Horrendous on numerous levels.

Maryland goes 12-0 and their reward is to play Notre Dame in quarters in South Bend assuming we both do our work against tough first round opponents.

We are understandably ticked but how the F is Maryland 3?

How are we 6? If our out-of-conference schedule was soft how do you explain Georgetown's entire schedule, which included 7 wins against Providence, St. John's, Marquette, and Mt. St. Mary's.

Syracuse over Army is criminal and Tim Leonard- Townson's AD and Tourney Chair - said it was painfully close. What impressed them most? Syracuse's 14-goal loss to ND or their 12-goal loss to Carolina, where they gave up both times and got the s&%t betaen out of them. Perhaps it was the 7-goal loss to Army, the team at issue where apparently it was painfully close.

In the past, they've cited travel budgets and costs as factors but it clearly didn't matter this year. Otherwise, a team from Maine wouldn't be flying to Virgina, and teams from Indiana, Pennsylvania, and Maryland wouldn't be flying to Denver.

I think Syracuse got in on the strength of

Winning twice against Virginia, including once on the road. Those were better quality wins than anything Army had. Without those wins, I think leaving Syracuse out would have been a no-brainer. On the other hand, maybe the Committee was simply excited about the possibility of matching up Syracuse and Georgetown, although that's more of a basketball rivalry than a lacrosse rivalry.

Even in a normal year, travel restrictions shouldn't be an issue in deciding between Syracuse and Army. It's 220 miles from Syracuse to West Point, and if you're talking about traveling to DC to face Georgetown, the difference is even smaller than that.

And Vermont. My issue is how they discount losses and

only look at the comparison of wins. UVA is a great team and those wins were impressive but they were blown out by others, including Army. That first loss wasn't a blip on the screen. It's who they are - a team capable of big games but also of major letdowns. I think if it's close you have to value head-to-head, especially this year when teams were mostly wedded to a limited non-conference schedule.

It's moot now and Syracuse has the talent to win at all or lose by 10 to Georgetown.

Agree on the travel budget having no impact on the decision between the two. My point was on the seeding not Army v. Syracuse.

The travel restrictions were suspended this year.

I think it's pretty safe to assume the 2-flight rule and higher seeded teams getting 1st round home games will be put back in place next year once the COVID situation is resolved.

Bryant is in Rhode Island, not Maine, BTW. There would have had to be some major reshuffling of the bracket to stay within the 2-flight rule since someone would have had to fly from the East Coast to Denver and SB.

I'm not sure what the NCAA accomplished by doing that

However. Unless the intention was to put each team into a sort of bubble at the first round sites, I don't think this was a good idea.

As it is, instead of 8 teams traveling to first-round sites, this year 13 teams are traveling to first-round sites (all except North Carolina, Duke and Virginia). 10 of those 13 teams will have to fly to first-round sites (exceptions are Georgetown, High Point and Loyola).

If the tournament ever adds a round prior to the Round of 16, I think that four sites for the Round of 16 would be an excellent idea. I don't think it was a good idea for this year.

As far as the two air travel games rule goes, I think the NCAA has occasionally allowed three air travel games, and I think they would have done so this year as well. The only two unseeded teams in the bracket within bussing distance to Duke and North Carolina were High Point and Loyola. Matching up Loyola against Duke would not have been fair to either team, and moving Denver to the unseeded part of the field so that they could face ND (a move which would have saved one air travel game) wouldn't be fair to either team as well.

Makes sense. And right on Bryant. *