Danes-Hopkins Game Story

[Dane Pound]

Danes find hype not much help-TU

[GreatDanes06]

the article said it best...they were overhyped about being in the Top 20. I mean you got alot of energy and stuff going when you feel that for the first time. And like they said, this is not SB or Darmouth...we talking about probably one of the top 3 Lacrosse programs of all time here, its a another level on its own. Binghamton should get us back on track.

[reeder]

It's amazing that Marr can get this kind of talent without any facilities. Do you just sell them on going to the NCAA tournament?

[Scooby]

Scott Marr is a great coach period. He knows how to evaluate talent, coach and recruit. He also knows New York and has great connections in the state. I hope UAlbany can keep him around for a long time but it will be hard. This is where fundraising can help. It will offset the costs to keep him at UAlbany.

[alum73]

There are < 60 D1 jobs in LAX and > 300 in Basketball, so that helps. New facilities is another big plus. Hopefully we'll attract even more talent than current.

[Dane Pound]

Welcome Scooby-great handle for a lax poster.

 

Agreed Marr has brought great talent into a program with no D1 history and subpar facilities. I think it's more fun to consider what kind of talent he can bring in with a brand new lacrosse stadium and a program that's been ranked and to the tourney a couple of times.

[DaneFan2k3]

Although I know this isn't really the case, because it does matter, I don't see how facilities really affect recruiting.

 

Again, I know they do.

 

But it's not like men's hoops, where if you're wanting to play in the NBA you want to get exposure, play a lot, etc. etc. (hence you go to a big school).

 

In men's lacrosse, most likely your career stops after college. The pro level isn't huge.

 

So, to me, you have to consider other factors.

 

I would love to go to play at UAlbany, especially if they threw some money at me. You have the lure of getting a degree, staying close to home (for most of the kids) but not too close, you have a chance to win every year, you have a chance to play a lot (whereas at a Hopkins they are so freaking loaded you might have to sit). To me, when considering schools for a non-revenue sport, facilities would be a somewhat minor factor.

 

Now, do they have a disadvantage not having turf to practice on? Absolutely. In that sense, it matters. But in other sports for example ...

 

Does it really matter if you play volleyball in University Gym in front of 200 fans, or in a 1,000-seat "arena" in front of 200 fans? (Obviously if you're really big-time and you're going somewhere like Hawai'i where they pack the joint for VB, then yes, it matters). But otherwise, to me, it doesn't.

 

But I'm not an 18-year-old kid, so maybe one can chime in and tell me why you'd go to a school with better facilities as the deciding factor.

[reeder]

I don't think the issue is necessarily how nice the facilities are - they don't have anything now. These kids play some home games at Yorktown Heights and others at RPI. I think Field Hockey plays at Union.

 

I agree on volleyball - but they have a home at the gym.

 

It would be such a benefit to the University to put down new field turf on the football field and make that an all purpose field. That could be phase 1 of the facilities redesign. It would cost less than $1 million and football, lacrosse, field hockey would all benefit. I also think it would increase the odds of getting major teams to play at UA - maybe Syracuse, Hobart...

 

A single mulit-purpose field is good enough for many 1AA schools - good enough for Syracuse...

[alum73]

I believe SU has 2 turf fields. One outdoor and 1 in the dome.