This gentlemen, is the problem.
http://web1.ncaa.org/committees/committees_roster.jsp?CommitteeName=1MLA
http://web1.ncaa.org/committees/committees_roster.jsp?CommitteeName=1MLA
NCAA MLAX Selection Committee
- Thread starter Caliknight
- Start date
Pretty small group whose conference affiliations do not seem to reflect the growth in the sport. The Southern Conference gets a member but the B-10 and ACC do not? They ought to expand the size of the committee to seat representative of other conferences with automatic bids.
I’m not saying him being on the committee doesn’t help but we know he can’t be in the room when his school is discussed.
Being on the committee definitely helps. Long time Navy coach Richie Meade was certainly a factor in Navy getting in two years ago. There isn't a lot of Rutgers love there from what I understand.
Bucknell AD being on the committee is a problem this year. I can see it coming down to Rutgers and Bucknell if certain things happen. You tell me those other guys are going to sit in that room and tell him he isn't getting in?
Hopefully it if comes to it, Amplo does his former high school team mate and friend a solid.
The fact that the B1G and acc don't have representatives on this committee is not right. Rutgers needs to get some sort of representation. Lacrosse is still too small to not have influence.
Beat Maryland!
Bucknell AD being on the committee is a problem this year. I can see it coming down to Rutgers and Bucknell if certain things happen. You tell me those other guys are going to sit in that room and tell him he isn't getting in?
Hopefully it if comes to it, Amplo does his former high school team mate and friend a solid.
The fact that the B1G and acc don't have representatives on this committee is not right. Rutgers needs to get some sort of representation. Lacrosse is still too small to not have influence.
Beat Maryland!
There should be one media member, i.e. one writer from Inside Lacrosse or US Lax Magazine ... those people know 10x more about the sport and follow closer than the AD of Brown, trust me..
I agree, but not that it should be really big like 32 or anything. Given all the at-larges for the small conferences, and there are teams that go on a run (or maybe some gamesmenship, who knows) that always get in, I feel it should be about 20, that way you have room for the at-larges who deserve it (like us) that won't get knocked out by an 8-win team winning their 1-hit-wonder conference.
As it stands, 26% of MD1 programs can access the playoffs in lacrosse. In MD1 basketball, only 19% of programs can make the playoffs. I think people need to see those numbers to understand how big a mistake it would be to expand the men's lacrosse tournament.
Not sure it needs to expand but the number of AQs need to be reduced. 25% of the total bids currently go to AQs which are not ranked in the top 16. I get the reason that they were originally liberal with handing out AQs, but those reasons are no longer valid today. The highest ranked team from among SoCon, Northeast and Metro Atlantic should get the one and only AQ. Any team can get in as an at-large if they earn it.
I always said 20 was the magic number. Have 4 wild card games maybe Tuesday or Wednesday night after Selection Sunday at the home of the higher seeded team. Winner moves on to the Round of 16 on Saturday/Sunday. For example, Rutgers vs Bucknell would be a wild card game at RU Stadium next Wednesday. Winner would move on and face say Albany in the Round of 16.
Rbled hits the nail. The number of AQ's need to be reduced. Don't be surprised if the overall number is lowered though. There is serious talk about making it smaller.
That's exactly the reason they are talking about making it smaller. Of course, the real reason is $$$.
Or even do like an 8 team NIT for lax if they want to cap it at 16. Have the first two rounds at home of the higher seed, than play the NIT Championship at the Final Four before the NC Game.
I think that's the way to do it. Ivy, ACC, B1G and BE all still get AQs, Patriot League as well. But the MAAC, SoCon and NE don't deserve an AQ. Give that to the highest ranked one after Tourney Week.
See, when we start deciding which leagues are worthy of an autobid, just to bring more P5 schools in, I start to get uncomfortable. I think part of the wonder of college sports is that no matter if you win the Big Ten or the A-10, you have a spot reserved for you as your reward.
As for the poster's notion about a NIT for lacrosse, that's not happening. NCAA lacrosse is already seeing declining numbers to its tournament. No chance in hell they allow a potential competitor in as an alternative. Plus, I question whether the interest is there. If you don't win your conference tournament and finish the season with a losing conference record, do you really deserve to be playing in anyone's tournament? Sometimes, teams really just needed another win or one fewer loss.
People knock the ACC on this board as if it's some mystical offshoot of the Illuminati, but there's no secret or conspiracy to what they do. Sure, we as fans can split hairs when it comes down to the last team in, but ACC squads generally plays top talent OOC and obviously in conference. As a result, they often are either solidly in or in the conversation when Selection Sunday rolls around.
Which is exactly where Rutgers is right now. Simply playing Maryland again helps us. It was the basis that on how so many acc teams got into the tournament. Simply playing other conference teams twice.
And the B1G is much better than the acc this year. That needs to be considered.
And the B1G is much better than the acc this year. That needs to be considered.
Outside of two teams, there are a lot of other that had a lot uglier losses than that. Did you see Uva vs. Notre Dame? If that was a fight, they would have stopped it. Lacrosse mercy rule would have been instituted.
Albany got woodsheded recently. Villanova lost by like 15 goals a couple of weeks ago.
We can't look at Rutgers in a silo. There is a lot going on out there.
Albany got woodsheded recently. Villanova lost by like 15 goals a couple of weeks ago.
We can't look at Rutgers in a silo. There is a lot going on out there.
RU has no one to blame but itself. Take care of business and this is not an issue. Fail to do so and live with the consequences. Second year in a row the team learns a lesson the hard d way.
This may be true, but again, control your own destiny. The team has the talent to do that.
Well, I am not going to go there yet.
Again, this isn't in a vacuum. Name a team we are competing with for an at large spot and debate it. It's more complex than just saying they didn't win this game or that game so too bad.
Again, this isn't in a vacuum. Name a team we are competing with for an at large spot and debate it. It's more complex than just saying they didn't win this game or that game so too bad.
If they do, how many teams are we looking at? I like what rbled stated. Why not put the top 16 teams (combined ranking and rpi score) if they're not going to expand so we get away from AQ from lesser conferences. Basketball gets away with it by having AQ's plus play in games and they expanded from 64 to 68 teams.
Well, this makes sense to me, but according to Cali they want to decrease the number of teams that get in.
I never understood in a sport like Lacrosse why tournament champions get the auto bid. You could literally dick around all year ala a Marquette last year get hot for just two games and voila you punch your ticket. It's much harder in say basketball where if you dick around and get a 13 seed you have to run a 5 game gauntlet. We see it every year. A team undeserving of a spot pulls two upsets and they're in.
As to the ACC gig. They have an inflated RPI do to playing each other in conference. Sure they schedule good out of conference foes, but the bigger factor is when your in conference foes are artificially inflated to start each season based on past accolades that will artificially inflate your RPI. It's the same thing the SEC does in football.
When they lose they don't drop much because it's considered a good loss. When they win they jump way up and the cycle thus perpetuates itself. I've watched college football for way too long and I recognize the same pattern presenting itself here.
No clue. Just know that I've heard rumblings, based on the hoops % of teams in the tourney, that lacrosse is too high. It's all about money, I am sure.
West of the Alleganies? Outside of Air Force and Denver nobody west of the Mississippi plays D1, mainly due to TitleIX and money. They do have a lively club system
Don't expand. Don't contract. Reduce the number of AQs. A team like Denver will still get in if they deserve it.
That is why I said idiots. Spent time coaching both boys and girls. Based on what I saw, I literally believe most were concussed. Love the sport but it can be violent and it takes it toll.
Utah played their first year of D1 this year. Keep an eye on them, they have a good coach, outstanding facilities, a lot of untapped local-ish talent between Utah, CO and TX. Wouldn’t be surprised if USC, CO & the AZ schools add men’s lax if they can navigate the T9 implications. Would be relatively easy to convince one of the other PAC schools to jump in or pull in Denver as an associate member to become an AQ conference.
And Denver is member of the BE in lax so they will not be at risk in the number of AQs is contracted. The BE would retain AQ status. Either way, I don’t see the number of AQs being reduced anytime soon due to the potential of the above happening. Would be hard to convince a major conference to support a new men’s sport without at least the promise of an AQ. There wouldn’t be a B1G today if they were not given AQ status because RU, OSU & PSU were already in an AQ conference and no way Hopkins was going to join a non-AQ conference.
I hope a bunch of the Pac-12 schools start lax all at once...USC, Stanford, UCLA, Colorado, Oregon, Arizona State, Utah and Denver sound like a seriously good D1 lax conference. They could do a B1G/Pac-12 Lax Challenge in SoCal every year in February...play it at the Rose Bowl.
