LaxTV Forums | A Forum About The MCLA

RANK. TEAM (MCLA RECORD) [T25W/T25L/NON-RANKED L]

1. Michigan (6 - 0) [4/0/0]
W.....Oakland....................28-0

T25 W: #6 Arizona State (11-8), #1 BYU (12-9), #15 Arizona (9-4), #3 Minn-Duluth (12-9)
T25 L:

2. Colorado State (6 - 1) [4/1/0]
IDLE

T25 W: #12 Boston College (9-7), #3 Minn-Duluth (9-7), #24 Texas (13-3), #20 Loyola-Marymont (12-11)
T25 L: #9 Sonoma State (8-9)

3. Chapman (9 - 0) [4/0/0]
W.....#25 Utah....................14-6

T25 W: #1 BYU (16-15), #9 Northeastern (15-9), #19 Florida (17-6)
T25 L:

4. BYU (5 - 3) [5/3/0]
W.....#17 Arizona....................16-1
L.....#7 Minn-Duluth.................6-8

T25 W: #3 UCSB (15-9), #24 Simon Fraser (17-11), #23 Michigan State (18-6), #8 Arizona State (17-15)
T25 L: #15 Chapman (15-16), #7 Michigan (12-9)

5. Oregon (9 - 0) [1/0/0]
W.....#10 Colorado....................11-9

6. UCSB (9 - 1) [3/1/0]
IDLE

T25 W: #9 Arizona (8-3), #22 Cal-Poly (11-5), #9 Northeastern (7-4)
T25 L: #1 BYU (9-15)

7. Minnesota-Duluth (5 - 2) [3/2/0]
W.....#17 Arizona....................10-6
W.....Utah State.......................16-4
W.....#4 BYU............................8-6

T25 W: #12 Boston College (10-5)
T25 L: #2 Colorado State (7-9), #7 Michigan (9-12)

8. Arizona State (7 - 2) [2/2/0]
W.....Illinois.............................19-10
W.....San Diego State...............17-10

T25 W: #22 Cal Poly (10-9), #25 Utah (22-8)
T25 L: #8 Michigan (8-11), #4 BYU (15-17)

9. Sonoma State (7 - 1) [3/1/0]
L.....#11 Simon Fraser...............9-10
W.....Washington.......................13-2

T25 W: #17 Texas A&M (10-6), #19 Cal Poly (7-12), #2 Colorado State (9-8)
T25 L:

10. Colorado (1 - 1) [1/1/0]
L.....#5 Oregon.........................9-11

T25 W: #24 Texas (10-6)
T25 L:

11. Simon Fraser (8 - 1) [3/1/0]
W.....Washington....................16-11
W.....#9 Sonoma State...........10-9

T25 W:#14 Lindenwood (13-5), #18 Texas A&M (10-7)
T25 L: #1 BYU (11-17)

12. Florida State (9 - 1) [2/1/0]
W.....#22 Central Florida.........23-14

T25 W: #21 Utah (14-6)
T25 L: #13 Georgia (9-12)

13. Cal Poly (6 - 3) [3/3/0]
W.....#25 Utah.......................10-8

T25 W: #9 Arizona (8-7), #9 Northeastern (13-9)
T25 L: #6 Arizona State (9-10), #3 UCSB (5-11), #10 Sonoma State (7-12)

14. Boston College (2 - 3) [1/3/0]
IDLE

T25 W: #19 Florida (8-7)
T25 L: #13 Georgia (9-11), #3 Minn-Duluth (5-10), #2 CSU (7-9)

15. Lindenwood (8 - 2) [3/1/1]
W.....Missouri State....................17-2

T25 W: #13 Georgia (10-7), #22 Indiana (16-7), #18 Texas A&M (14-6)
T25 L: #20 Simon Fraser (5-13)
NR L: Georgia Tech (5-9)

16. Georgia (6 - 3) [3/3/0]
IDLE

T25 W: #7 Boston College (11-9), #21 Utah (11-9), #16 FSU (12-9)
T25 L: #19 Florida(9-13), #11 Lindenwood (7-10), #21 Virginia Tech (13-16)

17. Arizona (4 - 6) [0/5/1]
L.....#7 Minn-Duluth..............6-10
L.....#4 BYU.........................1-16
W.....Illinois.........................8-7
L.....San Diego State............7-8

T25 W:
T25 L: #22 Cal Poly (7-8), #3 UCSB (3-8), #7 Michigan (4-9),

18. Texas A&M (9 - 3) [0/3/0]
W.....Chico State...................9-4

T25 W:
T25 L: #14 Sonoma State (6-10), #20 Simon Fraser (7-10), #14 Lindenwood (6-14)

19. Florida (7 - 3) [1/2/1]
W.....California....................12-9

T25 W: #13 Georgia (13-9)
T25 L: #7 Boston College (7-8), #3 Chapman (6-17)
NR L: Loyola Marymount (11-12 OT)

20. Loyola Marymount (7 - 3) [1/3/0]
W.....North Texas.........................16-13

T25 W: #17 Florida (12-11 OT)
T25 L: #17 Chapman (7-18), #16 FSU (15-11), #2 Colorado State (11-12)

21. Virginia Tech (6 - 1) [1/0/1]
W.....Pittsburgh.........................13-3
W.....South Carolina...................14-4

T25 W: #13 Georgia (16-13)
T25 L:
NR L: Central Florida (10-15)


22. Central Florida (6 - 2) [1/1/1]
L.....#12 Florida State...............14-23
L.....Santa Clara.......................10-12

T25 W: #21 Virginia Tech
T25 L:


23. Northeastern (0 - 4) [0/3/1]
IDLE

T25 W:
T25 L: #5 UCSB (4-7), #4 Chapman (9-15), #19 Cal-Poly (9-13)
NR L: Stanford (10-11)

24. Texas (7 - 3) [0/2/1]
L.....Chico State....................8-9
W.....Minnesota....................11-8
W.....Rice.............................18-8

T25 W:
T25 L: #11 Colorado, #2 Colorado State (3-13)

25. Utah (3 - 6) [1/5/1]
L.....Clarmont.......................5-15
L.....#3 Chapman..................6-14
L.....#13 Cal Poly..................8-10

T25 W: #23 Michigan State (12-11)
T25 L: #13 Georgia (9-11), #16 FSU(6-14), #8 Arizona State

ZD's Winners & Losers -


Winners - Chapman for a close loss to D3 Ithaca. This "game" had to give them confidence as they move forward, especially because it was a mid-season game and not just an opening tune up for either team.

Losers - Any of the MCLA world who thinks this game caused east coast laxers to give any more respect to club ball. These games are great, but until these games are set up as a 1 and 1 at both schools, the east coast will never get budge because they don't see you play. Respect will finally come when MCLA teams go play these teams on their home turf and let the naysayers come out and see (win or lose) the level of play.

-----

Winners - Simon Fraser with Oregon's win over Colorado. Now it is Simon Fraser who is glad Oregon has a T10 team, because it means the PNCLL tournament will be a boost to whomever takes home that title.

Losers - MCLA pollsters with Oregon's win over Colorado. The match up of 2 perennial top 10 teams who both took some heavy losses off-season in terms of players and coaches, and who were unchalleged as of yet was going to give them a look at these teams - until it snowed and weather may have played a huge factor. Would Oregon have played better, or possible Colorado was hampered?? It is like the lax-gods are against the pollsters.

-----

Winners - Minn-Duluth with their win over Arizona (and subsequently BYU). After several straight loses, these wins stopped the bleeding and showed they are still a strong, competitive team.

Losers - Cal Poly with Minn-Duluth's win over Arizona. Cal Poly has 2 T25 wins over #9 Arizona and #9 Northeastern (rank at time of game). The drop in Northeastern and Arizona hurts Cal Poly. Now I'd give them credit for two T10 wins, but hold back nixing them any points, unless they stumbled. If they stumbled them they get nixed for that loss and the fact Arizona and Northeastern were over-ranked. However, if you listen to the WCLL collective consciousness I think they are going to revoke Arizona's membership. The quickness that they kicked Arizona to the curb is amazing. And in the process Cal Poly's resume gets kicked in the groin as well.

-----

Winners - #11-#14 Seeds in the MCLA tournament whomever they are, with Sonoma State's win over Colorado State. #3-7 all seem to be very talented but no one is rising up to the level of Chapman and Michigan. Which translates they they all have weaknesses and any of them can be beat on any given day. These seeds could see an upset, and then even a second round win.

Losers - Arizona State with Sonoma State's win over Colorado State. Arizona State could be ranked #8-10 at the MCLA tournament when this is all finished (assuming they do not take the WCLL title). Which means if they win on day 1 they'll face Michigan or Chapman and their stay might be shortened. Unfortunately for them, they are too good to move down, and with only UCSB to go, they won't move up (again without a great showing at the WCLL tournament).

Any others? Any thoughts?

Winners: Fans of MCLA lacrosse who want to see more than just the traditional teams at the top. If things keep going the same way, there may be 10-12 teams that have a shot at winning it all.

DG

Zamboni...under the last "losers". Do you mean ASU or Arizona seeded #8 or 10?

buffalowill wrote:Zamboni...under the last "losers". Do you mean ASU or Arizona seeded #8 or 10?

I meant Arizona State.

And anybody have a better term than "winners" and "losers"...not a big fan of that, but hope everyone gets what I'm attempting here.

sorry for being out of the loop but still very curious... why is arizona going to lose wcll membership?

freddoi wrote:sorry for being out of the loop but still very curious... why is arizona going to lose wcll membership?

I believe ZD was being a bit facetious in his statement.

freddoi wrote:sorry for being out of the loop but still very curious... why is arizona going to lose wcll membership?

Sorry busy day...

Ok, strip away the analogies and metaphors and here it is what I was getting at...

1. Cal Poly has 2 T25 wins against teams that once were both T10 and have since fallen dramatically (Arizona and Northeastern). In the short term this may not hurt them, but if they stumble it will come back on them double fold.

unless

2. There are a block of pollsters who think like the posts that are coming out of the WCLL lately on Arizona. They are either very harsh on them or non-existent. It seems like the WCLL collective voice is caught in a dilemma - recognize that Arizona is probably a good team going through adjustments and give credit to non-WCLL teams for their win over AZ, or bash AZ as a bottom feeder of the WCLL so that the WCLL elite don't have "bad" OOC losses. It is my interpretation of their posts that they have chosen the second avenue of labelling AZ as a bad team and distancing from the WCLL top programs - which makes Cal Poly's win over them very meaningless.


Now I'm sure that some may come in and argue I'm reading too much into the posts by WCLL fans about not wanting to lose OOC games and take it out on teams that do, and that this is evident by their non-negative posts after SFU beat SSU and FSU beat UCSB. I would argue back that it was easy to bash AZ when they were the only one, now that others have drop some very tough games they might have changed their approach.

Back to the lacrosse - I think Cal Poly is still a 11-12-13th team, and I think AZ is a T25 talent team, who's confidence is low and thus performance sporatic.

Losers - Any of the MCLA world who thinks this game caused east coast laxers to give any more respect to club ball. These games are great, but until these games are set up as a 1 and 1 at both schools, the east coast will never get budge because they don't see you play. Respect will finally come when MCLA teams go play these teams on their home turf and let the naysayers come out and see (win or lose) the level of play.

I hear what you're saying and agree within the context of this conversation. I believe that this is a slippery slope that we have to monitor very closely as a league. The success on and off the field has to be approached with a keen eye on continued and greater school support. Are the varsity teams really doing us a disfavor by having the games be non counters? This is the debate that needs to be had and it should probably happen over the next 2 to 3 years. We've experienced nothing but positives regarding individual team growth, so far. Each of the cases where we’ve seen individual schools embrace their club teams and support them to the next level from an administrative and financial perspective have been positive. However, we are approaching a glass ceiling where there are bound to be exceptions and we as a league need to be prepared.

Sorry for the left turn........

Luckily for Cal Poly they hold their destiny in their own hands. With two game sin Colorado coming up followed by a game at Chapman, they can make a statement about where they belong. In my opinion, this team is getting better every week. At the beginning of the season, on the offensive side of the ball, The attack led by senior Seth Kweller was shouldering the entire load. In recent weeks the midfield seems to be improving which is going to take some of the pressure off the attack. They are slowing forming into an balanced offensive.

Poly's defense has been steady all season long. Senior Captain Marc Govan is a defender who has the perfect balance of body defense and nasty take away checks. Of the several games that I have seen this year, I don't believe he has been beaten one on one even once. I would not be surprised if they are able to get one or maybe even two wins in their next three games. Cal Poly will determine their own fate and will not have to leave it in the hands of the pollsters.

thank you very much for the clarification.... which actually sparks another question(s)...

with regards to cal poly and their ranking, they are more or less in the same spot every year in the polls for about the last 4 years. this year, as pointed out they have two ranked wins against former t10 teams that have since dropped. i believe it is fare to say that many people think that they deserve their spot based on their talent, personel, coaching, whatever and that they improve each game. however, is that the correct way of looking at any team with regards to rank: how we know they can play? or what their record shows? which brings the side question: are their t10 wins still t10 wins or are they less meaningful now because of the those 2 teams. i don't mean to criticize poly or voters, and i feel myself rambling, so here are my Qs (and i know one is very hard and has been discussed before):

1. how much weight do wins against high ranked teams have after those high ranked teams drop in the polls, slightly or severly and
2. do we sometimes hand out a ranking to teams based on what they are showing improvements towards, or how they are playing at the time of the poll vote

to try and reitterate the fact that i don't think poly should be ranked lower, i think they are in the right spot. they are just a example based on their previous involvement in this thread. i assure you my wildcat rep and the boot don't play in my thoughts...

freddoi wrote:thank you very much for the clarification.... which actually sparks another question(s)...

Well if you care about a non-poll voter's approach....

I think wins/loses against ranked teams should be frozen at the time of the game. I've argued before that we can't tell how wins/loses can affect a team (i.e. a loss by a good team can hurt their confidence and send them spiraling or a win can give a mediocre team more confidence). So with that being said, I give Cal Poly credit for 2 T10 wins.

However, my rankings are very much "what have you done for me lately." Thus wins (and loses) losse value over the season. In the specific case, if Cal Poly doesn't perform well in the near future, they lose points for bad play, and the lose points because more time has passed since their wins. But if they win, the points for winning overshadows any point loss from depreciation of early wins.

I feel the polls (regardless of the sport) should rank who is playing the best lacrosse going into the tournament. AQ's provide the tournament with those that have played the most consistent by winning all year, getting a good spot in their league tournament and winning it. If the most consistent and the hottest are the same - then great!

Zamboni_Driver wrote:I think wins/loses against ranked teams should be frozen at the time of the game.

Well, the win is always frozen.....a win can't be taken away from a team. However, a voter should not suspend his judgement about the quality of a win if more evidence comes to light to reevaluate that win.

For example, Northeastern was ranked pretty highly at the beginning of the year, #9. They lose their first 4 games (one to an unranked opponent), topple in the ratings (deservedly so), and now sit at about #24. As a voter, I don't see how you can ignore those facts and not downgrade the quality of those wins for the teams who got them. Yeah, it was a win against #9 at the time, but more evidence shows that they were overrated at that same time.

CATLAX MAN wrote:

Zamboni_Driver wrote:I think wins/loses against ranked teams should be frozen at the time of the game.

Well, the win is always frozen.....a win can't be taken away from a team. However, a voter should not suspend his judgement about the quality of a win if more evidence comes to light to reevaluate that win.

For example, Northeastern was ranked pretty highly at the beginning of the year, #9. They lose their first 4 games (one to an unranked opponent), topple in the ratings (deservedly so), and now sit at about #24. As a voter, I don't see how you can ignore those facts and not downgrade the quality of those wins for the teams who got them. Yeah, it was a win against #9 at the time, but more evidence shows that they were overrated at that same time.

The quality of wins is always more apparent near the end of the season. A win against a pre-season #9 is not the same as a win against #9 at the end of the season. The pre-season ranking is based more on speculation, and the end-of-season ranking is based more on the true quality of the team.

DG

so, if i hear correctly from the previous two posts, freezing the win as a t10 (or whatever) win makes no sense because that would intern mean that further rankings for that t10 who lost were meaningless. if team A beats a t10 and then the t10 drops, considering that team A still beat a t10 team makes no sense to me.....