2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by kingpin248
2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: kingpin248 (---.dyn.optonline.net)
Date: May 05, 2013 09:13PM
(1) Syracuse v. Bryant
(8) Penn State v. Yale
(5) North Carolina v. Lehigh
(4) Denver v. Albany
(3) Ohio State v. Towson
(6) Maryland v. Cornell
(7) Duke v. Loyola
(2) Notre Dame v. Detroit
1/8 and 3/6 quarterfinals at College Park; 4/5 and 2/7 quarterfinals at Indianapolis.
(8) Penn State v. Yale
(5) North Carolina v. Lehigh
(4) Denver v. Albany
(3) Ohio State v. Towson
(6) Maryland v. Cornell
(7) Duke v. Loyola
(2) Notre Dame v. Detroit
1/8 and 3/6 quarterfinals at College Park; 4/5 and 2/7 quarterfinals at Indianapolis.
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 05/05/2013 09:27PM by kingpin248.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: phillysportsfan (---.hsd1.md.comcast.net)
Date: May 05, 2013 09:16PM
How is UNC's seed not higher?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/05/2013 09:16PM by phillysportsfan.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: phillysportsfan (---.hsd1.md.comcast.net)
Date: May 05, 2013 09:25PM
Damn we dont even get a home game
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: ugarte (---.dyn.optonline.net)
Date: May 05, 2013 09:48PM
this makes us the last team in, right?
___________________________
quality tweets | bluesky (twitter 2) | ALAB Series podcast | Other podcasts and writing
quality tweets | bluesky (twitter 2) | ALAB Series podcast | Other podcasts and writing
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: flyersgolf (---.phlapa.fios.verizon.net)
Date: May 05, 2013 09:54PM
Reminds me of ncaa hockey seedings of years past. Cornell dropped to the 10th seed. If you have the home field for your conference tournament you should win at least one game.
UNC and Cornell demoted.
Ohio State got a bump up.
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Projected braketology
Lacrosse Magazine
College Park
(1) BIG EAST/Syracuse vs. NORTHEAST/Bryant
(8) Cornell vs. Loyola
Indianapolis
(4) ECAC/Ohio State vs. PATRIOT/Lehigh
(5) Denver vs. Duke
College Park
(3) North Carolina vs. COLONIAL/Towson
(6) Maryland vs. AMERICA EAST/Albany
Indianapolis
(2) Notre Dame vs. METRO ATLANTIC/Detroit
(7) Penn State vs. IVY/Yale
Inside lacrosse
1. Syracuse (Big East)
Bryant (NEC)
8. Cornell
Albany (America East)
4. North Carolina
Towson (CAA)
Penn State
5. Ohio State
Yale (Ivy)
3. Denver (ECAC)
6. Maryland
Lehigh (Patriot League)
Loyola
7. Duke
Detroit (MAAC)
2. Notre Dame
UNC and Cornell demoted.
Ohio State got a bump up.
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Projected braketology
Lacrosse Magazine
College Park
(1) BIG EAST/Syracuse vs. NORTHEAST/Bryant
(8) Cornell vs. Loyola
Indianapolis
(4) ECAC/Ohio State vs. PATRIOT/Lehigh
(5) Denver vs. Duke
College Park
(3) North Carolina vs. COLONIAL/Towson
(6) Maryland vs. AMERICA EAST/Albany
Indianapolis
(2) Notre Dame vs. METRO ATLANTIC/Detroit
(7) Penn State vs. IVY/Yale
Inside lacrosse
1. Syracuse (Big East)
Bryant (NEC)
8. Cornell
Albany (America East)
4. North Carolina
Towson (CAA)
Penn State
5. Ohio State
Yale (Ivy)
3. Denver (ECAC)
6. Maryland
Lehigh (Patriot League)
Loyola
7. Duke
Detroit (MAAC)
2. Notre Dame
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/05/2013 09:56PM by flyersgolf.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament - ESPNU selection show
Posted by: billhoward (---.hsd1.nj.comcast.net)
Date: May 05, 2013 10:16PM
The sport of lacrosse is ascending. The ESPNU selection show is descending, run by a bunch of amateurs (drawing paychecks) with game video backing them up. The studio announcers had a chance to talk about who's likely to advance and Kessenich and Carcaterra don't say squat beyond that Syracuse, the No. 1 seed, has a favorable matchup. Well, yes, Bryant (Laxpower RPI 32) and Detroit (RPI 53) don't belong in the tournament except they won conference championships. Which may be for the good of lacrosse. I think one of them mentioned that Cornell and Loyola (also Lehigh (?)) might be tough competition in an aside.
The show brings on Bryant (fired Duke) coach Mike Pressler about the excitement of being in the show but, please, in fairness at least mention it wasn't "circumstances" it was a coach who lost control of his players off-field that got him fired. They bring on the NCAA selection committee head and don't drill him harder on whether a formulaic selection system misses getting the best teams in the tournament, or why No. 1 (polls) UNC is a 5-seed. The most he admitted to was that Bucknell was probably that the last team not to make it.
Quint Kessenich looks like a young Bob Costas. But if he wants to be the next Bob Costas, he has to step us his game. Otherwise he's going to top out covering college lacrosse and wrestling.
The show brings on Bryant (fired Duke) coach Mike Pressler about the excitement of being in the show but, please, in fairness at least mention it wasn't "circumstances" it was a coach who lost control of his players off-field that got him fired. They bring on the NCAA selection committee head and don't drill him harder on whether a formulaic selection system misses getting the best teams in the tournament, or why No. 1 (polls) UNC is a 5-seed. The most he admitted to was that Bucknell was probably that the last team not to make it.
Quint Kessenich looks like a young Bob Costas. But if he wants to be the next Bob Costas, he has to step us his game. Otherwise he's going to top out covering college lacrosse and wrestling.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament - upsets
Posted by: billhoward (---.hsd1.nj.comcast.net)
Date: May 05, 2013 10:28PM
I like Cornell and Albany to beat the higher seeds, maybe Lehigh over NC. The only two safe games are the 1-2 seeds, Syracuse over Bryant (although the Orange did lose to RPI-39 Hobart and Bryant is better than that at 32) and Notre Dame over Deroit (RPI 53 of 63).
kingpin248
(1) Syracuse v. Bryant <<< Syracuse
(8) Penn State v. Yale <<< pick 'em
(5) North Carolina v. Lehigh <<< Lehigh?
(4) Denver v. Albany <<< Albany
(3) Ohio State v. Towson <<< pick 'em, don't see either in the final four
(6) Maryland v. Cornell <<< Cornell
(7) Duke v. Loyola <<< pick 'em
(2) Notre Dame v. Detroit <<< disband the team if the Irish don't win; to save airfare Detroit buses to ND not flies to Syracuse
1/8 and 3/6 quarterfinals at College Park; 4/5 and 2/7 quarterfinals at Indianapolis.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: billhoward (---.hsd1.nj.comcast.net)
Date: May 05, 2013 10:35PM
Apparently so (Cornell as last team in) since Loyola gets a lower-seeded opponent, No. 7 duke instead of No. 6 Maryland. Give or take E-W brackets, we are the 11 seed and 12-16 are AQ cannon fodder.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/05/2013 10:54PM by billhoward.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: billhoward (---.hsd1.nj.comcast.net)
Date: May 05, 2013 10:56PM
RPI has it Cornell, Maryland, NC as top three teams if I read it rightphillysportsfan
How is UNC's seed not higher?
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament - ESPNU selection show
Posted by: phillysportsfan (---.hsd1.md.comcast.net)
Date: May 05, 2013 11:18PM
billhoward
The sport of lacrosse is ascending. The ESPNU selection show is descending, run by a bunch of amateurs (drawing paychecks) with game video backing them up. The studio announcers had a chance to talk about who's likely to advance and Kessenich and Carcaterra don't say squat beyond that Syracuse, the No. 1 seed, has a favorable matchup. Well, yes, Bryant (Laxpower RPI 32) and Detroit (RPI 53) don't belong in the tournament except they won conference championships. Which may be for the good of lacrosse. I think one of them mentioned that Cornell and Loyola (also Lehigh (?)) might be tough competition in an aside.
The show brings on Bryant (fired Duke) coach Mike Pressler about the excitement of being in the show but, please, in fairness at least mention it wasn't "circumstances" it was a coach who lost control of his players off-field that got him fired. They bring on the NCAA selection committee head and don't drill him harder on whether a formulaic selection system misses getting the best teams in the tournament, or why No. 1 (polls) UNC is a 5-seed. The most he admitted to was that Bucknell was probably that the last team not to make it.
Quint Kessenich looks like a young Bob Costas. But if he wants to be the next Bob Costas, he has to step us his game. Otherwise he's going to top out covering college lacrosse and wrestling.
Yeah and they are obsessed with Hopkins, they wasted 5 minutes talking about Hopkins and interviewing Pietramala instead of talking about the teams actually in the tournament
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Jeff Hopkins '82 (---.airproducts.com)
Date: May 06, 2013 07:42AM
I think the nebulous "Strength of Schedule" burned us this year. We played one top 5 team, and too many weak teams. I understand we want to support NY state lax and keep travel costs down, but we need to pick some better teams if we want to be treated like a real program.
That and with the exception of Denver, the seeds all show signs of Big Name School Bias.
That and with the exception of Denver, the seeds all show signs of Big Name School Bias.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Trotsky (---.dc.dc.cox.net)
Date: May 06, 2013 09:40AM
If somebody keeps their objective criteria secret, they aren't using objective criteria.flyersgolf
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Towerroad (---.hfc.comcastbusiness.net)
Date: May 06, 2013 10:50AM
With the first round loss in the Ivy tournament and the lack of games against what ended up being the cream of the crop I think we got the placing we deserved +/- 1.
I don't think we were ever going to draw Bryant/Detroit in the first round and there is a lot of parity among the balance of the field so we were going to have to beat somebody good to get to he second round so it might as well be Maryland.
I don't think we were ever going to draw Bryant/Detroit in the first round and there is a lot of parity among the balance of the field so we were going to have to beat somebody good to get to he second round so it might as well be Maryland.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: RichH (---.northropgrumman.com)
Date: May 06, 2013 12:04PM
Towerroad
With the first round loss in the Ivy tournament and the lack of games against what ended up being the cream of the crop I think we got the placing we deserved +/- 1.
I don't think we were ever going to draw Bryant/Detroit in the first round and there is a lot of parity among the balance of the field so we were going to have to beat somebody good to get to he second round so it might as well be Maryland.
Should we get by Maryland, I like the potential QF pairing over any of the others, too.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: billhoward (---.hsd1.nj.comcast.net)
Date: May 06, 2013 01:24PM
RichH
Towerroad
With the first round loss in the Ivy tournament and the lack of games against what ended up being the cream of the crop I think we got the placing we deserved +/- 1.
I don't think we were ever going to draw Bryant/Detroit in the first round and there is a lot of parity among the balance of the field so we were going to have to beat somebody good to get to he second round so it might as well be Maryland.
Should we get by Maryland, I like the potential QF pairing over any of the others, too.
And fortunately our bracket plays the QF game at Maryland; I had thought our bracket was going to Indianapolis (since Mariucci Arena was not available to stuff Cornell in). The Cornell-Maryland winner gets the Towson-Ohio State winner in the QFs. The NCAA seeders have TOSU as the third best team in the country. [insidelacrosse.com]
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Josh '99 (---.nycmny.fios.verizon.net)
Date: May 06, 2013 01:34PM
That's... not really true. If someone keeps their objective criteria secret, it gives external observers reason to believe they might not be using objective critieria, but it doesn't mean they're not objective. Here, this list of names is ranked using objective criteria:Trotsky
If somebody keeps their objective criteria secret, they aren't using objective criteria.flyersgolf
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Jeff Hopkins '82
ugarte
phillysportsfan
RichH
billhoward
kingpin248
flyersgolf
Josh '99
towerroad
Trotsky
The fact that you don't know what the criteria are (though I would imagine it's not a difficult code to crack) doesn't mean they weren't objective.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Kyle Rose (---.customer.alter.net)
Date: May 06, 2013 01:47PM
In this case, guessing is far more entertaining than knowing.Josh '99
That's... not really true. If someone keeps their objective criteria secret, it gives external observers reason to believe they might not be using objective critieria, but it doesn't mean they're not objective. Here, this list of names is ranked using objective criteria:Trotsky
If somebody keeps their objective criteria secret, they aren't using objective criteria.flyersgolf
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Jeff Hopkins '82
ugarte
phillysportsfan
RichH
billhoward
kingpin248
flyersgolf
Josh '99
towerroad
Trotsky
The fact that you don't know what the criteria are (though I would imagine it's not a difficult code to crack) doesn't mean they weren't objective.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Rita (---.med.miami.edu)
Date: May 06, 2013 02:20PM
Kyle Rose
In this case, guessing is far more entertaining than knowing.Josh '99
That's... not really true. If someone keeps their objective criteria secret, it gives external observers reason to believe they might not be using objective critieria, but it doesn't mean they're not objective. Here, this list of names is ranked using objective criteria:Trotsky
If somebody keeps their objective criteria secret, they aren't using objective criteria.flyersgolf
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Jeff Hopkins '82
ugarte
phillysportsfan
RichH
billhoward
kingpin248
flyersgolf
Josh '99
towerroad
Trotsky
The fact that you don't know what the criteria are (though I would imagine it's not a difficult code to crack) doesn't mean they weren't objective.
Yeah, that and speculating why Kyle didn't make the list.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Chris '03 (38.104.240.---)
Date: May 06, 2013 02:28PM
Rita
Kyle Rose
In this case, guessing is far more entertaining than knowing.Josh '99
That's... not really true. If someone keeps their objective criteria secret, it gives external observers reason to believe they might not be using objective critieria, but it doesn't mean they're not objective. Here, this list of names is ranked using objective criteria:Trotsky
If somebody keeps their objective criteria secret, they aren't using objective criteria.flyersgolf
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Jeff Hopkins '82
ugarte
phillysportsfan
RichH
billhoward
kingpin248
flyersgolf
Josh '99
towerroad
Trotsky
The fact that you don't know what the criteria are (though I would imagine it's not a difficult code to crack) doesn't mean they weren't objective.
Yeah, that and speculating why Kyle didn't make the list.
Kyle would have been last in the list and Josh didn't want to pick any fights. And he wanted Greg to be last.
___________________________
"Mark Mazzoleni looks like a guy whose dog just died out there..."
"Mark Mazzoleni looks like a guy whose dog just died out there..."
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Josh '99 (---.nycmny.fios.verizon.net)
Date: May 06, 2013 02:40PM
Greg being last in a list that I created to dispute a point he made was really just a coincidence.Chris '03
Rita
Kyle Rose
In this case, guessing is far more entertaining than knowing.Josh '99
That's... not really true. If someone keeps their objective criteria secret, it gives external observers reason to believe they might not be using objective critieria, but it doesn't mean they're not objective. Here, this list of names is ranked using objective criteria:Trotsky
If somebody keeps their objective criteria secret, they aren't using objective criteria.flyersgolf
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Jeff Hopkins '82
ugarte
phillysportsfan
RichH
billhoward
kingpin248
flyersgolf
Josh '99
towerroad
Trotsky
The fact that you don't know what the criteria are (though I would imagine it's not a difficult code to crack) doesn't mean they weren't objective.
Yeah, that and speculating why Kyle didn't make the list.
Kyle would have been last in the list and Josh didn't want to pick any fights. And he wanted Greg to be last.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: billhoward (---.hsd1.nj.comcast.net)
Date: May 06, 2013 02:57PM
IQ? Looks? Girth? Posts? Snarky posts? Semesters to graduate?
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Josh '99 (---.nycmny.fios.verizon.net)
Date: May 06, 2013 03:17PM
Many of those are subjective, and I would have no way of accurately judging any of them except for post count.billhoward
IQ? Looks? Girth? Posts? Snarky posts? Semesters to graduate?
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Jeff Hopkins '82 (---.airproducts.com)
Date: May 06, 2013 03:20PM
Trotsky
If somebody keeps their objective criteria secret, they aren't using objective criteria.flyersgolf
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
I object!
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: KenP (---.ssmcnet.noaa.gov)
Date: May 06, 2013 04:22PM
Tickets available at this link. According to the U-MD ticket office, "All seating in the bowl area is general admission. Typically, the visiting team fans will just congregate in an area behind the visiting team bench area."
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Towerroad (---.hfc.comcastbusiness.net)
Date: May 06, 2013 04:32PM
Josh '99
Greg being last in a list that I created to dispute a point he made was really just a coincidence.Chris '03
Rita
Kyle Rose
In this case, guessing is far more entertaining than knowing.Josh '99
That's... not really true. If someone keeps their objective criteria secret, it gives external observers reason to believe they might not be using objective critieria, but it doesn't mean they're not objective. Here, this list of names is ranked using objective criteria:Trotsky
If somebody keeps their objective criteria secret, they aren't using objective criteria.flyersgolf
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Jeff Hopkins '82
ugarte
phillysportsfan
RichH
billhoward
kingpin248
flyersgolf
Josh '99
towerroad
Trotsky
The fact that you don't know what the criteria are (though I would imagine it's not a difficult code to crack) doesn't mean they weren't objective.
Yeah, that and speculating why Kyle didn't make the list.
Kyle would have been last in the list and Josh didn't want to pick any fights. And he wanted Greg to be last.
Aphabetical starting with the second letter.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Josh '99 (---.nycmny.fios.verizon.net)
Date: May 06, 2013 04:36PM
That's correct.Towerroad
Josh '99
Greg being last in a list that I created to dispute a point he made was really just a coincidence.Chris '03
Rita
Kyle Rose
In this case, guessing is far more entertaining than knowing.Josh '99
That's... not really true. If someone keeps their objective criteria secret, it gives external observers reason to believe they might not be using objective critieria, but it doesn't mean they're not objective. Here, this list of names is ranked using objective criteria:Trotsky
If somebody keeps their objective criteria secret, they aren't using objective criteria.flyersgolf
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Jeff Hopkins '82
ugarte
phillysportsfan
RichH
billhoward
kingpin248
flyersgolf
Josh '99
towerroad
Trotsky
The fact that you don't know what the criteria are (though I would imagine it's not a difficult code to crack) doesn't mean they weren't objective.
Yeah, that and speculating why Kyle didn't make the list.
Kyle would have been last in the list and Josh didn't want to pick any fights. And he wanted Greg to be last.
Aphabetical starting with the second letter.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Kyle Rose (---.customer.alter.net)
Date: May 06, 2013 04:44PM
Too bad (Rob) Szewczyk isn't a hockey fan.Josh '99
That's correct.Towerroad
Josh '99
Greg being last in a list that I created to dispute a point he made was really just a coincidence.Chris '03
Rita
Kyle Rose
In this case, guessing is far more entertaining than knowing.Josh '99
That's... not really true. If someone keeps their objective criteria secret, it gives external observers reason to believe they might not be using objective critieria, but it doesn't mean they're not objective. Here, this list of names is ranked using objective criteria:Trotsky
If somebody keeps their objective criteria secret, they aren't using objective criteria.flyersgolf
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Jeff Hopkins '82
ugarte
phillysportsfan
RichH
billhoward
kingpin248
flyersgolf
Josh '99
towerroad
Trotsky
The fact that you don't know what the criteria are (though I would imagine it's not a difficult code to crack) doesn't mean they weren't objective.
Yeah, that and speculating why Kyle didn't make the list.
Kyle would have been last in the list and Josh didn't want to pick any fights. And he wanted Greg to be last.
Aphabetical starting with the second letter.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Swampy (131.128.163.---)
Date: May 06, 2013 06:10PM
Josh '99
That's correct.Towerroad
Josh '99
Greg being last in a list that I created to dispute a point he made was really just a coincidence.Chris '03
Rita
Kyle Rose
In this case, guessing is far more entertaining than knowing.Josh '99
That's... not really true. If someone keeps their objective criteria secret, it gives external observers reason to believe they might not be using objective critieria, but it doesn't mean they're not objective. Here, this list of names is ranked using objective criteria:Trotsky
If somebody keeps their objective criteria secret, they aren't using objective criteria.flyersgolf
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Jeff Hopkins '82
ugarte
phillysportsfan
RichH
billhoward
kingpin248
flyersgolf
Josh '99
towerroad
Trotsky
The fact that you don't know what the criteria are (though I would imagine it's not a difficult code to crack) doesn't mean they weren't objective.
Yeah, that and speculating why Kyle didn't make the list.
Kyle would have been last in the list and Josh didn't want to pick any fights. And he wanted Greg to be last.
Aphabetical starting with the second letter.
What's objective about that? You chose to use the Roman alphabet instead of Hebrew, Hangul, Aramaic, or any of the rest. What were your objective criteria for choosing this particular alphabet? Huh?
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Swampy (131.128.163.---)
Date: May 06, 2013 06:10PM
Josh '99
That's correct.Towerroad
Josh '99
Greg being last in a list that I created to dispute a point he made was really just a coincidence.Chris '03
Rita
Kyle Rose
In this case, guessing is far more entertaining than knowing.Josh '99
That's... not really true. If someone keeps their objective criteria secret, it gives external observers reason to believe they might not be using objective critieria, but it doesn't mean they're not objective. Here, this list of names is ranked using objective criteria:Trotsky
If somebody keeps their objective criteria secret, they aren't using objective criteria.flyersgolf
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Jeff Hopkins '82
ugarte
phillysportsfan
RichH
billhoward
kingpin248
flyersgolf
Josh '99
towerroad
Trotsky
The fact that you don't know what the criteria are (though I would imagine it's not a difficult code to crack) doesn't mean they weren't objective.
Yeah, that and speculating why Kyle didn't make the list.
Kyle would have been last in the list and Josh didn't want to pick any fights. And he wanted Greg to be last.
Aphabetical starting with the second letter.
What's objective about that? You chose to use the Roman alphabet instead of Hebrew, Hangul, Aramaic, or any of the rest. What were your objective criteria for choosing this particular alphabet? Huh?
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Jim Hyla (---.arthritishealthdoctors.com)
Date: May 06, 2013 07:49PM
Swampy
Josh '99
That's correct.Towerroad
Josh '99
Greg being last in a list that I created to dispute a point he made was really just a coincidence.Chris '03
Rita
Kyle Rose
In this case, guessing is far more entertaining than knowing.Josh '99
That's... not really true. If someone keeps their objective criteria secret, it gives external observers reason to believe they might not be using objective critieria, but it doesn't mean they're not objective. Here, this list of names is ranked using objective criteria:Trotsky
If somebody keeps their objective criteria secret, they aren't using objective criteria.flyersgolf
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Jeff Hopkins '82
ugarte
phillysportsfan
RichH
billhoward
kingpin248
flyersgolf
Josh '99
towerroad
Trotsky
The fact that you don't know what the criteria are (though I would imagine it's not a difficult code to crack) doesn't mean they weren't objective.
Yeah, that and speculating why Kyle didn't make the list.
Kyle would have been last in the list and Josh didn't want to pick any fights. And he wanted Greg to be last.
Aphabetical starting with the second letter.
What's objective about that? You chose to use the Roman alphabet instead of Hebrew, Hangul, Aramaic, or any of the rest. What were your objective criteria for choosing this particular alphabet? Huh?
So, you couldn't be objective enough with 1 post?
___________________________
"Cornell Fans Made the Timbers Tremble", Boston Globe, March/1970
Cornell lawyers stopped the candy throwing. Jan/2005
"Cornell Fans Made the Timbers Tremble", Boston Globe, March/1970
Cornell lawyers stopped the candy throwing. Jan/2005
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Josh '99 (---.nyc.res.rr.com)
Date: May 07, 2013 08:59AM
Well, you raise a good point in that there's subjectivity involved in the selection of any particular set of objective criteria to use, but that's the case even if the criteria are openly described like the PWR.Swampy
Josh '99
That's correct.Towerroad
Josh '99
Greg being last in a list that I created to dispute a point he made was really just a coincidence.Chris '03
Rita
Kyle Rose
In this case, guessing is far more entertaining than knowing.Josh '99
That's... not really true. If someone keeps their objective criteria secret, it gives external observers reason to believe they might not be using objective critieria, but it doesn't mean they're not objective. Here, this list of names is ranked using objective criteria:Trotsky
If somebody keeps their objective criteria secret, they aren't using objective criteria.flyersgolf
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Jeff Hopkins '82
ugarte
phillysportsfan
RichH
billhoward
kingpin248
flyersgolf
Josh '99
towerroad
Trotsky
The fact that you don't know what the criteria are (though I would imagine it's not a difficult code to crack) doesn't mean they weren't objective.
Yeah, that and speculating why Kyle didn't make the list.
Kyle would have been last in the list and Josh didn't want to pick any fights. And he wanted Greg to be last.
Aphabetical starting with the second letter.
What's objective about that? You chose to use the Roman alphabet instead of Hebrew, Hangul, Aramaic, or any of the rest. What were your objective criteria for choosing this particular alphabet? Huh?
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: billhoward (---.hsd1.nj.comcast.net)
Date: May 07, 2013 09:52AM
That was the one semi-tough question asked on the ESPNU selection show. Its strength of schedule is No. 8, which is not bad. Its losses were by one goal each to UMass and Notre Dame (OT) and by three to Duke. It had three one-goal wins, over Fairfield 10-9, Princeton 16-15 and over Duke 18-17 in the ACC playoffs. They should not have lost to UMass or Fairfield. Maybe that had some impact.phillysportsfan
How is UNC's seed not higher?
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament - lax insights
Posted by: billhoward (---.hsd1.nj.comcast.net)
Date: May 07, 2013 10:39AM
To give you a better idea of how the 16 teams shake out in the 2013 NCAA lax tournament and who will win in the first round, chew on this, Quint: Selection Sunday Q&A, Reaction
QK
IL: Who is ripe to be upset?
QK: To answer that question, you've got to go watch practice all week and see who isn't mentally locked-in.
IL: How many of the 16 teams can really win the title?
QK: It would surprise me if Detroit, Towson and Bryant won the title.
IL: Who got snubbed?
QK: Bucknell has the strongest resume of the non-participants. ... Penn, Princeton and Drexel are the next best teams to be bypassed in 2013. Hopkins and Virginia will use May as a reflective month, soul searching for solutions. Both programs must evolve if they are going to maintain their status as the sports elite.
As my yoga instructor sister Kyle likes to remind me: "The moments between poses of breathing, thinking and peace are more important than the actual poses themselves."
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Towerroad (---.bstnma.fios.verizon.net)
Date: May 08, 2013 07:46AM
Josh '99
Well, you raise a good point in that there's subjectivity involved in the selection of any particular set of objective criteria to use, but that's the case even if the criteria are openly described like the PWR.Swampy
Josh '99
That's correct.Towerroad
Josh '99
Greg being last in a list that I created to dispute a point he made was really just a coincidence.Chris '03
Rita
Kyle Rose
In this case, guessing is far more entertaining than knowing.Josh '99
That's... not really true. If someone keeps their objective criteria secret, it gives external observers reason to believe they might not be using objective critieria, but it doesn't mean they're not objective. Here, this list of names is ranked using objective criteria:Trotsky
If somebody keeps their objective criteria secret, they aren't using objective criteria.flyersgolf
They said they used computer rankings to help with seeding. I do not see much of that.
Jeff Hopkins '82
ugarte
phillysportsfan
RichH
billhoward
kingpin248
flyersgolf
Josh '99
towerroad
Trotsky
The fact that you don't know what the criteria are (though I would imagine it's not a difficult code to crack) doesn't mean they weren't objective.
Yeah, that and speculating why Kyle didn't make the list.
Kyle would have been last in the list and Josh didn't want to pick any fights. And he wanted Greg to be last.
Aphabetical starting with the second letter.
What's objective about that? You chose to use the Roman alphabet instead of Hebrew, Hangul, Aramaic, or any of the rest. What were your objective criteria for choosing this particular alphabet? Huh?
An "objective" criterion ought to be at least mimimally related to the purpose for which it is intended. Just because a selection criterion is definable does not mean it is objective. As a Yankees fan I do not want playoff slots determined by alphabetic order. (Age of the closer would be ok though)
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: KeithK (---.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net)
Date: May 08, 2013 11:30AM
Stupid and irrational doesn't make something not objective.Towerroad
An "objective" criterion ought to be at least mimimally related to the purpose for which it is intended. Just because a selection criterion is definable does not mean it is objective. As a Yankees fan I do not want playoff slots determined by alphabetic order. (Age of the closer would be ok though)
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Towerroad (---.hfc.comcastbusiness.net)
Date: May 08, 2013 12:44PM
KeithK
Stupid and irrational doesn't make something not objective.Towerroad
An "objective" criterion ought to be at least mimimally related to the purpose for which it is intended. Just because a selection criterion is definable does not mean it is objective. As a Yankees fan I do not want playoff slots determined by alphabetic order. (Age of the closer would be ok though)
I beg to differ. Stupid and irrational are just that stupid and irrational. The root of the word objective is object. If the object to be considered is the winning of a tournament then objective criterion for selection should in some way relate to the probability of winning. A further constraint is that they should be clearly definable preferably well in advance of the actual application of the criterion.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Trotsky (---.dc.dc.cox.net)
Date: May 08, 2013 12:54PM
Objective does not mean "oriented towards the object." It means "corresponding to observed fact."
An objective criterion could be irrelevant to the object, and thus stupid or irrational, but it would still be objective.
An objective criterion could be irrelevant to the object, and thus stupid or irrational, but it would still be objective.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Towerroad (---.hfc.comcastbusiness.net)
Date: May 08, 2013 12:56PM
Trotsky
Objective does not mean "oriented towards the object." It means "corresponding to observed fact."
An objective criterion could be irrelevant to the object, and thus stupid or irrational, but it would still be objective.
I don't think you are being objective.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Trotsky (---.dc.dc.cox.net)
Date: May 08, 2013 03:39PM
I came in here for an argumentTowerroad
Trotsky
Objective does not mean "oriented towards the object." It means "corresponding to observed fact."
An objective criterion could be irrelevant to the object, and thus stupid or irrational, but it would still be objective.
I don't think you are being objective.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Weder (---.austin.hp.com)
Date: May 08, 2013 03:49PM
Trotsky
I came in here for an argumentTowerroad
Trotsky
Objective does not mean "oriented towards the object." It means "corresponding to observed fact."
An objective criterion could be irrelevant to the object, and thus stupid or irrational, but it would still be objective.
I don't think you are being objective.
That's not allowed unless you've paid.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Swampy (---.ri.ri.cox.net)
Date: May 08, 2013 11:23PM
Trotsky
Objective does not mean "oriented towards the object." It means "corresponding to observed fact."
An objective criterion could be irrelevant to the object, and thus stupid or irrational, but it would still be objective.
But what is an "observed fact"? You're not still trying to get that doggie of empiricism to hunt are you?
Facts are "theory laden," which calls into question the whole notion of "objectivity," at least if it's defined as "corresponding to observed fact."
Oh, and about correspondence theories of truth or meaning, well don't get me started.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Al DeFlorio (---.hsd1.ma.comcast.net)
Date: May 09, 2013 08:35PM
Laxmagazine.com pre-game article here: [laxmagazine.com]
___________________________
Al DeFlorio '65
Al DeFlorio '65
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: billhoward (---.hsd1.nj.comcast.net)
Date: May 09, 2013 10:08PM
And thinks Cornell has the better team.Al DeFlorio
Laxmagazine.com pre-game article here: [laxmagazine.com]
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: ugarte (---.dyn.optonline.net)
Date: May 10, 2013 12:34AM
Shut your festering gob, you twit.Weder
Trotsky
I came in here for an argumentTowerroad
Trotsky
Objective does not mean "oriented towards the object." It means "corresponding to observed fact."
An objective criterion could be irrelevant to the object, and thus stupid or irrational, but it would still be objective.
I don't think you are being objective.
That's not allowed unless you've paid.
___________________________
quality tweets | bluesky (twitter 2) | ALAB Series podcast | Other podcasts and writing
quality tweets | bluesky (twitter 2) | ALAB Series podcast | Other podcasts and writing
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Jeff Hopkins '82 (---.airproducts.com)
Date: May 10, 2013 07:30AM
ugarte
Shut your festering gob, you twit.Weder
Trotsky
I came in here for an argumentTowerroad
Trotsky
Objective does not mean "oriented towards the object." It means "corresponding to observed fact."
An objective criterion could be irrelevant to the object, and thus stupid or irrational, but it would still be objective.
I don't think you are being objective.
That's not allowed unless you've paid.
You vacuous, toffee-nosed, malodorous pervert!
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Trotsky (---.dc.dc.cox.net)
Date: May 13, 2013 09:58AM
Next round:
5/18 12:30 ET: (3) Ohio State vs Cornell at College Park
5/18 03:00 ET: (1) Syracuse vs Yale at College Park
5/19 02:30 ET: (2) Notre Dame vs (7) Duke at Indianapolis
5/19 12:00 ET: (4) Denver vs (5) UNC at Indianapolis
5/18 12:30 ET: (3) Ohio State vs Cornell at College Park
5/18 03:00 ET: (1) Syracuse vs Yale at College Park
5/19 02:30 ET: (2) Notre Dame vs (7) Duke at Indianapolis
5/19 12:00 ET: (4) Denver vs (5) UNC at Indianapolis
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/13/2013 10:02AM by Trotsky.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: BearLover (---.twcny.res.rr.com)
Date: May 14, 2013 12:12AM
This is one case when it's okay to root for Yale
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: JasonN95 (38.105.135.---)
Date: May 14, 2013 08:10AM
BearLover
This is one case when it's okay to root for Yale
Yes, although another win for Yale puts them dangerously close to fluke win of lacrosse national championship to go with hockey, at which point my head explodes.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Jeff Hopkins '82 (---.airproducts.com)
Date: May 14, 2013 08:12AM
BearLover
This is one case when it's okay to root for Yale
So was last week.
Considering how the Ivy league got dissed by the seeding committee, I think I'd pretty much like to see a Cornell-Yale final. That'll show the bastards.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: scoop85 (173.84.100.---)
Date: May 14, 2013 11:37AM
JasonN95
BearLover
This is one case when it's okay to root for Yale
Yes, although another win for Yale puts them dangerously close to fluke win of lacrosse national championship to go with hockey, at which point my head explodes.
Yeah, this has been lurking in my mind as soon as Yale beat PSU.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Jim Hyla (---.arthritishealthdoctors.com)
Date: May 14, 2013 12:52PM
Inside Lacrosse article on Onondaga CC winning their fifth straight championship.
Here's the Syracuse.com article.
Here's the Syracuse.com article.
___________________________
"Cornell Fans Made the Timbers Tremble", Boston Globe, March/1970
Cornell lawyers stopped the candy throwing. Jan/2005
"Cornell Fans Made the Timbers Tremble", Boston Globe, March/1970
Cornell lawyers stopped the candy throwing. Jan/2005
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/14/2013 12:56PM by Jim Hyla.
Re: 2013 NCAA Lacrosse Tournament
Posted by: Swampy (---.ri.ri.cox.net)
Date: May 14, 2013 11:59PM
Jeff Hopkins '82
BearLover
This is one case when it's okay to root for Yale
So was last week.
So was the game against Harvard.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.