Jump to content



UAlbany Athletics- America East-
SOCIAL MEDIA: UAlbany Facebook- UAlbany Instagram- UAlbany Twitter- UAlbany Blog-
MEDIA: Albany Student Press- America East TV- ESPN3- Schenectady Gazette- The Team 104.5 ESPN Radio- The Team 104.5 ESPN Radio Archive interviews- Times Union College Sports- Times Union Sports- WCDB- WOFX 980-
FALL SPORTS LINKS: CAA Football-
WINTER SPORTS LINKS: College Insider- Pomeroy Ratings- Real TimeRPI-
SPRING SPORTS LINKS: Inside Lacrosse- Lax Power Backup Stick-
OTHER FORUMS: America East Forum- Any Given Saturday Forum- Championship Subdivision forum(1-AA Discussion) The Hen House - Siena Forum- Stony Brook Forum- Vermont Forum

Recommended Posts

Albany is only going to go as far as the FO take them. It killed them in the quarters in 2014 and 2015 and already has killed them in the conference tourney this year. Hope they have better gameplan against Ben Williams, who is also one of the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we all know that the team screwed themselves here. I was just pointing out that playing in one of the lesser leagues gives you very little wiggle room when more than half your league is bad. When SB is the only league opponent that helps your RPI, you have to continuously schedule very difficult OOC games away. That is not a recipe for success in the long run and if we want to continue to grow as a college sports program either the rest of the league needs to get a lot better or we need to find a new conference. I don't have a lot of faith in the rest of the conference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously we shot ourselves in the foot. Hartford did not win the game UA lost it.

That being said, I have been reading everything I could find on Marquette hosting a game. I could not find a single writer or prognosticator who thought they deserved a #7 seed. Most said if they had lost to Denver [which they should have,] there was a very strong possibility they would not be in the tournament @ all. Even with the win against Denver there was no RPI, SOS, other quality wins; that would indicate a host team.

 

I am beginning to the think administrators in Ncaa sports are as corrupt as World Cup Soccer and Olympic officials. University presidents need to take a LONG look at who is running college athletics and need to return college athletics to COLLEGE. I know I am rambling (just so sore about another ncaa snub), but sanctions for cheaters seem like a slap in the face, the rich programs get richer, and the average college student gets further in debt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously we shot ourselves in the foot. Hartford did not win the game UA lost it.

That being said, I have been reading everything I could find on Marquette hosting a game. I could not find a single writer or prognosticator who thought they deserved a #7 seed. Most said if they had lost to Denver [which they should have,] there was a very strong possibility they would not be in the tournament @ all. Even with the win against Denver there was no RPI, SOS, other quality wins; that would indicate a host team.

 

I am beginning to the think administrators in Ncaa sports are as corrupt as World Cup Soccer and Olympic officials. University presidents need to take a LONG look at who is running college athletics and need to return college athletics to COLLEGE. I know I am rambling (just so sore about another ncaa snub), but sanctions for cheaters seem like a slap in the face, the rich programs get richer, and the average college student gets further in debt.

Their head coach was on the five person selection committee and they are not a #7 seed, they are a #6.

 

I don't think UA was snubbed at all and were seeded correctly. If anyone was snubbed it was Syracuse as an #8. UA should either be traveling to Marquette or Loyola, not Syracuse. Will not be surprising to see UNC and Duke upset both Marquette and Loyola.

Edited by UA'08
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Obviously we shot ourselves in the foot. Hartford did not win the game UA lost it.

That being said, I have been reading everything I could find on Marquette hosting a game. I could not find a single writer or prognosticator who thought they deserved a #7 seed. Most said if they had lost to Denver [which they should have,] there was a very strong possibility they would not be in the tournament @ all. Even with the win against Denver there was no RPI, SOS, other quality wins; that would indicate a host team.

 

I am beginning to the think administrators in Ncaa sports are as corrupt as World Cup Soccer and Olympic officials. University presidents need to take a LONG look at who is running college athletics and need to return college athletics to COLLEGE. I know I am rambling (just so sore about another ncaa snub), but sanctions for cheaters seem like a slap in the face, the rich programs get richer, and the average college student gets further in debt.

Their head coach was on the five person selection committee and they are not a #7 seed, they are a #6.

 

I don't think UA was snubbed at all and were seeded correctly. If anyone was snubbed it was Syracuse as an #8. UA should either be traveling to Marquette or Loyola, not Syracuse. Will not be surprising to see UNC and Duke upset both Marquette and Loyola.

 

I wouldn't even call them upsets......lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Obviously we shot ourselves in the foot. Hartford did not win the game UA lost it.

That being said, I have been reading everything I could find on Marquette hosting a game. I could not find a single writer or prognosticator who thought they deserved a #7 seed. Most said if they had lost to Denver [which they should have,] there was a very strong possibility they would not be in the tournament @ all. Even with the win against Denver there was no RPI, SOS, other quality wins; that would indicate a host team.

 

I am beginning to the think administrators in Ncaa sports are as corrupt as World Cup Soccer and Olympic officials. University presidents need to take a LONG look at who is running college athletics and need to return college athletics to COLLEGE. I know I am rambling (just so sore about another ncaa snub), but sanctions for cheaters seem like a slap in the face, the rich programs get richer, and the average college student gets further in debt.

Their head coach was on the five person selection committee and they are not a #7 seed, they are a #6.

 

I don't think UA was snubbed at all and were seeded correctly. If anyone was snubbed it was Syracuse as an #8. UA should either be traveling to Marquette or Loyola, not Syracuse. Will not be surprising to see UNC and Duke upset both Marquette and Loyola.

 

 

I agree with you that Syracuse was snubbed; but so was Albany. In both coaches and media polls we were higher than Marquette and neck and neck with Loyola. We scored higher than Marquette in every numeric score (rpi; sos; etc) and were pretty much evenly split with Loyola and actually out pointed them 95.57 to 95.23 on Power Rating which is the overall computer compilation of rpi; sos; etc. Objectively there is no argument we should have hosted a first round game. Numerically and Factually we should have been IN. The only reason we are not hosting is based on subjective criteria which is influenced by personal bias and opinion. I know coaches and media polls are subjective; and Power Ratings etc. are NOT a perfect science; but by those standards at least we should have hosted and yet the ncaa chose to ignore them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Obviously we shot ourselves in the foot. Hartford did not win the game UA lost it.

That being said, I have been reading everything I could find on Marquette hosting a game. I could not find a single writer or prognosticator who thought they deserved a #7 seed. Most said if they had lost to Denver [which they should have,] there was a very strong possibility they would not be in the tournament @ all. Even with the win against Denver there was no RPI, SOS, other quality wins; that would indicate a host team.

 

I am beginning to the think administrators in Ncaa sports are as corrupt as World Cup Soccer and Olympic officials. University presidents need to take a LONG look at who is running college athletics and need to return college athletics to COLLEGE. I know I am rambling (just so sore about another ncaa snub), but sanctions for cheaters seem like a slap in the face, the rich programs get richer, and the average college student gets further in debt.

Their head coach was on the five person selection committee and they are not a #7 seed, they are a #6.

 

I don't think UA was snubbed at all and were seeded correctly. If anyone was snubbed it was Syracuse as an #8. UA should either be traveling to Marquette or Loyola, not Syracuse. Will not be surprising to see UNC and Duke upset both Marquette and Loyola.

 

 

I agree with you that Syracuse was snubbed; but so was Albany. In both coaches and media polls we were higher than Marquette and neck and neck with Loyola. We scored higher than Marquette in every numeric score (rpi; sos; etc) and were pretty much evenly split with Loyola and actually out pointed them 95.57 to 95.23 on Power Rating which is the overall computer compilation of rpi; sos; etc. Objectively there is no argument we should have hosted a first round game. Numerically and Factually we should have been IN. The only reason we are not hosting is based on subjective criteria which is influenced by personal bias and opinion. I know coaches and media polls are subjective; and Power Ratings etc. are NOT a perfect science; but by those standards at least we should have hosted and yet the ncaa chose to ignore them.

 

as much as I hate to say it, I have to disagree. We prob play in the worst conference, we HOSTED the tournament and lost a first round game against an inferior opponent. Not sure how we can even have an argument for a home game regardless of stats, power ranking etc. UA has a glaring weakness that it has had for too long, the damn faceoff...until that gets "fixed", we will most likely continue to lose heartbreakers in the NCAA tourney...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Obviously we shot ourselves in the foot. Hartford did not win the game UA lost it.

That being said, I have been reading everything I could find on Marquette hosting a game. I could not find a single writer or prognosticator who thought they deserved a #7 seed. Most said if they had lost to Denver [which they should have,] there was a very strong possibility they would not be in the tournament @ all. Even with the win against Denver there was no RPI, SOS, other quality wins; that would indicate a host team.

 

I am beginning to the think administrators in Ncaa sports are as corrupt as World Cup Soccer and Olympic officials. University presidents need to take a LONG look at who is running college athletics and need to return college athletics to COLLEGE. I know I am rambling (just so sore about another ncaa snub), but sanctions for cheaters seem like a slap in the face, the rich programs get richer, and the average college student gets further in debt.

Their head coach was on the five person selection committee and they are not a #7 seed, they are a #6.

 

I don't think UA was snubbed at all and were seeded correctly. If anyone was snubbed it was Syracuse as an #8. UA should either be traveling to Marquette or Loyola, not Syracuse. Will not be surprising to see UNC and Duke upset both Marquette and Loyola.

 

 

I agree with you that Syracuse was snubbed; but so was Albany. In both coaches and media polls we were higher than Marquette and neck and neck with Loyola. We scored higher than Marquette in every numeric score (rpi; sos; etc) and were pretty much evenly split with Loyola and actually out pointed them 95.57 to 95.23 on Power Rating which is the overall computer compilation of rpi; sos; etc. Objectively there is no argument we should have hosted a first round game. Numerically and Factually we should have been IN. The only reason we are not hosting is based on subjective criteria which is influenced by personal bias and opinion. I know coaches and media polls are subjective; and Power Ratings etc. are NOT a perfect science; but by those standards at least we should have hosted and yet the ncaa chose to ignore them.

 

as much as I hate to say it, I have to disagree. We prob play in the worst conference, we HOSTED the tournament and lost a first round game against an inferior opponent. Not sure how we can even have an argument for a home game regardless of stats, power ranking etc. UA has a glaring weakness that it has had for too long, the damn faceoff...until that gets "fixed", we will most likely continue to lose heartbreakers in the NCAA tourney...

 

 

 

If you are talking in all of division 1 you are dead wrong as long as the maac is still in divison 1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Obviously we shot ourselves in the foot. Hartford did not win the game UA lost it.

That being said, I have been reading everything I could find on Marquette hosting a game. I could not find a single writer or prognosticator who thought they deserved a #7 seed. Most said if they had lost to Denver [which they should have,] there was a very strong possibility they would not be in the tournament @ all. Even with the win against Denver there was no RPI, SOS, other quality wins; that would indicate a host team.

 

I am beginning to the think administrators in Ncaa sports are as corrupt as World Cup Soccer and Olympic officials. University presidents need to take a LONG look at who is running college athletics and need to return college athletics to COLLEGE. I know I am rambling (just so sore about another ncaa snub), but sanctions for cheaters seem like a slap in the face, the rich programs get richer, and the average college student gets further in debt.

Their head coach was on the five person selection committee and they are not a #7 seed, they are a #6.

 

I don't think UA was snubbed at all and were seeded correctly. If anyone was snubbed it was Syracuse as an #8. UA should either be traveling to Marquette or Loyola, not Syracuse. Will not be surprising to see UNC and Duke upset both Marquette and Loyola.

I agree with you that Syracuse was snubbed; but so was Albany. In both coaches and media polls we were higher than Marquette and neck and neck with Loyola. We scored higher than Marquette in every numeric score (rpi; sos; etc) and were pretty much evenly split with Loyola and actually out pointed them 95.57 to 95.23 on Power Rating which is the overall computer compilation of rpi; sos; etc. Objectively there is no argument we should have hosted a first round game. Numerically and Factually we should have been IN. The only reason we are not hosting is based on subjective criteria which is influenced by personal bias and opinion. I know coaches and media polls are subjective; and Power Ratings etc. are NOT a perfect science; but by those standards at least we should have hosted and yet the ncaa chose to ignore them.

A lot has to do with travel costs and attendance. Syracuse draws more fans than Albany so if it came down to who gets the home game it'd be them. Syracuse couldn't have played duke or UNC in the first round, so logistically sending Albany to cuse made sense.

 

You can't go by polls either, because Towson is ranked 10th and was put in the play-in game.

Edited by UA'08
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another AE coach resigns. Hartford coach resigned today. That makes 4 openings in the AE along with Bing, UMBC, and Vermont. These guys feel that UA is so good and getting superior recruits that they can never win? I know lax is not a priority at Vermont and is not that big a deal at Bing and Hartford. UMBC coach had been around for many years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

II know lax is not a priority at Vermont

Vermont just announced they'll be building a grandstand this summer at Virtue Field, where they moved the soccer and lacrosse games in 2012.

 

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/sports/college/vermont/2016/05/13/uvms-virtue-field-gain-stadium-fall/84316228/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not much chatter about Sunday, but expected after a poor finish to the regular season. If Albany can keep the face off percentage at least 30% they'll have a shot I think. If it's a disaster at the X like the Hartford game there is a 0% chance of winning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...