Thursday, October 31st, 2024
 
 
 
Updates automatically
Twitter Link
CHN iOS App
 
NCAA
1967 1970

ECAC
1967 1968 1969 1970 1973 1980 1986 1996 1997 2003 2005 2010

IVY
1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1977 1978 1983 1984 1985 1996 1997 2002 2003 2004 2005 2012 2014

Cleary Spittoon
2002 2003 2005

Ned Harkness Cup
2003 2005 2008 2013
 
Brendon
Iles
Pokulok
Schafer
Syphilis

lax tourney

Posted by dadeo 
lax tourney
Posted by: dadeo (---.dyn.optonline.net)
Date: May 08, 2005 10:02PM

and here i thought the NCAA hockey tournament was screwy with our laborious trip to Minneapolis.

How are we ranked #3 in the polls, we beat Syracuse, and we dont even get in the top 8 in the tournament.??

Can someone tell me if that makes any sense whatsoever?

Thanks
Dave '02

LGR
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: May 08, 2005 10:03PM

I'm not sure if it makes sense. I'll wait for someone who's gone through the process to explain it all. The win against Syracuse gives us a top 6-10 win. The win against Notre Dame gives us an 11-15 win. 0-1-1. I don't know how that compares but I woulda thought it would mean more.
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: scoop85 (---.hvc.res.rr.com)
Date: May 08, 2005 10:12PM

Well, other than the preposterous fact that we have to travel to Towson, I think the bracket is ok. I would much rather have the chance to play Duke at Princeton than play Hopkins at their place. But first things first, and use this disrepect as a motivational tool to take this tournament by storm.

Looking at Towson's record, nothing there gives me any clue as to why they got the #7 seed, other than the fact that they played Maryland, Virginia and Hopkins (and lost all those games). They twice beat Villanova by 1 goal, and beat Rutgers by 1. They were lauded for losing to Hopkins by only 4, but Hopkins hardly blew out anyone this year.

I think the Red will be angry and looking to put a serious hurt on somebody.
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: Hillel Hoffmann (---.chesnh01.pa.comcast.net)
Date: May 08, 2005 10:23PM

I like this matchup for Cornell.

A few tidbits about Towson:

They are very, very young.

One of their leading scorers is the son (I think) of Cornell lax great Norm Engelke '81.

Their coach is former Ivy bonephone Tony Seaman. I always disliked him when he was at Penn.

I have always liked their stadium.

 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: Al DeFlorio (---.hsd1.ma.comcast.net)
Date: May 08, 2005 10:24PM

Interestingly, the nine teams seeded (apparently, as they didn't assign seeding numbers to the visiting teams) ahead of Cornell were the nine with higher RPIs. The trick seems to be to schedule the toughest teams but make sure you have enough teams you can beat so you finish at .500 or above. UNC, despite having a 5-8 record, finished 11th--just behind Cornell--in RPI. Doesn't matter if you lose to top teams, as long as you play 'em to pad your RPI--and win enough other games to hit the .500 mark.

I do think Hillel's right: better to play Towson away than Syracuse at home--or UMass at UMass, for that matter.

 
___________________________
Al DeFlorio '65
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: Al DeFlorio (---.hsd1.ma.comcast.net)
Date: May 08, 2005 10:29PM

Here's a link to final tabulation of RPI, SOS, and "quality wins." Looking at Towson, it sure appears the first two were the difference-makers this year.

[www.insidelacrosse.com]

 
___________________________
Al DeFlorio '65
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: Al DeFlorio (---.hsd1.ma.comcast.net)
Date: May 08, 2005 11:07PM

Towson athletics web site says the game is "tentatively" scheduled for Saturday night at 7:30pm.

[www.towsontigers.com]

 
___________________________
Al DeFlorio '65
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: Hillel Hoffmann (---.chesnh01.pa.comcast.net)
Date: May 08, 2005 11:16PM

[Q]Al DeFlorio Wrote:

Towson athletics web site says the game is "tentatively" scheduled for Saturday night at 7:30pm.[/q]
I'm not surprised. Towson always plays a lot of their home games at night. It has been a shtick of theirs for a long time. Their venue, Unitas Stadium (nee Minnegan), is a cozy pseudo-horseshoe (one end zone is a grassy slope) with steeply banked seats on each side. Can make for a very intense atmosphere once the sun sets.

 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: jkahn (---.hsd1.il.comcast.net)
Date: May 09, 2005 07:43AM

Does anyone do a Bradley-Terry (KRACH) rating for lacrosse? I'm curious to see what that would be.

 
___________________________
Jeff Kahn '70 '72
 
Re: lax tourney: Say what?
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: May 09, 2005 09:04AM

The NCAA offers this time-warp insight into the tournament's history:

>>>Johns Hopkins University has won the event seven times, while Syracuse University has won eight times and is the defending national champion. Since 1988, either Syracuse or Princeton has won every year except Johns Hopkins’ 1987 victory and the University of Virginia’s 1999 and 2003 titles. [www.ncaasports.com]

(NC won in 1991)



 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: peterg (---.com)
Date: May 09, 2005 09:24AM

[Q]Al DeFlorio Wrote:

Towson athletics web site says the game is "tentatively" scheduled for Saturday night at 7:30pm.[/q]

CU web site confirms that time.
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: Chris 02 (---.icsincorporated.com)
Date: May 09, 2005 09:56AM

[Q]Al DeFlorio Wrote:

Here's a link to final tabulation of RPI, SOS, and "quality wins." Looking at Towson, it sure appears the first two were the difference-makers this year.[/q]

I'm not so sure about this table. It shows both Towson with a win over Delaware and Delaware with a win over Towson.

According to

[www.insidelacrosse.com]

They never twice.
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: Jordan 04 (12.42.45.---)
Date: May 09, 2005 10:08AM

That schedule is wrong.

[www.towsontigers.com]

Lost to the Blue Hens in the regular season. Edged them for the CAA tournament title.
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: Al DeFlorio (---.hsd1.ma.comcast.net)
Date: May 09, 2005 10:26AM

[Q]Chris 02 Wrote:

Al DeFlorio Wrote:

Here's a link to final tabulation of RPI, SOS, and "quality wins." Looking at Towson, it sure appears the first two were the difference-makers this year.[/Q]
I'm not so sure about this table. It shows both Towson with a win over Delaware and Delaware with a win over Towson.

According to

They never twice.[/q]
Delaware beat Towson in the regular season, and Towson beat Delaware in the league's tournament.

I think there is a flaw in the table, however. It appears that in assigning "top 5 wins," etc., they are not using RPI but some other ranking (polls?) to determine top 5, top 10, etc., which is not how the NCAA allegedly operates. For example, note that Army is credited with a "top 5" win over Cornell, while Cornell is shown as #11 in RPI. Also, the footnote says that RPI and SOS were based on calculations prior to this past weekend, and are therefore out of date. Almost as shaky as the case for WMD.

The bottom line still, apparently, is that this year's committee gave RPI and SOS more weight than in the past, and gave less weight to "quality wins." This is disappointing, because RPI and SOS are driven more by whom you've played (the latter essentially entirely so), not how you did. Giving strong consideration to "quality wins" at least meant you had to beat one or more of those difficult opponents that padded your RPI and SOS. Anyone can lose to the top five teams in the country. If you've played them but didn't beat any of them, what does that prove? That you managed to get them on your schedule?



 
___________________________
Al DeFlorio '65
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.raytheon.com)
Date: May 09, 2005 10:39AM

Yup, they weighted RPI and SOS a lot heavier this year, which is to say, at all.

Why? Easy. Syracuse, who's only quality wins were #12 (and, for kicks #17). Go by quality wins alone, as has always been the case in the past, and Syracuse doesn't make the tournament. The good ol' boys can't have that happen, so they weight RPI (in which Syracuse was #6 for having lost to good teams) and SOS higher than ever before. In order to be consistent, they do that through the whole process, thereby shafting us the home game and screwing Dartmouth entirely.
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: jtwcornell91 (---.loyno.edu)
Date: May 09, 2005 11:30AM

[Q]jkahn Wrote:

Does anyone do a Bradley-Terry (KRACH) rating for lacrosse? I'm curious to see what that would be.[/q]

I did this a couple of years ago, but never got around to it this year, in part because no one asked me after hockey season ended. IIRC someone had a javascript page which converted the laxpower scores page into a format my scripts were set up to handle.


 
___________________________
JTW

@jtwcornell91@hostux.social
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: Josh '99 (---.nyc.res.rr.com)
Date: May 10, 2005 12:18PM

So, now that it's become apparent that our first-round game location wasn't a typo, is anyone going down to Maryland to catch the game this weekend? I wish I could but it's smack in the middle of exams for me so I can't pull it off, but I'm hoping to be able to go next weekend if we beat Towson. *fingers crossed*
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: KateWithThe8 (128.8.221.---)
Date: May 10, 2005 02:33PM

If not for an out-of-town wedding this weekend, Jon and I would be there! (Considering it might as well be in our backyard)

 
___________________________
The jersey that is....
But usually you'll find me in a 22 (next to a 2)!
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: Trotsky (---.cust-rtr.swbell.net)
Date: May 10, 2005 03:26PM

I have to work all weekend, so I'm screwed (it's only an hour or so from my house).
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: Jordan 04 (12.42.45.---)
Date: May 10, 2005 04:48PM

Unlikely to be going this weekend, but I'm sure I'll be at Princeton if we get there.
 
2005 All-Ivy lax team
Posted by: Al DeFlorio (---.hsd1.ma.comcast.net)
Date: May 10, 2005 04:51PM

As you'd expect, lots of Cornellians.

[www.ivyleaguesports.com]

 
___________________________
Al DeFlorio '65
 
Re: 2005 All-Ivy lax team
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: May 10, 2005 11:13PM

Six of ten All-Ivy first team lacrosse players are Cornellians. Only one from Princeton. But six second team and honorable mention, so there's always next year for the Tigers.
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: Hillel Hoffmann (---.usb.temple.edu)
Date: May 11, 2005 09:24AM

[Q]jmh30 Wrote: So, now that it's become apparent that our first-round game location wasn't a typo, is anyone going down to Maryland to catch the game this weekend? [/q]
I gambled and lost: I assumed they'd get a home playoff game and made arrangements to be in Ithaca this weekend. My skin is crawling, I'm so f'ing frustrated.
 
Re: 2005 All-Ivy lax team
Posted by: Hillel Hoffmann (---.usb.temple.edu)
Date: May 11, 2005 09:52AM

[Q]billhoward Wrote: Six of ten All-Ivy first team lacrosse players are Cornellians. Only one from Princeton. But six second team and honorable mention, so there's always next year for the Tigers. [/q]
Nice to see CU's seniors get special props. Kyle Georgalas, who didn't exactly start the season on fire, was phenomenal in league games and was one of few unanimous sfirst-team elections. Nee finally gets his reward for playing with pain. And Greenhalgh is a great choice for Ivy POY. He has added a lot to his game the last two seasons, and is so good on the ride.

When Princeton's Cocoziello got the no-brainer Ivy Rookie of the Year award, he became the first defenseman ever to get ROY. Long poles of the world, you have nothing to lose but your chains.

Cornell's women's lax team got two freshmen on the All-Ivy second team.
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: ithacat (128.253.193.---)
Date: May 11, 2005 01:47PM

I think Cornell got screwed. It's hard for me to argue with that, though I believed they played the fewest number of games against top-10 teams (according to RPI). SOS...hmm, this seems like a Big Red refrain this year. Maybe instead of Binghamton Cornell should play Hopkins or UVA?

I personally think any team that makes it to 22 straight final fours deserves a chance, as long as they meet minimum qualifications and can present an arguement for inclusion. I also do not believe there are 16 teams in the country better than SU (though this year it seems close).

Cornell's wins came against teams with an average RPI of 27, SU's came against teams with an average of 24.6. Cornell's losses came against teams with an average RPI of 11.5, SU's loses were against teams with an average of 6.2. I like Cornell's side of the bracket more than SU's, though Duke is having a special year & Maryland is scary...of course, that's assuming Cornell gets past Towson.

BTW, SU & Towson are the only 2 teams (in the top-10 RPI) without a win vs a top-10 RPI team. As far as Towson goes I hope that streak continues.

I still think Cornell got screwed...again.
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: ugarte (---.cisco.com)
Date: May 11, 2005 01:48PM

[Q]Hillel Hoffmann Wrote:

jmh30 Wrote: So, now that it's become apparent that our first-round game location wasn't a typo, is anyone going down to Maryland to catch the game this weekend? [/Q]
I gambled and lost: I assumed they'd get a home playoff game and made arrangements to be in Ithaca this weekend. My skin is crawling, I'm so f'ing frustrated.[/q]Don't you live in the DC area, Hillel? I'm sure your Ithaca hosts will understand if you stay at home.



 
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: Al DeFlorio (---.hsd1.ma.comcast.net)
Date: May 11, 2005 02:02PM

[Q]ithacat Wrote:
BTW, SU & Towson are the only 2 teams (in the top-10 RPI) without a win vs a top-10 RPI team. As far as Towson goes I hope that streak continues.

I still think Cornell got screwed...again. [/q]
I agree, although it was easy to see it coming.

There used to be two safeguards against the problem of RPI and strength-of-schedule being too dependent on whom you played as opposed to how you did against them. One of those safeguards--requiring a winning percentage of at least .500--knocked UNC out of this year's tournament, despite their high RPI and SOS. The other safeguard--and allegedly the #1 priority criterion for selection--has in the past been wins against top teams, which meant you not only had to play top teams (which boosted your RPI) but actually had to beat one or more of them (anyone can lose to Hopkins, Virginia, and Maryland--as Towson did--but it does pad your RPI and SOS). This year they apparently disregarded "safeguard" number two in both the selection and the seeding.

I agree that it would have been just plain wrong to leave Syracuse out of a 16-team tournament. Interesting how the Hopkins partisans on LaxPower were one day saying Syracuse didn't deserve to be selected based on their record but the next day were complaining about how tough a draw they were given (Syracuse or UMass--but primarily the prospect of playing the former) in the quarterfinals.



 
___________________________
Al DeFlorio '65
 
Re: 2005 All-Ivy lax team
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: May 11, 2005 02:40PM

>>> [Hillel:] Cornell's women's lax team got two freshmen on the All-Ivy second team.

That's a start.

Too bad the men's sports we care most about these days, hockey and lacrosse, have not done well this year or last on the women's side. Although women's lacrosse did have a national contender three (?) years back.
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.raytheon.com)
Date: May 11, 2005 03:13PM

It's not an issue of Syracuse not deserving to be there, I agree they did, but it *is* an issue of purposefully modifying their weighting of the criteria from each of the previous years in order to accomplish such. Quality Wins being the only factor that counted is and always was stupid, but it was consistent. To pick and chose your weights and which criterias your consider in order to get the desired end result is exactly what hockey avoids, and exactly what is horribly wrong. It almost makes it a waste to bother having criteria at all.

Using RPI and SOS to keep Syracuse in the tournament makes sense, but consider QW is still (officlally anyway) the *primary* criteria, you could have knocked Syracuse down another peg or two and kept us home, allowing QWs to be primary and actually sensibly use the others. But when the good ol' boys get together in a smokey room, sense doesn't play into it. Heck, you do that and you could end up with a Syr @ Cornell matchup. That'd be fun.

On second thought, I'd rather face Towson ;)
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: May 11, 2005 04:23PM

[Q]Al DeFlorio Wrote: ... Interesting how the Hopkins partisans on LaxPower were one day saying Syracuse didn't deserve to be selected based on their record but the next day were complaining about how tough a draw they were given (Syracuse or UMass--but primarily the prospect of playing the former) in the quarterfinals.[/q]Gripe, gripe, gripe. Hopkins has the easiest path into the finals of anybody in the Hopkins half of the bracket.

In the other bracket, Towson must be thrilled with home turf (home grass?) but not so pleased with its first-round opponent.
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: Robb (---.external.lmco.com)
Date: May 11, 2005 04:55PM

Seriously, why don't they just stop calling this crap "criteria" and just label it "Annual Post-Selection Justification" and be done with it. "Criteria" somehow implies that the same standards will apply next year, when we all know they won't.
 
Re: 2005 All-Ivy lax team
Posted by: Chris '03 (---.phil.east.verizon.net)
Date: May 11, 2005 06:19PM

[Q]billhoward Wrote:

Although women's lacrosse did have a national contender three (?) years back. [/q]

They made the tourney in '01 and '02. In '02 they snapped maryland's streak of 7 titles in the quarters before falling to georgetown (do we ever beat them in anything? we get a shot at the hoyas in football in october...) in ot in the semis the day before the men lost to UVa in the quarters. It was a tough weekend for cu lax.

 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: Jeff Hopkins '82 (---.mis.prserv.net)
Date: May 11, 2005 11:02PM

We said it in March, and we can say it now: if you can't beat ______, you don't deserve to move on. The boys need to stomp Towson. Prove the smoke-filled assholes wrong.

I can't make Saturday's game 'cause I'm on vacation in Texas. If we win this weekend, I'll be at Princeton.
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: ithacat (---.twcny.res.rr.com)
Date: May 11, 2005 11:05PM

[Q]Al DeFlorio Wrote:
Interesting how the Hopkins partisans on LaxPower were one day saying Syracuse didn't deserve to be selected based on their record but the next day were complaining about how tough a draw they were given (Syracuse or UMass--but primarily the prospect of playing the former) in the quarterfinals.[/q]

I've also found it interesting that some people (particularly at laxpower) have been quick to dismiss SU as a worthy tourny team (and one that is over-rated) and then proclaim an SU win as a resume-building win. Can't have it both ways.

If the past few months have shown us anything it's SOS appears to matter more than people want to admit. I'm not sure Cornell would have pulled a top 4 seed even if they had gone undefeated.

lgr
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: ithacat (---.twcny.res.rr.com)
Date: May 11, 2005 11:33PM

[Q]DeltaOne81 Wrote:

It's not an issue of Syracuse not deserving to be there, I agree they did, but it *is* an issue of purposefully modifying their weighting of the criteria from each of the previous years in order to accomplish such. Quality Wins being the only factor that counted is and always was stupid, but it was consistent. To pick and chose your weights and which criterias your consider in order to get the desired end result is exactly what hockey avoids, and exactly what is horribly wrong. It almost makes it a waste to bother having criteria at all.

Using RPI and SOS to keep Syracuse in the tournament makes sense, but consider QW is still (officlally anyway) the *primary* criteria, you could have knocked Syracuse down another peg or two and kept us home, allowing QWs to be primary and actually sensibly use the others. But when the good ol' boys get together in a smokey room, sense doesn't play into it. Heck, you do that and you could end up with a Syr @ Cornell matchup. That'd be fun.

On second thought, I'd rather face Towson [/q]

At some point every measure has its subjectivity built into it and, thankfully, there's a playoff system to provide an answer (unlike football). Using laxpower's QWs ranking, Cornell is still only 10th, SU is 16th. Cornell had zero wins against teams in the top 10 in QWs, while SU beat 2 top-10 (as ranked by QWs) teams. So what does that say?

I don't think a program makes it to 22 straight final fours and wins 9 NCs with smoke and mirrors. SU has earned their greatness on the field, not in a selection board room.

I would have loved to see SU at Cornell in round one. If anyone's going to stop SU streak I'd have rather it be Cornell. This rivalry is getting very hot... Orange hot or Red hot?

Now, Let's Go Red... B-]
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: KeithK (---.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
Date: May 12, 2005 02:24AM

The number of national championships or final four appearances shouldn't have anything to do with whether a team has earned the right to play for the championship this year.
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: ithacat (---.lightlink.com)
Date: May 12, 2005 07:40AM

[Q]KeithK Wrote:

The number of national championships or final four appearances shouldn't have anything to do with whether a team has earned the right to play for the championship this year.[/q]

I think any team (how many have there been?) that's on a run of 22 straight final fours will need to disqualify themselves from consideration.
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: KeithK (---.external.lmco.com)
Date: May 12, 2005 11:28AM

[q]I think any team (how many have there been?) that's on a run of 22 straight final fours will need to disqualify themselves from consideration.[/q]In a smoke filled room that certainly will be the case. But it's not right. Everyone should be treated fairly and equally in this regard, regardless of history.

Again, having somewhat subjective criteria makes more sense to me with such a short season. I'm just saying that SU shouldn't get any special consideration due to history. However, no opinion here on whether they deserve to be in or not this year.
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: ithacat (128.253.193.---)
Date: May 12, 2005 01:53PM

[Q]KeithK Wrote:

I think any team (how many have there been?) that's on a run of 22 straight final fours will need to disqualify themselves from consideration.[/Q]
In a smoke filled room that certainly will be the case. But it's not right. Everyone should be treated fairly and equally in this regard, regardless of history.

Again, having somewhat subjective criteria makes more sense to me with such a short season. I'm just saying that SU shouldn't get any special consideration due to history. However, no opinion here on whether they deserve to be in or not this year.[/q]

I agree with you, in general: however, the tricky part is what's fair and equal? Is it fair and equal to have an inferior team from a weak conference get an AQ at the expense of a more talented team, which one might argue happens every year?

I'm not sure why people are beating on SU. There are 5 other schools in the tourny with as many losses as SU (and only one of them played as difficult a schedule), and there's one school with 7 losses. All of SU's losses are to teams ranked in the top 8 -- they may actually be the 9th best team in the country (a poor year by their standards, but deserving of a chance to defend their title), we'll see this weekend. Just about every measure one sees has them in the top ten. If people want to question a school's inclusion how about Marist? Maybe they should pull all the AQs and eliminate some of the bogus conference tournaments (which basically just give some schools another chance to rack up a "quality win" or redeem their regular season).

It is tough with so few teams making the tourny. I don't know what's fair... (though I have a strong feeling it sure doesn't look like Minneapolis in March :-( ).

LGR...
 
Re: lax tourney
Posted by: KeithK (---.external.lmco.com)
Date: May 12, 2005 02:47PM

AQ's are completely fair. They are handed out to the winners of a predetermined number of confferences that meet appropriate NCAA qualifications. Nothing unfair about that.

I'm not trying to beat on SU here. (Like I said, I don't really have a strong opinion here.) I'm just reacting to one of your comments which I thought implied that Syracuse should get credit towards this year's selection based on their 22 years in the FF. Seems like I may have read too much into your post.

The complaint here seems to be that the lax committee makes things up as they go along in order to get the results they want, when they are supposed to have certain criteria to use. Especially for those of us who have gotten used to the very deterministic hockey system this is bothersome. It seems to have helped SU this year so they are the proxy target.
 

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login