The importance of being seeded 1, 2 or 3

by DG on Thu Apr 14, 2005 2:30 am

I'm thinking that this year, being 1, 2 or 3 is even more important than in years past. Here's why...

Michigan is #5. I've been saying for a while that I think they are the real deal. Their only 2 blemishes are the BYU loss (on the road by 1 goal...also missing a few starters in that game) and the 1 goal win vs. Oregon at home. Otherwise, they have really dominated their opponents. The 12-1 win @ Arizona and tonight's 11-1 win vs Oakland (again at a neutral site, and not in Osterbaan) are pretty strong statements. Unlike past Wolverine squads, this team can play on the road.

Unfortunately for Michigan, it will be difficult for them to break into the top 4. Unless one of the current top 4 slips in the next couple of weeks, or loses early in their conference playoffs, I believe that the Wolverines will remain at #5. I'm making a big assumption that Michigan will continue their high level of play in the CCLA tournament. Whether their #5 ranking is fair or not is up for debate, but that's what I think will happen.

Now to the point of the post. Assuming that all the top seeds win their early games, the matchups would be as follows:

#1 plays #8 Oakland (I believe that they might stay #8, despite the loss tonight). #2 gets #7 Arizona. #3 gets #6 Colorado. #4 gets #5 Michigan. I believe that Arizona and Colorado both have lots of potential, but Michigan is clearly playing the best lacrosse of the lower seeds.

So the Rams, Seawolves, Cougars and Gauchos need to get busy in the next few weeks. Otherwise, their quarterfinal matchup in Blaine might just be with very good, and extremely motivated, Michigan team. I just don't think I would want to be the team playing Michigan in the quarters.

Thoughts?

DG

**Sponsor**

by **onpoint** on Thu Apr 14, 2005 9:18 am

Definitely agree, though I don't see Michigan as necessarily being any BETTER than any of the seeds above them, they certainly have the potential to pull out the elusive victory in the second round. I think the #4 will go to the team that performs the worst in their conference tournament and could really go to any of the top teams. Even if that does slip one of the top 4 into the 5th spot, I don't see Michigan getting higher than #4 regardless of what happens in the RMLC and WCLL playoffs and they will likely play in that tough game against one of the top four either way.

by DG on Fri Apr 15, 2005 10:15 am

onpoint wrote:Definitely agree, though I don't see Michigan as necessarily being any BETTER than any of the seeds above them, they certainly have the potential to pull out the elusive victory in the second round. I think the #4 will go to the team that performs the worst in their conference tournament and could really go to any of the top teams. Even if that does slip one of the top 4 into the 5th spot, I don't see Michigan getting higher than #4 regardless of what happens in the RMLC and WCLL playoffs and they will likely play in that tough game against one of the top four either way.

I guess if BYU lost to CU, or Sonoma/UCSB lost to Arizona, Michigan could slide up there in to the top 4. The only team that I think is a lock for top 4 is CSU.

I still believe that being a #4 seed this year is a significant disadvantage, no matter who #5 is (BYU, Sonoma, UCSB, or Michigan). That quarterfinal game will be as tough as a semifinal game.

DG

by **Sonny** on Fri Apr 15, 2005 10:18 am

DG wrote: I still believe that being a #4 seed this year is a significant disadvantage, no matter who #5 is (BYU, Sonoma, UCSB, or Michigan). That quarterfinal game will be as tough as a semifinal game.

Yep. You are faced with playing basically 3 "championship" intensity games over 4 days - Wed, Fri, Saturday.