away and he felt wanted.
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Nov 25, 2019 6:45 pm
and yet, sacred heart and dartmouth don't dot your final four.
dartmouth in particular i don't believe you've seen play much recently.
ok, you want to split nuts, fine. But, no, no they don't. Nor will they. I was referring to teams like Denver (won with NO Maryland or NY kids, I recall ) or Rutgers. Or St. Johns. Or Nova. Or Bucknell. Or Utah. Or High Pt. Richmond. or Bryant. or Hobart. Or Mercy, here comes Detroit. (not this year )
How's that transfer portal looking
well, later/back to normal recruiting, "poaching" and the transfer portal isn't going to help the bostons of the world. i do believe we've gotten to an intermediate stage. where it isn't 'cuse, hopkins, tierney, uva or maryland every year. duke and maryland are still on a run, but those runs are getting shorter and shorter. we've gone from 4-6 teams contending to probably 8 or 10.
perennial doormat psu is now the short odds, 2 years in a row. yale is in there. penn (80's last time?). denver, notre dame. even unc is back. it wasn't too too long ago that duke wasn't even relevant. and the next tier is pulling up right behind them.
the difference now is for every middie sacred heart has, uva has 3 other guys that are better than their other 3 guys. so out of that 8 or 10 teams, most will perform and be right there. but there are 60+ other teams that can have several catch lightning in a bottle, for sure. richmond, high point. some of the others you mention, could be any of them. in either 5 or 10 years, 2 or 3 outlier teams will be making the final 8 regularly, and one or 2 will be in the show. from there, it's game on.
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Nov 25, 2019 6:45 pm
and yet, sacred heart and dartmouth don't dot your final four.
dartmouth in particular i don't believe you've seen play much recently.
ok, you want to split nuts, fine. But, no, no they don't. Nor will they. I was referring to teams like Denver (won with NO Maryland or NY kids, I recall ) or Rutgers. Or St. Johns. Or Nova. Or Bucknell. Or Utah. Or High Pt. Richmond. or Bryant. or Hobart. Or Mercy, here comes Detroit. (not this year )
How's that transfer portal looking
well, later/back to normal recruiting, "poaching" and the transfer portal isn't going to help the bostons of the world. i do believe we've gotten to an intermediate stage. where it isn't 'cuse, hopkins, tierney, uva or maryland every year. duke and maryland are still on a run, but those runs are getting shorter and shorter. we've gone from 4-6 teams contending to probably 8 or 10.
perennial doormat psu is now the short odds, 2 years in a row. yale is in there. penn (80's last time?). denver, notre dame. even unc is back. it wasn't too too long ago that duke wasn't even relevant. and the next tier is pulling up right behind them.
the difference now is for every middie sacred heart has, uva has 3 other guys that are better than their other 3 guys. so out of that 8 or 10 teams, most will perform and be right there. but there are 60+ other teams that can have several catch lightning in a bottle, for sure. richmond, high point. some of the others you mention, could be any of them. in either 5 or 10 years, 2 or 3 outlier teams will be making the final 8 regularly, and one or 2 will be in the show. from there, it's game on.
I believe from say 1975, until Duke won the title, there were only like 5 NCAA champions. We have had Duke, Yale, Denver, and Loyola since then. Far more competition.
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Nov 25, 2019 6:45 pm
and yet, sacred heart and dartmouth don't dot your final four.
dartmouth in particular i don't believe you've seen play much recently.
ok, you want to split nuts, fine. But, no, no they don't. Nor will they. I was referring to teams like Denver (won with NO Maryland or NY kids, I recall ) or Rutgers. Or St. Johns. Or Nova. Or Bucknell. Or Utah. Or High Pt. Richmond. or Bryant. or Hobart. Or Mercy, here comes Detroit. (not this year )
How's that transfer portal looking
well, later/back to normal recruiting, "poaching" and the transfer portal isn't going to help the bostons of the world. i do believe we've gotten to an intermediate stage. where it isn't 'cuse, hopkins, tierney, uva or maryland every year. duke and maryland are still on a run, but those runs are getting shorter and shorter. we've gone from 4-6 teams contending to probably 8 or 10.
perennial doormat psu is now the short odds, 2 years in a row. yale is in there. penn (80's last time?). denver, notre dame. even unc is back. it wasn't too too long ago that duke wasn't even relevant. and the next tier is pulling up right behind them.
the difference now is for every middie sacred heart has, uva has 3 other guys that are better than their other 3 guys. so out of that 8 or 10 teams, most will perform and be right there. but there are 60+ other teams that can have several catch lightning in a bottle, for sure. richmond, high point. some of the others you mention, could be any of them. in either 5 or 10 years, 2 or 3 outlier teams will be making the final 8 regularly, and one or 2 will be in the show. from there, it's game on.
So, UVA's 3 other "better" guys just had the flu when losing to High Point, or was that earlier in the season when Brown and Nassau Hall took the cosmic champ to OT. High Point That would be like wgdsr losing to Hampden Sydney or Randolph Macon In fact, 4 one goal games in a row for the Hoo's, only one being an old school "power" . Not like they rambled and rolled easily past the Wahoo's Patriot opponents.
Nah, I'll stick with UMass having equally good players as UVA. Maybe more ACC teams should visit the CONn river valley and small pox blanket honoree Amherst. How'd that work out for UNC.....getting whipped on their way to the CHampionship . Umass , nor Hofstra, another team that rolled UNC that year, didn't get an invite. But UNC, with it's 5 regular season loses did Like I said, it was great to watch that run and happy for the coach, BUT.........yes,the old argument, you gotta be at the party to pick up the girl. Did High Point make the NCAA's? What's that, NO.
Why
A 13-3 team with a great winning % (matters in every other sport, just NOT college lacrosse ) that beat DUKE, UVA and pretty much every body else, doesn't get a NCAA bid It's pathetic. It's laundry worship. Only college football has a more stupid system.
Are mid weed playoff games an advantage, or a problem, in late May? exactly
Last edited by ABV 8.3% on Tue Nov 26, 2019 8:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Nov 25, 2019 6:45 pm
and yet, sacred heart and dartmouth don't dot your final four.
dartmouth in particular i don't believe you've seen play much recently.
ok, you want to split nuts, fine. But, no, no they don't. Nor will they. I was referring to teams like Denver (won with NO Maryland or NY kids, I recall ) or Rutgers. Or St. Johns. Or Nova. Or Bucknell. Or Utah. Or High Pt. Richmond. or Bryant. or Hobart. Or Mercy, here comes Detroit. (not this year )
How's that transfer portal looking
well, later/back to normal recruiting, "poaching" and the transfer portal isn't going to help the bostons of the world. i do believe we've gotten to an intermediate stage. where it isn't 'cuse, hopkins, tierney, uva or maryland every year. duke and maryland are still on a run, but those runs are getting shorter and shorter. we've gone from 4-6 teams contending to probably 8 or 10.
perennial doormat psu is now the short odds, 2 years in a row. yale is in there. penn (80's last time?). denver, notre dame. even unc is back. it wasn't too too long ago that duke wasn't even relevant. and the next tier is pulling up right behind them.
the difference now is for every middie sacred heart has, uva has 3 other guys that are better than their other 3 guys. so out of that 8 or 10 teams, most will perform and be right there. but there are 60+ other teams that can have several catch lightning in a bottle, for sure. richmond, high point. some of the others you mention, could be any of them. in either 5 or 10 years, 2 or 3 outlier teams will be making the final 8 regularly, and one or 2 will be in the show. from there, it's game on.
So, UVA's 3 other "better" guys just had the flu when losing to High Point, or was that earlier in the season when Brown and Nassau Hall took the cosmic champ to OT. High Point That would be like wgdsr losing to Hampden Sydney or Randolph Macon In fact, 4 one goal games in a row for the Hoo's, only one being an old school "power" . Not like they rambled and rolled easily past the Wahoo's Patriot opponents.
Nah, I'll stick with UMass having equally good players as UVA. Maybe more ACC teams should visit the CONn river valley and small pox blanket honoree Amherst. How'd that work out for UNC.....getting whipped on their way to the CHampionship . Umass , nor Hofstra, another team that rolled UNC that year, didn't get an invite. But UNC, with it's 5 regular season loses did Like I said, it was great to watch that run and happy for the coach, BUT.........yes,the old argument, you gotta be at the party to pick up the girl. Did High Point make the NCAA's? What's that, NO.
Why
There is a structural flaw in the lacrosse selection process. This “who did you lose to” is not a good model. Preseason poll bias holds up all the way through the end of the season. We agree on something.
ABV 8.3% wrote: ↑Mon Nov 25, 2019 6:33 pm
Point is, many good players are doing just that, playing for a "less good team". Not everyone wants to suffer PC wokeness at a Duke type academic, some guys just wanna ball and become fire fighters or addition builders. Not everyone wants to be a wallstreet bankster........somebody has to be the stooge and loose it all. (investments )
ABV - I am saying that in today's world, there is a good chance I would make the choice to PLAY at a "lesser" program over being a practice dummy for a "top" program. Not sure where I would fall on the scale in between. But first and foremost a player should be picking the SCHOOL he wants to attend, not the lacrosse program he wants to play for.
I am all for welders, first responders, small business owners, and even cube-jockeys - but they still need to pick the right school!
There are a LOT of choices out there: "blue blood" D1, blue blood D3, upstart D everything, club, partial athletic scholarships, full-ride need-based scholarships, partial/full academic scholarships.
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Nov 25, 2019 8:09 pm
we've gone from 4-6 teams contending to probably 8 or 10.
this is thanks to the growth of the game. LI, Balto and Upstate NY don't have a monopoly on the great players. Finding great players is both harder and easier. Harder because of the geography you have to cover, easier because there are more than 4 teams worth of great players.....
STILL somewhere back in the day....
...and waiting/hoping for a tinfoil hat emoji......
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Nov 25, 2019 6:45 pm
and yet, sacred heart and dartmouth don't dot your final four.
dartmouth in particular i don't believe you've seen play much recently.
ok, you want to split nuts, fine. But, no, no they don't. Nor will they. I was referring to teams like Denver (won with NO Maryland or NY kids, I recall ) or Rutgers. Or St. Johns. Or Nova. Or Bucknell. Or Utah. Or High Pt. Richmond. or Bryant. or Hobart. Or Mercy, here comes Detroit. (not this year )
How's that transfer portal looking
well, later/back to normal recruiting, "poaching" and the transfer portal isn't going to help the bostons of the world. i do believe we've gotten to an intermediate stage. where it isn't 'cuse, hopkins, tierney, uva or maryland every year. duke and maryland are still on a run, but those runs are getting shorter and shorter. we've gone from 4-6 teams contending to probably 8 or 10.
perennial doormat psu is now the short odds, 2 years in a row. yale is in there. penn (80's last time?). denver, notre dame. even unc is back. it wasn't too too long ago that duke wasn't even relevant. and the next tier is pulling up right behind them.
the difference now is for every middie sacred heart has, uva has 3 other guys that are better than their other 3 guys. so out of that 8 or 10 teams, most will perform and be right there. but there are 60+ other teams that can have several catch lightning in a bottle, for sure. richmond, high point. some of the others you mention, could be any of them. in either 5 or 10 years, 2 or 3 outlier teams will be making the final 8 regularly, and one or 2 will be in the show. from there, it's game on.
So, UVA's 3 other "better" guys just had the flu when losing to High Point, or was that earlier in the season when Brown and Nassau Hall took the cosmic champ to OT. High Point That would be like wgdsr losing to Hampden Sydney or Randolph Macon In fact, 4 one goal games in a row for the Hoo's, only one being an old school "power" . Not like they rambled and rolled easily past the Wahoo's Patriot opponents.
Nah, I'll stick with UMass having equally good players as UVA. Maybe more ACC teams should visit the CONn river valley and small pox blanket honoree Amherst. How'd that work out for UNC.....getting whipped on their way to the CHampionship . Umass , nor Hofstra, another team that rolled UNC that year, didn't get an invite. But UNC, with it's 5 regular season loses did Like I said, it was great to watch that run and happy for the coach, BUT.........yes,the old argument, you gotta be at the party to pick up the girl. Did High Point make the NCAA's? What's that, NO.
Why
There is a structural flaw in the lacrosse selection process. This “who did you lose to” is not a good model. Preseason poll bias holds up all the way through the end of the season. We agree on something.
To me, anyway, it was interesting to hear the comments on the recently posted 1977 Maryland-Jays game, when they almost scored 77 goals ! They said that the POLLS mattered for NCAA selection.
And, regarding d3..........how many NCAA championships would the NESCAC have won if allowed to play. IVY league should ban post season play, the carbon footprint being what it is with all that playoff travel. Are the dorms at UNC or Duke airconditioned. I hope so, May is brutally humid in North Carolina
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Nov 25, 2019 6:45 pm
and yet, sacred heart and dartmouth don't dot your final four.
dartmouth in particular i don't believe you've seen play much recently.
ok, you want to split nuts, fine. But, no, no they don't. Nor will they. I was referring to teams like Denver (won with NO Maryland or NY kids, I recall ) or Rutgers. Or St. Johns. Or Nova. Or Bucknell. Or Utah. Or High Pt. Richmond. or Bryant. or Hobart. Or Mercy, here comes Detroit. (not this year )
How's that transfer portal looking
well, later/back to normal recruiting, "poaching" and the transfer portal isn't going to help the bostons of the world. i do believe we've gotten to an intermediate stage. where it isn't 'cuse, hopkins, tierney, uva or maryland every year. duke and maryland are still on a run, but those runs are getting shorter and shorter. we've gone from 4-6 teams contending to probably 8 or 10.
perennial doormat psu is now the short odds, 2 years in a row. yale is in there. penn (80's last time?). denver, notre dame. even unc is back. it wasn't too too long ago that duke wasn't even relevant. and the next tier is pulling up right behind them.
the difference now is for every middie sacred heart has, uva has 3 other guys that are better than their other 3 guys. so out of that 8 or 10 teams, most will perform and be right there. but there are 60+ other teams that can have several catch lightning in a bottle, for sure. richmond, high point. some of the others you mention, could be any of them. in either 5 or 10 years, 2 or 3 outlier teams will be making the final 8 regularly, and one or 2 will be in the show. from there, it's game on.
So, UVA's 3 other "better" guys just had the flu when losing to High Point, or was that earlier in the season when Brown and Nassau Hall took the cosmic champ to OT. High Point That would be like wgdsr losing to Hampden Sydney or Randolph Macon In fact, 4 one goal games in a row for the Hoo's, only one being an old school "power" . Not like they rambled and rolled easily past the Wahoo's Patriot opponents.
Nah, I'll stick with UMass having equally good players as UVA. Maybe more ACC teams should visit the CONn river valley and small pox blanket honoree Amherst. How'd that work out for UNC.....getting whipped on their way to the CHampionship . Umass , nor Hofstra, another team that rolled UNC that year, didn't get an invite. But UNC, with it's 5 regular season loses did Like I said, it was great to watch that run and happy for the coach, BUT.........yes,the old argument, you gotta be at the party to pick up the girl. Did High Point make the NCAA's? What's that, NO.
Why
There is a structural flaw in the lacrosse selection process. This “who did you lose to” is not a good model. Preseason poll bias holds up all the way through the end of the season. We agree on something.
To me, anyway, it was interesting to hear the comments on the recently posted 1977 Maryland-Jays game, when they almost scored 77 goals ! They said that the POLLS mattered for NCAA selection.
And, regarding d3..........how many NCAA championships would the NESCAC have won if allowed to play. IVY league should ban post season play, the carbon footprint being what it is with all that playoff travel. Are the dorms at UNC or Duke airconditioned. I hope so, May is brutally humid in North Carolina
It depends on when the NESCAC would have been in. While Hobart was D3, not many. Unfortunately we don’t live in an all or nothing world. Alcohol is bad, ban drinking. Screw moderation, don’t drink at all.....if you drink beer or alcohol you don’t care about alcoholism at all...pretend.
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Nov 25, 2019 6:45 pm
and yet, sacred heart and dartmouth don't dot your final four.
dartmouth in particular i don't believe you've seen play much recently.
ok, you want to split nuts, fine. But, no, no they don't. Nor will they. I was referring to teams like Denver (won with NO Maryland or NY kids, I recall ) or Rutgers. Or St. Johns. Or Nova. Or Bucknell. Or Utah. Or High Pt. Richmond. or Bryant. or Hobart. Or Mercy, here comes Detroit. (not this year )
How's that transfer portal looking
well, later/back to normal recruiting, "poaching" and the transfer portal isn't going to help the bostons of the world. i do believe we've gotten to an intermediate stage. where it isn't 'cuse, hopkins, tierney, uva or maryland every year. duke and maryland are still on a run, but those runs are getting shorter and shorter. we've gone from 4-6 teams contending to probably 8 or 10.
perennial doormat psu is now the short odds, 2 years in a row. yale is in there. penn (80's last time?). denver, notre dame. even unc is back. it wasn't too too long ago that duke wasn't even relevant. and the next tier is pulling up right behind them.
the difference now is for every middie sacred heart has, uva has 3 other guys that are better than their other 3 guys. so out of that 8 or 10 teams, most will perform and be right there. but there are 60+ other teams that can have several catch lightning in a bottle, for sure. richmond, high point. some of the others you mention, could be any of them. in either 5 or 10 years, 2 or 3 outlier teams will be making the final 8 regularly, and one or 2 will be in the show. from there, it's game on.
So, UVA's 3 other "better" guys just had the flu when losing to High Point, or was that earlier in the season when Brown and Nassau Hall took the cosmic champ to OT. High Point That would be like wgdsr losing to Hampden Sydney or Randolph Macon In fact, 4 one goal games in a row for the Hoo's, only one being an old school "power" . Not like they rambled and rolled easily past the Wahoo's Patriot opponents.
Nah, I'll stick with UMass having equally good players as UVA. Maybe more ACC teams should visit the CONn river valley and small pox blanket honoree Amherst. How'd that work out for UNC.....getting whipped on their way to the CHampionship . Umass , nor Hofstra, another team that rolled UNC that year, didn't get an invite. But UNC, with it's 5 regular season loses did Like I said, it was great to watch that run and happy for the coach, BUT.........yes,the old argument, you gotta be at the party to pick up the girl. Did High Point make the NCAA's? What's that, NO.
Why
A 13-3 team with a great winning % (matters in every other sport, just NOT college lacrosse ) that beat DUKE, UVA and pretty much every body else, doesn't get a NCAA bid It's pathetic. It's laundry worship. Only college football has a more stupid system.
Are mid weed playoff games an advantage, or a problem, in late May? exactly
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Nov 25, 2019 6:45 pm
and yet, sacred heart and dartmouth don't dot your final four.
dartmouth in particular i don't believe you've seen play much recently.
ok, you want to split nuts, fine. But, no, no they don't. Nor will they. I was referring to teams like Denver (won with NO Maryland or NY kids, I recall ) or Rutgers. Or St. Johns. Or Nova. Or Bucknell. Or Utah. Or High Pt. Richmond. or Bryant. or Hobart. Or Mercy, here comes Detroit. (not this year )
How's that transfer portal looking
well, later/back to normal recruiting, "poaching" and the transfer portal isn't going to help the bostons of the world. i do believe we've gotten to an intermediate stage. where it isn't 'cuse, hopkins, tierney, uva or maryland every year. duke and maryland are still on a run, but those runs are getting shorter and shorter. we've gone from 4-6 teams contending to probably 8 or 10.
perennial doormat psu is now the short odds, 2 years in a row. yale is in there. penn (80's last time?). denver, notre dame. even unc is back. it wasn't too too long ago that duke wasn't even relevant. and the next tier is pulling up right behind them.
the difference now is for every middie sacred heart has, uva has 3 other guys that are better than their other 3 guys. so out of that 8 or 10 teams, most will perform and be right there. but there are 60+ other teams that can have several catch lightning in a bottle, for sure. richmond, high point. some of the others you mention, could be any of them. in either 5 or 10 years, 2 or 3 outlier teams will be making the final 8 regularly, and one or 2 will be in the show. from there, it's game on.
So, UVA's 3 other "better" guys just had the flu when losing to High Point, or was that earlier in the season when Brown and Nassau Hall took the cosmic champ to OT. High Point That would be like wgdsr losing to Hampden Sydney or Randolph Macon In fact, 4 one goal games in a row for the Hoo's, only one being an old school "power" . Not like they rambled and rolled easily past the Wahoo's Patriot opponents.
Nah, I'll stick with UMass having equally good players as UVA. Maybe more ACC teams should visit the CONn river valley and small pox blanket honoree Amherst. How'd that work out for UNC.....getting whipped on their way to the CHampionship . Umass , nor Hofstra, another team that rolled UNC that year, didn't get an invite. But UNC, with it's 5 regular season loses did Like I said, it was great to watch that run and happy for the coach, BUT.........yes,the old argument, you gotta be at the party to pick up the girl. Did High Point make the NCAA's? What's that, NO.
Why
A 13-3 team with a great winning % (matters in every other sport, just NOT college lacrosse ) that beat DUKE, UVA and pretty much every body else, doesn't get a NCAA bid It's pathetic. It's laundry worship. Only college football has a more stupid system.
Are mid weed playoff games an advantage, or a problem, in late May? exactly
you continue to send yourself down rabbit holes, no matter what site you're on.
you want your arguments to be all aligned with all your specific parameters, and then you move the goalposts.
i'm fairly sure i was addressing your contention that because sacred heart had a fantastic middie that -- paraphrasing -- their players (or their top 8-12 players including all 4 classes?) are as good as anyone else's and ipso facto because of that one guy they're a threat to win the nc$$ tourney and they're being shut out unfairly.
that's a whole lot of cheese to swallow.
next i guess is you get to point out one or 2 games and make similar claims.
opinions abound that rpi, particularly using straight (one's own) rpi, is a poor metric to use if that's really all you're doing in a selection process. i agree. last year, i'd say that was largely true in what they did, if not entirely true. prior to that, at least a case could be made that they were actually going by the (flawed) metrics of looking at who you beat, how tough your schedule was, and other factors. last year, they chucked all that and admitted as much, and were using essentially straight rpi, which says next to nothing about who you specifically beat (unless you were undefeated).
here's the thing about rpi though, for better or worse -- it's a computer program that doesn't put laundry in as an input. it's all 1's, 0's, w's and l's. there is bias in the derivation certainly, but at least everyone knows what that bias is.
i remember years ago when your contention was that criteria should be how many winning teams did you beat. i like that one, too. i pointed out to you a bunch of times that ran counter to your cinderellas actually getting in, because they in fact didn't beat as many winning teams as the teams that got selected. so last several years you've moved on to the arbitrary 15% fatty index, where beating a slate of under-.500 cupcakes should win you the bid.
do i think a 7 loss team should've been in last year, given the competition? no, i do not. do i think umass was hosed, with their having beaten maybe 3? over .500 teams, as well as suffering a couple "bad losses". no, i do not.
not sure where you get the notion that other sports don't have a similar mindset with regard to winning % and sos. name one that doesn't.
ABV 8.3% wrote: ↑Tue Nov 26, 2019 8:03 amNah, I'll stick with UMass having equally good players as UVA. Maybe more ACC teams should visit the CONn river valley and small pox blanket honoree Amherst. How'd that work out for UNC.....getting whipped on their way to the CHampionship . Umass , nor Hofstra, another team that rolled UNC that year, didn't get an invite. But UNC, with it's 5 regular season loses did
in yet another instance for you, umass was 4 and 9 that year.
hofstra also had 5 reg season losses. they, however, only had 2 wins against .500 teams, unc and 9 and 8 vermont. their other 7 wins were against teams below .500. unc, for all their warts, had 3. hofstra also managed to one up unc's umass loss with a black mark vs 2-12 g'town (and an under .500 providence). so if you really think hofstra shoulda been in, you must really have liked unc. even if you won't admit it. go heels.
It's not insignificant that the teams that have won NCs with five or six losses have been UVA and UNC. You can argue that lots of losses should keep a team out of the tournament, but so far the teams that have won with lots of losses have been traditional powers who played strong schedules.
you continue to send yourself down rabbit holes, no matter what site you're on.
you want your arguments to be all aligned with all your specific parameters, and then you move the goalposts.
i'm fairly sure i was addressing your contention that because sacred heart had a fantastic middie that -- paraphrasing -- their players (or their top 8-12 players including all 4 classes?) What you may consider moving goalposts, my reality is that I said 2 -3 players, per class. Not your number. Maybe you're jaded when you read are as good as anyone else's and ipso facto because of that one guy they're a threat to win the nc$$ tourney and they're being shut out unfairly.
that's a whole lot of cheese to swallow.
next i guess is you get to point out one or 2 games and make similar claims.
opinions abound that rpi, particularly using straight (one's own) rpi, is a poor metric to use if that's really all you're doing in a selection process. i agree. last year, i'd say that was largely true in what they did, if not entirely true. prior to that, at least a case could be made that they were actually going by the (flawed) metrics of looking at who you beat, how tough your schedule was, and other factors. last year, they chucked all that and admitted as much, and were using essentially straight rpi, which says next to nothing about who you specifically beat (unless you were undefeated).
here's the thing about rpi though, for better or worse -- it's a computer program that doesn't put laundry in as an input. it's all 1's, 0's, w's and l's. there is bias in the derivation certainly, but at least everyone knows what that bias is. You still haven't answered whether Hampton's OVERALL record, and the concorrent opponents opponets records, factored into ALL of the sunshine league conference.
i remember years ago when your contention was that criteria should be how many winning teams did you beat. i like that one, too. i pointed out to you a bunch of times that ran counter to your cinderellas actually getting in, because they in fact didn't beat as many winning teams as the teams that got selected. so last several years you've moved on to the arbitrary 15% fatty index, where beating a slate of under-.500 cupcakes should win you the bid. This directly applies to my 13-3 example, regardless of the laundry. High Point , your "cinderella", beat UVA and DUke. Lots of other teams too. No other sport does this. NO OTHER SPORT DOES THIS.....ignores winning.
do i think a 7 loss team should've been in last year, given the competition? no, i do not. do i think umass was hosed, with their having beaten maybe 3? over .500 teams, as well as suffering a couple "bad losses". no, i do not.
not sure where you get the notion that other sports don't have a similar mindset with regard to winning % and sos. name one that doesn't.
ABV 8.3% wrote: ↑Tue Nov 26, 2019 8:03 amNah, I'll stick with UMass having equally good players as UVA. Maybe more ACC teams should visit the CONn river valley and small pox blanket honoree Amherst. How'd that work out for UNC.....getting whipped on their way to the CHampionship . Umass , nor Hofstra, another team that rolled UNC that year, didn't get an invite. But UNC, with it's 5 regular season loses did
in yet another instance for you, umass was 4 and 9 that year.
hofstra also had 5 reg season losses. they, however, only had 2 wins against .500 teams, unc and 9 and 8 vermont. their other 7 wins were against teams below .500. unc, for all their warts, had 3. hofstra also managed to one up unc's umass loss with a black mark vs 2-12 g'town (and an under .500 providence). so if you really think hofstra shoulda been in, you must really have liked unc. even if you won't admit it. go heels.
[/quote]
So, by your reasoning, based on those teams records, UNC had an artificial winning percentage because they beat weak teams, and also got in because they LOST to team with marginally better records.....
.....your tail is chewing its own argument
It's nonsense. Sit in a room and explain the process to athletes from hoops or football, who have lil to zero knowledge of lacrosse.
The laundry.
And , to them, Dom Starsia sounds like a really nice fish dish at that Italian joint.....explain how High Point gets left out, after beating Duke, UVA......and 11 other teams. Let us know how it goes.
you continue to send yourself down rabbit holes, no matter what site you're on.
you want your arguments to be all aligned with all your specific parameters, and then you move the goalposts.
i'm fairly sure i was addressing your contention that because sacred heart had a fantastic middie that -- paraphrasing -- their players (or their top 8-12 players including all 4 classes?) What you may consider moving goalposts, my reality is that I said 2 -3 players, per class. Not your number. Maybe you're jaded when you read are as good as anyone else's and ipso facto because of that one guy they're a threat to win the nc$$ tourney and they're being shut out unfairly.
that's a whole lot of cheese to swallow. i literally and simply did that math. 2 - 3 per class x 4 = 8 to 12. you surely can claim that sacred heart's best 10 guys are as good as anyone's based on one player, but it doesn't mean it's not nonsensical logic.
next i guess is you get to point out one or 2 games and make similar claims.
opinions abound that rpi, particularly using straight (one's own) rpi, is a poor metric to use if that's really all you're doing in a selection process. i agree. last year, i'd say that was largely true in what they did, if not entirely true. prior to that, at least a case could be made that they were actually going by the (flawed) metrics of looking at who you beat, how tough your schedule was, and other factors. last year, they chucked all that and admitted as much, and were using essentially straight rpi, which says next to nothing about who you specifically beat (unless you were undefeated).
here's the thing about rpi though, for better or worse -- it's a computer program that doesn't put laundry in as an input. it's all 1's, 0's, w's and l's. there is bias in the derivation certainly, but at least everyone knows what that bias is. You still haven't answered whether Hampton's OVERALL record, and the concorrent opponents opponets records, factored into ALL of the sunshine league conference.not sure where this is coming from. from the dc urban mom's thread? were we talking about hampton? i'd heard hampton's stuff was thrown out. whatever their standing for the computer, has it been kept secret from the coaches? you seem to know.
i remember years ago when your contention was that criteria should be how many winning teams did you beat. i like that one, too. i pointed out to you a bunch of times that ran counter to your cinderellas actually getting in, because they in fact didn't beat as many winning teams as the teams that got selected. so last several years you've moved on to the arbitrary 15% fatty index, where beating a slate of under-.500 cupcakes should win you the bid. This directly applies to my 13-3 example, regardless of the laundry. High Point , your "cinderella", beat UVA and DUke. Lots of other teams too. No other sport does this. NO OTHER SPORT DOES THIS.....ignores winning.
you may simply not follow other sports. which is fine. but if you don't, making proclamations about this seems more than silly. there are dozens, if not hundreds, of hoops teams that are left out of the dance with better records than teams that get in. they have more complicated math going in to playing tough schedules than any of the selection committee can keep track of. do you pay attention to the selection show? at all? there are teams with double digit losses all over the place. the acc, big east in the day, b1g -- they place 7-10 teams into the tournament. a select number of power conferences dominate the at larges. it is a smorgasboard of rpi.
i caught like 5 minutes of a women's volleyball 5th set last night. near the end of the season, they mentioned rpi like 14 times. https://www.ncaa.com/news/volleyball-wo ... tournament https://www.ncaa.com/news/volleyball-wo ... tournament
football - minnesota undefeated a few weeks ago, baylor also... they're not sniffing the bcs playoff in front of teams with losses ahead of them. did you not see that? it's worse in football as conferences only really play each other and patsies out of conference. it's the "eye test". and fuhtbawl.
i don't even know what to say about this claim. other than again -- what sport(s) don't do it this way, that the strength of your opponents is factored in?
do i think a 7 loss team should've been in last year, given the competition? no, i do not. do i think umass was hosed, with their having beaten maybe 3? over .500 teams, as well as suffering a couple "bad losses". no, i do not.
not sure where you get the notion that other sports don't have a similar mindset with regard to winning % and sos. name one that doesn't.
ABV 8.3% wrote: ↑Tue Nov 26, 2019 8:03 amNah, I'll stick with UMass having equally good players as UVA. Maybe more ACC teams should visit the CONn river valley and small pox blanket honoree Amherst. How'd that work out for UNC.....getting whipped on their way to the CHampionship . Umass , nor Hofstra, another team that rolled UNC that year, didn't get an invite. But UNC, with it's 5 regular season loses did
in yet another instance for you, umass was 4 and 9 that year.
hofstra also had 5 reg season losses. they, however, only had 2 wins against .500 teams, unc and 9 and 8 vermont. their other 7 wins were against teams below .500. unc, for all their warts, had 3. hofstra also managed to one up unc's umass loss with a black mark vs 2-12 g'town (and an under .500 providence). so if you really think hofstra shoulda been in, you must really have liked unc. even if you won't admit it. go heels.
ABV 8.3% wrote: ↑Tue Nov 26, 2019 8:04 pm
So, by your reasoning, based on those teams records, UNC had an artificial winning percentage because they beat weak teams, and also got in because they LOST to team with marginally better records..... that's not my reasoning at all and you in fact know it. i compared the 2 teams you were comparing, on the 2 metrics that you love to quote, but expanded it to include not just one singular game. which is your fave. hofstra compared unfavorably on your metrics. don't blame me, i'm just the messenger. who had a better resume in '16 than unc?
.....your tail is chewing its own argument
It's nonsense. Sit in a room and explain the process to athletes from hoops or football, who have lil to zero knowledge of lacrosse.
The laundry.
And , to them, Dom Starsia sounds like a really nice fish dish at that Italian joint.....explain how High Point gets left out, after beating Duke, UVA......and 11 other teams. Let us know how it goes.
i liked high point to be in last year. said as much. more cornell than high point, but both definitely in front of hopkins. however, i knew high point was doomed going in. the committee decided to order pizza, print out the rpi list, and cut out of there for happy hour last year. they did at least 2 teams a disservice.
torpey at least understands what was wrong with his schedule last year, and dropped st john's (an ooc that would not help him in any way with his weak conference, much less if you lose to them) and replaced them with maryland and cornell. probably should've broken any contract with bonnies while he was at it. but he's doing something about it. i think someone has advocated for this before?
High Point by any standard did not deserve to be in the tourney considering how tight it was last year. Two quality wins does not guarantee everything, especially when of their three losses two were to 4-10 St. Johns and 6-9 Jacksonville. The only other quality win they had was Richmond, with solid wins over Air Force and Drexel who showed potential at times. If you want to talk about how too much is based on who you beat and who you lost to, then lets bring in more "eye test" type results. In two strait games in April they almost lost to both 1-12 (yes actually 1-12) Mercer and 3-10 Bellarmine, beating both teams by only one goal. If you are barely beating two truly awful teams in April along with the two bad losses and relatively weak strength of schedule, then it has to be win your tourney or bust. They didn't get it done against Richmond in the tourney (lost by 8 by the way) and were left out. Plenty of conversations to be had about reforming the selection process but I honestly don't think that High Point team is the poster child for everything wrong with the tourney. The at large teams that got in truly had more of a case.
Antonio114 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 27, 2019 10:01 am
High Point by any standard did not deserve to be in the tourney considering how tight it was last year. Two quality wins does not guarantee everything, especially when of their three losses two were to 4-10 St. Johns and 6-9 Jacksonville. The only other quality win they had was Richmond, with solid wins over Air Force and Drexel who showed potential at times. If you want to talk about how too much is based on who you beat and who you lost to, then lets bring in more "eye test" type results. In two strait games in April they almost lost to both 1-12 (yes actually 1-12) Mercer and 3-10 Bellarmine, beating both teams by only one goal. If you are barely beating two truly awful teams in April along with the two bad losses and relatively weak strength of schedule, then it has to be win your tourney or bust. They didn't get it done against Richmond in the tourney (lost by 8 by the way) and were left out. Plenty of conversations to be had about reforming the selection process but I honestly don't think that High Point team is the poster child for everything wrong with the tourney. The at large teams that got in truly had more of a case.
Antonio114 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 27, 2019 10:01 am
High Point by any standard did not deserve to be in the tourney considering how tight it was last year. Two quality wins does not guarantee everything, especially when of their three losses two were to 4-10 St. Johns and 6-9 Jacksonville. The only other quality win they had was Richmond, with solid wins over Air Force and Drexel who showed potential at times. If you want to talk about how too much is based on who you beat and who you lost to, then lets bring in more "eye test" type results. In two strait games in April they almost lost to both 1-12 (yes actually 1-12) Mercer and 3-10 Bellarmine, beating both teams by only one goal. If you are barely beating two truly awful teams in April along with the two bad losses and relatively weak strength of schedule, then it has to be win your tourney or bust. They didn't get it done against Richmond in the tourney (lost by 8 by the way) and were left out. Plenty of conversations to be had about reforming the selection process but I honestly don't think that High Point team is the poster child for everything wrong with the tourney. The at large teams that got in truly had more of a case.
make the case for hopkins over high point. hopkins' wins were better? how's that?
All games at any stage are suppose to factor equally which is flawed . Never heard in sports that its how you start that matters rather than how you finish. HP would have won a title if season ended after two weeks when upsets reigned but trophies aren't handed out that early. HP was a rather average team after that start and Antonio was spot on exposing the faults of arguing for them. If any team had a gripe about JHU inclusion it was Cornell moreso than HP, with Army upsetting Loyola, Big Red had to win their tough conference and they couldn't yet they were clearly better than the champs of America East and MAAC who made the tourney despite being very average teams . Ill take the opposite of AE position and say the real issue in 19 was the AQ's given to Marist and UMBC, if you are going to keep AQ then expand the field to best ensure that the best sixteen teams are included
Cal Dearth was outstanding. Ended up at BU to play right away and he felt wanted.
That would be like wgdsr losing to Hampden Sydney or Randolph Macon 
Like I said, it was great to watch that run and happy for the coach, BUT.........yes,the old argument, you gotta be at the party to pick up the girl. Did High Point make the NCAA's? What's that, NO. 