NCAA Lacrosse selection show
- Thread starter RUtix4me
- Start date
Despite the team getting screwed by the NCAA's confounded logic, I applaud how the guys performed this year. They did enough to get into the tournament.
Apparently head to head competition had no relevance. Strange, because isn't that a hallmark of athletic competition? Surprising if RU beat Hopkins once, but to beat them twice … that's just absurd.
I don't think it's just the mathematical aspect. There's a "look-test" thing going on here, in my opinion. Wagner, Monmouth and NJIT don't look that great on a 14 game schedule.
Again, I think Rutgers got shafted, but the schedule didn't help.
The lacrosse selection committee has always seemed to place a massive emphasis on strength of schedule...favoring teams in better conferences and teams like Johns Hopkins that are high-profile programs that everyone wants to schedule. In my mind, Rutgers was snubbed, but it doesn't shock me. In lacrosse, the RPI and things like that seem very weighted to traditional powers (because of their schedules) and I think they often miss the forest for the trees.
I'm a Loyola alum, and in 2014, Loyola was 15-1 going into the NCAA Tournament. The only loss was Week 1 in overtime to Virginia. During the season, they beat Duke 14-7 and Hopkins, but the rest of the schedule, being in the Patriot League, was only OK. They ended up the 3 seed behind 13-3 Duke (who Loyola beat) and 11-4 Syracuse (both ACC). The top two seeds get the play-in game winners, Loyola ended up with a very dangerous Albany team and lost. So for a team like Loyola, losing in early February on the road in overtime to a good team is enough to knock you down a few notches.
In my mind, looking at Rutgers vs. Hopkins this year, their resumes were similar enough considering the limited sample size in lacrosse where two head-to-head match-ups were relevant.
Here is another situation where the ratings could, no should, take care of itself. No guess work to say who would win if none of the contenders played each other. If we beat JH once and the overall records are similar, then maybe we lose out. But because we won twice and have a good record, that should hold some weight too. You can only play the schedule that has been given to you. Stands to reason we should qualify and somebody else should be packing their equipment away. Probably won't happen either.
This is a dangerous precedent. Losing to perceived good teams from bigger conferences is viewed more highly than beating lesser conference teams.
Why wouldn't the B1G, Acc and Ivy band together and just play each other? Outside of the AQ's, no other conference team would get in.
Why wouldn't the B1G, Acc and Ivy band together and just play each other? Outside of the AQ's, no other conference team would get in.
so it was JHU's win over Cuse that got them in and was better than beating them 2x, including at their place in the B1G tourney?
I wonder if it wasn't the loss at OSU that did us in
so JHU got more credit for losing to RU than RU did in beating JHU
I wonder if it wasn't the loss at OSU that did us in
so JHU got more credit for losing to RU than RU did in beating JHU
One thing I wonder about. What if the wins vs. NJIT and Wagner had been wins over Bucknell and Hofstra? Probably never know the answer but I wish we did.
And I agree with Scarletrat, that OSU loss was costly.
We had Uva on the schedule. Unfortunately, they backed out of a 4 game deal after 2 games. I am pretty sure one of these teams was added in their place.
That game would have have helped.
If we beat OSU we're 12-4 instead of 11-5 and it'd be damn near impossible to leave us out. On the other hand based on the way the 18 team field is selected we might still be on the outside looking in. Losing to Princeton in their uncharacteristically down year hurt us a little bit, but the late season loss to Ohio State put the nail in the coffin. We had to win the conference tourney to make it at that point.
Going into the conference tournament, Hopkins had a top-10 RPI. Ours? Not even top 20 and behind Penn State.
When are people going to learn that these selections are not supposed to be based on head-to-head outcomes? If you did that, you would have a never-ending stream of this-team-beat-that-team, but that-team-beat-this-team issues. As far as the committee is concerned, we beat Team X with Team X's resume twice. High-quality wins, and still not enough for our RPI to be near theirs.
A couple of other teams have a better case than we do, but as our program improves I expect to see stronger schedules. Considering where we THOUGHT we would be this year, our schedule was not unreasonable. Until we had a good season and wanted an at-large NCAA bid.
Actually at the beginning of the show yesterday it clearly laid out the 4 criteria used by the committee and one was "head-to-head."
Beyond that it wasn't one early season win. I can see that being discounted. It was a win after the midpoint of the season AND a win in the conference tournament.
Actually Hobbs should be writing that sternly worded letter asking for clarification on what the committee's decision to exclude us from the tournament was based on. And what their criteria is going to be moving forward. So that this never occurs again. We know it can't be based on head to head matchups in lieu of the committee's decision. Can an RPI really hold that much weight when your only playing 14 to 16 games? These questions need to be answered for any AD in this situation. I'm sure at 10:01 pm he was in his home office pen and paper in hand crafting just that letter. The man does seem to be on top of things, I'm sure he wants answers just like the rest of us. Problem is we won't get them but he should.
Last edited:
Pat Hobbs was at the B1G Championship game against Maryland. He wants to see this program rise high.
I can't imagine that he isn't getting on the horn with the B1G offices to either infiltrate or try and take over this how these selections are made.
With the power of the B1G, I wouldn't be surprised if major changes are made.
I can't imagine that he isn't getting on the horn with the B1G offices to either infiltrate or try and take over this how these selections are made.
With the power of the B1G, I wouldn't be surprised if major changes are made.
Baltimore Sun
Part 1 of Q&A with ESPN men's lacrosse analyst Paul Carcaterra
"Which team has the strongest case for being snubbed?Rutgers."
Inside Lacrosse
NCAA Tournament Snubs and Surprises
Part 1 of Q&A with ESPN men's lacrosse analyst Paul Carcaterra
"Which team has the strongest case for being snubbed?Rutgers."
Inside Lacrosse
NCAA Tournament Snubs and Surprises
Paul Carcaterra is very positive towards Rutgers. He gets what's going on in Pway.
lol @ the guy who picked "Harvard," a .500 team, as the one which got "snubbed."
