UNC Women’s Lacrosse Continues Title Defense, Clinches Final Four Berth With Win Over Stanford
North Carolina secured its spot in a second consecutive Final Four with a win over Stanford Thursday night, continuing its title defense.
UNC Women’s Lacrosse Continues Title Defense, Clinches Final Four Berth With Win Over Stanford
- Thread starter SpencerHaskell
- Start date
Final Four is chalk so it will be a big challenge to win the Championship. And it's hard to go back-to-back. UNC is the best team there, but stay focused and hungry ladies and hoist another one.
This should be posted in every single locker room and athletic support facility at Carolina because this says it all! Salute!!
“Culture and standards and excellence is about people, and bringing the right people into Chapel Hill to wear our uniform — hard working, passionate, great teammates,” Levy said. “People that love the sport and love to come to practice every day. And so it doesn’t guarantee you wins, but it guarantees you an opportunity to be successful.” Coach Levy
“Culture and standards and excellence is about people, and bringing the right people into Chapel Hill to wear our uniform — hard working, passionate, great teammates,” Levy said. “People that love the sport and love to come to practice every day. And so it doesn’t guarantee you wins, but it guarantees you an opportunity to be successful.” Coach Levy
It's the culture Dean started here 65 years ago.
And water is wet.
In fact, last I checked The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill predated and showed athletic excellence well before 1961.
This is not a personal affront to Coach Smith or you. This is a great quote, it is current, and, in this age of NIL, the name on the front of the jersey still means something.
In talking to people in the lacrosse sphere, it seems that there was some fuss regarding this year's bracket and the RPI. Most people I've spoken to think that UNC is the best team, but the Big Ten had a better year than the ACC, and thus got rewarded with the top seed. Levy made a comment in last night's interview that caught my eye.
"Stanford's a good team. I think it was a shame that they had to see us in the quarterfinal"
"Stanford's a good team. I think it was a shame that they had to see us in the quarterfinal"
UNC80, I hate to burst your bubble, but Anson Dorrence started the culture here. Dean Smith stated this fact on numerous occasions that UNC should be known for women's soccer since they have the most National Championships and the way that Anson built the program up was amazing to Dean Smith. You have to give credit to Anson since Dean Smith said this himself. Go back and watch the tape / film.
Actually, while you’re bursting bubbles, coach Smith never said that, let alone “on numerous occasions.”
If you take your own advice and go back and watch the tape Coach Smith’s comments to this effect usually came in the context of interviewers labeling Carolina a “basketball school” and Coach would correct them that it was a women’s soccer school.
He absolutely did mention Coach Dorrance, Coach Fox, Coach Brown (1.0) and all of the other successful coaches on campus every chance he got, but let’s not edit what he said to make conform it to a specific narrative.
Yes, he did. If you go back and watch how the ACC basketball was formed. It gave the history of ACC basketball back when Frank McGuire was the head coach at UNC before Dean Smith, he did say it in the commentary. I am surprised that you did not watch this series. If was great. It went all the way back when Larry Brown played at UNC under Frank McGuire, Bones McKinney, etc., back when University of South Carolina was in the ACC and that was back in the 1950's.
Dorrance has often said he spent hours with a notebook watching Dean's practices- so Id say it started with Dean. Now Dorrance did alot to continue that as have other coaches.
We have the best Olympic coaches in the nation Id wager.
We have the best Olympic coaches in the nation Id wager.
You're not bursting my bubble. Dean was here long before Anson. He was very humble and always deflecting attention from himself to others. I'm certain he much admired Anson's program deeply, but the extraordinary culture started with Dean, from his daily thoughts, huddling at the free throw line, pointing to the passer to integrating UNC athletics. The list is infinite.
Last edited:
Greg and I did a long two part show with Coach Dorrance a couple years ago....I'd suggest everyone go listen to that.....might be enlightening on the how and why and who around Coach Dorrance and the program......
That said, let's keep this thread on topic....Carolina's elite WLax team/program
Yes, it’s been on the WLax season thread also. Stanford lost a couple games with a crazy travel schedule and illnesses if I recall correctly. They lost to Villanova on that trip + 1 other, on quick turnaround 2 game weekend. It cost our whole conference IMO. And the bottom of the conference was weak Louisville, FSU).
And to repeat some of the other thread, yes, shame on the committee for chalk seeding to RPI. I cannot calculate 3 losses getting #1 seed vs 1 loss in OT vs a top team. And the committee pretty much failed to use the eye test as most such groups are supposed to. Otherwise, why have the Committee? Clemson deserved to show what they can do also. Thy were a good team. Not enough ACC vs B1G tosettle the RPI validity IMO. Weak stewardship / leadership of the game.
Yet, I’d be most pleased if it motivates the Heels’ team. And I think it does.
We're talking with them again tomorrow... looking forward to it.
All of the ACC OOC losses this year with RPI rankings:
The kicker here is that the ACC lost almost every single 1 goal OOC match; those games were extremely pivotal. The ACC was something like 1-11 in 1 goal and OT games. That is certainly a statistical outlier with huge impact on the conference strength for the computers.
Basically, the ACC scheduled really weak and lost the few games that were meaningful.
I think that part of the explanation here is the major changes in the ACC: we added two west coast teams with zero WLax history. Stanford got surprisingly good real fast, but Cal cancelled them out. In addition FSU, Pitt and Clemson recently added programs. Clemson also got good real fast but FSU and Pitt more than cancelled them out. We suddenly have bottom feeders in our conference that for right now are a drag on the overall conference strength.
The lesson for now to the top ACC teams should be: find some more solid OOC opponents because you will have a few easy wins within your conference. Conversely, there is no need to schedule as many easy wins out-of-conference as breathers. That is the new paradigm we now live in.
But I still think Stanford got hosed by the committee. They spent much of the year ranked top 5, only to fall after losing to BC and UNC twice. They finished 2nd in the ACC regular season and made it to the ACCT finals. Their only other loss was to Nova, admittedly a bad loss. But is seems like that one game sealed their fate. Their "reward" was seed the team ranked 5th/6th in the nation in the polls as 11th and in UNC's path, a team on the opposite coast they have already played twice. That is pretty indefensible. It is also was not fair to Mich who was "upset" by Stanford. As the 7 seed they should not play a team ranked higher than they are in the round of 16.
- #2 (16-1) UNC: #1 NW in OT (Beat #15 JMU)
- #6 (13-5) Cuse: #3 MD (Beat #1 NW, #21 Yale)
- #11 (15-4) Stanford: #32 Villanova by 1 goal (no ranked OOC wins)
- #14 (14-5) Clemson: #10 UofF by 1 goal (no ranked OOC wins)
- #19 (9-7) BC: #1 NW, #9 Mich by 1 goal (no ranked OOC wins)
- #22 (8-9) UVA: #3 MD, #5 Navy, #15 JMU, by 1 goal #25 Richmond by 1 goal (beat #16 Princeton)
- #30 (12-5) ND: none (beat #9 Mich)
- #31 (9-8) dook: #7 Johns Hopkins in OT, #25 Richmond in OT, #60 Harvard (no ranked OOC wins)
- #41 (9-7) Pitt: #18 Penn St in OT (no ranked OOC wins)
- #45 (9-8) VT: #15 JMU (no ranked OOC wins)
- #56 (6-9) Louisville: #37 Ohio St in OT (no ranked OOC wins)
- #79 (6-11) Cal: #44 USC, #71 UC Davis by 1 goal (no ranked OOC wins)
- #93 (4-12) FSU: #12 Army, #71 UC Davis (no ranked OOC wins)
The kicker here is that the ACC lost almost every single 1 goal OOC match; those games were extremely pivotal. The ACC was something like 1-11 in 1 goal and OT games. That is certainly a statistical outlier with huge impact on the conference strength for the computers.
Basically, the ACC scheduled really weak and lost the few games that were meaningful.
I think that part of the explanation here is the major changes in the ACC: we added two west coast teams with zero WLax history. Stanford got surprisingly good real fast, but Cal cancelled them out. In addition FSU, Pitt and Clemson recently added programs. Clemson also got good real fast but FSU and Pitt more than cancelled them out. We suddenly have bottom feeders in our conference that for right now are a drag on the overall conference strength.
The lesson for now to the top ACC teams should be: find some more solid OOC opponents because you will have a few easy wins within your conference. Conversely, there is no need to schedule as many easy wins out-of-conference as breathers. That is the new paradigm we now live in.
But I still think Stanford got hosed by the committee. They spent much of the year ranked top 5, only to fall after losing to BC and UNC twice. They finished 2nd in the ACC regular season and made it to the ACCT finals. Their only other loss was to Nova, admittedly a bad loss. But is seems like that one game sealed their fate. Their "reward" was seed the team ranked 5th/6th in the nation in the polls as 11th and in UNC's path, a team on the opposite coast they have already played twice. That is pretty indefensible. It is also was not fair to Mich who was "upset" by Stanford. As the 7 seed they should not play a team ranked higher than they are in the round of 16.
Here is the quote made by Dean Smith.
This is a women's soccer school. We're just trying to keep up with them.
--Dean Smith
This is a women's soccer school. We're just trying to keep up with them.
--Dean Smith