AlbanyFan2018

Solid effort. The Achilles heal for us has been the defense just leaving guys and just bad, early slides.  How many of the ND goals in the second half have basically been uncontested, open looks with no Dane near them?

18 hours ago, dslyank said:

Not sure the announcer for UMBC is a reliable source; but he was promoting the opposite several times yesterday. Claimed one or more of the league blue bloods could be on the outside looking in this year for the AmEast tournament. Not saying he is right, but he was praising the league heartily.

On the other hand, while praising the current UMBC coach, he was saying UA and UMBC have played some of the greatest games of all time. Again not arguing that , but pretty sure many of the games he referenced were with UMBC former coach I believe.

Personally, I cannot say if the league is weak or not this year, but it does seem pretty balanced overall, more so than ever perhaps. For a 5 or 6 year period UA pretty much crushed "everyone" in the league. No one has done that since or perhaps ever? So was the league weaker than or was UA just in a league by themselves ??

UVM is down this year for sure after a good run, Stony Brook is no longer in the conference. I guess you could say Bryant is solid, but other than that Bingo is what Bingo is, NJIT is a bit better but still not a top team, and UMass L is bad. I don't think how the announcer could make the case that the AE is a good conference. I'll stand by the fact that this is probably the first team in 4-5 years that is showing some serious grit and getting better.  The defense to include D middies needs to get better, but this team could definitely get into the tournament with winning the AE conference tournament. 

15 hours ago, ctdanes said:

That’s not a game we win last year or even earlier this year. Solid W

100% agree with you. I have not been happy with this staff for a while, but I do have to say this team is showing much more grit and has improved through the season as opposed to what we have seen the last several years. This is the weakest the AE has been in a while, but a nice road win for sure.

The youth does show, and we have been young for a number of years without a lot of development. Rather than get negative I will have to sign off. The last five years or so after the great run we had are tough to watch.  I think we had the chance to be the Gonzaga of college lacrosse, but for some reason it slipped through our fingers. It is tough to watch the same mistakes being made over and over again. I do think we have a nice crop of freshmen on the team, but we haven't seen the sort of growth you would expect over four years.

I said it years ago, I applaud and love Coach Marr's loyalty, but it is time to look out side the program for the coaching staff. It is only natural for things to get too comfortable. Time to shake things up, and bring in some fresh eyes.

I think this is going how it going to look. A little sloppy with younger players, but this group seems to be playing with a lot more heart than other recent teams. I still hate the slide packages, and we create more offense then we actually give up.

Looks like Piseno, at least for now, back at LSM, but not for long!!

Silly defensive breakdown leads to a point blank shot for a goal and Piseno as good as he is just made a terrible missed check in close and the goalie bails us out. That has got to cleaned up ASAP.

Just saw the starting lineup for today's game and Hogg has been moved back to attack.

5 hours ago, jimbo said:

I watched the whole game. UA got off to a slow start, but then settled down. It’s funny, but watching the game it really looked like Colgate was dominating and yet the team stats don’t show that at all. It seemed like every time there was a scrum the Raiders would come out with the ball…but the GBs were even. The big thing was some unforced errors on passes that I think cost them the contest. Not a chippy game, but very aggressive D on both sides and the refs let them play. Lots of newbies as well. For a first game against what is clearly a good team with three games under their belts they did well. 

I agree with you. What I think happened at the end, and is to be expected, is that when we had the ball in that last 90 seconds after Colgate scored, there wasn't a go to guy to run the play through or to try and take the game over. That's why I was a bit surprised, at least for now, that Hogg was playing up top. Over his career he has been pretty effective at beating his guy from X or at least getting the defense moving.

I'm not sure I love Piseno playing down low, but I say that not having a clue anymore of who can really do what down low. I just think he is much more disruptive in the middle of the field and his go for broke defensive style is better suited in space then in close. He did give up one or two yesterday going for a high risk reward check. That is better suited in space then in close. I just don't think playing close plays to his strengths. There were some bad slides and ball watching by a few guys, but hopefully that gets cleaned up as they get more time at game speed.

The freshmen goalie looked really good. At least 3-4 of the goals he gave up were from poor defensive plays where he had little to no chance. 

2 minutes ago, GreatDanes06 said:

critical errors hurt them. Could have won. Young kids learning. No such this as good loses, but I can call it that. On to the next.

I would agree. I still am not seeing anyone who can win a one on one matchup. That is one reason I am a bit surprised Hogg is coming out of the box. He was pretty much a non factor on offense, especially for a 5th year senior. 

All depends on the growth over the next 2-3 games, but for a team playing its 4th game vs our first overall I felt OK with it.

I know he is out of school, but not sure if he is trying to play somewhere else or not.

1 hour ago, UAFAN said:

Still recovering? Transferred?

Seeing the same defensive mistakes over and over the last 5-6 years. 

18 minutes ago, UAFAN said:

Cam Hay still on team?

He is not

Let's go Danes - Can't say I love another youth movement but we will see.

Finally got that monkey off our back! Gutsy call by Marr to put Heller in at goalie and it paid off big.

12 hours ago, PrisonMike said:

Gash with a walking boot and crutches was not good to see. Hopefully hes alright and its just precautionary. There have been quite a few injuries this season. I saw Fingar on the box score but I thought he was out for the season? 

There was no quit in this team today, they played hard until the final whistle. Eleven assists was a season high, and an overall solid offensive performance should build confidence heading into the tournament. 

Definitely some good pieces on offense. Have to give the coaches kudos for moving Salit to attack. Hopefully Hogg will be OK to play in the tournament because if he does play the 4th attack out of the box he can cause the defense to rotate. It was a solid effort start to finish, but when that is what we have to hang our hat on after a loss to Bingo that should be unacceptable for our program. Somehow have to get this program back to the Dane Train days. I see some bright spots with some of the younger offensive players, but we just can't seem to recruit or develop the two way middie's who really made that offense hum with great outlet passing.

I am not sure how Sam Stratton got in the dog house. IMO he should be playing, and played well last year as a starter for most if not all of the year. The poles are playing OK but the breakdowns yesterday were once again the short stick defenders

8 hours ago, Laxdawg20 said:

No one says anything here when they play well just when the don’t it’s very odd

Definitely the best effort game of the season. Would have one another game or two if we could have played with that kind of energy from start to finish.

2 hours ago, cwdickens said:

A Great Dane win 13-11 with a brawl as the game came to an end.  From my view, completely caused by an unnecessary slashing event by a Merrimack player.  Not only did it take the referrers and coaches, but it also took additional staff including Mark Benson, Vic Cegles and at least one University Police Officer to separate the players and coaches.  Both head coaches exchange angry words from a distance and traditional post-game handshakes did not occur.  Merrimack gather at one end of the field for an extended post-game discussion before vacating the field with the assistance of University Police.

That was quite the brawl. Haven't seen Scott that fired up in a long time. Agree it was that late slash by Merrimack.

1 hour ago, jimbo said:

For some reason I thought the game was today. Appears I didn’t miss much. It’s a shame the 2300 who paid didn’t see a better product on the field. 

Never miss when Yale comes to town. Somber start to the start of the game with the tribute to Coach Marr's mom. It was an odd game from my perspective, because we did come out with good energy and it was a tight game with solid goalie play. We looked pretty quick on offense with Hogg playing the 4th attack from up top, but just couldn't score.

Then we got the usual defensive breakdowns, unforced turnovers, and while we got a decent amount of looks we just couldn't score. I bet we had more shots than Yale and I thought overall both goalies played good games. Something just isn't right.

4 hours ago, dslyank said:

and rather than developing players the staff continually seems to be searching for something

I agree searching & experimenting seems to be a recurring UA theme the last few years. But I am not sure exactly your point about recruiting and then not letting the new “better” kids play over the veterans. Always got to keep building and get better. I know it may hurt moral, but if you got a good kid & you sit him, in this day & age of immediate gratification & the portal, you are going to lose him.  

If anything, over the years, I think Scott has been faithful (often to a fault) to the veterans. I do not have your inside information and I know moral & team chemistry are important. But in the long run IMHO it comes down to talent & how it is used. Again, I do not have your coaching background, and I’m probably wrong but isn’t building & developing players, and team, and chemistry, equally on the players as well as the staff.

Totally agree.

I guess I have a slightly different take because I had a bit more of a front row seat. I didn't do a great job of articulating my point and thanks to HOF as I was not taking a shot at Carino, but more pointing that out as an example of pumping up a new player with no recent lax experience as the possible missing piece. I meant to add the constant changes in offense, two way middle, no two way middie, the constant defensive scheme changes........

For the last 4-5 years there just has been little to no identity. I completely agree that you always try to recruit guys who are better than the ones you have and if they are, work hard and develop then those are the guys who should be on the field. I am just aware of a few too many instances when the players know who can and who can't get it done and have lost confidence. 

8 hours ago, HOF2013 said:

Carino had not played in a couple of years BUT he was pretty heavily recruited out of HS.   PLUS he had almost no time in a game until recently.  Not sure why the animosity torward him.  If a kid has an issue he should WORK HARDER and prove he should be playing.  Carino played as well yesterday as anybody - both ways, had a couple of mistakes.  There comes a time when coaches have to decide what is best for the TEAM not individuals.  If new recruits are better, they should play - bottom line.  Or if upper classman are just not doing it they should sit - bottom line.  My opinion.  The way to get better recruits is to win.

 

Not animosity, but when you shine a light on a guy who hasn't played a second of lacrosse in several years IMO it erodes team morale, and he hasn't been a factor. I was pointing out this has been a recurring theme, and rather than developing players the staff continually seems to be searching for something

7 hours ago, dslyank said:

I agree to an extent on your shinny new pennies pushing out established players possibly being an issue. Where I question it to some extent, we’ve all been looking for UA to capitalize on their final four success with better recruits! I know there are only so many Thompson or Fields out there, we simply have not been bringing in 5, 4 or even 3 star recruits. And when we think we may have a “good” one they turn out not to be. If they were really good enough, the pennies would NOT push them out so easily??

As for experimenting with line-ups, strategies & having to pump guys up well into the season, are things should be taken care of in the fall & pre-season. Of course corrections & fine tuning always needed; but not to the extent UA seems to be struggling with the last few years. 

100%

There is always going to be tweaking, and players can't stand on the their laurels and just expect to have their spot. I used to coach a bit with one of better area travel teams and the two guys your rarely saw at events were Desko when he was still at Cuse and Coach Marr. Since D1 lacrosse hasn't grown too much in terms of number of teams, and more kids playing you would sort of think with so many kids fighting for not a lot of spots that given our recent history we would be winning our share of the recruiting battles.

I do think our facilities and things like the locker room, supplemental food and what not hurts us to some degree, but there is enough talent out there. I have been on several recruiting trips to help several families out and there is no question we are the minor league when it comes to the bells and whistles part of the program. 

You could be right about why certain guys get pushed out in favor of new recruits, but I haven't seen something like we have been seeing, especially when the recruits are as you have said, and I agree not highly rated. 

19 hours ago, cwdickens said:

The Times Union will have an article involving concerns expressed by Scott Marr about the MLAX practice on Wednesday.

Thanks, I hadn't seen it and just read it. Unfortunately, no real meat to the story, but at least everyone on this forum has seen this and screaming at the top of our lungs for a while now. I've heard a few things second hand so can't say, but the one thing that has struck me for years is the disconnect between fall ball and the inability to start the season knowing who your 20-28 guys are with reasonable certainty. For the last 4-5 years there has been constant experimenting to try and find the elusive chemistry. Then you see guys disappear for a whole host of odd reasons. 

I don't know the Carino kid, but if I were on the team, and I guy who has played no lacrosse, and really hasn't shown anything, gets a ton of hype leading into the season at the expense of kids who have been busing their butt in the program IMO is the sort of thing that gets under player's skin. I don't know that is a problem per se, but there have been things like that, and what I call the shiny new penny syndrome over the last few years which can't help team cohesion.

I didn't get a chance to comment on what appeared to be a very good performance against UMBC, but today is a complete and utter disaster. This lack of preparation is what was happening at the tail end of our time with the program and is 100% on the coaches.  Time to blow it up.

On 3/28/2023 at 11:04 AM, nysteve661 said:

Yup.  When Marr does not have an 1st team All-American attackman, ie. Restateris, Thompson, Fields, we are mediocre at best on offense over the past 15 years.  Time to find the next 1st teamer coach.  Or UA will be a middle of the road team offensively year after year.

I think the demise of the offense has been more about not having stud two way middies, and the ability to bring another dangerous attack men out of the box to give us that 4th option that we did so well. It seems as if Coach Marr and the OC have struggled ever since. No doubt the names you mention are a big part of the problem, but the Thompson's in particular were generational type of players that most teams never have on their roster.

The biggest surprise to me is the continued lack of Canadian influence, and lack of stick skills/ball movement, but it all starts with one or two guys who can break down a defense and get it moving, and if you don't have that then you have to do it with creative two man games, picks, and crisp ball movement. 

Did we just happen to catch lighting in a bottle? It is beginning to look like that might have been the case.