Coyne’s Bracket Breakdown: Women’s D-III
by Jac Coyne | Lacrosse Magazine Online Staff | Coyne Archive | Twitter
|
| As expected, Kim Cudmore and Salisbury have one of the four regionals. Will the Sea Gulls get a crack at avenging their only loss of the season to TCNJ? |
The Women’s NCAA Division III selection committee has released
its field for the 28-team women’s lacrosse tournament,
which begins Wednesday, May 12.
The committee has made some monumental decisions this year, moving
away from precedents set in the past to create a whole new paradigm
for the division.
Let’s try to break this thing down.
LAST TEAM IN
Mary Washington
The logical assumption would be Kenyon, but I’m not sure
logic is a criterion this spring. Both Kenyon (14-2) and Brockport
(12-3) are from weak conferences – Kenyon did not play one
ranked team this spring – so since it appears the committee
has completely ignored any kind of strength of schedule component,
the last team had to be Mary Washington and their relatively
pedestrian 12-5 record.
FIRST TEAM OUT
Centenary? Alvernia? Husson? Greensboro?
Since it appears winning percentage is the one, true factor in
determining the best teams in the land this year, any of these four
could have been on the outside looking in. While everyone else
inhabiting this planet might guess Amherst, Union, Ithaca or Tufts,
the committee must have been trying to figure out whether the USA
South or the NCAC deserved to be a two-bid league while the Liberty
only received an AQ.
SNUBBED?
Consistency
There is a serious disconnect between the way the selection process
has gone over the last couple of years and this spring. Last year,
the committee put a primacy on strength of schedule and selected
Middlebury, even though the Panthers had a 9-5 record. Looking at
that precedent, Union went out and played essentially the most
difficult schedule possible and went 11-7, but was left out of the
tournament. It is simply not fair to pull the rug out from
underneath a team.
Is there turnover on the committee? Sure, but that should not mean
that there is a fundamental shift in how criteria is weighted from
one year to the next. It’s amateurish, and reflects poorly on
the whole process.
BEST FIRST-ROUND MATCHUP
Babson at Williams
The Wooster-Kenyon and W&L-Elizabethtown contests are
intriguing, but the clash between the Ephs and Beavers is the one
to watch. It’s primarily because they are two experienced
teams who can play with anyone in the country (making it a shame
that somehow they meet in the first round). It’s also a game
to keep an eye on because the winner will get Gettysburg –
a beatable opponent for either of those teams. The victor
could end up taking a deep run in the tourney.
UPSET WATCH
Brockport
The No. 20 Golden Eagles will be hosting Rowan, so that means
they’re the higher seed, thus susceptible to the upset. The
Profs not only have a road win over TCNJ, but have played a stiff
schedule that will have them ready to face a surging Brockport
squad. Rowan fears no team, so the hosts better have its
‘A’ game.
EASIEST TITLE ROUTE
Franklin & Marshall.
It’s good to be champ. Every year there is an imbalance
within the brackets and this year is no different as the F&M
bracket is considerably weaker than the three others. The highest
ranked team in the Dips’ regional is No. 15 Washington &
Lee, a team F&M has already defeated this year. Meanwhile,
Hamilton has No. 6 Cortland and No. 9 Colby; Salisbury has No. 7
TCNJ; and Gettysburg is in the proverbial “Group of
Death” with No. 5 Trinity, No. 8 Stevens and No. 10
Babson.
FIVE BURNING QUESTIONS
1. Did the committee make a concerted effort to
“diversify” the field?
It’s pretty clear they did. By ignoring a fourth team
from the NESCAC – by any criteria, Amherst is a stronger
candidate than Mary Washington, Brockport or Kenyon – the
committee tacitly said it isn’t going to let one conference
dominate the at-large pool. The exclusion of Union also reverses a
recent precedent of rewarding strong schedules.
It’s an interesting development because the committee now
goes from being less of a judicial body – blindly judging the
criteria via precedent – to more of an activist entity,
moving the goal posts as they deem appropriate to allow a broader
range of programs to participate. Is it better? It depends on your
definition, I suppose.
2. Did Claremont deserve a home game?
If the Athenas can be considered among the Top 12 out of the
24 first-round participants, they did deserve to host. However,
Cortland, Colby, Rowan, Washington & Lee, Elizabethtown,
Williams, Babson, Mary Washington, Catholic, Christopher Newport,
Stevens, and Trinity would all be ahead of them in my book.
That’s 12. So Claremont probably shouldn’t have
received one according to my criteria, but as we know, overall
record is what is driving this year’s process (no SOS). The
Athenas are 14-2, so their home seed makes sense in that
regard.
3. What is Union coach Jessica Critchlow
thinking right now?
I bet she’s devastated. She did everything she could to
give her student-athletes a chance to succeed via scheduling, but
the committee, unbeknownst to anyone, changed the blueprints. And
just for anyone who hasn’t seen the Dutchwomen’s
schedule, let’s recap some of the teams on the slate: Babson
(14-3), Stevens (16-2), Washington & Lee (14-4), Salisbury
(17-1), Trinity (13-3), Middlebury (8-7), Cortland (16-2), St.
Lawrence (12-5; twice) and Hamilton (18-0; twice). So
that’s 10 of their 18 games against teams with a combined
record of 158-32 (.832) – and they finished four games over
.500! Come to think of it, Critchlow may be more angry than
devastated.
4. Is there anything that should make us believe the top four
seeds won’t be in the semifinals.
Actually, yes. Gettysburg has an Achilles heel on defense and
could be exposed as early as the second round when the Bullets play
either Williams or Babson. Stevens or Trinity will also be serious
hurdles for Gettysburg to overcome in the quarterfinals.
Salisbury will likely have to face TCNJ in the quarterfinals and
the Lions are the only team to beat the Gulls so far this year.
Hamilton and F&M are solid favorites to make it to
Gettysburg.
5. What grade would you give the committee?
I’m giving them a ‘C’ and, honestly, I’m
tempted to go lower. I’ll leave room for the possibility that
there is a plausible reason for the committee to make the decisions
they did, although it’s tough to fathom at this point. I
guess what bothers me the most is this was less of a tournament
selection and more of a lacrosse version of social engineering.
Here’s hoping that this was a one-year anomaly and not a
future trend for this division.
