LaxTV Forums | A Forum About The MCLA

Any predictions on the pre-season poll for the MCLA D1?

1. BYU
2. CSU
3. Oregon
4. UMD
5. UCSB
6. Northeastern
7. BC
8. Arizona
9. Colorado
10. Michigan

Woda wrote:Any predictions on the pre-season poll for the MCLA D1?

1. BYU
2. CSU
3. Oregon
4. UMD
5. UCSB
6. Northeastern
7. BC
8. Arizona
9. Colorado
10. Michigan

Last year ASU beat 4 of those teams in your top 10 (Oregon, BC, Colorado & Michigan). They need to be above atleast 1 or 2 of those 4 teams

glennking wrote:

Woda wrote:Any predictions on the pre-season poll for the MCLA D1?

1. BYU
2. CSU
3. Oregon
4. UMD
5. UCSB
6. Northeastern
7. BC
8. Arizona
9. Colorado
10. Michigan

Last year ASU beat 4 of those teams in your top 10 (Oregon, BC, Colorado & Michigan). They need to be above atleast 1 or 2 of those 4 teams

BC only played ASU in a consolation game. Those should not be considered at all when ranking teams. Neither team was playing their starters the whole game, and it was clear that the game wasnt played at 100%

I like these rankings, but I would put BC ahead of NU since BC beat them twice in the regular season, and I would replace Michigan with ASU
1. BYU
2. CSU
3. Oregon
4. UMD
5. UCSB
6. BC
7. Northeastern
8. Arizona
9. Colorado
10. ASU

More Cowbell wrote:BC only played ASU in a consolation game. Those should not be considered at all when ranking teams. Neither team was playing their starters the whole game, and it was clear that the game wasnt played at 100%

I like these rankings, but I would put BC ahead of NU since BC beat them twice in the regular season, and I would replace Michigan with ASU
1. BYU
2. CSU
3. Oregon
4. UMD
5. UCSB
6. BC
7. Northeastern
8. Arizona
9. Colorado
10. ASU

perhaps, but a win is a win is a win. But I agree BC belongs above NU, at least for the time being.
1 BYU
2 CSU
3 Oregon
4 UMD
5 UCSB
6 ASU
7 BC
8 NU
9 Arizona
10 Colorado

scooter wrote:

More Cowbell wrote:BC only played ASU in a consolation game. Those should not be considered at all when ranking teams. Neither team was playing their starters the whole game, and it was clear that the game wasnt played at 100%

I like these rankings, but I would put BC ahead of NU since BC beat them twice in the regular season, and I would replace Michigan with ASU
1. BYU
2. CSU
3. Oregon
4. UMD
5. UCSB
6. BC
7. Northeastern
8. Arizona
9. Colorado
10. ASU

perhaps, but a win is a win is a win. But I agree BC belongs above NU, at least for the time being.
1 BYU
2 CSU
3 Oregon
4 UMD
5 UCSB
6 ASU
7 BC
8 NU
9 Arizona
10 Colorado

I disagree. I don't think a consolation game should carry any more weight than a scrimmage, especially when the teams are treating it like a scrimmage. How can a win be a win when one team isn't playing their best players under the assumption that the game doesn't matter?

More Cowbell wrote:

scooter wrote:

More Cowbell wrote:BC only played ASU in a consolation game. Those should not be considered at all when ranking teams. Neither team was playing their starters the whole game, and it was clear that the game wasnt played at 100%

I like these rankings, but I would put BC ahead of NU since BC beat them twice in the regular season, and I would replace Michigan with ASU

perhaps, but a win is a win is a win. But I agree BC belongs above NU, at least for the time being.

I disagree. I don't think a consolation game should carry any more weight than a scrimmage, especially when the teams are treating it like a scrimmage. How can a win be a win when one team isn't playing their best players under the assumption that the game doesn't matter?

...which is part of the reason the powers that be are intent on eliminating consolation games at the National Tournament.

more cowbell- so you are saying BC went onto the field with the intention of losing the game? While I don't believe the game was played with the same intensity as other games at the championship, I still think it should have a bit of merit to it.

How about ASU won, but BC didn't lose?

You can count consolation games as much as you can count a fall ball scrimmage. There are teams that treat those games differently, and even players within teams who will treat the games differently.

Anyone who has played at nationals knows conciliation games could mean anything. If both teams lost in the first round, they both could be playing for pride. If they lost in the quarterfinals then both teams aren't going to care one bit about who wins. Especially the seniors who have nothing to play for anymore. I used to think conciliations games had a place at nationals, but as our league progresses I feel they should slowly eliminately them.

I think for this year the only conciliation games that should be scheduled are for the losers of the first round, so everyone gets 2 games guaranteed, after that if coaches want to arrange more games they can, but nothing is forced.

Let the seniors end their careers playing their hearts out in a game that matters, not some filler game that no one cares about.

scooter wrote:more cowbell- so you are saying BC went onto the field with the intention of losing the game? While I don't believe the game was played with the same intensity as other games at the championship, I still think it should have a bit of merit to it.

How about ASU won, but BC didn't lose?

I'm not saying they had no intention of winning, I'm saying they didn't care one way or the other. Most of their starters sat the whole game, and both backup goalies played. It doesn't make sense to think of this as any more than a scrimmage.

I knew that argument was going to come up, I should have put an asterisk next to the BC mention even if I don't completely agree. But even if you ignore that one game my point still stands that ASU belongs in the top ten. But it seems that everybody else who posted their top ten agreed so I'll stop talking about that.

Sidenote from the PNCLL meeting... Oregon has lost 20 players from last years team along with their head coach. To me this is much more of a factor than some consolation game from last year.

Personally I could see a return of Simon Fraser to the top 10. They've put together a pretty good schedule for the first time in a while and if they can beat the Ducks then who knows.

glennking wrote:I knew that argument was going to come up, I should have put an asterisk next to the BC mention even if I don't completely agree. But even if you ignore that one game my point still stands that ASU belongs in the top ten. But it seems that everybody else who posted their top ten agreed so I'll stop talking about that.

ASU is the only team EVER to get shut out in a game at nationals.... Not a top ten team, especially since they lost their coach.

Hi-Line Lax wrote:Sidenote from the PNCLL meeting... Oregon has lost 20 players from last years team along with their head coach. To me this is much more of a factor than some consolation game from last year.

Personally I could see a return of Simon Fraser to the top 10. They've put together a pretty good schedule for the first time in a while and if they can beat the Ducks then who knows.

I know they lost a lot of guys, but 20? I could only count about 12, not that that is much better.

Woda wrote:
ASU is the only team EVER to get shut out in a game at nationals.... Not a top ten team, especially since they lost their coach.

Yes, 10th seeded ASU got whomped by the 2nd seed in the league at that time. Is that enough reason to not include them in the top ten? How about 4th seeded Michigan getting whomped by 11 goals to a 13 seed? Is it better to get dominated by a worse team or a better team? Apparently you would answer that it's better to lose to a worse team, because that didn't stop you from putting Michigan at #10 did it?

And I'm not sure how much you know about the ASU program but last year, they had a brand new coach at the beginning of the season and they had arguably the best season any ASU team has ever had. So having a new coach doesn't automatically make you a worse team, it can actually make you much better. But of course you already knew that because you put both Arizona (who lost in the first round, and has a new coach) and Oregon (new coach) as #3. Wow, nice job.

So give me a new reason why ASU shouldn't be in the top ten, 'cuz those two you just gave me are stupid and don't even stand up to your own reasoning.