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

10 minutes ago, HOF2013 said:

#11 Yunker, as a freshman, has been fairly good all year - he does try to force shots sometimes.  #41 Ramirez has played a lot the last few games.   #9 McComber, I agree but he was highly touted and should play some.  We need to get those young guys game experience.  

Yunker has clearly been the biggest positive surprise among the freshmen class, and should be in the starting rotation. The combination of Laffin, Patterson, and Casey IMO just isn't a good complementary group. In that group you really don't have a quarterback or point guard of the offense. 

Ramirez hasn't played a lot. He started the season seeing some action, then disappeared, then reinserted. IMO he needs to work on his shooting as do all of the middies, but he has a good burst and energy and can get a defense moving.

McComber started off with a lot of buzz, but quickly disappeared and IMO based upon game situations that was probably the right call, but we all just found it odd that after zero playing time in a long time, he is in the game very early, makes a good play, and then never sees the field again.

Just a very bizarre way to coach a team and leads to a lot of frustration. I am not sure if Ramirez got back in the game either, but if he did it was very little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a little late to the conversation. When I was reading this blog this am, I was a little surprised about how negative the comments were on yesterday's game. So I wanted to re-watch before posting myself. I came away from the game thinking UA played pretty well overall; and after re-watching I still think it was a plus UA effort. If there was/is any negative IMHO it was the shooting was off. Eccles and Nanticoke missed 26 shots between them (15E -11N.) Eccles did hit the post twice and the score and game would not have been close, with a little better shooting.

Many have mentioned that bc's zone had a negative impact on UA, but I also saw it as UA taking what bc was giving--the outside shot. If bc isn't much of a team, the one thing they do well is play defense, so some credit there for sure. But a little more accuracy and the game would not have been as close as it was.

Our D played well, only allowing 7 goals. In the day of the shot clock, even against a bad team, that is a good day IMHO. That said I'm not impressed by the shot clock at all and for me, the constant subbing and using every bit of the clock trying to get off the "perfect" shot has slowed the game and made the game less, NOT more interesting/exciting.

Anyhow, my other thought on the game, & others in my area seemed to agree; it may be time to end the Nanticoke as fourth attack experiment. While it has been relatively successful and may have kept Tehoka from getting killed, IMHO I think we need him full time on attack, mixing it up inside and creating for others. I'd bring Patterson back as the 4th, where he always seemed more comfortable. And Nanticoke inside can draw more penalties, like he did yesterday to clinch. {of course he has to be careful of his temper and not retaliate & negate the man up advantage.}

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, AlbanyFan2018 said:

We don't have much in the way of zone busting midfielders so we will struggle against zones unless Eccles gets on fire or they can find ways to free up Laffin or maybe Tehoka for shots. I think we scored six goals in 6 v 6 situation which isn't going to cut it.

Perla played the whole game. They have been spelling Dhluy a bit with Kozar who played some in the first half. Not sure, but think Dhluy has been fighting an injury all season.

Sorry you are right it was  Dhluy.  #37.  got beat and was removed. He has been getting beaten every game on close D.  Around the corner.

Edited by HOF2013

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dslyank said:

I am a little late to the conversation. When I was reading this blog this am, I was a little surprised about how negative the comments were on yesterday's game. So I wanted to re-watch before posting myself. I came away from the game thinking UA played pretty well overall; and after re-watching I still think it was a plus UA effort. If there was/is any negative IMHO it was the shooting was off. Eccles and Nanticoke missed 26 shots between them (15E -11N.) Eccles did hit the post twice and the score and game would not have been close, with a little better shooting.

Many have mentioned that bc's zone had a negative impact on UA, but I also saw it as UA taking what bc was giving--the outside shot. If bc isn't much of a team, the one thing they do well is play defense, so some credit there for sure. But a little more accuracy and the game would not have been as close as it was.

Our D played well, only allowing 7 goals. In the day of the shot clock, even against a bad team, that is a good day IMHO. That said I'm not impressed by the shot clock at all and for me, the constant subbing and using every bit of the clock trying to get off the "perfect" shot has slowed the game and made the game less, NOT more interesting/exciting.

Anyhow, my other thought on the game, & others in my area seemed to agree; it may be time to end the Nanticoke as fourth attack experiment. While it has been relatively successful and may have kept Tehoka from getting killed, IMHO I think we need him full time on attack, mixing it up inside and creating for others. I'd bring Patterson back as the 4th, where he always seemed more comfortable. And Nanticoke inside can draw more penalties, like he did yesterday to clinch. {of course he has to be careful of his temper and not retaliate & negate the man up advantage.}

 

AGREE!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dslyank said:

I am a little late to the conversation. When I was reading this blog this am, I was a little surprised about how negative the comments were on yesterday's game. So I wanted to re-watch before posting myself. I came away from the game thinking UA played pretty well overall; and after re-watching I still think it was a plus UA effort. If there was/is any negative IMHO it was the shooting was off. Eccles and Nanticoke missed 26 shots between them (15E -11N.) Eccles did hit the post twice and the score and game would not have been close, with a little better shooting.

Many have mentioned that bc's zone had a negative impact on UA, but I also saw it as UA taking what bc was giving--the outside shot. If bc isn't much of a team, the one thing they do well is play defense, so some credit there for sure. But a little more accuracy and the game would not have been as close as it was.

Our D played well, only allowing 7 goals. In the day of the shot clock, even against a bad team, that is a good day IMHO. That said I'm not impressed by the shot clock at all and for me, the constant subbing and using every bit of the clock trying to get off the "perfect" shot has slowed the game and made the game less, NOT more interesting/exciting.

Anyhow, my other thought on the game, & others in my area seemed to agree; it may be time to end the Nanticoke as fourth attack experiment. While it has been relatively successful and may have kept Tehoka from getting killed, IMHO I think we need him full time on attack, mixing it up inside and creating for others. I'd bring Patterson back as the 4th, where he always seemed more comfortable. And Nanticoke inside can draw more penalties, like he did yesterday to clinch. {of course he has to be careful of his temper and not retaliate & negate the man up advantage.}

 

Totally agree on Nanticoke. It takes too long to get him out on the field as a middie most of the time, and we are wasting 20-30 seconds on most possessions. With our starting attack we have no one who can dodge consistently, and Patterson is much more effective from up top IMO.

Overall I thought it was another mediocre performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, AlbanyFan2018 said:

Totally agree on Nanticoke. It takes too long to get him out on the field as a middie most of the time, and we are wasting 20-30 seconds on most possessions. With our starting attack we have no one who can dodge consistently, and Patterson is much more effective from up top IMO.

Overall I thought it was another mediocre performance.

One change that should be made.  The middies jog off the field when they are trying to get Tehoka in and it does waste time. Jacob has more difficulty as attack and just seems better coming in from the box.  No question.  This is where I say UMBC played really good def.  They kept Jacob from getting anywhere near taking a shot.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of what UMBC was able to do, and we have seen the something similar the last few games as Patterson has been kind of quiet, is that it is easy to double him because our other two guys at attack just are not a threat. There has to be a better combination or we have to invert our middies to me defense start to rotate and switch.

Laffin is an amazing crease finisher, and if he gets his hands free is a threat to score, but he isn't going to scare anyone dodging. I like Casey's hustle, but I don't think he has beaten anyone dodging all season. Every time Patterson gets the ball, defenses are doubling him hard which is why his scoring is down and turnovers are up.

The dilemma of moving Tehoka back to attack is that we will then have very little production from the midfield. I am hopeful that Eccles will find his shot as he did against Harvard, but without he and Tehoka up top who can consistently hit an outside shot and force an opposing defense out of a zone? A guy or two have had good games with a goal or two, but no one stands out to me as a consistent scoring threat from the midfield, and with no other dodging threats, it allows defense to put Patterson in a lot of tough spots.

We have seen some confusing rotations this year. The best ball movement was against Cornell. I think we have to live or die with Yunker starting. I don't see the Casey, Laffin, Patterson trio as much of a threat. I have no problem with Mitch at attack as the off ball guy, finisher which is a great roll for him.

Alex Burgmaster has a really good outside shot and I don't know why he wasn't given more opportunities there, but now with him being injured that isn't an option.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I said sloppy mess before I was really referring to the unforced turnovers. If the opponent has a great ride or a double team that produces a turnover, that's understandable. I just see too many lackadaisical or off target passes for a team at the D1 level to be producing and they are so often completely uncovered at both ends. I never played LAX but don't LAX guys pretty much spend their free time passing the ball back and forth? LOL. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, AlbanyFan2018 said:

The dilemma of moving Tehoka back to attack is that we will then have very little production from the midfield.

Agree and Agree with lack of Dodging from Laffin and Casey. Casey came as a middie and perhaps he would add an outside shooting option. Laffin also seems to have a powerful outside shot, but like you, I like him around the crease. Both Burgmasters have shown in the past the ability to score from the outside. Noah Taylor and Peter Schwab have shown alittle this year from up top. Yunker and McComber really are the best dodgers and at some point will get over the freshman turnover jitters. 

Of course it means ZERO, but I'd use Tehoka-Laffin-Yunker/McComber on attack; Patterson @ the 4; and hope Eccles gets his shot back and role with some of the above middies and take my chances. {also don't know what the situation with Davis Diamond is but he has/had shown signs of being a good feeder and on dodger?????}

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, dslyank said:

Of course it means ZERO, but I'd use Tehoka-Laffin-Yunker/McComber on attack; Patterson @ the 4; and hope Eccles gets his shot back and role with some of the above middies and take my chances. {also don't know what the situation with Davis Diamond is but he has/had shown signs of being a good feeder and on dodger?????}

While there may be hiccups to me that is our best combination for long term success. I know Davis wasn't dressed for a few games, but don't know his current status.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, dslyank said:

Agree and Agree with lack of Dodging from Laffin and Casey. Casey came as a middie and perhaps he would add an outside shooting option. Laffin also seems to have a powerful outside shot, but like you, I like him around the crease. Both Burgmasters have shown in the past the ability to score from the outside. Noah Taylor and Peter Schwab have shown alittle this year from up top. Yunker and McComber really are the best dodgers and at some point will get over the freshman turnover jitters. 

Of course it means ZERO, but I'd use Tehoka-Laffin-Yunker/McComber on attack; Patterson @ the 4; and hope Eccles gets his shot back and role with some of the above middies and take my chances. {also don't know what the situation with Davis Diamond is but he has/had shown signs of being a good feeder and on dodger?????}

Well done - can't disagree

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that really pisses me off about the team is the inconsistent aggressiveness.  They come out the first period and maybe even into the second being really aggressive and it helps the over-all performance.  But by the third and fourth they seem to have lost that and other teams start scoring and getting ground balls mainly because they are far more aggressive.  I know against VT we were not getting ANY faceoff wins BUT I think we lost our aggressiveness and then the game.  That led to the loss as much as not getting the FO.  Same thing almost happened the other night, although in my mind we played far better over-all. UMBC has a much better Def than VT. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×