The Field

You can view the entire bracket with links to matchups and game previews at MCLA.us

Here are all the teams in seed order, with AQ and At-Large status indicated:

1. St. Thomas (UMLL AQ)
2. Westminster (RMLC AQ)
3. St. John’s (At Large)
4. Liberty (SELC AQ)
5. Concordia (SLC AQ)
6. Grand Valley State (CCLA AQ)
7. Palm Beach Atlantic (At Large)
8. Sam Houston State (At Large)
9. US Coast Guard (At Large)
10. Indiana Tech (At Large)
11. Savannah College of Art and Design (At Large)
12. Grove City (At Large)
13. North Dakota State (At Large)
14. Western Oregon (PNCLL AQ)
15. Briarcliffe (PCLL AQ)
16. Depaul (GRLC AQ)

Couple of surprises in the form of AQ’s, first with Depaul winning the GRLC, though roughly 37 teams could’ve won that league this year.  Second, and more importantly, Briarcliffe turned the regular season result around and upset US Coast Guard in the PCLL championship to steal away the AQ, and send a team on the bubble home.

How the Bubble Shook Out

So who got hurt by the Briarcliffe win?  It looks like Elon and Florida Gulf Coast have the biggest gripes.  However, the cases to get into the field are shaky for both teams, and the D2 field presented the committee with quite the challenge in terms of both At Large selection and seeding in 2013.

Let’s take a look at teams that found themselves in the discussion for At Large berths:

• St. John’s
• Palm Beach Atlantic
• Elon
• US Coast Guard
• Indiana Tech
• SCAD
• Grove City
• Sam Houston State
• North Dakota State
• Florida Gulf Coast

In no real particular order, let’s talk through these teams and the difficult situation around picking 8 teams out of 10 fighting for an At Large.

St. John’s - St. John’s was always in.  Clearly.  We can all agree on that, let’s hope.

Palm Beach Atlantic – Some people discredited PBA’s overall resume in some forum chatter, but I stand by my assertion that PBA was the second best At Large almost all season long.  Wins over Grand Valley, Sam Houston, and Florida Gulf Coast seem to support that point.  The SCAD loss was mentioned as a bad loss earlier, but SCAD played PBA into a stronger position by getting hot late.

Indiana Tech - The Warriors started *air quotes* slow *air quotes*, but a convincing win over Dayton that essentially removed the Flyers from At Large discussion and another convincing win over Grand Valley likely got Indiana Tech into the field quite easily.  I would’ve had IT as my third At Large in.

Grove City - The Wolverines’ schedule may be toughest to stomach for At Large misses Elon and FGCU.  Look for a quality win and you won’t find it.  Dayton?  I think we all know now that they were a fraud living off past goodwill in 2013.  Grove City gets in by the margin of a Wolverine whisker, likely on the “merit” of an OT loss to the streaking Grand Valley State Lakers.

Sam Houston – Is there a team that gets more hate than the Bearkats?  If there is, I haven’t run across them.  While I don’t love their seeding, a little high for my blood, I agree with the committee that Sam Houston was easily in the field for 2013, earned by a strong OOC trip to Florida.

Florida Gulf Coast - New blood to the national scene, the FGCU Eagles crossed their fingers on Sunday night hoping for a seed, any seed, maybe even a fortuitous and ironic 15 seed again?  Not to be.  The loss to PBA at home to close the season and force them to miss the SELC playoffs ends up being the death knell for their national tournament hopes as well.  The win that could have gotten them in?  The Eagles shocked Grand Valley in their first game of the season, but my money is on the committee feels if they met again that Kransberger and Co. wouldn’t be as kind to the boys from Fort Meyers.

US Coast Guard – The Bears caused confusion mid-season, as word came out that they had actually submitted paperwork to fulfill a bid to the national tournament.  They caused headaches when they blew the PCLL title game and allowed an overall unimpressive Briarcliffe team into the field.  The PCLL didn’t have any OOC wins to hang their hats on aside from USCG’s win over SCAD in February.  What’s more, is that the USCG had been higher in human polls than computer polls all season.  But the Briarcliffe win and the SCAD streak had an odd buoying effect on USCG in the computer polls late.  If the committee had one eye on each set of polling it is likely what pushed the Bears into the field, and shockingly to me as high as the 9 seed.

North Dakota State – And finally, the combo breaker for the committee.  As soon as I thought I had their formula figured out, NDSU comes along and makes me reassess.  First, I thought they were looking for quality wins.  Then Grove City gets in.  Then I thought they were looking for the teams that finished hot.  But looking at that nasty loss to St. John’s, we can’t honestly argue they finished hot right?  Despite the ugly finish, the Bison did have two wins that pushed them over the top: an early season win over Indiana Tech in addition to a win over PNCLL champ Western Oregon, both on neutral sites.

So we are left with Elon and FGCU looking for chairs when the music stopped, with none left open.  Both have arguments for being in the field, Elon maybe the strongest with wins over tournament teams Briarcliffe and Grove City.  But in the end, with this field of bubble teams the committee was stuck between a rock and a bracket that needed to be completed.

What I Would Change

For At Large’s, I am pretty sure I would have lobbied hard for Elon over Grove City.  Outside of an OT loss to Grand Valley, Grove City has no resume.  Elon also beat Grove City head-to-head, which for the sake of this discussion looks … bad at best.  I’m fine with FGCU being out, the committee might as well call it the “SCAD Rule” after making the same decision on the Bees in the identical situation in 2012 when they missed their own league playoffs.

For seeding, I really don’t like that St. John’s and WOU get stuck in a repeat matchup.  I like it less when I point out that Grove City is the weakest At Large, and you could easily sort the teams as such:

12. NDSU, 13. WOU, 14. Grove City

And prevent that repeat matchup without any complaints.  That would clearly signal Grove City as the weakest At Large, barely making the field.  As it is, NDSU is seeded lower with a better resume.  Not really sure what the thought process was on that one.

As for the other overall seeding?  I said SHSU and USCG were a little high for my tastes, but honestly I am fine with where they are because who would I move?  No one really, and the two get the pleasure of beating each other up just to get blasted back to the Stone Age by the Tommies.

Overall Grade

B+

Where the D1 bracket was a near masterpiece, the D2 bracket leaves a couple more questions and a couple more feelings hurt.  In the end, the product of the games on the field is strong, and the top teams have been substantively rewarded with correct seeding.  Nice work by the committee once again, and I look forward to how these play out!

For starters, it looks like the committee did an outstanding job.  What follows is, admittedly, splitting hairs in the few instances where I would’ve done things differently.  It appears that the overall field was largely decided before the conference tournaments, and there were really only one or two “surprises” in the field.

The Field

Here is a picture of the bracket from MCLA.us, you can view the full page with links to individual matchups there at MCLA.us as well:

Full Bracket with Matchup links: http://mcla.us/national_tournament/2013/1/

Here are the teams in Seed order, with AQ or AL status indicated:

1. Colorado State (RMLC AQ)
   
2. Colorado (At Large)
3. Arizona State (SLC AQ)
4. Brigham Young (At Large)
5. Chapman (At Large)
6. UC Santa Barbara (At Large)
7. Stanford (WCLL AQ)
8. Boston College (PCLL AQ)
9. Sonoma State (At Large)
10. Michigan State (CCLA AQ)
11. Oregon State (PNCLL AQ)
12. Oregon (At Large)
13. Grand Canyon (At Large)
14. Georgia (SELC AQ)
15. Texas (LSA AQ)
16. Purdue (GRLC AQ)

When looking at the field you really only have one true “surprise” in the form of Oregon State.  I’ll cover each team below individually, but the OSU win over Oregon in the PNCLL title game likely knocked out one of the bubble teams, because Oregon State did not have a resume to get into the field.

How the Bubble Likely Shook Out

So who was on the bubble and the teams that came the closest to getting in?  The bubble came down to these teams competing for At Larges:

• Oregon
• Grand Canyon
• California
• Connecticut
• Pittsburgh

Let’s look at each one’s case to get in, and why the committee got it right with Oregon and Grand Canyon.  We’ll go in reverse order to show you the who-beat-who trail to our current field:

Pittsburgh - Pittsburgh is in the At Large discussion based off two wins over Davenport, a converted D1-from-D2 team, that showed life and good wins over Simon Fraser and Virginia Tech in a strong first year D1 campaign.  The Davenport wins essentially eliminated Davenport from discussion, but outside of those two wins Pittsburgh didn’t have much else to hang their hat on, despite a hard luck 1 goal loss to Michigan State in the CCLA title game.  So close, yet so far.

Connecticut – A late schedule had many wondering if their lofty computer rankings were deserved.  Yes and no.  The team wasn’t a paper tiger, as proven by their 11-1 regular season record, including wins over Virginia Tech, Texas State, Northeastern, and Pittsburgh.  The last of that list likely serving as an elimination game for the committee in this At Large discussion.  But in the end, Connecticut had a lot of “good” wins, but not a single one against the established tournament field of AQ’s and highest ranking AL’s.  Similar to Pittsburgh, missing the AQ meant the season was over.

California - Is there a worse way to go out than how Cal did in 2013?  Planted firmly in the Top 10 up until the final poll, two brutal losses to rival Stanford end up being the final nail in the coffin for the Golden Bears.  Cal was a team all season long that the nation agreed was good, but just didn’t end up having wins that could make a case for great.  Go back and look at Cal’s schedule, and the only win against the tournament field as it stands is Oregon.  A head-to-head win takes precedent in most situations, but…

Oregon - The Ducks overcome the Cal loss, a fellow bubble team, by virtue of having two wins against AQ teams (Chapman and Oregon State) and a third win against WCLL runner-up and locked in AL Sonoma State.  The Ducks get a lot of love and an equal amount of hate from the MCLA fans around the country, for reasons largely unknown to yours truly, but the committee rewarded the Ducks for scheduling extremely hard and getting enough wins in those OOC matchups to get to Greenville.

Grand Canyon – While Oregon got in with three strong wins despite the head-to-head loss to Cal, Grand Canyon took a different path to be the last team into the field.  Grand Canyon’s resume is built off one win, and one win alone, I don’t care who says otherwise: the Arizona State win gets the Lopes to Greenville in their first year as a D1 team.  Now realistically, GCU has another factor in its favor: Carson Barton.  Does one player earn a trip to the national tournament?  No, but was there another player in the bubble pool that has an affect on a first round matchup like Barton?  Yeah, I’ll wait…

What I Would Change

Overall, this bracket is outstanding.  Every first round matchup provides a storyline … well, OK, CSU/Purdue maybe doesn’t make my toes curl up in anticipation, but you get the idea.  There is only one thing I would’ve changed:

Swap Oregon and Oregon State’s seeds: Why?  The committee likely felt hamstrung by the Oregon State upset in the PNCLL (the first time since 2002 a team other than Oregon or Simon Fraser won the PNCLL).  While the committee did a good job preventing first round matchups, they still ended up with Chapman and Oregon meeting not only for the second time this season, but in a repeat matchup from the 2012 MCLA Tournament first round.  Should last year’s tournament have an affect on this year’s seedings?  No, not in most cases.  But really?  Chapman/Oregon again?!?!  It will be a great game, and Chapman will be seething for revenge.  These two teams have no love lost for each other.  But with a simple swap putting Oregon in the 11 line would have created an obvious UCSB/Oregon matchup (one of the few West Coast duos to not have a regular season matchup) and also an unpredicatable Champan/Oregon State matchup (the two teams haven’t met since 2006).

It’s splitting hairs.  I admit.  And I know while the committee met, someone surely uttered this phrase verbatim, “We can’t seed Oregon above OSU when the Beavers just beat the Ducks.”  But still, first round matchups repeated!  Aughhhh.  So close.  So close.

Overall Grade

A-

The committee did an outstanding job.  The slightest markdown for the Oregon/Chapman repeat game, but if that’s the worst thing in this field, then I think we are set for a great tournament!

Disagree?  Think your team should be in or got a bad seed?  Let me know in the comments or on Twitter @PattonLAS or @MCLA_Fan

So here is the Early April Division 2 Bracketology:

Who Made It, Who Didn’t

Right off the bat, the field is completely the same from the last edition.  So if you were hoping your team hopped in off the bubble, it hasn’t happened yet.  But as I’ll explain ahead, the bubble in D2 could have some movement ahead.

For now, the last team in off the bubble is Dayton.  But that hold on a position in the tournament is tenuous at best for Charlie Mark and the Flyers, as their schedule is unusually small and their best win is over a questionable Briarcliffe squad.  What’s even more important for the Flyers, is they may be playing for their At-Large lives tomorrow night against the team that is poised to jump them: Indiana Tech.  While the Warriors don’t have a signature win either, they scheduled tougher than Dayton.  Their best win is over a disappointing Washington-St. Louis team.  Both Indiana Tech and Dayton will play CCLA foe Grand Valley State before the CCLA tournament, and a win there could help their At-Large position immensely.  But the game Friday between Indiana Tech and Dayton serves as a de facto elimination game from At-Large consideration for the two teams.

Dayton is the last one in, what about the other At-Large teams?  Here they are listed in rank order of first At-Large selected to last team in off the bubble:

1. St. John’s
2. Elon
3. Grand Valley State
4. Palm Beach Atlantic
5. Florida Gulf Coast
6. Sam Houston State
7. North Dakota State
8. Dayton

It should come as no surprise that St. John’s is the top At-Large and has the 3 seed locked down.  If the Johnnies are able to turn the score around against St. Thomas in the UMLL championship, then maybe they could persuade the selection committee into a 1 or a 2 seed.

Elon has single handedly sent the PCLL stock falling, as the Phoenix posted big wins against Briarcliffe and Stonehill on the road.  The loss to Sam Houston State is looking more and more like an aberration.  The selection committee has to assume that despite Elon’s history of showing up some days and not on others, that they’ll be able to make the short trip to Greenville quite easily.

Back from the dead, Grand Valley State put up a big eight-goal win over fellow At-Large North Dakota State.  Thanks to that game, the two teams went opposite directions in this week’s Bracketology, with Grand Valley jumping all the way from 15 to 7 thanks to both human and computer polls spreading the love.  Rumors of the Lakeshow’s demise were greatly exaggerated it appears.

Palm Beach Atlantic and Florida Gulf Coast are still buoyed in relatively the same position, and a head-to-head matchup could flip-flop the two teams’ positions as we get closer to Greenville.  The computers love both teams’ resumes so far, but beware of SCAD in the SELC tournament.  The Bees have postseason experience and certainly have been reading all the forum posts about how they don’t belong in this year’s national rankings.

And finally Sam Houston State is looking pretty safe to get an At-Large bid thanks to their trip to Florida earlier this year.  The flameout against PBA notwithstanding, the Bearkats appear to have earned their way back to Greenville and another attempt to silence the LSA haters.

Michael Mann and Sam Houston have an At-Large bid all but locked up

Most of the Automatic Qualifiers have stayed the same, but we’ve had some movement thanks to a couple key results.  Grove City has solidified its position as de facto CCLA champ (GVSU will have something to say about that come May), and for now has moved all the way to the 6 seed.  Concordia had a strong trip to Utah, but couldn’t pull it out against Westminster and the computers had no mercy following the loss.  Despite appearing to be a shoe-in for the SLC AQ, the Eagles have dropped down to the unenviable 8 seed position.

The first teams out are listed as follows, in order of next to receive an At-Large and so on:

1. Indiana Tech
   
2. Fullerton
3. Gonzaga
4. Portland
5. SCAD
6. Reinhardt
7. Siena Heights

All these teams have quite the gap to overcome to get into the At-Large discussion, and most will likely have their eyes set on their league’s AQ bid in May to get a ticket to Greenville.  SCAD is the team that could most shake things up with a game left against Florida Gulf Coast.  Portland will have two shots at WOU potentially, and Gonzaga would get one of the two if they make it to the PNCLL title game.  Regardless of those big matchups, it’s unlikely any of these teams listed will get legitimate At-Large discussion.

Will FGCU be jumping for joy with their matchup?

Matchups

I’m going to keep beating the drum, because I believe the product will improve because of it: there should be ZERO first round repeat matchups from the regular season!  The SELC makes things somewhat tough to seed everyone having four teams projected in the field currently, but note that all the seeds in this projection should make sense and provide great matchups on Day 1.

Given my matchups that I slated in this projection, I would argue that outside of St. Thomas/St. John’s/Westminster, there are a variety of potential first round upsets.  In a Liberty/Western Oregon matchup, you would see a team making its first trip to the National Tourament facing off against a team making its sixth straight appearance.  Florida Gulf Coast/Grand Valley State is another new blood/blue blood matchup that provides a great matchup.  And if there were Vegas odds for MCLA games, I think some bookies could have North Dakota State favored by a couple goals against an unpredictable Elon team.

So it’s starting to take shape.  The teams on the bubble have to keep winning, and the AQ’s have yet to be decided.  But by and large we have a pretty good idea of who should be competing in Greenville.  Let me know what you think of this Bracketology in the comments, on Twitter @PattonLAS, or in the LAS forums!

Let’s start with the bracket for this week:

Who Made it, Who Didn’t

If you read my first MCLA D1 Bracketology, you’ll notice that almost all the faces are the same for the overall field.  But there is one new At-Large team: Davenport, replacing the other D2 up-convert Grand Canyon.  Davenport has had an outstanding couple of weeks of lacrosse, beating Top 25 teams Simon Fraser and Virginia Tech, the latter on the road.  Throw in a victory over a confounding team in Clemson, and Davenport has surged up both the human and computer rankings.  They’ve moved up so far so fast, that they actually debut at the 10 seed for this bracketology.  Based on the teams they have beaten I think that is completely fair, and serves as reward for scheduling hard and winning those games.  Oh, by the way, Davenport’s only losses are an OT loss to Grand Canyon and a six goal loss to Arizona State, both on the road.  Do you really want to see this team in Greenville on the first Monday of the tournament?

All the conference AQ’s are projected out to be the same, except for the WCLL where Sonoma State soundly defeated Stanford since our last Bracketology.  As a reminder to the impassioned fans of ASU, I have Chapman as the SLC AQ simply because they have beaten ASU this season (the only team to do so). Despite Chapman being the AQ (based solely on head-to-head so far), I have both teams seeded appropriately based on body of work, and Arizona State has, at least in my opinion, clearly earned the 3 seed.  True, BYU gets a little shorted because of their losses to Colorado and Colorado State, two teams that ASU will not play before Greenville, but with Zach Handy facing off I give ASU the edge in many theoretical head-to-head matchups right now.

Zach Handy has ASU settled into the 3 seed
photo courtesy Colleen T. Hayes (http://colleens-pics.com/Lacrosse/lacrosse13.htm)

Here are the At-Large teams ranked in order of selection into the field, with first team listed the strongest of the At-Large field, and last team listed the last team “off the bubble.”

1. Colorado
2. Arizona State
3. BYU
4. UC Santa Barbara
5. California
6. Davenport
7. Stanford

Stanford saw a noticeable drop from the first Bracketology, with brutal home losses to BYU and Sonoma knocking them down a few pegs.  They are the last team in off the bubble, but for now the margin between them and the next group of teams is big enough that the Cardinal shouldn’t be too worried.

Here is the list of the “First Teams Out” listed in order of next most likely to be selected for an At-Large, and so on:

1. Simon Fraser
2. Grand Canyon
3. Connecticut
4. Georgia
5. Arizona
6. Minnesota-Duluth
7. Oregon State
8. Pittsburgh

The first team out right now is Simon Fraser, who, thanks to a big road win over Michigan State, leapfrogged Grand Canyon in my Bracketology ranking.  Grand Canyon still has nothing to be ashamed of, holding strong in both human and computer polls.  Right now they lack a true signature win to get them into the field, but a matchup with Arizona State looms (TONIGHT!) and a win there could catapult them back off the bubble.

Connecticut finally gave us some more data to assess them, and after beating Northeastern I thought their lofty Laxpower ranking (#1 for over a month) might be more correct than I first believed.  But the Huskies returned to earth somewhat, losing to a Boston College team that looks to be the clear frontrunner in the PCLL from here on out.

Georgia, and the rest of the SELC teams continue to confuse both humans and computers alike.  The greatest variance of any conference in the rankings is in the SELC, where scores don’t seem to follow any discernable pattern.  If you show me a person who says they know who will win the SELC, I will show you a dirty liar.  For now, Georgia is the one-eyed-man in the kingdom of the pretty good lacrosse and is the top of the heap down south thanks to a convincing win over Auburn.  But we won’t know the SELC representative in Greenville until after the conference’s championship game.  Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech, Clemson, and Florida State could all be in play in addition to Georgia.

As for the GRLC in D1, I thought Wisconsin was the odds on favorite based on the computer rankings, but Illinois just beat them on the road.  I wouldn’t be surprised to see Illinois, Wisconsin, or Indiana in South Carolina.  We’ll just have to see how the GRLC tournament shakes out.

If your team isn’t listed in that group of bubble teams, it isn’t looking good for getting into the At-Large discussion.

Matchups

Once again, I took care to avoid repeat matchups.  In this addition, I only needed to make one small change: swapping Stanford and Texas on the 12 and 13 lines to avoid the BYU/Stanford repeat game.  What results is a good slate of first round games.  Davenport/Santa Barbara?  You know that’s a one-goal game.  Boston College/Cal?  West Coast vs. East Coast, couldn’t wait to see it.  Michigan State/Sonoma State?  Killer matchup.  And even Arizona State/Oregon would matchup Payson Clark with Ben Smood, two of the best at their position in the country.

So once again, that’s it.  Let me know what you think and I’ll do my best to respond in the Comments section or in the LAS forums.

]]> http://mcla.laxallstars.com/mcla-bracketology-division-1-early-april-edition/feed/ 1 http://mcla.laxallstars.com/mcla-bracketology-division-2-week-1/ http://mcla.laxallstars.com/mcla-bracketology-division-2-week-1/#comments Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:02:23 +0000 Patton http://mcla.laxallstars.com/?p=9371 As we introduce our first MCLA Division 2 Bracketology, I have to immediately warn you that this might throw your perceptions of D2 for a loop.  In case you didn’t read our intro, you can check it out here and read about the methodology.  The methodology we use to create our bracket has a huge impact in how we view Division 2 and create our seedings and matchups for the first round.  The overall themes you will see when looking at where we placed teams will be scheduling tough and winning games.

The Bracket – Week of March 25th

Who Made It, Who Didn’t

The D2 bubble is quite different from D1.  In D2, there is a noticeable “cliff” from one group of teams to the next, and what is very nice about this version of bracketology, that “cliff” presents itself right after the 8th and final At-Large team is selected.  Take a look at the chart below, which shows our proprietary ranking system and how it ranks those on the bubble and those beyond:

You’ll see that Western Oregon and US Coast Guard are given Automatic Qualifiers for now, as I have defaulted them as league champs as the highest rated teams in their league before the rest of their league games and playoffs, that could all change.  What is critical for the D2 breakdown, is that Sam Houston is the final At-Large selection, but WOU is an AQ that could be challenged by Portland which is at 19 for now in our ranking system (again read our methodology here).  With WOU’s strong position based on strong OOC scheduling and strong position in all computer and human polls, they will get an At-Large should they be upset in the PNCLL playoffs.  Good news for the Wolves, bad news for Sam Houston which for the first time this year will not benefit from an AQ from the LSA after they lost UT-Dallas before the season began.  In this version, Sam Houston makes it with a strong win over Elon and strong OOC trip in general that has kept the Bearkats high in all polls, but you can see the potential for changes on a dime.

For 2013, there are eight AQ conferences in D2, and 8 at-large berths.  Here are your AQ’s in order:

• St. Thomas (UMLC)
• Westminster (RMLC)
• Liberty (SELC)
• Concordia (SLC)
• Dayton (CCLA)
• Western Oregon (PNCLL)
• US Coast Guard (PCLL)
• GRLC Champ – presumably WU-St. Louis based on past history, but Lindenwood-Belleville is making a strong case and will be able to play to prove they belong; either way no at-larges from the GRLC by a long shot in 2013
• No at-larges from the WCLL either which has no AQ with two of their seven teams being D1A Football schools, and the conference does not meet the minimum teams for an AQ

The At-larges in order:

• St. John’s
• North Dakota State (UMLC has three of our rankings Top 5 teams)
• Palm Beach Atlantic
• Elon
• Florida Gulf Coast
• Grove City
• Grand Valley State
• Sam Houston State

Matchups

Just like in D1, it wasn’t too hard to prevent first round repeat matchups.  In D2 I did have to shuffle two teams to prevent matchups, as our system originally spit out FGCU and Elon to match up again.  As I explained in my D1 bracketology, I believe you should be able to move the bottom eight seeds up or down a spot to prevent matchups quite easily.  The top eight seeds have earned that position and should only be moved if absolutely necessary.

US Coast Guard at 14? Really?  You better believe it.  Not only did the Bears not schedule many OOC games, Kennesaw and SCAD ended up being busts.  The computers hate the Coast Guard Academy and they get no bonuses for quality wins so far.  Further, Briarcliffe is not looked upon kindly by computers either, with almost identical problems as the Coast Guard.  If the Selection Committee uses ANY type of quantitative analysis, it is clear that the PCLL should be a one-bid league in 2013.

The SELC sends four teams quite easily, with none of their four currently in danger of being knocked off the bubble.  In fact, if SCAD had managed to win one more game, ANY one of the games they lost against strong opponents, it’s likely that computers and humans alike would have them much higher.  Similar to the PNCLL situation, if SCAD makes a run and wins the SELC tourney, Sam Houston would be out and the SELC could send five teams to Greenville.  Southern hospitality indeed!

Somewhat surprisingly to yours truly, the CCLA isn’t a stretch to send three teams dancing.  I thought either Dayton or GVSU wouldn’t be looked upon kindly and be left out of the tourney for the first time in a while.  But despite Dayton’s disappointing scheduling in terms of quantity, it doesn’t lack in quality and the computers don’t hate the Flyers, yet.  GVSU scheduled better, and while they seemed to shock the entire D2 community with their first couple of games in Florida, it turns out they lost to good teams.

First Shot

Finally, it’s important to note that in the methodology, Division 2 teams playing Division 1 teams does not give any boost outside of the computer ratings that factor that in.  Human polls are supposed to keep those games excluded (though likely it is difficult to ignore).  Something to chew on for future bracketologies, as I know the Laker fans will be pointing to their strong showing against a D1 Davenport squad as evidence their resurgence is merely a matter of time.

Let me know what you think, what you hate, and who I should’ve included in this first bracket for MCLA Division 2.

Read the Bracketology for Division 1 Week 1 here.

Update: It was brought to our attention by our friend Dave Franklin over at Inside Lacrosse, that the US Coast Guard is not able to fulfill a bid to the National Tournament.  This is because of annual service academy scheduling that has commitments for all students at the academy that they cannot miss.  If the USCG wins the PCLL tournament, an AQ bid would go to the runner-up so that the league can fulfill its AQ.  For this edition, we will keep USCG in the 14 seed slot, but for all intensive purposes that seed would go to the non-USCG PCLL champion.  We will address this in future editions, for now the USCG gets rewarded as a placeholder for their season work to date.  Thanks again to Dave for the keen eye!

The Bracket – Week of March 25th

Who Made It, Who Didn’t

Quick glance, and some MCLA traditionalists will likely cringe.  Last year’s national runner up, Cal Poly?  Not invited.  Early MCLA royalty, Minnesota-Duluth?  Left watching Weather Channel reports about storms named after Disney characters.  And is that really … Grand Canyon? A team that was in Division 2 last season?

Well, yes.  Grand Canyon made it in.  The last team off the bubble to be precise.  And this allows us to show off our spanking new methodology, to be cheered and exalted or ripped to pieces by you, the MCLA Fan.  Using our methodology for Division 1, Grand Canyon does in fact end up in a tight grouping of teams fighting to get off the bubble.  Here is the ranking with our power rating for bubble teams:

The number on the left is the overall ranking in our system, and the number on the right is the number our formula spits out.  Texas is in, with the LSA AQ.  For the first time this season, the UMLC will not have an AQ after losing Marquette, and Minnesota-Duluth is left in a precarious position one spot above Grand Canyon.  And this leads to our first quandary in bracketologizing: when do we trust the numbers and when do we use qualitative “feelings” to guide our way?  In this edition, I chose Grand Canyon because of two Top 25 wins (Davenport and Arizona) to Minnesota-Duluth’s one Top 25 win (Cal Poly).  I didn’t even put Connecticut in the argument since their position is based off two games alone.

Right or wrong for my At-Large teams getting in off the bubble, we’ve gotta realize it’s still early and this grouping may shake out, but for now it is tight.  And this type of decision will likely get made to determine a team to get in, and a team to be left out.

For 2013, there are nine AQ conferences in D1, and 7 at-large berths, here is a breakdown for this edition of bracketology, and for now realize that I’m arbitrarily choosing the highest rated team as conference champ (or in event of an already played head to head matchup like ASU/Chapman, the winner of that game):

• Colorado State (RMLC)
• Chapman (SLC)
• Michigan State (CCLA)
• Texas (LSA)
• Boston College (PCLL)
• Oregon (PNCLL)
• Stanford (WCLL)
• I didn’t project a winner for the SELC or GRLC which both seem to be a toss-up.  It’s important to note that neither league is close to receiving an at-large outside of Virginia Tech in the SELC, and I had them out in this projection by a few spots.

The At-larges in order:

• BYU (earns the 2 seed as an at-large fresh off their reign of terror in California)
• Colorado
• ASU
• UCSB
• Sonoma St.
• Cal
• Grand Canyon

Matchups - No Repeats!

You’ll notice that I took extra care to prevent repeat matchups in the first round, a stated goal that I believe the Committees must pursue.  Guess what: it wasn’t difficult!  And all teams are still seeded quite appropriately.  In the event of needing to move teams to avoid repeat matchups, my method would be to move teams in bottom half seeds (9-16) up or down one or two spots to create fresh matchups.  The top 8 seeds presumably should be rewarded for earning top half position and be kept as close to their seeding “right” as possible.

Outside of creating no repeat matchups, I think this would be an awesome first round to watch.  BC/Sonoma; Chapman/Cal; Oregon/UCSB are all super-intriguing matchups for the first round, and even Grand Canyon/Colorado could provide an upset alert situation.  Beyond the SELC/GRLC champs, I don’t see any easy outs for 2013.  It’s just getting heated up!

First Shot

So that’s it.  What do you think?  Hate it?  Love it?  Feedback on how I set it up?  Lay it on me!

Read the Bracketology for Division 2 Week 1 here.

So without further ado: MCLA Fan is proud to introduce its first stab at MCLA Bracketology!

It isn’t lost on us that this entire process is bound to create controversy, and I invite your feedback and input into how we can more conclusively determine which teams deserve to be in Greenville, and which teams just haven’t proved enough.  We aren’t diving into this to hurt feelings or question the manhood of any individual or team, but it’s likely that those who we project to be on the outside looking in, or seeded lower than they feel is just, will have their share of criticisms.  We expect that, and to be honest we want that.  Without passion and feedback then why are we playing, coaching, or officiating in this league to begin with?

OK, let’s jump in head first and look at the goals that should be considered when selecting teams and creating a bracket, our methodology in quantitatively and qualitatively ranking teams, and how this applies to the teams in the two MCLA divisions in 2013.

Goals of the Selection Committees

The National Tournament Selection Committee for either division has two main goals when creating the National Tournament brackets:

1. Reward the best teams with the top seeds, and seed coherently throughout
   
2. Select the most deserving non-automatic qualifier teams to receive an at-large invite

Certainly no one can argue against those two goals, but I’m going to argue for a third goal that should be just as important though third in line for priority:

3. Prevent first round repeat matchups from the regular season

The reason I am passionate about this point is that with increasing level of competition, the separation between teams has grown closer and closer.  Games that are decided by a goal or two in the regular season can easily swing the other way in a repeat matchup.  While everyone knows a playoff win is more valuable, the psychological impact of a repeat matchup puts both teams in an unfair position in addition to distracting from the purpose of a national tournament: a shootout between ALL teams.  Avoiding repeat matchups, and encouraging new matchups increases the excitement and overall value of the product being put on the field.  Repeat matchups will happen in later rounds, when bad blood and rivalries get born and renewed.  But that first round should prove a team’s worthiness to move on by beating a team they haven’t seen before.

Methodology

It’s easy to assume that a simple poll would suffice here, but just jump into some of the poll forum threads and you’ll see that each week there is vocal opposition to any given team’s position.  A human poll encompasses a qualitative feel for ranking, but it doesn’t necessarily capture strength of schedule, home/away/neutral, weather, or any variety of other small variables that can affect a team’s win/loss record.  So just a single poll isn’t enough.  We need more.

Thankfully, through discussions with past National Tournament Selection Committee members, we know some of the criteria that have been used in the past to choose at-large teams and in ranking teams for seeding purposes.  A few of these include:

1. Wins over Top 25 teams (points awarded for higher ranking of a defeated team)
2. Total OOC games
3. Road OOC games

Committee members sought to reward teams for Top 25 victories, scheduling out-of-conference games, and in addition traveling out-of-conference to play those games.  (It is important to note these criteria were used in the past and may not necessarily be used this season, but we will use elements of these ideas as we will outline ahead.)  These things are all valuable and may not be adequately accounted for in human polls, and some of these pieces may be missed in computer polling as well.  We can quickly see though that applying these to the two divisions may not have the same, or intended, results.

When looking at Division 1 teams, it’s quick to see that everyone schedules aggressively and travels around the country on at least one large road trip.  Further, there really is no such phenomenon in Division 1 of a team that can be arguably in the mix for an At-Large berth that does not schedule Top 25 OOC opponents.  In Division 2, it’s a different story.  While the best teams schedule quite aggressively, there are still several teams that do not schedule beyond the minimum 2 OOC games for at-large consideration.  Because of this, in our methodology we will apply quantitative values differently when dealing with Division 1 and Division 2 teams.

Here’s a breakdown of how we will create a quantitive ranking value for each team:

Division 1 Quantitative Numbers:

1. AVG of (Laxpower/Massey/MCLA poll)
2. One point rewarded for each Top 25 win

For D1, it’s pretty simple.  We include two computer polls that each use slightly different methodology to account for strength, then we add in the human poll.  We average all three so that we get a more indicative value of overall ranking relative to the rest of Division 1.  Next we add in one point for each Top 25 win.  I toyed with the idea of using a strength value for wins (i.e. higher points awarded for a higher ranked team defeated), but in general the top 10 teams beat each other, and no one outside that group cracks in.  A Top 25 win is a Top 25 win in Division 1.  Feel free to disagree.

Division 2 Quantitative Numbers:

1. AVG of (Laxpower/Massey/MCLA poll)
   
2. One point for Road OOC game
3. Half point for Home OOC game
4. 5 Points for win over Top 5, 4 Points win over ranked 6-10, etc.

Same logic around computer and human polls for D2.  But a shift in terms of OOC games.  In Division 2, as I mentioned, there are teams that still need to be coaxed into scheduling OOC games.  While it is true, the best of the best play each other, several teams competing for an at-large berth in 2013 have only scheduled the bare minimum.  And finally, some upsets and turnover among “traditional powers” and new teams on the scene in 2013 lead to a graduated approach in awarding points for strength of win.

Applying it to Division 1 and 2

Later today we’ll unleash our methodology and show you just how the brackets should break down if created today.  Granted, I know, I know.  It’s still early.  But I wanted to introduce the system, get feedback on the methodology, and practice creating matchups.

At the very least, we can begin to debate who is on the bubble, who is in barring disaster, and who has lots and lots of work to do to get a ticket to Greenville.

Here are the links to Week 1 for each Division:

Division 1 Week 1

Division 2 Week 1

Since I have this soapbox for just a moment longer, you can read on to understand why it came to this.

For those of you who know me, you know full well that these are words I have fought for nine years to not write.  You know that I don’t write this with joy, sarcasm, or general disinterest for the league.  You know that we would not be in this position had we not taken every opportunity to continue.  The men’s lacrosse program at Willamette University did not die for lack of care, passion, or love of the game.  In fact, it died in spite of all those things.

People might say that this team should have died long ago, and they might be right.  People might also say that teams that can’t keep players interested and in uniform, should never have been involved in the MCLA in the first place.  In a vacuum, you may be right.  But in the MCLA, we exist in a club sports universe full of unpredictable variables.  We exist in an MCLA reality that if we knew every single rostered player would show up to the next game, it wouldn’t be the MCLA after all.  We exist in an MCLA reality where the only thing less sure than when the dues money will roll in is if the field we reserved for our game will be filled with varsity soccer players come game-time.

I’m not complaining about these realities, or citing them as reasons for our program’s failure.  I’m simply trying to remind everyone that as MCLA Darwinism claims another victim, it is important to remember how fragile our existence can be.  If you don’t have to worry about your players getting wasted the night before your next game, or the fraternities holding initiation all week keeping your guys from practice, or the rugby team playing dirty politics and bad-mouthing your intentions to the university president, then more power to you.  I’m quite confident you are in the minority, and you don’t see the reality around you that your peers live in every day.

It’s a mean sports world out there.  The teams, coaches, players, and sports that survive are the ones that just keep grinding it out.  For a long time, my team was in that category.  I’m not bitter that my team has now folded, just disappointed that I let it happen.  I hope that my team’s failure is your team’s reminder that a similar fate may not be so unthinkable.

If I had one piece of advice, it would be this: Cut out the cancer.  Negativity needs to die and leave any program immediately.  The second that a player, coach, administrator, or parent cannot remove their fixation from the negative, is the second that you are losing the battle and starting to lose the war.  You can vent about the frustrations, but do not let your venting become a habit, and do it with people not associated with the team. Negativity breeds negativity.  Sometimes the problem may lie within yourself, as hard as it is to admit.

Take a good look, you might not see a Bearcat again anytime soon

There are several people I want to thank for their work to keep Willamette Lacrosse alive, without whom the team would have died way back in 2004:

Pat Kabealo, Keith Bondaug, and Nick Christianson (Class of 2004): These were the three seniors who loved the game and spent the time and energy to keep a winless team inspired to show up the next day.  They also stayed active as alumni and were positive influences on my development as a player and a person.  Thank you.

Andrew Clark, Elliot Bates, and Dan Ulshafer: Four year players were not a common occurrence during my time at WU.  Andrew and Elliot played all four years and were committed to this team.  Less common, were players who would have their parents host spaghetti feeds and drive players to and from game sites as far away as Ashland.  Dan Ulshafer and his parents were as committed to Willamette as I have a seen a family in my time in sports.

The Class of 2010 (Andrew Theis, Andrew Benware, Pete Stonebraker, Morgan Faricy):  This class took the program from a 30 game losing streak to the playoffs.  To say that these four individuals brought hope, excitement, and a love for each other and those around them would be an understatement.  Without them, Willamette Lacrosse would not exist.  Thank you all.

Pete Stonebraker (again), Jake Horacek, Ian McAnnis-Entenman, and Sean Harding:  These four players were not only men who fit the adage “If I had a daughter I’d hope they’d marry this guy”, but they also served as team president and helped me run the chaos.  What is also unique about EACH one of these guys is that they never got the respect they deserved as lacrosse players on the field.  Thank you.

Ben Murphy: A player, similar to the above four, who was never appreciated in terms of his skill on the field.  He was a four year starter, and returned to coach in 2012.  Thank you!

Mark Brown and Bubba Gutherless: Both coaches in the PNCLL that provided me countless good laughs and conversations, in addition to limitless advice on coaching, the league, and life in general.  I owe each of you a debt of gratitude that will be difficult to repay.  Thank you.

Brian Miller: Last but not least, Brian Miller is a gentleman whose commitment to Willamette Lacrosse, and lacrosse anywhere, rivals any man’s!  Brian was the unsung hero of our program, providing guidance, advice, friendship, and of course time-keeping for the last seven years.  Brian did all of this, and never received one dime of payment.  Brian is as commendable an individual as I have run across in my time in any walk of life.  Thank you for your hard work and commitment Brian, it does not go unnoticed, and I can only to begin to repay you in the coming years.

Thank you to everyone who supported Willamette Lacrosse, including LaxAllStars.  Time will tell if we can re-grow the game at Willamette.

Game time: 9PM EST/8 CST/6PM PST

We’ve got you covered if you want to discuss the D2 National Championship game live, featuring the top 2 seeds: the Colorado State Rams vs. the Cal Poly Mustangs.  Click the image above to get into the Cover It Live event and sound off on who you think will win and why!

You can also get involved via Twitter using the hastag #MCLA2012

The Championship game can be viewed on Fox College Sports LIVE!  Check your local cable provider’s listings for the channel # in your area!

Game time: 6:30PM EST/5:30 CST/3:30PM PST

We’ve got you covered if you want to discuss the D2 National Championship game live, featuring the top 2 seeds: Grand Valley State Lakers vs. St. Thomas Tommies.  Click the image above to get into the Cover It Live event and sound off on who you think will win and why!

You can also get involved via Twitter using the hastag #MCLA2012

Both Championship games can be viewed on Fox College Sports LIVE!  Check your local cable provider’s listings for the channel # in your area!

D1 Championship Game between #1 Cal Poly Mustangs and #2 Colorado State Rams will take place at 9PM EST/6PM PST.  We’ll have live blog coverage of that game too!