LaxPower Back-Up Stick

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 5:21 pm

wlaxphan20 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 4:05 pm

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 1:01 pm

wlaxphan20 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 12:20 pm

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 10:02 am

Madlax59 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 9:17 am

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 9:07 am Anyone else find the “asterisk” comments about records on last night’s broadcast interesting? Pretty honest take I thought.

I didn’t hear it what was the gist of it?

Wide brush stroke paraphrase…while the records being broken and new ones set are legitimate there may need to be an asterisk to explain the circumstances.

What circumstances? The only one I can really think of is the shot clock, and I think there is something in the record book that mentions that it was introduced in 2017.

If it’s about “extra games from 2020” that point is actually invalid IMO. I made a post about this last year. There are a number of players in the record books, who had traditional 4 year careers, and who still played more total career games than players who had the 5-6 games from the canceled 2020 season in addition to their 4 years.

What are the circumstance of those players in the record books? Are these more career games due to play in the post season? Continuation of the season they are in?

Post season. Cummings and Treanor had two of the highest if I recall correctly.

edit:
https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=352494#p352494

https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... er#p358696

https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=356698#p356698

First. Don’t care about the records. Was just an observation from last night. Count them or not, really don’t care.

Second, you are comparing apples to oranges. A gift of eligibility vs post season play that a team earned. Sorry don’t see it the same but that’s my opinion.

Someone brought up a player with a medical redshirt. Those redshirts have a set of criteria that need to be met. How many of these current players would have met that criteria (games played) in 2020 that would have allowed them to redshirt? So while I don’t really care about the records I think the ruling in 2020 was short sighted and hurt more athletes in terms of opportunities than helped. I’m sure not many will agree but that’s how I see it.

wlaxphan20 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 2:17 am

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 5:21 pm

wlaxphan20 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 4:05 pm

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 1:01 pm

wlaxphan20 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 12:20 pm

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 10:02 am

Madlax59 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 9:17 am

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 9:07 am Anyone else find the “asterisk” comments about records on last night’s broadcast interesting? Pretty honest take I thought.

I didn’t hear it what was the gist of it?

Wide brush stroke paraphrase…while the records being broken and new ones set are legitimate there may need to be an asterisk to explain the circumstances.

What circumstances? The only one I can really think of is the shot clock, and I think there is something in the record book that mentions that it was introduced in 2017.

If it’s about “extra games from 2020” that point is actually invalid IMO. I made a post about this last year. There are a number of players in the record books, who had traditional 4 year careers, and who still played more total career games than players who had the 5-6 games from the canceled 2020 season in addition to their 4 years.

What are the circumstance of those players in the record books? Are these more career games due to play in the post season? Continuation of the season they are in?

Post season. Cummings and Treanor had two of the highest if I recall correctly.

edit:
https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=352494#p352494

https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... er#p358696

https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=356698#p356698

First. Don’t care about the records. Was just an observation from last night. Count them or not, really don’t care.

Second, you are comparing apples to oranges. A gift of eligibility vs post season play that a team earned. Sorry don’t see it the same but that’s my opinion.

Someone brought up a player with a medical redshirt. Those redshirts have a set of criteria that need to be met. How many of these current players would have met that criteria (games played) in 2020 that would have allowed them to redshirt? So while I don’t really care about the records I think the ruling in 2020 was short sighted and hurt more athletes in terms of opportunities than helped. I’m sure not many will agree but that’s how I see it.

Woah, Bart. I thought you found the comment about an asterisk to records being set interesting, so I was adding my $0.02 about that - not about whether I thought the decision made to grant an extra year of eligibility was fair to the players or not.

That’s fine if we don’t agree. IMO I thought i was comparing apples to apples - number of games played in a career and if players with a COVID season had an advantage in that sense.

I find the asterisk discussion interesting as well, but I think there’s too much hyper focus on the “extra games” people believe players were granted and not enough focus on just how much more opportunity the shot clock has created. That’s just my observation.

The ruling in 2020 is what it is. I think the NCAA would have faced a lot of backlash either way, but hindsight is always 20/20. Yeah, redshirts have set criteria, but I don’t think any entity in the country had a “set criteria” for their response in 2020. Fair, unfair, whatever your opinion is, I didn’t really think that’s what this was about.

Maybe I’m reading into this too much, and I get that this is a sensitive subject for a lot of people who were personally impacted, but I’m not really sure what I said to warrant the tone of your response.

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 6:41 am I stopped watching the Maryland-Princeton game when it was something like 14-7. 15--11 MD final. What happened?

Essexfenwick wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 7:58 am

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 6:41 am I stopped watching the Maryland-Princeton game when it was something like 14-7. 15--11 MD final. What happened?

UMD took off the 2nd half and rested.

laxlaxlax wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 9:22 am

Essexfenwick wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 7:58 am

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 6:41 am I stopped watching the Maryland-Princeton game when it was something like 14-7. 15--11 MD final. What happened?

UMD took off the 2nd half and rested.

I think starters stayed on the field didn’t they?

Princeton’s goalie just played better / terps shot less efficiently and only scored 3 in the whole 2nd half. Had a quick look at stats and that was on 15 shots.
Terps also turned over the ball 10 times in the 2nd which probably didn’t help.

Princeton let the game get away from them in 2Q and then it was always going to be difficult to get back in it.

laxlaxlax wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 9:22 am

Essexfenwick wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 7:58 am

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 6:41 am I stopped watching the Maryland-Princeton game when it was something like 14-7. 15--11 MD final. What happened?

UMD took off the 2nd half and rested.

I think starters stayed on the field didn’t they?

Princeton’s goalie just played better / terps shot less efficiently and only scored 3 in the whole 2nd half. Had a quick look at stats and that was on 15 shots.
Terps also turned over the ball 10 times in the 2nd which probably didn’t help.

Princeton let the game get away from them in 2Q and then it was always going to be difficult to get back in it.

njbill wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 11:58 am Preseason, I had Maryland beating Boston College in the finals. I would like a do over.

njbill wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 1:00 pm Syracuse and Northwestern, but a blind squirrel could probably make those selections.

njbill wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 1:00 pm Syracuse and Northwestern, but a blind squirrel could probably make those selections.

Bart wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 7:20 am

wlaxphan20 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 2:17 am

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 5:21 pm

wlaxphan20 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 4:05 pm

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 1:01 pm

wlaxphan20 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 12:20 pm

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 10:02 am

Madlax59 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 9:17 am

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 9:07 am Anyone else find the “asterisk” comments about records on last night’s broadcast interesting? Pretty honest take I thought.

I didn’t hear it what was the gist of it?

Wide brush stroke paraphrase…while the records being broken and new ones set are legitimate there may need to be an asterisk to explain the circumstances.

What circumstances? The only one I can really think of is the shot clock, and I think there is something in the record book that mentions that it was introduced in 2017.

If it’s about “extra games from 2020” that point is actually invalid IMO. I made a post about this last year. There are a number of players in the record books, who had traditional 4 year careers, and who still played more total career games than players who had the 5-6 games from the canceled 2020 season in addition to their 4 years.

What are the circumstance of those players in the record books? Are these more career games due to play in the post season? Continuation of the season they are in?

Post season. Cummings and Treanor had two of the highest if I recall correctly.

edit:
https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=352494#p352494

https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... er#p358696

https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=356698#p356698

First. Don’t care about the records. Was just an observation from last night. Count them or not, really don’t care.

Second, you are comparing apples to oranges. A gift of eligibility vs post season play that a team earned. Sorry don’t see it the same but that’s my opinion.

Someone brought up a player with a medical redshirt. Those redshirts have a set of criteria that need to be met. How many of these current players would have met that criteria (games played) in 2020 that would have allowed them to redshirt? So while I don’t really care about the records I think the ruling in 2020 was short sighted and hurt more athletes in terms of opportunities than helped. I’m sure not many will agree but that’s how I see it.

Woah, Bart. I thought you found the comment about an asterisk to records being set interesting, so I was adding my $0.02 about that - not about whether I thought the decision made to grant an extra year of eligibility was fair to the players or not.

That’s fine if we don’t agree. IMO I thought i was comparing apples to apples - number of games played in a career and if players with a COVID season had an advantage in that sense.

I find the asterisk discussion interesting as well, but I think there’s too much hyper focus on the “extra games” people believe players were granted and not enough focus on just how much more opportunity the shot clock has created. That’s just my observation.

The ruling in 2020 is what it is. I think the NCAA would have faced a lot of backlash either way, but hindsight is always 20/20. Yeah, redshirts have set criteria, but I don’t think any entity in the country had a “set criteria” for their response in 2020. Fair, unfair, whatever your opinion is, I didn’t really think that’s what this was about.

Maybe I’m reading into this too much, and I get that this is a sensitive subject for a lot of people who were personally impacted, but I’m not really sure what I said to warrant the tone of your response.

There was no tone intended. Sorry if it came across that way. This was originally about an interesting comment made on a lacrosse broadcast. I think all the things we have spoken about are rolled up in that comment. Not a bid deal. Again, I really do not care about the numbers. I just care about watching competitive games.

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 8:22 pm NU up on PSU early.

This Sammie White kid is explosive. Wow.