If that's the case it's even more unlikely a conference will get 5 teams in. Especially given the fact that the NCAA is loathe to reduce the number of AQs. Knock 1 bid out in 2017 and Hopkins likely would have stayed home.
OT: 2017 NCAA Men's Lacrosse Tourney - RU is out
- Thread starter Debtbubble
- Start date
If that's the case it's even more unlikely a conference will get 5 teams in. Especially given the fact that the NCAA is loathe to reduce the number of AQs. Knock 1 bid out in 2017 and Hopkins likely would have stayed home.
16 is the right # for lacrosse. Size of tournament field isn't issue, AQs outside of top 12-16 is problem.
BINGO!!!
If they do that, then they need to limit the AQ's, or drop them altogether.
Something tells me we definitely deserved to be in this tournament. We beat one finalist and took the other to triple OT. Man, whoever's on this committee needs to get their head's out of their asses. They should be ashamed of themselves.
Last edited:
In football or Lacrosse? Unlike Michigan St. and Ohio St., Washington actually put points up on the board in the CFP.
If my memory is correct we beat OSU in triple OT and lost to MD in triple OT. Seems we should have been in the tourney..............yeah. yeah, I know we weren't. Just saying.
I'm sure Atlanta has 'Scored 28 points in the Super Bowl' t-shirts selling like hotcakes.
Joe P.
Kole it didn't matter one way or the other when Denver lost in the BE tourney this year, they were taking the last at large spot based on SOS & RPI. What really needs to change is the Baltimore Mafia's love of the ACC & their rankings as they showed they were over rated in the tournament this year. To some extent I agree that RU should have been in over at least UNC and possibly ND.
See what next year brings as THE BIG has now shown it is the best Lax conference this year.
Seriously? You're going to come on OUR board and post this garbage??? Think REAL HARD about what you say next.
Dirt - RU still may have missed out on the Tourney BUT if Denver wins the BE tourney they are the BE AQ thus freeing up an at-large spot. Then the committee, based on some rumors, would have taken Army over RU. Anyway we will never know.
As much as I love Rutgers, I'm not in favor for the reduction of any AQ's. I can't name a team on that list that didn't belong. Even Monmouth was in the playin game. We play in a tough conference. If we can't win it or make the conference tournament, that is on us.
So you think Monmouth, Air Force, Bryant, Loyola, Yale, UNC and Marquette were all better than us and belonged in this tournament over us?[roll] On what merit? Because they got hot or lucky for two games in an entire season. Some play in absolute crap conferences where a below .500 record gets you into their conference tournament.
Friggin cancel the season just play the conference tournaments with this train of thought. The at large bids are just going to the established powers anyway, doesn't matter if they're 8-7 have a worse RPI or lose to you head to head.
Last edited:
An NCAA committee member was recorded stating that Army would have been next up. Which is completely F'd up. We beat them head to head and had a higher RPI. The committee isn't even following their own rules which they established. Now that's a big problem.
RU also came in FIFTH in the B1G. Beat Hopkins and/or Penn St. and they were in. Don't forget those losses and just cite the OT games vs. finalists. Also remember that neither Hopkins not Penn St. got through the first round of the tournament. And when it comes to selection and seedings for 2018 the committee will remember that.
Yes, the Baltimore Mafia will favor the ACC. But, given the first round performance of both the ACC AND the B1G (each losing two teams) I don't see them selecting 5 teams from ANY conference in the forseeable future.
They have already selected 5 acc teams very recently.
With the performance the B1G is having with the two finalists, if there is a conference deserving of 5, it was the B1G. This year.
With the performance the B1G is having with the two finalists, if there is a conference deserving of 5, it was the B1G. This year.
Any team can beat a team on any given day. Look at the Delaware game for us? The NCAA tournament is about giving smaller conference teams a shot. We had our and came up short. We can agree to disagree.
True about agreeing to disagree because I can't possibly disagree more. Us being left out of the tournament this year was a crock of s**t.
Joe P.
You can't name an AQ team that doesn't belong. Are you freakin serious? Do you go to and watch these games?
I can name at least 5 or 6 teams that compared to Rutgers, we are WAAYYYY better. Look at the team's we played this year, and how well we played. Either less AQs or a larger tournament field with some play in games.
This is simple sh!t.
The NCAA hockey to
We lost to Delaware. We loss to Penn St. We finished 5th in the conference. You want to be given a spot. We need to earn it. We are Rutgers.
10-4, RPI of 12, ranked in the Top 15 by people who know the sport. We DID EARN IT. A group of good ol'boys just decided upholding the status quo was more important. I know who we are; I'm just not going to be one of those self-loathing Opus Dei Rutgers fans who self-depreciates everything we do. With the whole '5th in the conference' deal, weren't the Giants NFC 5-seeds their last 2 Super Bowls?
Joe P.
Last edited:
Joe - you are a great Rutgers fan. I love the program as well and was disappointed we missed the tournament. I'm not a self hating Rutgers fan. I'm an alumni. Been a football season ticket holder for almost 30 years. Attended almost all the bowl games. I have been to over 10 lacrosse final fours. Yes we had a great RPI, but that's not how it works. However comparing the NCAA lacrosse tournament to the NFL playoffs is dumb. The Giants earned it by being on of the Top 6 teams.
I know it's not quite the same but I have no clue how 8-6/ 8-7 teams are in and we're not. IMO there's no justification for it besides the selection committee choosing based on the names on the front of the jerseys instead of what happened on the field.
Joe P.
HUH?:confused:
It's one of the criteria supposedly used in selecting at large bids per the committee. That's why we strengthened our schedule this year and the reason they used to keep us out last year. Past laurels and favoritism are not part of that criteria but seem to be what the committee uses most. Remember UNC made it at 8-7 and the ACC doesn't have an automatic bid.
Not this year, and I've acknowledged the bias of the Baltimore Mafia many times in the past. This year an ongoing policy of the NCAA to give out numerous AQs to weaker conferences in an attempt to expand the sport kept Rutgers out of the tournament.
And let's look at those 8-6, 8-7 type teams that made it
Marquette - AQ, out of the committee's hands
Bryant - ditto
Johns Hopkins - Beat RU and made the B1G tournament
North Carolina - Won the ACC tournament though not an AQ. BTW, someone above said all the ACC teams make their tournament. Tell that to UVA.
Last edited:
Maryland National Champs!
For what it's worth, you guys got screwed, but this is the kind of thing that will help build RU prestige for next time during the selection process.
For what it's worth, you guys got screwed, but this is the kind of thing that will help build RU prestige for next time during the selection process.
Funny thing is every B1G school outside of Michigan is capable of going all the way, and watch Michigan blow up fast when they hire an ace coach. Get in and get hot.
Yep B1G with BTN, has really done a great job of building a national contender lacrosse conference.
Similar threads
