2022 D1 Selection Committee

[Wheels]

Everyone talking about how we need to completely overhaul the selection process. I’m not going to say it’s without its flaws, but how about we need to seriously reevaluate how polling is done. People taking 10 mins to fill out a survey about teams they haven’t actually watched creates major disconnect for your average fan. The bigger question isn’t “why isn’t Notre Dame in the tournament”. It’s “why were they ranked as high as #4 in the polls”?

The Fanlax Forum polls are more thorough, aren't they? I bet most coaches have their SIDs fill out their weekly poll, and the media? Well, see how they're reacting right now to the selection committee's decisions and then think about these people having votes for the media poll!!

[Big Dog]

Harvard lost 3 of the last 4 games. Gave up 61 goals (15 a game) in the last four. And, did not make the conference tournament.

That's one big problem with RPI. Once conference play starts, RPI doesn't move much: slightly up if you win and slightly down if you lose. A loss to a ranked team is better than a W against a 'lesser' team. Sure, that makes logical sense, but that just means several L's can be worth more than Ws (and that starts to make no sense). There's a reason college basketball has gotten away from RPI as the sole factor.

If Calc and Anish et al should take on the RPI if they want to make things more 'fair' however defined.

[crazyhorse]

Analysis of Harvard and Notre Dame using NCAA's stated criteria:

Strength of schedule: ND 16, H 21

RPI results
Overall: ND 11, H 15
vs grouping of opponents' RPIs: 1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21+
Harvard 1-1 1-2 1-1 0-0 5-0
Notre Dame 0-2 2-1 0-1 1-0 5-0
Avg opponent RPI of wins: ND 31, H 34
Avg opponent RPI of losses: ND 7, H 8

Head-to-head and common opponents: both beat Michigan and lost to OSU

Significant wins vs teams with better RPIs: Harvard 3 (Princeton, Brown, BU)
ND 2 (Duke x2)
Significant losses vs teams with worse RPIs: Harvard 0
ND 1 (OSU)

In my view, edge goes to ND. The only way to justify Harvard in is to start discounting the Duke wins. That's a slippery slope.

Result of putting Harvard in is to have 6 Ivies and 1 ACC team in an 18 team tournament. Does not pass the eye test or the small test.

I am sure the ACC coaches have a special shout out for Joe Breschi, who had their back as a member of the selection committee.

[QuakerSouth]

ND and Duke being left out has folks hopping mad! Quint, Anish and the crew are hysterical. We should let the ESPN and PLL guys make the selections.

Anish's histrionics on Twitter are something else. Now we're going to have to hear about this all the way through Memorial Day. That this tournament is illegitimate. That the winner of the whole thing benefitted from not having ND in the field. Those dudes can't help themselves. They're going to slip it into every broadcast they're on.

Maybe we can get him/them banned for "disinformation." Anyone have Elon's number?

[Kismet]

Harvard lost 3 of the last 4 games. Gave up 61 goals (15 a game) in the last four. And, did not make the conference tournament.

That's one big problem with RPI. Once conference play starts, RPI doesn't move much: slightly up if you win and slightly down if you lose.

Yep. Like a baseball average (which RPI is an average of game results)

If it wasn't for the hard 18 team limit you could add Duke and ND and make two more of the other qualifiers play-in with them.

[Wheels]

And here we have Lars talking about the eye test.

https://www.usalaxmagazine.com/college/ ... selections

[Ezra White]

Just a thought - how about a minimum RPI or other metric be put in place for a conference to get an AQ. You then get a much stronger field without expanding the total number of teams by growing the AL bids. Not sure why lacrosse has to follow the hoops model.

Just not the point of the AQ. It’s about broader participation and equal access, actually never ever been about putting only the very best teams in.

A discussion to change the AQ system comes with a much larger and broader conversation about how the sport should grow in the future without being a closed loop system an keep schools engaged and participating. It’s fine if you only want 35 schools participating but drop the AQ and you’d lose 10-15 schools within 5-7 years.

Great points. Consider: the west coast is a sleeping giant. One day, instead of praising players from Oregon who come east, we may praise Oregon’s team stocked with WC players. Something similar can be said about the southwest.

But there must be a transition period, hence keep the AQ. But it’s also important to keep lacrosse a sport where factory schools with megabucks revenues from televised football and, to a lesser extent, basketball, can’t subsidize minor sports, like lacrosse, to make them part of the money game.

[CU88]

In the Derby, Rich Strike got it done


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFb2XSDv6vE

[Big Dog]

Just a thought - how about a minimum RPI or other metric be put in place for a conference to get an AQ. You then get a much stronger field without expanding the total number of teams by growing the AL bids. Not sure why lacrosse has to follow the hoops model.

Just not the point of the AQ. It’s about broader participation and equal access, actually never ever been about putting only the very best teams in.

A discussion to change the AQ system comes with a much larger and broader conversation about how the sport should grow in the future without being a closed loop system an keep schools engaged and participating. It’s fine if you only want 35 schools participating but drop the AQ and you’d lose 10-15 schools within 5-7 years.

Great points. Consider: the west coast is a sleeping giant. One day, instead of praising players from Oregon who come east, we may praise Oregon’s team stocked with WC players. Something similar can be said about the southwest.

But there must be a transition period, hence keep the AQ. But it’s also important to keep lacrosse a sport where factory schools with megabucks revenues from televised football and, to a lesser extent, basketball, can’t subsidize minor sports, like lacrosse, to make them part of the money game.

I'm a big fan of lax, but there is no way a P5 school is gonna add another non-rev men's sport. Just no way, and particularly not on the west coast.

(How many P5 schools have added lacrosse in the past decade(s)? I beleive that is just two: Michigan and Utah, and the latter was a result of an alum paying for it all.)

[Typical Lax Dad]

ND and Duke being left out has folks hopping mad! Quint, Anish and the crew are hysterical. We should let the ESPN and PLL guys make the selections.

Anish's histrionics on Twitter are something else. Now we're going to have to hear about this all the way through Memorial Day. That this tournament is illegitimate. That the winner of the whole thing benefitted from not having ND in the field. Those dudes can't help themselves. They're going to slip it into every broadcast they're on.

So unprofessional its hard to believe but that’s lacrosse.

[wgdsr]

having read the committee's rationale for the last 6 teams considered, i say welcome back to crazy. i'd say it was the most inane illogical rationale i've seen, but it's really just a re-up from past years going back a while. nd and duke just got caught up in it this year.

the consequences are that there'll be great anticipation for those final selections. and also that teams will have absolutely no idea what's important to get in year to year. don't live on the bubble.

Sometimes you have to blow up the algorithm when all participants are modeling their systems to the algo. I don’t mind it. This is a college sport. An expenditure and still extracurricular no matter what the “it’s all business now” crowd seems to think so it’s more disappointing that institutions of higher learning would try to game scheduling to work a system rather than let kids just go compete and win the games out in front of them without all these other considerations. Maybe it won’t matter if the OSU AD gets his way and FBS takes over CFB freeing up the NCAA in some ways.

+1.
the irony is the beneficiaries of the system didn't even realize how it works and the advantage they had. they created more internal games thinking more is better. said multiple times that was likely a mistake. then they dropped crossovers with the ivy (and patriot).

see basketball: when you have a de minimus number of games ooc, now they're all uber important. acc lost several more games in hoops than optimal. 30+ games, like 16 teams. but now that they're up to 20+ in conference games, several more early season losses can't be made up. and so like 10 b1g teams get in and are well seeded, and the acc is lucky to have a handful and nit scraps.

and now they've boxed themselves in for 2 more years. nd had cuse twice.

now the squad with the easiest schedule got in and they're probably dumb enough to follow that model. they'll be chasing their tail if they do. uva took one more loss anywhere, they were probably out.

[jerseyjames]

So when are we getting the schedule for the weekend...

[Farfromgeneva]

Just a thought - how about a minimum RPI or other metric be put in place for a conference to get an AQ. You then get a much stronger field without expanding the total number of teams by growing the AL bids. Not sure why lacrosse has to follow the hoops model.

Just not the point of the AQ. It’s about broader participation and equal access, actually never ever been about putting only the very best teams in.

A discussion to change the AQ system comes with a much larger and broader conversation about how the sport should grow in the future without being a closed loop system an keep schools engaged and participating. It’s fine if you only want 35 schools participating but drop the AQ and you’d lose 10-15 schools within 5-7 years.

Great points. Consider: the west coast is a sleeping giant. One day, instead of praising players from Oregon who come east, we may praise Oregon’s team stocked with WC players. Something similar can be said about the southwest.

But there must be a transition period, hence keep the AQ. But it’s also important to keep lacrosse a sport where factory schools with megabucks revenues from televised football and, to a lesser extent, basketball, can’t subsidize minor sports, like lacrosse, to make them part of the money game.

I'm a big fan of lax, but there is no way a P5 school is gonna add another non-rev men's sport. Just no way, and particularly not on the west coast.

(How many P5 schools have added lacrosse in the past decade(s)? I beleive that is just two: Michigan and Utah, and the latter was a result of an alum paying for it all.)

No one knows how NIL will work through college athletics yet. Football is the tail wagging the dog and title 9 isn’t going away but predicting any future in college athletics, other than that most SEC schools will continue to prioritize football over all else including academics, right now is asking to be wrong.

[RedIvy]

Analysis of Harvard and Notre Dame using NCAA's stated criteria:

Strength of schedule: ND 16, H 21

RPI results
Overall: ND 11, H 15
vs grouping of opponents' RPIs: 1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21+
Harvard 1-1 1-2 1-1 0-0 5-0
Notre Dame 0-2 2-1 0-1 1-0 5-0
Avg opponent RPI of wins: ND 31, H 34
Avg opponent RPI of losses: ND 7, H 8

Head-to-head and common opponents: both beat Michigan and lost to OSU

Significant wins vs teams with better RPIs: Harvard 3 (Princeton, Brown, BU)
ND 2 (Duke x2)
Significant losses vs teams with worse RPIs: Harvard 0
ND 1 (OSU)

In my view, edge goes to ND. The only way to justify Harvard in is to start discounting the Duke wins. That's a slippery slope.

Result of putting Harvard in is to have 6 Ivies and 1 ACC team in an 18 team tournament. Does not pass the eye test or the small test.

I am sure the ACC coaches have a special shout out for Joe Breschi, who had their back as a member of the selection committee.

Good comparison and as I mentioned I would have given the nod to ND. But this clearly shows how close it was and depending on how significant wins are considered you can see it can go either way. Based on this data I don’t think it’s nearly as outrageous as some are saying. ACC scheduling clearly was the issue for ND. Look at NC, UVA and Dukes schedules and the limited travel…. They seem to dictate this. I don’t recall Duke coming to Ithaca in the past 20 years.

[Big Dog]

Just a thought - how about a minimum RPI or other metric be put in place for a conference to get an AQ. You then get a much stronger field without expanding the total number of teams by growing the AL bids. Not sure why lacrosse has to follow the hoops model.

Just not the point of the AQ. It’s about broader participation and equal access, actually never ever been about putting only the very best teams in.

A discussion to change the AQ system comes with a much larger and broader conversation about how the sport should grow in the future without being a closed loop system an keep schools engaged and participating. It’s fine if you only want 35 schools participating but drop the AQ and you’d lose 10-15 schools within 5-7 years.

Great points. Consider: the west coast is a sleeping giant. One day, instead of praising players from Oregon who come east, we may praise Oregon’s team stocked with WC players. Something similar can be said about the southwest.

But there must be a transition period, hence keep the AQ. But it’s also important to keep lacrosse a sport where factory schools with megabucks revenues from televised football and, to a lesser extent, basketball, can’t subsidize minor sports, like lacrosse, to make them part of the money game.

I'm a big fan of lax, but there is no way a P5 school is gonna add another non-rev men's sport. Just no way, and particularly not on the west coast.

(How many P5 schools have added lacrosse in the past decade(s)? I beleive that is just two: Michigan and Utah, and the latter was a result of an alum paying for it all.)

No one knows how NIL will work through college athletics yet. Football is the tail wagging the dog and title 9 isn’t going away but predicting any future in college athletics, other than that most SEC schools will continue to prioritize football over all else including academics, right now is asking to be wrong.

Well, of course, predictions can and will be wrong. But let's look at the facts: only two P5 schools have added men's lax in decades. And this was before NIL.

Utah 2019
Michigan 2012

Despite 'fastest growing sport' marketing, there is no other interest in the p12 whatsoever. On the contrary, most of the p12 are looking to cut athletic expenses -- even the wealthy schools like Stanford and USC, the latter of which is all-in for football.

But this is getting off point adn only relevant when planning for the future tourney size.

[joewillie78]

Harvard lost 3 of the last 4 games. Gave up 61 goals (15 a game) in the last four. And, did not make the conference tournament.

Actually, CORNELL also lost 3 out of their last 4 if you count the ILT game, but that 1 win was against the #2RPI team and that pretty much locked up a spot for the Big Red.

In retrospect, Did Harvard and Princeton actually luck out the most by getting 2 full weeks rest, while Penn and Yale got the "worst" of it having to play 2 extra gut wrenching games and hence getting much less rest?

Hmmm......
GOBIGRED
Joewillie78

[johnnyonthegunpowder]

Woodruff and company are absolutely ridiculous, and most of them have no business being on that committee. "Data" without actual interpretation is why higher education is such a absolutely disaster and Woodruff epitomizes that thoughtlessness to a perfection while chairing this committee.

Breschi, wow, very, very disappointed in him. Weird year. Not much to like about 2022's Tarheels and then add to to the equation.

I agree with Typical Lax Dad, give it to ESPN and PLL guys. Though they can be impossible to listen to, at least they know how to watch a game and they understand competition and aesthetics.

What a joke.

[Slim]

The NCAA can go straight to hell. It's an absolute cluster-you know what. What a crock-o-poo! A complete joke organization! #FireDonna #firethemall #bestinterestofstudentathletesmyass #ivypityparty

[Farfromgeneva]

Just a thought - how about a minimum RPI or other metric be put in place for a conference to get an AQ. You then get a much stronger field without expanding the total number of teams by growing the AL bids. Not sure why lacrosse has to follow the hoops model.

Just not the point of the AQ. It’s about broader participation and equal access, actually never ever been about putting only the very best teams in.

A discussion to change the AQ system comes with a much larger and broader conversation about how the sport should grow in the future without being a closed loop system an keep schools engaged and participating. It’s fine if you only want 35 schools participating but drop the AQ and you’d lose 10-15 schools within 5-7 years.

Great points. Consider: the west coast is a sleeping giant. One day, instead of praising players from Oregon who come east, we may praise Oregon’s team stocked with WC players. Something similar can be said about the southwest.

But there must be a transition period, hence keep the AQ. But it’s also important to keep lacrosse a sport where factory schools with megabucks revenues from televised football and, to a lesser extent, basketball, can’t subsidize minor sports, like lacrosse, to make them part of the money game.

I'm a big fan of lax, but there is no way a P5 school is gonna add another non-rev men's sport. Just no way, and particularly not on the west coast.

(How many P5 schools have added lacrosse in the past decade(s)? I beleive that is just two: Michigan and Utah, and the latter was a result of an alum paying for it all.)

No one knows how NIL will work through college athletics yet. Football is the tail wagging the dog and title 9 isn’t going away but predicting any future in college athletics, other than that most SEC schools will continue to prioritize football over all else including academics, right now is asking to be wrong.

Well, of course, predictions can and will be wrong. But let's look at the facts: only two P5 schools have added men's lax in decades. And this was before NIL.

Utah 2019
Michigan 2012

Despite 'fastest growing sport' marketing, there is no other interest in the p12 whatsoever. On the contrary, most of the p12 are looking to cut athletic expenses -- even the wealthy schools like Stanford and USC, the latter of which is all-in for football.

But this is getting off point adn only relevant when planning for the future tourney size.

You were projecting weren’t you? Post NIL. Which it seems is a bigger thing than you appear to be valuing it as given the “sure predictions can be wrong” but then apply a pre major SCOTUS ruling analysis given how it’s going to flip college sports on its head. I can’t even tell you what P5 is going to mean in ten years. Vandy and Wake included? What about Rice. What if interdivisional programs/ play we’re allowed and suddenly some NESCAC or UAA schools decided to move up with their war chests and lack of AI?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Woodruff and company are absolutely ridiculous, and most of them have no business being on that committee. "Data" without actual interpretation is why higher education is such a absolutely disaster and Woodruff epitomizes that thoughtlessness to a perfection while chairing this committee.

Breschi, wow, very, very disappointed in him. Weird year. Not much to like about 2022's Tarheels and then add to to the equation.

I agree with Typical Lax Dad, give it to ESPN and PLL guys. Though they can be impossible to listen to, at least they know how to watch a game and they understand competition and aesthetics.

What a joke.

I was joking.