April 17, 2008
I gave Gabe Valenzuela, the head coach at Southern Cal and a member of the Women's Division Intercollegiate Associates selection committee, a call earlier this week. I knew the WDIA season was wrapping up and the national championship tournament selections would be made on Tuesday morning, so I wanted to make it sure it was kosher for me to do a mock selection of the field.
I did the check because the WDIA is sponsored by US Lacrosse, the umbrella organization that runs this site, and I didn't want to step on any toes. When I asked the question, Valenzuela just chuckled. "Go for it," he said, slightly bemused.
Valenzuela wasn't terribly worried about my impending selections because it's hard enough for the WDIA committee to pick the 16-team field with all of the information in front of them, never mind the weekend before the eight automatic-qualifying conferences determine their representatives. But I've made a bit of a habit of predicting the divisions I cover and wasn't about to let a little conjecture stand in the way.
As I dug further into the machinations of the various conference tournaments, both AQ and otherwise, it became even clearer why Valenzuela wasn't worried about me nailing the field four days prior to its announcement.
It starts with the fact that many of the conferences have a back-draw (i.e., consolation brackets) in their tourneys, meaning a team could conceivably take three losses in a league tournament - more than enough to knock it from a tournament contender to an also-ran. Predicting the automatic qualifier in a conference like the Western Women's Lacrosse League, which boasts four tournament-quality teams, is hard enough. Predicting a back-draw is nearly impossible.
The obstacles continue when dealing with conferences that don't have automatic qualifiers. The Rocky Mountain Women's Lacrosse League plays a conference tourney, but it has nothing riding on it. This throws Colorado State, Colorado and BYU into the at-large pool. The Middle-Atlantic Women's Lacrosse League, with teams like the Virginia Tech Club and Maryland Club, had an automatic qualifier up until two weeks ago, but no longer does.
There's also the chance a team earning an automatic qualifier won't participate in the national tournament because of budget issues or academic/graduation conflicts.
But these are just excuses, right?
I remain unwavered in my pursuit of this fool's errand. It's this adventuresome spirit that separates me from the rest of the LMO staff, who sit in their cubicles breathlessly breaking down the Tewaaraton watch lists.
So without further ado, my picks and seedings for the WDIA national tournament, which will be announced officially on Tuesday morning and will be played on May 7-10, in Denver.
Just to be clear: these are simply my picks gleaned from some leg work I did using the posted criteria. They are (un)educated guesses. I received no direction from Valenzuela or inside info (if it even exists) from USL.
1. Colorado State (Estimated Final Record: 18-1)
Anyone familiar with the WDIA knows that for the Rams to be the No. 1 seed there must have been some movement in the WWLL. We'll get to that in a minute. Colorado State will handle both of its opponents in the RMWLL tourney. Combined with the strength of the CSU schedule, which features seven of the Top 10 teams, the Rams have to be at the top of the list. The Rams are going to be in the top two even without the loss by...
2. UC Santa Barbara (EFR: 15-1)
Yes, I'm predicting a Gauchos loss (stop laughing), opening the door for CSU to slip into the top spot. The explanation will come with the next team. UCSB will coast into the WWLL finals, which means it will only drop one spot. The Gauchos have answered the bell in each game this year and seven times beat Top 10 squads, and by predicting a UCSB loss I'm not pinpointing an inherent flaw. It's due to the respect earned by...
3. Cal Poly (EFR: 11-5)
Sorry. When you're the seven-time national champ, you get the benefit of the doubt. My doubt, anyway. A third seed with five losses makes me a little uneasy, but if the Mustangs navigate their way to the WWLL title, which I'm expecting, it will mean wins against Santa Clara and UCSB. That should be enough for the big bump. In addition to receiving credit for past accomplishments, Cal Poly is just 11 goals away from being undefeated. The Mustangs' five losses came to teams ranked 1-5 and none were by more than two goals. They can play with anyone, and have the expectation of winning.
4. Colorado (EFR: 12-3)
I went back and forth on this one for a little while. Colorado and Santa Clara are neck-and-neck for the 4-5 spot, but I gave the nod to the Buffs because I project them making the conference championship game (although it should be noted that Santa Clara has a larger conference tourney). I envision these two facing off in the quarters anyway, so it'll all work out.
5. Santa Clara (EFR: 13-3)
See No. 4. A brief aside: the Broncos have the potential to blow up my top eight seeds because it is well within the realm of possibility that instead of finishing third (my projection), SC could win the WWLL (it lost to UCSB in early March, 12-11). This would bump them up to No. 2 and drop Cal Poly five or six spots from where I have them.
6. Michigan (EFR: 14-3)
Michigan has played a competitive national schedule and has the confidence to win the WCLL, earning them this spot. I have faith in this pick because the Wolverines only have to navigate their way past either Pittsburgh or Michigan State in the title game, not both along the way.
7. Lindenwood (EFR: 13-6)
The Lions are tough for me. They play a great schedule (seven Top 10s), but they went 1-6 against the upper tier. Still, I think this is the right spot if things play out as I expect. What I can take to the bank is Lindenwood will win the CPWLL AQ.
8. Pittsburgh (EFR: 16-2)
I admit that I may have been persuaded to put the Panthers here after talking with their coach, Gary Neft, last week. I'm picking Pitt to beat Michigan State - a team that beat the Panthers 4-2 in the first game of the season - in the semifinals before losing to Michigan in the WCLL finals. Neft says he has a different team from when it first met the Spartans, a game he said was played in a "monsoon." Even if they lose in the semis to Sparty, I think Pitt will just flip spots with State (at No. 11).
9. Florida (EFR: 11-3)
Man, this is tough. I can't find whether the Southeastern Women's Lacrosse League is a two, four or eight-team tournament, so I'll assume eight and give it to the Gators based on their wins against Central Florida and Georgia already. UF is a bit of a keystone for me because if it doesn't get the SWLL AQ, it could lead to massive changes from here on out. I'll cross my fingers now.
10. Texas A&M (EFR: 12-7)
The fact A&M only beat Texas by a goal during the season scares me, but considering the stiff schedule the Aggies have played down the stretch they should be hardened to win the Texas Women's Lacrosse League automatic qualifier. If they don't win the AQ, A&M is out.
11. Michigan State (EFR: 12-5)
Losing to A&M in the final game of the regular season makes me queasy about including Michigan State as an at-large bid and leaving out a team like UCLA. And the fact that I don't even have Sparty making the championship game of the WCLL doesn't make me feel any better, but I think the Bruins will end up in more dire straights in the WWLL.
12. Virginia Tech (EFR: 12-0)
There's a fact that not all programs in the WDIA are on the same plane when it comes to resources (actually, that's a fact in any division). So the question is: should a team that stays in its own region and has success be penalized because it doesn't have the budget to play better programs in a stronger region? I'm of two minds on this one, but I'm guessing Tech's inclusion is the right answer in this instance.
13. Rhode Island (EFR: 11-2)
Whichever team wins the ECWLA will be seeded here, and I'm banking on the Rams, although the loss to Northeastern in the regular season finale raises some questions. Just remember, this team beat A&M during the season and hung around with Santa Clara.
14. Central Florida (EFR: 13-2)
See No. 12. But you could easily convince me UCLA should be in this spot, no matter how the Bruins finish in their conference tourney. Just a hunch.
15. Minnesota (EFR: 11-3)
Pencil the winner of the North Central Women's Lacrosse League in here. I'd be a little more confident if Minnesota and St. Thomas actually met as scheduled during the regular season, but a couple of comparative scores led me in the direction of the Golden Gophers.
16. Boston College (EFR: 9-0)
I'm not sure if the New England Women's Lacrosse League has the juice deserving of an AQ at this point, but they've got their paperwork in order, so they're in. Simply put, no one is going to sneak up on the Eagles this year in the conference.
Well, that was fun.
I was unable to find the exact tournament structure (if any) for a couple of the conferences and I'm also laboring under the assumption that all of the teams I have included in the seedings are actually eligible (something that may not be known until Tuesday). If anything changes in this respect, I cannot be held responsible.
Surprisingly, I actually feel pretty good about these picks, but we'll see just how close I came in a couple of days.
Email Jac Coyne at jcoyne@uslacrosse.org.
