Agree about Rode completely. He looked good against us on Saturday, but our shots didn't always test him as much as they could have. He looked amazing today. And Virginia are deserving champs. They made the plays they really needed to and had a hot goalie, which is a good formula. But...
This, sadly, is true. Watching in Philadephia, especially after seeing the first half of the Yale-Penn State game, we thought, "oh well, Duke and UVA were playing for second place anyway." But watching in person today, it looked much more like the first semifinal was, in fact, the championship game. Against Penn State, Yale's passing was crisp, their shots were pinpoint precise, and they made up for their smaller size with greater speed and quickness. Against UVA, though, they weren't faster and quicker, just (mostly) smaller, and they couldn't get the shots they did on Saturday. Given that the UVA FOGO won hardly any faceoffs, the biggest advantage Yale would have against Duke could probably be neutralized by forcing turnovers and bad shots, as UVA did. I think Duke would have won this game unless they beat themselves (which of course we know is quite possible).
This is the saving grace for me--I can't speak to whether it is tightness or something else as Coach Danowski can, but all year this team, for all its obvious talent, hasn't looked like a team that could reliably put it together for four quarters several games in a row and win the whole thing. So while I hoped for Duke to win, I went in with a healthy skepticism, thus am less disappointed than I would have been. I still haven't gotten over 2007 or 2008, for example.