M Lax Results 5/4-5/6

[Al DeFlorio]

I'm thinking we're gonna get Colgate in the first round, wherever we're seeded.  Seedings don't necessarily mean much in terms of the quality of your opponent until the quarters.  [Siena, you bleepin' weenies...]

[Chris '03]

[quote billhoward]For those arguing Princeton doesn't deserve any of the 16 slots: Name a team you'd not want to be playing in round 2 at Princeton. I'd say, "Princeton."[/quote]

Anyone with a good faceoff man...

I don't want to see Navy in the second round... particularly at Navy.
I'm also not keen on UNC, but I'm not sure why.
Princeton would be pretty high on my list of quarters opponents I wouldn't mind seeing actually.

[billhoward]

We have a medium-short list of team such as Navy and Syracuse we wouldn't want to be paired up against because they have long midfields or faceoff wizards. OTOH, while Cornell 2007 may not be Virginia 2006,  there is probably a long list of teams that would not like to be paired up against Cornell under the latest possible game.

[Al DeFlorio]

Loyola's faceoff guy is tough.  Played for Yale last year and led the nation.

[DeltaOne81]

[quote billhoward]For those arguing Princeton doesn't deserve any of the 16 slots: Name a team you'd not want to be playing in round 2 at Princeton. I'd say, "Princeton."[/quote]

I never said they didn't deserve it. I'm just looking objectively at the criteria, and there's no doubt objectively that Princeton is on the bubble. Probably on the 'in'-side of the bubble, but bubble nonetheless.

But considering that, a) its Princeton, b) its Tierney, c) Princeton is hosting, and d) Tierney is on the selection committee, I fully expect to see Princeton there. But seeing as the top 2 criteria are 1) quality wins and 2) SoS, and in neither is Princeton in the top 16, they will be very questionable in doing so (but they will anyway).

[Al DeFlorio]

[quote DeltaOne81]I never said they didn't deserve it. I'm just looking objectively at the criteria, and there's no doubt objectively that Princeton is on the bubble. Probably on the 'in'-side of the bubble, but bubble nonetheless.
[/quote]
Another illustration of the inadequacy of the criteria.

[peterg]

[quote DeltaOne81I never said they didn't deserve it. I'm just looking objectively at the criteria, and there's no doubt objectively that Princeton is on the bubble. Probably on the 'in'-side of the bubble, but bubble nonetheless.

But considering that, a) its Princeton, b) its Tierney, c) Princeton is hosting, and d) Tierney is on the selection committee, I fully expect to see Princeton there. But seeing as the top 2 criteria are 1) quality wins and 2) SoS, and in neither is Princeton in the top 16, they will be very questionable in doing so (but they will anyway).[/quote]

For what it's worth, Tierney is no longer on the committee.  The committee is comprised of Butler associate AD Jon Hind, chair for the 3rd year in a row (interesting since Butler dropped men's lacrosse on the eve of this season leaving their players and the teams on their schedule in a mess), Albany Coach Scott Marr, Maryland Coach Dave Cottle, Hofstra AD Jack Hayes, and Bucknell senior associate AD Tim Pavlechko.

[cth95]

This seemed like as good a thread as any to use for this post.

I was catching the last day of skiing at Sugarbush today and saw a guy with a Princeton sweatshirt.  When I looked again I realized under Princeton the word "Sucks" was written clearly with a Sharpie.  I asked what school he went to and he said "Cornell".  He is on the track team and Princeton is their big rival.  Then we talked about how well the lacrosse team has done so far.

[scoop85]

With just under an hour until the selections are announced, the tide of opinion (Laxpower, Inside Lacrosse) seems to be moving towards Duke as the top seed.  What a bizarre circumstance where a head-to-head victory (on their turf no less) is only considered as a "secondary criteria."

As others have noted, a second seed (I will presume we will get at least that slot) would not seem to have much effect on quality of opponents throughout the tournament. Perhaps the perceived (if not actual) disrespect would work in our favor by adding to the team's collective chip on the shoulder.

[JasonN95]

[quote scoop85]With just under an hour until the selections are announced, the tide of opinion (Laxpower, Inside Lacrosse) seems to be moving towards Duke as the top seed.  What a bizarre circumstance where a head-to-head victory (on their turf no less) is only considered as a "secondary criteria."
[/quote]

If it was any team other than Duke, I think that the committee would use their subjective powers to make Cornell, the head-to-head winner and undefeated team the no. 1 seed. But with Duke, having them no. 1 is basically going to grab free promotion for the tourney. ESPN and other won't be able to help themselves from at least a blurb about how Duke lax has bounced back and garnered the top seed.

[peterg]

[quote cth95]This seemed like as good a thread as any to use for this post.

I was catching the last day of skiing at Sugarbush today and saw a guy with a Princeton sweatshirt.  When I looked again I realized under Princeton the word "Sucks" was written clearly with a Sharpie.  I asked what school he went to and he said "Cornell".  He is on the track team and Princeton is their big rival.  Then we talked about how well the lacrosse team has done so far.[/quote]

Seems he should have been at the Outdoor Heps instead of skiing, no?

[BillCharlton]

If the committee uses quality wins as the primary selection criterion, I expect to be seeded as low as 4 or 5. In an interview following the Hobart game, Tambroni said that after talking to other coaches he told the team that they could be seeded 3 or worse. Given the weakness of the Ivies this year (essentially no quality wins except for us), this result would not be surprising.

[Jacob '06]

And duke gets #1. They play providence.

[Jacob '06]

And we get the 4 to play towson. We are in the quarters in princeton if we win.