Under and Overrated teams?

[John Paul]

I tend to look at trends when I vote. One close game to a significantly lower ranked team doesn't mean a lot to me, even if other teams have beaten that same lower ranked team by significantly more. Every team, at every level, in every sport, has off days. Better teams overcome those off days and still find a way to win. If a highly ranked team is consistently having to pull out nail-biters to win against lesser competition, then you have a point. If it happens once (or twice over a long season), and they still win, I don't drop them.

[Rad44]

A win is a win. If BC beats Pitt, it should do no more than to solidify BC's ranking thoguh. In my opinion, Oakland would have to lose 1 or 2 to fall back. A win by a few goals+ over Pitt when also considering that Pitt lost in overtime to Oakland would only SUGGEST that BC could potentially beat Oakland and advance in the rankings.

[Bentiss]

I tend to look at trends when I vote. One close game to a significantly lower ranked team doesn't mean a lot to me, even if other teams have beaten that same lower ranked team by significantly more. Every team, at every level, in every sport, has off days. Better teams overcome those off days and still find a way to win. If a highly ranked team is consistently having to pull out nail-biters to win against lesser competition, then you have a point. If it happens once (or twice over a long season), and they still win, I don't drop them.

JP couldn't have put it any better. He wrote exactly what I have been too lazy to write, but that doesn't mean I could coach a lacrosse team as well as him...GET MY POINT?

[TMcCourt]

No Bentiss, I don't get your point at all but since you would defend Oakland in any way, shape or form I am not suprised to see a nice bold post.

With all due respect to JP, I do think it matters if one team beats some one by 7 or 8 goals and another team wins in overtime. An overtime game is not a game you take lightly and it is not usually a fluke. You have to look at goal differential to examine teams that have not played each other. If two teams have played the exact same teams and gone undefeated and one won some of them close and the other won all safely (by 5 or more), then the second team deserves a higher ranking. If a team seems to have more "off days" than another then they are not as good even if it is only one or two more "off days".

In regards to teams like Oakland and BC who have not played very many ranked teams due to conference schedules that are not as strong as a conference like the WCLL, you must look at their close games to see a difference (I also note the LSA struggles are not Oakland's fault but those teams are just not living up to the level people had them at). I personally do not think Pitt will be the best indicator of Oakland's level this year but rather the Michigan game will be much more important to see where they belong; however, Oakland has not played Michigan yet and so right now the Pitt score allows a decent indication of what type of team they are.

[Dulax]

Lindenwood is for real! They have the best attackmen hands down that I have seen, solid middies, and there defenseman are giants. My prediction is they will finish the year undefeated....we will have to see at nationals how they stack up against Michigans and Colorado...should be exciting