2016 MCLA Tournament selections talk

Men's Collegiate Lacrosse Association

2016 MCLA Tournament selections talk

New postby FeauxGeaux on Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:47 am

Been a few interesting weeks on the D1 MCLA front. These conference battles for the AQ could make this year's tourney field even more interesting with any upsets. Who do you view as a lock to make it? As a bubble? As not having a chance?

To me, it looks like this:

#1 Chapman (SLC AQ) v #16 Indiana (GRLC AQ)
#2 Grand Canyon (At-Large) v #15 SMU (LSA AQ)
#3 Georgia Tech (SELC AQ) v #14 Davenport (CCLA AQ)
#4 Cal Poly (WCLL AQ) v #13 Oregon (PNCLL AQ)
#5 Colorado (RMLC AQ) v #12 Stanford (At-Large)
#6 Colorado State (At-Large) v #11 BYU (At-Large)
#7 Boston College (PCLL AQ) v #10 UC-Santa Barbara (At-Large)
#8 Arizona State (At-Large) v #9 Arizona (At-Large)

Not that it's even worth it to predict winners of seedings that are entirely arbitrary until Sunday, but just for fun:

Elite Eight
#1 Chapman vs. #9 Arizona
#4 Cal Poly vs. #5 Colorado
#2 Grand Canyon vs. #10 UCSB
#3 Georgia Tech vs. #6 Colorado State

Final Four
#1 Chapman vs. #4 Cal Poly
#2 Grand Canyon vs. #6 Colorado State

Championship
#2 Grand Canyon over #1 Chapman

Again, making picks on brackets that may likely not exist in exactitude seems pointless. However, barring any major conference tourney upsets, I don't see the teams selected being any different than those 16.
Don't stop believing, hold onto the feeling
User avatar
FeauxGeaux
 
Posts: 727
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 12:48 pm

Re: 2016 MCLA Tournament selections talk

New postby ty.jodi1984 on Thu May 05, 2016 8:15 pm

Agree with the picks but Grand Canyon will not beat Chapman. Seen them both multiple times and Chapman is deeper has better clear capability and their poles are better. GC's chances are improved by their Golie play...MCLA overall quality of play is getting better each year. More & more players are making noise and being recruited to move up into D-3 or even D-1. Great for the game.
ty.jodi1984
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 8:03 pm

Re: 2016 MCLA Tournament selections talk

New postby holmes435 on Thu May 05, 2016 10:15 pm

Actual field as announced

May 9th
No. 16 Purdue (9-5) vs. No. 1 Chapman (18-0), 4:15 p.m.
No. 15 Southern Methodist (16-0) vs. No. 2 Cal Poly (14-1), 4:15 p.m.
No. 14 Michigan State (9-4) vs. No. 3 Grand Canyon (10-4), 4:15 p.m.
No. 13 California (10-6) vs. No. 4 Georgia Tech (14-0), 4:15 p.m.
No. 12 Oregon State (11-4) vs. No. 5 Brigham Young (12-4), 7 p.m.
No. 11 Arizona (7-5) vs. No. 6 Boston College (12-3), 7 p.m.
No. 10 UC Santa Barbara (10-5) vs. No. 7 Colorado (10-5), 7 p.m.
No. 9 Arizona State (7-6) vs. No. 8 Colorado State (10-4), 7 p.m.

May 10
Purdue/Chap vs CSU/ASU
GT/Cal vs BYU/OSU

CPSLO/SMU vs CU/UCSB
GCU/MSU vs BC/AZ

Breakdown by IL: http://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/m ... ound/35030

As usual, SOS and west coast teams getting the benefit of the doubt with the seeding.

This will be an exciting tourney though, definitely hope to see some upsets.
User avatar
holmes435
 
Posts: 2624
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:56 pm

Re: 2016 MCLA Tournament selections talk

New postby PointTaken on Thu May 05, 2016 10:59 pm

Georgia Tech not traveling outside of GA hurt them.

Florida State is likely one of the top 5-8 teams in the country, but they got in trouble and were not selected.

Arizona and ASU get in with near .500 records - Arizona didn't even make conference tourney.

Cal surprises most with a huge jump into the field.

I don't think the committee missed much other than FSU being out for one of ASU/Arizona/Cal.

The east coast teams traditionally don't play as many out of conference games - mostly because west coast teams don't risk a trip to Boston in March that will likely be snowed out with nowhere to play the games.

Potential BYU/Ga Tech game sets up really nice, but BYU has to get by a sneaky OSU team.

Should be good stuff next week!
PointTaken
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: 2016 MCLA Tournament selections talk

New postby dds120 on Mon May 16, 2016 6:13 pm

Is there no way to have the playoffs at a neutral site? Might be an advantage having the championship games at your home field.
dds120
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 6:10 pm

Re: 2016 MCLA Tournament selections talk

New postby umnlaxcoach on Tue May 17, 2016 9:32 am

Championship venue based on bid process. It's been at neutral sites more often than not (St Louis AB Center, National Sports Center in MN, Multiple HS sites in Texas, Dick's Sporting Goods park in Denver, and Geeenville NC) .

Next year's site is being announced in the near future.
umnlaxcoach
 
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:51 pm

Re: 2016 MCLA Tournament selections talk

New postby sculaxcoach on Tue May 17, 2016 3:19 pm

The site hasn't been any advantage to Chapman in the two previous years.
sculaxcoach
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:52 pm

Re: 2016 MCLA Tournament selections talk

New postby holmes435 on Tue May 17, 2016 8:17 pm

sculaxcoach wrote:The site hasn't been any advantage to Chapman in the two previous years.


That's debatable - they may have played a little worse at a neutral venue the past two years.

Either way, it definitely needs to be at a neutral site.

Final polls look solid, although I'm not sure who's voting for GT at the #1 spot. They definitely deserve the 2 spot above CP and GCU though.
User avatar
holmes435
 
Posts: 2624
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:56 pm

Re: 2016 MCLA Tournament selections talk

New postby dds120 on Thu May 19, 2016 11:51 am

The site hasn't been any advantage to Chapman in the two previous years.


You weren't one of the announcers were you?

No they didnt win the championship the last two years, but if you don't think playing on your own field, sleeping in your own bed, not having to travel to another time zone isnt an advantage, you're oblivious.
dds120
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 6:10 pm

Re: 2016 MCLA Tournament selections talk

New postby umnlaxcoach on Thu May 19, 2016 12:01 pm

It is an advantage, but if the bid that included games at Chapman was the best (or possibly only) bid, what is the MCLA to do?

The California teams complained for years about having Championship Tournament games 2-3 time zones away. They finally got in gear and produced a bid to host out west that was selected. Good for them.

I don't see a lot of other organizations - particularly neutral sites (other than Greenville) banging on the MCLA's door begging to host the event.
umnlaxcoach
 
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:51 pm

Re: 2016 MCLA Tournament selections talk

New postby dds120 on Thu May 19, 2016 12:09 pm

True, what about St. Louis
dds120
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 6:10 pm

Re: 2016 MCLA Tournament selections talk

New postby numbersman on Thu May 19, 2016 12:39 pm

"As usual, SOS and west coast teams getting the benefit of the doubt with the seeding."

Which west coast teams go the benefit of the doubt with regards to seeding? The IL article refers to GT's seeding as #4 to be the result of the infamous West Coast bias, but despite their record, I can see why it would be hard to rank them higher. Given they had not played many top 20 teams during the year, its harder to gauge their real strength. I think SOS likely weighed in heavily there.

Its always funny to see the IL analysis, since I don't think they have a clue about anything non-NCAA, or west of Baltimore. Their analysis of the first round Cal Poly v. SMU was hilarious. I was surprised Cal Poly only won by 8.
numbersman
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:51 pm

Re: 2016 MCLA Tournament selections talk

New postby umnlaxcoach on Thu May 19, 2016 1:09 pm

dds120 wrote:True, what about St. Louis

WashU was a de facto home team for a couple of those years. I don't recall if Lindenwood was making the MCLAs in the St Louis period.
umnlaxcoach
 
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:51 pm

Sponsor
 


Return to Men's - MCLA

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests