Playoff Format

Laxatively

Walk On
Joined
Apr 26, 2019
Messages
15
Like
15
I know it will never happen but would love to see revised D1 system that had 2 separate playoff "pools".
Pool A would use existing ranking system and have the real top 16 teams included - forget about including weak conference winners like we had in 2019. Pool B would include teams ranked 17-32 - this would have included teams like High Point in 2019. This would ensure that legit teams like Cuse in the ACC aren't on the bubble so that a MAAC conference winner can be included for sake of diversity and "growing the game",.

This format makes sure the top 16 legit playoff teams are fairly treated and would provide lower ranked teams with a better chance to compete in 2nd tier Pool B. Penn State's first round playoff opponent (UMBC) did not belong there which happens every year with weak conference winners included when they shouldn't be.

2 Pools would also address the fact that more teams have been/are continuing to be added i.e. Merrimack, LIU. Not only that, but the top teams continue to poach the best recruits (look at 2020 and 2021 recruits) so a pool b approach is their only realistic shot to have playoff games.
 

OrangeXtreme

The Mayor of Dewitt
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
108,734
Like
137,597
You want a 32 team tournament when there are only 70 D1 teams?

Good luck with that.
 

Laxatively

Walk On
Joined
Apr 26, 2019
Messages
15
Like
15
Pool B would be "separate" tournament. I know is a bit unwieldy but I find the current system ridiculous when often teams ranked say 13- 16 can miss out.
 

Shrmdougluvr

Drinkin Henny and I'm tryna forget
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
3,272
Like
4,682
My understanding is that there has been an exponential uptick in players at the youth lacrosse/high school level, as well as a geographic expansion. Lax is now pretty big in California, Oregon, and Washington. Its growing in Illinois, Minnesota, Texas, and Missouri. Yet, there is not a single D-1 program in any of those states, all of which have flagship public universities with incredibly well-funded athletic departments.

It seems to me that the next step in growing the game would be adding the requisite amount of D-1 programs to accommodate all of this "talent." The tournament seems fine. The reason the football and B-ball tourneys are expanding is simply a matter of providing content for TV. Lax isnt there yet. But add a UT, Texas A&M, Arizona, USC, UCLA, Washington, etc., and it may get there.
 

OrangeXtreme

The Mayor of Dewitt
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
108,734
Like
137,597
My understanding is that there has been an exponential uptick in players at the youth lacrosse/high school level, as well as a geographic expansion. Lax is now pretty big in California, Oregon, and Washington. Its growing in Illinois, Minnesota, Texas, and Missouri. Yet, there is not a single D-1 program in any of those states, all of which have flagship public universities with incredibly well-funded athletic departments.

It seems to me that the next step in growing the game would be adding the requisite amount of D-1 programs to accommodate all of this "talent." The tournament seems fine. The reason the football and B-ball tourneys are expanding is simply a matter of providing content for TV. Lax isnt there yet. But add a UT, Texas A&M, Arizona, USC, UCLA, Washington, etc., and it may get there.
Figure out a way to remain in compliance with Title IX and you'll be a hero.

The last FBS team to add Men's LAX was Utah in 2019, then you have to go all the way back to Michigan in 2012.

Personally, I'd love for Denver, Air Force and Utah to hook up with 3 Pac-12 schools for a nice Western Conference, but who knows.
 

Shrmdougluvr

Drinkin Henny and I'm tryna forget
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
3,272
Like
4,682
Figure out a way to remain in compliance with Title IX and you'll be a hero.

The last FBS team to add Men's LAX was Utah in 2019, then you have to go all the way back to Michigan in 2012.

Personally, I'd love for Denver, Air Force and Utah to hook up with 3 Pac-12 schools for a nice Western Conference, but who knows.
At its's core, this really isnt a Title IX issue, it's a financial issue. Some of those D-3 NESCAC schools like Williams offer something like 30 varsity sports. Syracuse offers a total of 18 (7 mens). Title IX is about equal access and opportunity. A school like U of Oregon, with their incredible influx of Nike money, would have to commit to not only the financial out lay for men's lax, but also equivalent out lay on the women's side, maybe even by funding multiple sports (adding to the cumulative number of schollies). Of course that's expensive, but as a school already heavily in bed with Nike (which obviously sells lacrosse products), I used Oregon as an example.
 

OrangeXtreme

The Mayor of Dewitt
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
108,734
Like
137,597
At its's core, this really isnt a Title IX issue, it's a financial issue. Some of those D-3 NESCAC schools like Williams offer something like 30 varsity sports. Syracuse offers a total of 18 (7 mens). Title IX is about equal access and opportunity. A school like U of Oregon, with their incredible influx of Nike money, would have to commit to not only the financial out lay for men's lax, but also equivalent out lay on the women's side, maybe even by funding multiple sports (adding to the cumulative number of schollies). Of course that's expensive, but as a school already heavily in bed with Nike (which obviously sells lacrosse products), I used Oregon as an example.
Oregon already has a Women's LAX team. ASU, Colorado, USC, Stanford and Cal as well.
 

Zack80

Scout Team
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
276
Like
136
Pool B would be "separate" tournament. I know is a bit unwieldy but I find the current system ridiculous when often teams ranked say 13- 16 can miss out.
13-16 actually seems fairly far from #1.
 

CuseAlum87

Walk On
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
148
Like
84
13-16 actually seems fairly far from #1.
Agreed. How many 13 through 16s have ever won the national championship? I'm thinking the 2016 UNC team which was 8-6 heading into the playoffs. Maybe Loyola as well, not sure.
 

Laxatively

Walk On
Joined
Apr 26, 2019
Messages
15
Like
15
I hear you. I just find it frustrating that Robert Morris, UMBC, Richmond and Georgetown were in round of 16 last May and teams like Cornell, Denver and Ohio State missed out. Next tim
 

Hoo's That

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
8,680
Like
12,270
You can blame the Auto Qualifier concept on whoever on the Lax Committee decided to exclude the undefeated Bucknell(?) Butler(?) team from the NCAAs in the 90s. IIRC, Desko was quoted as being shocked they were excluded. The AQ was brought in shortly thereafter to make sure it didn't happen again. The story I have always heard is that the D-1 tournament won't be expanded any time soon because there is a higher percentage of participating schools invited to the D-1 MLax tournament than the NCAA has in any of the other sports.
 

Hoo's That

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
8,680
Like
12,270
Agreed. How many 13 through 16s have ever won the national championship? I'm thinking the 2016 UNC team which was 8-6 heading into the playoffs. Maybe Loyola as well, not sure.
UNC was unseeded, so they were, by definition no better than #9. Since the flight limitation has the greatest influence over who plays whom, it's very hard to determine what their actual seeding was. Their RPI was #17, the lowest for the At-Large teams.
Loyola was the overall #1 seed at 18-1 when they won in 2012.
 

CuseAlum87

Walk On
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
148
Like
84
UNC was unseeded, so they were, by definition no better than #9. Since the flight limitation has the greatest influence over who plays whom, it's very hard to determine what their actual seeding was. Their RPI was #17, the lowest for the At-Large teams.
Loyola was the overall #1 seed at 18-1 when they won in 2012.
Thanks, I couldn't remember Loyola's seed/ranking and IL 's records only go back to 2014.
 

Orangeman

All Conference
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
2,476
Like
1,869
At its's core, this really isnt a Title IX issue, it's a financial issue. Some of those D-3 NESCAC schools like Williams offer something like 30 varsity sports. Syracuse offers a total of 18 (7 mens). Title IX is about equal access and opportunity. A school like U of Oregon, with their incredible influx of Nike money, would have to commit to not only the financial out lay for men's lax, but also equivalent out lay on the women's side, maybe even by funding multiple sports (adding to the cumulative number of schollies). Of course that's expensive, but as a school already heavily in bed with Nike (which obviously sells lacrosse products), I used Oregon as an example.

Very wrong
 

Orangeman

All Conference
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
2,476
Like
1,869
That’s Constructive.
What’s wrong about it?


Fair. It's just that you're asking to have it both ways.

Without question, Title 9 is the issue...and its an insurmountable issue, one that your examples obfuscate.

Richmond added Men's Lacrosse....they had to kill Men's Soccer

The current ratio of women/men attendance and graduation from college is 56/44 and 61/39...there is ZERO need for Title 9. In fact, when it was 46/54 the other way they created a national law.

So, Title 9 IS the problem for Men's Lacrosse growth, and nobody wants to admit it.
 

Shrmdougluvr

Drinkin Henny and I'm tryna forget
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
3,272
Like
4,682
Hey, i get the hang up. I was a borderline D-1 baseball recruit at a time when regional schools like Colgate, Vermont, New Hampshire, Boston, and Providence cut their programs.

But the law's the law. There are parts of this Country where girls would still be competing in the softball toss if there was not Title IX. There are college athletic departments and universities with exceptionally deep pockets in the PAC, SEC, Big Ten, etc. If they want mens' lax bad enough, they'll eventually find the way to fund it (even if it means adding two or three additional womens' sports).
 

Hoo's That

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
8,680
Like
12,270
Another aspect that both helps and hurts the expansion of MLax in the P5 is the success of the MCLA and NCLL. The club leagues give the schools a foot in the MLAX door and MLax a foot in the P5 door, while at the same time costing the athletic departments zero dollars and zero Title IX slots. Athletic directors like things that give their schools visibility within a sport at no cost to them. They don't mind keeping it that way. Plus, I understand some of the clubs have to pay rent/user fees on their fields to the athletic departments.
 

SkyTopBus44

2nd String
Joined
Jan 25, 2017
Messages
647
Like
585
Another aspect that both helps and hurts the expansion of MLax in the P5 is the success of the MCLA and NCLL. The club leagues give the schools a foot in the MLAX door and MLax a foot in the P5 door, while at the same time costing the athletic departments zero dollars and zero Title IX slots. Athletic directors like things that give their schools visibility within a sport at no cost to them. They don't mind keeping it that way. Plus, I understand some of the clubs have to pay rent/user fees on their fields to the athletic departments.
I could be completely wrong but I think the games are more boring now than they were 20 years ago. No hitting on defense without a penalty. The sticks are also too good. Too many teams therefore not enough good teams just more mediocre ones. I am for retraction rather than expansion :) hope it never gets any bigger.
 

Hoo's That

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
8,680
Like
12,270
I could be completely wrong but I think the games are more boring now than they were 20 years ago. No hitting on defense without a penalty. The sticks are also too good. Too many teams therefore not enough good teams just more mediocre ones. I am for retraction rather than expansion :) hope it never gets any bigger.
Straight sidewalls, 2" or less in width. No offset. Throw those bags away!
 

Online statistics

Members online
279
Guests online
1,329
Total visitors
1,608

Top Bottom