Cornell-Princeton lacrosse 4/27/19

A lot riding on the Princeton game, 12 noon Saturday at Schoellkopf. Win and Cornell is in the Ivy lacrosse tournament. Which tournament Cornell needs to win to guarantee a slot in the NCAA tournament although making it to the Ivy title game may be enough.

Princeton's season has been bad start, good finish: 2-5 start (including OT loss to Virginia, by 2 to Hopkins, by 1 to Rutgers), then 5-1 (lone loss vs. Brown), with MOVs +1 (Denver), -4 (Brown), +10 (Stony Brook), +9 (Siena), +9 (Dartmouth), +4 (Harvard). Junior A Michael Sowers #22 has 82 points this year and holds positions 1, 2 and 3 for single-season scoring. He was 3-7--10 vs. Harvard.

The ELF Cornell-Brown lax and Cornell 2019 threads lay out the possibilities. If Cornell loses to Princeton (could happen) and Brown beats Dartmouth, there is a wacky series of tiebreakers. Each of us will be 1-1 against the other two looking for the final two slots in the Ivy tournament. Each will be 0-2 against 1-seed Penn and 2-seed Yale, the others in the tournament. Each will be 2-0 against Harvard and Dartmouth, who will not make the tournament. It comes down to a goals differential tiebreaker against the other two teams contending.

Currently:
Cornell is +3 so far (12-9 over Brown)
Princeton is -4 so far (14-10 loss to Brown)
Brown stands at +1 (win 14-10 vs. Princeton, lose 12-9 vs. Cornell)
Goal differential would decide who gets #3 seed and plays Yale.
Then: Head to head decides who gets #4 seed and plays Penn
There are scenarios where if Princeton is beating Cornell by 5 (I believe it's 5) then Cornell benefits by losing by more because that pushes Princeton's goal differential above Brown's. If we lose by 1-2-3-or-4, we finish the H2H -1 at worst same as Brown and make the final slot (and play Penn).

Imagine the scenario where Princeton goes up by 5 goals late, we need to lose by 6, Princeton if it wins the following faceoff just stalls, and we could avoid that by winning the faceoff and oops scoring an against goal. Except we can't win a faceoff. (If we hadn't allowed the last Brown goal with 0.8 to play, we could lose by as many as 5 and still be in.) All of this a non-factor if we beat Princeton, which gives us third seed and a rematch with Yale, arguably a better team than Penn especially we match up so poorly against Yale on faceoffs. (Edit add: This is a joke on my part. I don't see how a team can honestly / legitimately / in a sportsmanlike manner deliberately score against-goals to lose by more in order to make a playoff.)

Read the threads on the Brown game and 2019 lax. Or just this one comment:

Jeff Hopkins '82
I will never get this shit. Never.

More on how the tiebreaker would work, from Cornell and Princeton PR:

GoPrincetonTigers.com
If Princeton beats Cornell and Dartmouth beats Brown, then Princeton is in. If Brown beats Dartmouth and Princeton beats Cornell, then Princeton, Cornell and Brown would all be 3-3 in the league, including 0-2 against Penn and Yale, 2-0 against Harvard and Dartmouth and 1-1 against each other. The next tiebreaker then would be goal-differential head-to-head among the three.

So far, Princeton has a four-goal loss to Brown, while Cornell defeated Brown 12-9 Saturday. Those two results have Cornell at plus-three, Brown at plus-one and Princeton at minus-four. After goal-differential breaks the tie for third, then head-to-head decides who would get fourth.

As a result of all of that, Princeton needs to defeat Cornell by at least three goals to push Brown ahead of Cornell in goal-differential, giving the Bears the third spot and then the Tigers the fourth by virtue of what would have to be a head-to-head win over Cornell. The strange part is that had Princeton lost to Brown by more, then it would have to defeat Cornell by less. [goprincetontigers.com]

CornellBigRed.com
The Big Red returns to Ithaca for its regular season finale as it celebrates Senior Day vs. Princeton at noon on Saturday, April 27. With the Tigers win over Harvard earlier today, the game will be pivotal in determining the final two spots of the Ivy League Tournament. Cornell can get in with a win over the Tigers. [cornellbigred.com]

Brown is +1, not -1. Brown's goal with .8 seconds left yesterday could be the decider. Nuts.

Princeton is wishing they had lost to Brown by 6 or more, instead of by 4. Then they would make the ILT with a win over Cornell by any margin. As it is, they must win by 3 or more.

billhoward
A lot riding on the Princeton game, 12 noon Saturday at Schoellkopf. Win and Cornell is in the Ivy lacrosse tournament. Which tournament Cornell needs to win to guarantee a slot in the NCAA tournament although making it to the Ivy title game may be enough.

Princeton's season has been bad start, good finish: 2-5 start (including OT loss to Virginia, by 2 to Hopkins, by 1 to Rutgers), then 5-1 (lone loss vs. Brown), with MOVs +1 (Denver), -4 (Brown), +10 (Stony Brook), +9 (Siena), +9 (Dartmouth), +4 (Harvard). Junior A Michael Sowers #22 has 82 points this year and holds positions 1, 2 and 3 for single-season scoring. He was 3-7--10 vs. Harvard.

The ELF Cornell-Brown lax and Cornell 2019 threads lay out the possibilities. If Cornell loses to Princeton (could happen) and Brown beats Dartmouth, there is a wacky series of tiebreakers. Each of us will be 1-1 against the other two looking for the final two slots in the Ivy tournament. Each will be 0-2 against 1-seed Penn and 2-seed Yale, the others in the tournament. Each will be 2-0 against Harvard and Dartmouth, who will not make the tournament. It comes down to a goals differential tiebreaker against the other two teams contending.

Currently:
Cornell is +3 so far (12-9 over Brown)
Princeton is -4 so far (14-10 loss to Brown)
Brown stands at +1 (win 14-10 vs. Princeton, lose 12-9 vs. Cornell)
Goal differential would decide who gets #3 seed and plays Yale.
Then: Head to head decides who gets #4 seed and plays Penn
There are scenarios where if Princeton is beating Cornell by 5 (I believe it's 5) then Cornell benefits by losing by more because that pushes Princeton's goal differential above Brown's. If we lose by 1-2-3-or-4, we finish the H2H -1 at worst same as Brown and make the final slot (and play Penn).

Imagine the scenario where Princeton goes up by 5 goals late, we need to lose by 6, Princeton if it wins the following faceoff just stalls, and we could avoid that by winning the faceoff and oops scoring an against goal. Except we can't win a faceoff. (If we hadn't allowed the last Brown goal with 0.8 to play, we could lose by as many as 5 and still be in.) All of this a non-factor if we beat Princeton, which gives us third seed and a rematch with Yale, arguably a better team than Penn especially we match up so poorly against Yale on faceoffs. (Edit add: This is a joke on my part. I don't see how a team can honestly / legitimately / in a sportsmanlike manner deliberately score against-goals to lose by more in order to make a playoff.)

Read the threads on the Brown game and 2019 lax. Or just this one comment:

Jeff Hopkins '82
I will never get this shit. Never.

Yeah, that comment still stands.

beat princeton not the abacus

just saw that td ierlan and yianni know each other from high school wrestling and now i'm even more upset that he went to yale instead

So I understand there are scenarios where Cornell would benefit from scoring an own goal or two, but my question is: would this be a detriment to Princeton? I assume not and it would only push out Brown, but I’m trying to envision a scenario where Princeton would be defending our net from us scoring an own goal - total mayhem.

Obviously Milman wouldn’t do this because it’s the type of thing that makes national news and gets coaches fired for “teaching the kids a bad lesson” but it’s fun to think about.

Give this a read if you aren’t familiar - not a totally unheard of situation.

[en.m.wikipedia.org]–2_Grenada_(1994_Caribbean_Cup_qualification)

Edit: Something funky in the link won’t let me paste it, but google “Barbados Grenada Caribbean cup” and read the Wikipedia

CU2007
So I understand there are scenarios where Cornell would benefit from scoring an own goal or two, but my question is: would this be a detriment to Princeton? I assume not and it would only push out Brown, but I’m trying to envision a scenario where Princeton would be defending our net from us scoring an own goal - total mayhem.

Obviously Milman wouldn’t do this because it’s the type of thing that makes national news and gets coaches fired for “teaching the kids a bad lesson” but it’s fun to think about.

What teaches kids a bad lesson is the governing body of a sport laying down rules for tournament qualification that even make such a scenario possible, thus putting the kids and their coach in a difficult position. Unlike the famous fifth down game, there's nothing sportsmanlike about allowing yourself to be eliminated from your post-season tournament because you played too well.

Beeeej

CU2007
So I understand there are scenarios where Cornell would benefit from scoring an own goal or two, but my question is: would this be a detriment to Princeton? I assume not and it would only push out Brown, but I’m trying to envision a scenario where Princeton would be defending our net from us scoring an own goal - total mayhem.

Obviously Milman wouldn’t do this because it’s the type of thing that makes national news and gets coaches fired for “teaching the kids a bad lesson” but it’s fun to think about.

What teaches kids a bad lesson is the governing body of a sport laying down rules for tournament qualification that even make such a scenario possible, thus putting the kids and their coach in a difficult position. Unlike the famous fifth down game, there's nothing sportsmanlike about allowing yourself to be eliminated from your post-season tournament because you played too well.

Obviously I’m not arguing that. But I still can’t see him giving the order to start firing it into our own net given the potential fallout of doing so seeing as its pretty close to the dreaded “match fixing” Maybe I’m wrong. My guess is the Ivy League and the NCAA wouldn’t take too kindly to it.

is scoring own goals any less sporting than running up a score?

upprdeck
is scoring own goals any less sporting than running up a score?

I think so. The assumed objective by all vested parties (let’s not forget about bettors here - there is a Vegas spread on this game) is to score on the opposition. Running up the score can enter a moral gray area at a somewhat arbitrary point (i.e. Answer will vary based on who you ask) but scoring on yourself goes against the spirit of competition pretty unanimously. (I hope)

CU2007

upprdeck
is scoring own goals any less sporting than running up a score?

I think so. The assumed objective by all vested parties (let’s not forget about bettors here - there is a Vegas spread on this game) is to score on the opposition. Running up the score can enter a moral gray area at a somewhat arbitrary point (i.e. Answer will vary based on who you ask) but scoring on yourself goes against the spirit of competition pretty unanimously. (I hope)

No, not unanimously in the least. College athletes owe absolutely nothing to the bettors except for their legal obligation not to manipulate the score for the financial gain of themselves or others. (EDIT to add: And by the way, if a bettor wagers money on this game without knowing all the factors that could contribute to the final score, they're not doing their due diligence.) The athletes' duty is to do everything they can to win individual games (and in the described scenario, they've already done that), then set themselves up for tournament success in the post-season, which would be more difficult the better they play in this hypothetical game. In this case I think it's the way the tournament qualification is set up that quite obviously goes against the spirit of competition. Once it's set up that way, it isn't up to the players and coaches to judge the morality of what they're doing to qualify for the tournament as long as they're not breaking the rules of the game.

Otherwise, you're basically saying that you'd rather have them win the game by too many goals and miss the tournament so that they can feel better about not violating the spirit of a rule that doesn't even exist, than have them qualify for the tournament by doing what's required.

the fun scenario is princeton wanting brown to make it over us and fighting at the x for the right to score matching own-goals to keep the win at the golden margin

Just win.

ugarte
the fun scenario is princeton wanting brown to make it over us and fighting at the x for the right to score matching own-goals to keep the win at the golden margin

That's when the league steps in and DQs both teams for the post-season.

It would be funny enough to be worth it. A "Magic Christian" of lacrosse.

Beeeej

CU2007

upprdeck
is scoring own goals any less sporting than running up a score?

I think so. The assumed objective by all vested parties (let’s not forget about bettors here - there is a Vegas spread on this game) is to score on the opposition. Running up the score can enter a moral gray area at a somewhat arbitrary point (i.e. Answer will vary based on who you ask) but scoring on yourself goes against the spirit of competition pretty unanimously. (I hope)

No, not unanimously in the least. College athletes owe absolutely nothing to the bettors except for their legal obligation not to manipulate the score for the financial gain of themselves or others. (EDIT to add: And by the way, if a bettor wagers money on this game without knowing all the factors that could contribute to the final score, they're not doing their due diligence.) The athletes' duty is to do everything they can to win individual games (and in the described scenario, they've already done that), then set themselves up for tournament success in the post-season, which would be more difficult the better they play in this hypothetical game. In this case I think it's the way the tournament qualification is set up that quite obviously goes against the spirit of competition. Once it's set up that way, it isn't up to the players and coaches to judge the morality of what they're doing to qualify for the tournament as long as they're not breaking the rules of the game.

Otherwise, you're basically saying that you'd rather have them win the game by too many goals and miss the tournament so that they can feel better about not violating the spirit of a rule that doesn't even exist, than have them qualify for the tournament by doing what's required.

Yea, I don’t know what to tell you. If you really think there’s no moral/legal/spirit of competition/whatever difference between scoring a couple more goals when some people might assume the game is in hand and purposefully scoring on yourself to manipulate a goal differential, we’re probably not going to agree.

Situation: Princeton leads by two when Cornell picks up a ground ball with 80 seconds left to play.

Does Cornell try to score and then hope to force overtime or play keep-away to prevent Princeton from scoring and winning by three? Reminds me of the bizarre two-games-total-goals series in NCAA hockey tournament hockey.

so basically if the rule says you can only win the war one way we should give up and win the battle?

Al DeFlorio
Situation: Princeton leads by two when Cornell picks up a ground ball with 80 seconds left to play.

Does Cornell try to score and then hope to force overtime or play keep-away to prevent Princeton from scoring and winning by three?

Holds the ball, of course. The probability of scoring two goals in 80 sec (with a weak FO game), and then first in OT, is very very small.

This situation is not even the weird one where it benefits Cornell to lose by 6 or more instead of by 3, 4, or 5. No tie-breaking system can avoid situations like the one you describe.

Two 2-"games"-total-goals hockey "series" was, in effect, a single two-hour game played over two days.

CU77

Al DeFlorio
Situation: Princeton leads by two when Cornell picks up a ground ball with 80 seconds left to play.

Does Cornell try to score and then hope to force overtime or play keep-away to prevent Princeton from scoring and winning by three?

Holds the ball, of course. The probability of scoring two goals in 80 sec (with a weak FO game), and then first in OT, is very very small.

What complicates this situation is losing to Princeton kisses at-large chances goodbye.

This situation is not even the weird one where it benefits Cornell to lose by 6 or more instead of by 3, 4, or 5. No tie-breaking system can avoid situations like the one you describe.

Yes, I identified that 6-goal anomaly on the other forum and corrected your subsequent chart. This situation was not brought about by the tiebreaker but by the two paths--at-large and auto-bid--to the NCAA tournament. What if the situation involved scoring only one goal to get to OT? Do you pass on the chance to protect a solid at-large posture with a win over Princeton to leave yourself where you have to beat both Penn and Yale to make the NCAAs?

Two 2-"games"-total-goals hockey "series" was, in effect, a single two-hour game played over two days.

Yes, I know. I lived through that absurdity. Deciding an important competition using different rules from those used in all other games was ridiculous.

Interesting that the Big Ten caps the victory margin at three for tiebreaking purposes, rather than the Ivy six. If it were three, Cornell would have the three-seed locked up. Brown would be at zero, not plus-one. Cornell would be plus-three and Princeton minus-three. A one or two goal Princeton win would give Cornell the goal differential win. A three or more goal Princeton win would give a three-way tie at zero and the next tiebreaker, goal differential against the number-one team, Penn, would decide. And Cornell wins that.

Don't think this would eliminate the six-goal margin anomaly we have now but it would minimize it.

Beeeej

CU2007

upprdeck
is scoring own goals any less sporting than running up a score?

I think so. The assumed objective by all vested parties (let’s not forget about bettors here - there is a Vegas spread on this game) is to score on the opposition. Running up the score can enter a moral gray area at a somewhat arbitrary point (i.e. Answer will vary based on who you ask) but scoring on yourself goes against the spirit of competition pretty unanimously. (I hope)

No, not unanimously in the least. College athletes owe absolutely nothing to the bettors except for their legal obligation not to manipulate the score for the financial gain of themselves or others. (EDIT to add: And by the way, if a bettor wagers money on this game without knowing all the factors that could contribute to the final score, they're not doing their due diligence.) The athletes' duty is to do everything they can to win individual games (and in the described scenario, they've already done that), then set themselves up for tournament success in the post-season, which would be more difficult the better they play in this hypothetical game. In this case I think it's the way the tournament qualification is set up that quite obviously goes against the spirit of competition. Once it's set up that way, it isn't up to the players and coaches to judge the morality of what they're doing to qualify for the tournament as long as they're not breaking the rules of the game.

Otherwise, you're basically saying that you'd rather have them win the game by too many goals and miss the tournament so that they can feel better about not violating the spirit of a rule that doesn't even exist, than have them qualify for the tournament by doing what's required.

I'll add to being on Beeeej's side. Competition is not just for 1 game. Competition is for the season. If the crazy rules say that the only way to extend the season is to only win by a certain amount, then the competition is to satisfy that rule.

They set up rules to play the game. We compete according to those rules. If those rules are crazy, so-be-it, we play according to those rules, for the season.

Beeeej

CU2007
So I understand there are scenarios where Cornell would benefit from scoring an own goal or two, but my question is: would this be a detriment to Princeton? I assume not and it would only push out Brown, but I’m trying to envision a scenario where Princeton would be defending our net from us scoring an own goal - total mayhem.

Obviously Milman wouldn’t do this because it’s the type of thing that makes national news and gets coaches fired for “teaching the kids a bad lesson” but it’s fun to think about.

What teaches kids a bad lesson is the governing body of a sport laying down rules for tournament qualification that even make such a scenario possible, thus putting the kids and their coach in a difficult position. Unlike the famous fifth down game, there's nothing sportsmanlike about allowing yourself to be eliminated from your post-season tournament because you played too well.

The players also learn that the older people of the governing body haven't considered all the possibilities and unintended consequences. Good skill to learn about for the rest of life. Cornell's athletes, all Ivy athletes, if not necessarily all NCAA athletes, need to keep in mind fair play. It's more important long-term than scoring against goals to get into a tournament we could have gotten into by, say, beating Penn. Lord knows, if you want to screw somebody based on arcane reading of the rules, Wall Street and the law beckon.

billhoward
Win and Cornell is in the Ivy lacrosse tournament.

I read through this whole thread and started to get nervous--but then I reminded myself that Bill's quote above is the key. Do that (win) and the other stuff doesn't matter.

Beating Princeton (or Yale or Penn) will be tough, but that's what Cornell has to do now.

Had me worried for a moment, did this email from the athletic ticketing office: Would the Princeton-Cornell lax game be a sellout? They've come close at Yale. Not so, just the early reminder to buy tickets for Red Hot Hockey vs. BU, again Thanksgiving Saturday 2019. Best attendance this year I believe was at Yale, 2,716.

SU losing to UNC is not a good result for Cornell. puts them back in the bubble talk and still could win the ACC.. So up 3 with 5 min left and blew it

upprdeck
SU losing to UNC is not a good result for Cornell. puts them back in the bubble talk and still could win the ACC.. So up 3 with 5 min left and blew it

What's this you're saying? Not the opponent but Syracuse is up by 3 late in the game ... and Syracuse loses?

yeah.. SU was up 3 late and lost

billhoward

upprdeck
SU losing to UNC is not a good result for Cornell. puts them back in the bubble talk and still could win the ACC.. So up 3 with 5 min left and blew it

What's this you're saying? Not the opponent but Syracuse is up by 3 late in the game ... and Syracuse loses?

I wasn't going to bring it up...

OSU losing to Mich is probably a good result for us.

OSU has ND win, PSU loss just like us BU/Umass their only solid wins, but that mich loss is bad
our Towson/hobart wins are better I think.

The difference in intensity between the Princeton close D and the Cornell close D is stark.

Officiating leaving a lot to be desired

Without the face-off advantage this would be a significant ass whoppin'

Maybe, but the Princeton goalie has also taken probably 5 goals off the board that should have been layups. He was out of his mind in the 1st half.

Cornell will go t the ILT

That out of bounds play was something special. Huge gut check win.

margolism
Cornell will go t the ILT

great in bounds play and pass by teat to peterson with 8 seconds on the clock to score the game winner with 4 seconds left followed by a terrible faceoff violation that gave princeton one last shot to tie it but ierlan came up with the save. 14-13 CU.

pretty cool to beat princeton on a back door cut for a layup

Nice win. Cornell helped by some questionable calls and Princeton's D-man Baughan, who was guarding JT51 and who did a terrific job last year, left the game sometime in the first half (presumably with an injury). But a win is a win is a win. On to Yale in NYC!

So the Cornell game on Friday won’t start until 8:30-9:00?

Princeton is at best an average team without Sowers. He is truly a great player but he is their entire story on offense.
Nobody in the country but Teat makes that pass. Watch the replay.
As above, the Cornell D should take a look at Princeton's and learn how a game can be won through physical, relentless effort. Cornell certainly has the talent. Combine smart, aggressive D with a terrific offense and the sky's the limit.

Jordan 04
So the Cornell game on Friday won’t start until 8:30-9:00?

That is correct.

woodpile
Princeton is at best an average team without Sowers. He is truly a great player but he is their entire story on offense.
Nobody in the country but Teat makes that pass. Watch the replay.
As above, the Cornell D should take a look at Princeton's and learn how a game can be won through physical, relentless effort. Cornell certainly has the talent. Combine smart, aggressive D with a terrific offense and the sky's the limit.

It was a beautifully accurate pass. Two screens, off ball and on ball. They had to be perfectly timed. What a play!

Sowers was amazing, 8 points Saturday on top of 10 the week before against Harvard. Best player in lacrosse this year, overshadowed Jeff Teat, I was thinking. And then, wham, that Teat pass to Petterson for the GWG. Nobody else could do it.

Sowers is the much better athlete and Dodger. Teat the better passer but physically he gets man handled at times by the elite D.

If only Sowers wanted to make the playoffs next yr.. Can you imagine how many pts they could score on the same team.

Ivy League top 5 closes with a Cornell montage in the 1 spot, including the game winner against Princeton.

We've got great defense and a whole bunch of walk-off wins in this week's #IvyTop5!

5️⃣ @BigGreenBasebal
4️⃣ @CULionsBaseball
3️⃣ @HarvardBaseball
2️⃣ @BrownSoftball
1️⃣ @CornellSports pic.twitter.com/Q8FkG82TP6

— Ivy League on ESPN (@IvyOnESPN) May 1, 2019

Don't often see rowing get a top-five video shout-out.