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

  • Replies 33
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

My Report:  with the declaimer that I've had some eye issues;  new glasses were suppose to arrive yesterday --did NOT. I had a real hard time picking out #s, especially on far end. People I was with s

I think there is a small viewing area. If open to the public, I will go and report.

9-8 UA at half. Some sloppy passing. FO gonna be a problem again. Not doing to bad, just can’t get any ground balls. Need better wing play

32 minutes ago, UAFAN said:

14-14 after 4. Got chippy, might have ended early couldn’t see clock. FOs gonna be huge problem. Gotta work on ground balls & clean up the sloppy passes

I thought we were up by at least one, maybe two at the end of the 4th we were keeping a running score [but not writing it down].  A lot of substitutions on O and D throughout the game. Scored one immediately in the extra period and I left.    FO was an issue.  They got 5 or 6 clean wins BUT they got most of the ground balls off the scrums.  WINGS have to be much better!  They did fight harder the second 1/2 but HAVE to get the ground balls. Against better teams this will not be good!   Sloppy play, yes.  Patterson had his 3 or 4 bad passes or look-aways and missed the passed ball.  Freshman Tanner Hay and Yunker played most of the game, others did sub in.   Sickierski actually did well in the net although he allowed most of the goals.  Made some great saves.  Close D has to be better, allowed guys to get clear shots from 8 - 10 yards on the corners, not directly in front.  Just lost them and gave up clear shots. 

Offense looked great sometimes, great passes etc.  McComber had a GREAT goal in the 4th.  Got a rebound and behind the back over the shoulder score.

Team has to work on jelling better I think.!

Edited by HOF2013
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HOF2013 said:

I thought we were up by at least one, maybe two at the end of the 4th we were keeping a running score [but not writing it down].  A lot of substitutions on O and D throughout the game. Scored one immediately in the extra period and I left.    FO was an issue.  They got 5 or 6 clean wins BUT they got most of the ground balls off the scrums.  WINGS have to be much better!  They did fight harder the second 1/2 but HAVE to get the ground balls. Against better teams this will not be good!   Sloppy play, yes.  Patterson had his 3 or 4 bad passes or look-aways and missed the passed ball.  Freshman Tanner Hay and Yunker played most of the game, others did sub in.   Sickierski actually did well in the net although he allowed most of the goals.  Made some great saves.  Close D has to be better, allowed guys to get clear shots from 8 - 10 yards on the corners, not directly in front.  Just lost them and gave up clear shots. 

Offense looked great sometimes, great passes etc.  McComber had a GREAT goal in the 4th.  Got a rebound and behind the back over the shoulder score.

Team has to work on jelling better I think.!

Thanks for the in person updates. I just got off the phone with one of the other parents and what he said pretty much jibed with your comments.

His main points were that the shot clock wasn’t a big deal, but the pace at times felt faster than it needed to be. Goalie play play across the board was actually pretty good. Lots of poor defense gave up some easy looks and several man down goals.

Face offs were bad but as you said more about ground balls. He said wing play overall was really poor.

Offense looked very good at times, but he felt little midfield production and as you said got sloppy at times.

Dhluy was banged up and didn’t play much and the other freshmen pole is also hurt but did play late and made several big plays which led to goals. But overall defense struggled, especially two d middies and one starting pole who continues to make poor slides. He felt Filipowski easily had the best game among the poles.

He said it was all tied after four quarters, and our third quarter was terrible, but we won the extra quarter by 3-4 goals. He said overall some strange combination of players with some of what he felt and others were better options didn’t play as much. He didn’t know if those guys were hurt or if they wanted to see some other things??

But biggest takeaway and I just got a text from the kid was that ground balls were a disaster and that kept Colgate in it for the most part.

Edited by AlbanyFan2018
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, AlbanyFan2018 said:

Thanks for the in person updates. I just got off the phone with one of the other parents and what he said pretty much jibed with your comments.

His main points were that the shot clock wasn’t a big deal, but the pace at times felt faster than it needed to be. Goalie play play across the board was actually pretty good. Lots of poor defense gave up some easy looks and several man down goals.

Face offs were bad but as you said more about ground balls. He said wing play overall was really poor.

Offense looked very good at times, but he felt little midfield production and as you said got sloppy at times.

Dhluy was banged up and didn’t play much and the other freshmen pole is also hurt but did play late and made several big plays which led to goals. But overall defense struggled, especially two d middies and one starting pole who continues to make poor slides. He felt Filipowski easily had the best game among the poles.

He said it was all tied after four quarters, and our third quarter was terrible, but we won the extra quarter by 3-4 goals. He said overall some strange combination of players with some of what he felt and others were better options didn’t play as much. He didn’t know if those guys were hurt or if they wanted to see some other things??

But biggest takeaway and I just got a text from the kid was that ground balls were a disaster and that kept Colgate in it for the most part.

10 hours ago, UAFAN said:

14-14 after 4. Got chippy, might have ended early couldn’t see clock. FOs gonna be huge problem. Gotta work on ground balls & clean up the sloppy passes

I thought we were up by at least one, maybe two at the end of the 4th.  A lot of substitutions on O and D throughout the game. Scored one immediately in the extra period and I left.    FO was an issue.  They got 5 or 6 clean wins BUT they got most of the ground balls off the scrums.  WINGS have to be much better!  They did fight harder the second 1/2 but HAVE to get the ground balls. Against better teams this will not be good!   Sloppy play, yes.  Patterson had his 3 or 4 bad passes or look-aways and missed the passed ball.  Freshman Tanner Hay and Yunker played most of the game, others did sub in.   Sickierski actually did well in the net although he allowed most of the goals.  Made some great saves.  Close D has to be better, allowed guys to get clear shots from 8 - 10 yards on the corners, not directly in front.  Just lost them and gave up clear shots. 

Offense looked great sometimes, great passes etc.  McComber had a GREAT goal in the 4th.  Got a rebound and behind the back over the shoulder score.

 

Agree with your response.   Some very strange combinations.  Ron Jon did not play by the way.  Patterson did not play until about 5- 6 minutes in by the way.  And then not as much as I expected.   Yunker seems to have a leg injury and aggravated it, limping in the 4th.  If Wings and other middies don't play better it could be a long season!!!!!!!!!!   Ground balls did allow them to stay in the game.  Faceoffs will be a huge problem going forward unless something changes!

Edited by HOF2013
Link to post
Share on other sites

My Report:  with the declaimer that I've had some eye issues;  new glasses were suppose to arrive yesterday --did NOT. I had a real hard time picking out #s, especially on far end. People I was with said they were having the same problem. Lighting was a bit off IMHO and field view not best; but with built in excuses now established here I go:

5-4 after one; then UA went on a 4 -0 run. As stated, gate closed to 9-8 at ½. Gate scored first two in third period and eventually wen up 2 couple of times. UA scored last two in regulation to tie 14-14. Won sudden death with first goal and went on to score 2-3 more and shut-out gate. Ramos played the extra session and everyone in my area agreed he looked the best of all the goalies, ours or gates {of course by this time the competition may have been 3-4th string?}

If gates face-off person was/is NOT an elite player [and I do not know if he is or is not], than we are in bigger trouble @ the X that I thought. In other words, if he was just say an average FO, than we are in a heap of trouble. I would guess gate won in the 70% range, maybe a touch higher. I tend to disagree that the problem was with our wings. IMHO both UA face-off guys seemed to be trying to do the TD grab and break, and were NOT utilizing their wings. I guess you may say is this a chicken or egg situation. But as others said needs A LOT OF work!  I am not the coach (obviously), but it might be time to stop rotating; pick one guy or the other, let him take his lumps and see if he improves??

I was very confused by the defensive rotations. Even the starting group was not who I expected. Maybe because of injuries or Marr just experimenting or because of my fore mentioned eye issues; but IMHO the D overall was the worse part of our game yesterday, even worse than the face-off issues. AT times our goalies made some incredible saves; and in spite of giving up 14 to gate, I agree with those who said they played pretty well mostly. Offensively gate was big and strong and quick and some credit should be acknowledged.

UA's offense needs to cut down the bad passes and un-forced errors. Obviously it is early and this is really a DUH statement. But right now they are their own worse enemy. Again, the rotation @ times seemed confusing, but could be just the staff still experimenting. I did notice (I think) that early on and during our runs, Tehoka was playing near the net and he and the attack was pretty near unstoppable. But a lot of times Marr had him way up on top and we seemed to be stagnant than. Maybe staff moved Tehoka away from the net because, when close in he was absolutely getting hammered. So maybe for his own protection??

Someone said that Yunker and TeComber played a lot. I did not see TeComber at all until the extra session and only saw Yunker sparingly. Maybe my eye issue. But they did look extremely good in the fifth quarter. I tried to watch Tanner Hay and it seemed to me he looked nervous and uncomfortable and made a number of errors. The END.

ps. gate bench on each face off was giving the UA TD cheer. Pretty classless if you ask me

 

 

 

Edited by dslyank
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dslyank said:

My Report:  with the declaimer that I've had some eye issues;  new glasses were suppose to arrive yesterday --did NOT. I had a real hard time picking out #s, especially on far end. People I was with said they were having the same problem. Lighting was a bit off IMHO and field view not best; but with built in excuses now established here I go:

5-4 after one; then UA went on a 4 -0 run. As stated, gate closed to 9-8 at ½. Gate scored first two in third period and eventually wen up 2 couple of times. UA scored last two in regulation to tie 14-14. Won sudden death with first goal and went on to score 2-3 more and shut-out gate. Ramos played the extra session and everyone in my area agreed he looked the best of all the goalies, ours or gates {of course by this time the competition may have been 3-4th string?}

If gates face-off person was/is NOT an elite player [and I do not know if he is or is not], than we are in bigger trouble @ the X that I thought. In other words, if he was just say an average FO, than we are in a heap of trouble. I would guess gate won in the 70% range, maybe a touch higher. I tend to disagree that the problem was with our wings. IMHO both UA face-off guys seemed to be trying to do the TD grab and break, and were NOT utilizing their wings. I guess you may say is this a chicken or egg situation. But as others said needs A LOT OF work!  I am not the coach (obviously), but it might be time to stop rotating; pick one guy or the other, let him take his lumps and see if he improves??

I was very confused by the defensive rotations. Even the starting group was not who I expected. Maybe because of injuries or Marr just experimenting or because of my fore mentioned eye issues; but IMHO the D overall was the worse part of our game yesterday, even worse than the face-off issues. AT times our goalies made some incredible saves; and in spite of giving up 14 to gate, I agree with those who said they played pretty well mostly. Offensively gate was big and strong and quick and some credit should be acknowledged.

UA's offense needs to cut down the bad passes and un-forced errors. Obviously it is early and this is really a DUH statement. But right now they are their own worse enemy. Again, the rotation @ times seemed confusing, but could be just the staff still experimenting. I did notice (I think) that early on and during our runs, Tehoka was playing near the net and he and the attack was pretty near unstoppable. But a lot of times Marr had him way up on top and we seemed to be stagnant than. Maybe staff moved Tehoka away from the net because, when close in he was absolutely getting hammered. So maybe for his own protection??

Someone said that Yunker and TeComber played a lot. I did not see TeComber at all until the extra session and only saw Yunker sparingly. Maybe my eye issue. But they did look extremely good in the fifth quarter. I tried to watch Tanner Hay and it seemed to me he looked nervous and uncomfortable and made a number of errors. The END.

ps. gate bench on each face off was giving the UA TD cheer. Pretty classless if you ask me

 

 

 

Awesome report!

I hadn't heard that Ron John didn't play, and no clue if he was sick or injured, and he is one of the middies that has to take a leap this year. I had a chance to get a further debrief after they watched film and the consensus is that it was more the entire face off unit, and the theme of the day was have to want ground balls. I would expect some more tinkering.

You are never going to hear me talk negative about any of the guys, but there have been some interesting depth chart changes which I don't understand based upon the fall and a week or so of practice, because the guys who got a lot of interesting run (unless there were injuries or disciplinary issues) didn't impress.

I too am surprised to hear that McComber played very little, but I did confirm that was the case.

Thanks again to everyone who took notes!

Edited by AlbanyFan2018
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, dslyank said:

tes face-off person was/is NOT an elite player [and I do not know if he is or is not], than we are in bigger trouble @ the X that I thought. In other words, if he was just say an average FO, than we are in a heap of trouble. I would guess gate won in the 70% range, maybe a touch higher. I tend to disagree that the problem was with our wings. IMHO both UA face-off guys seemed to be trying to do the TD grab and break, and were NOT utilizing their wings. I guess you may say is this a chicken or egg situation. But as others said needs A LOT OF work!  I am not the coach (obviously), but it might be time to stop rotating; pick one guy or the other, let him take his lumps and see if he improves??

Who were the Colgate FOs? I think last year's starter Orr #49 graduated. Only FO guys returning are #35 Feeney (9-12 last year ), #45 Giovanetti (6-6), #12 Baddley (1-1), and  #25 Salameda (0-1). So none are very experienced.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, UAalum72 said:

Who were the Colgate FOs? I think last year's starter Orr #49 graduated. Only FO guys returning are #35 Feeney (9-12 last year ), #45 Giovanetti (6-6), #12 Baddley (1-1), and  #25 Salameda (0-1). So none are very experienced.

#35 took every FO's until the 5th period.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, dslyank said:

My Report:  with the declaimer that I've had some eye issues;  new glasses were suppose to arrive yesterday --did NOT. I had a real hard time picking out #s, especially on far end. People I was with said they were having the same problem. Lighting was a bit off IMHO and field view not best; but with built in excuses now established here I go:

5-4 after one; then UA went on a 4 -0 run. As stated, gate closed to 9-8 at ½. Gate scored first two in third period and eventually wen up 2 couple of times. UA scored last two in regulation to tie 14-14. Won sudden death with first goal and went on to score 2-3 more and shut-out gate. Ramos played the extra session and everyone in my area agreed he looked the best of all the goalies, ours or gates {of course by this time the competition may have been 3-4th string?}

If gates face-off person was/is NOT an elite player [and I do not know if he is or is not], than we are in bigger trouble @ the X that I thought. In other words, if he was just say an average FO, than we are in a heap of trouble. I would guess gate won in the 70% range, maybe a touch higher. I tend to disagree that the problem was with our wings. IMHO both UA face-off guys seemed to be trying to do the TD grab and break, and were NOT utilizing their wings. I guess you may say is this a chicken or egg situation. But as others said needs A LOT OF work!  I am not the coach (obviously), but it might be time to stop rotating; pick one guy or the other, let him take his lumps and see if he improves??

I was very confused by the defensive rotations. Even the starting group was not who I expected. Maybe because of injuries or Marr just experimenting or because of my fore mentioned eye issues; but IMHO the D overall was the worse part of our game yesterday, even worse than the face-off issues. AT times our goalies made some incredible saves; and in spite of giving up 14 to gate, I agree with those who said they played pretty well mostly. Offensively gate was big and strong and quick and some credit should be acknowledged.

UA's offense needs to cut down the bad passes and un-forced errors. Obviously it is early and this is really a DUH statement. But right now they are their own worse enemy. Again, the rotation @ times seemed confusing, but could be just the staff still experimenting. I did notice (I think) that early on and during our runs, Tehoka was playing near the net and he and the attack was pretty near unstoppable. But a lot of times Marr had him way up on top and we seemed to be stagnant than. Maybe staff moved Tehoka away from the net because, when close in he was absolutely getting hammered. So maybe for his own protection??

Someone said that Yunker and TeComber played a lot. I did not see TeComber at all until the extra session and only saw Yunker sparingly. Maybe my eye issue. But they did look extremely good in the fifth quarter. I tried to watch Tanner Hay and it seemed to me he looked nervous and uncomfortable and made a number of errors. The END.

ps. gate bench on each face off was giving the UA TD cheer. Pretty classless if you ask me

 

 

 

Great point/question on the face off situation. In theory given how much physical abuse face off guys take, having two who can share the load to some extent is a good thing. However, each face off guy does things differently which can impact how the wings position themselves and the whole strategy of are you running to hole every time to start a break, trying to get a contested ground ball most of the time, or are you helping to create space for you face off guy so he can get a clean exit with the ball.

I didn't hear anyone say that Tehoka took a face off which I think would have been a sign of Coach Marr being desperate. Did any poles try to face off and/or did we try to double pole the wings? Notre Dame double poles a lot, but they have great LSM's, but the downside of that is if the opposing FOGO wins it clean you are exposed on defense with the fast break.

I would think we have an athletic long pole who is able to take face off's and at least be a bit more disruptive if we had to go that route.

Either way we need to get better as a face off unit, because Syracuse got the better of Irelan yesterday.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that Colgate looked at this scrimmage as their final line-up before next weekend 's match-up with Syracuse.  I would hope that our next scrimmage will show more focus.  Interesting note the traditional match-up between Syracuse and Colgate was these teams last regular season game for several seasons.  Syracuse in the ACC has changed things.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tehoka did NOT play FO at all.  As I said, and I was on the sideline bleachers behind the UA Bench,  Sickierski  played well -  LSD did not slide well on the edges from 6-8 yards or so, hard to stop all of those and that was where many of their scores came from.  

iI did not think that McComber played that much, Yunker did and as I said has an ankle or lower leg injury of some kind,  was limping pretty good in the 4th.   I had a roster with me and checked when guys played.   

Personally I think they were trying some different combinations of guys on both sides of the field.  May be trying to see who will step up - I have no insight at all, just my gut.  Didn't see many obvious injuries except Yunker [and an injury late in the game to one of the subs].  Ron Jon was walking on the sideline with his jacket on all game.    Lots of different guys on offense especially.  I agree that Tehoka may NOT be the guy to be up on top.  Didn't seem do as well from there.  He was being doubled and tripled a lot.  He still has to learn not to hang onto the ball and force and pass it quick!

I do agree, bad passes, not in sinque yet or whatever.  Looked a little disorganized some times. 

Of course we have to remember that this was a scrimmage!!  Coaches try things out.

By the way Altimari took many more of the faceoffs than Jones did.  As I said up top Colgate only got 4-6 outright wins on the FO,  most of them were won by their wings!  We also did get maybe 3 outrights.   Even when our wings got a few they seems not to know what to do with the ball and lost it or made bad passes.  

 

 

Edited by HOF2013
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, cwdickens said:

I suspect that Colgate looked at this scrimmage as their final line-up before next weekend 's match-up with Syracuse.  I would hope that our next scrimmage will show more focus.  Interesting note the traditional match-up between Syracuse and Colgate was these teams last regular season game for several seasons.  Syracuse in the ACC has changed things.

Very true. I forgot they were a week ahead of us.

 

8 hours ago, HOF2013 said:

Tehoka did NOT play FO at all.  As I said, and I was on the sideline bleachers behind the UA Bench,  Sickierski  played well -  LSD did not slide well on the edges from 6-8 yards or so, hard to stop all of those and that was where many of their scores came from.  

iI did not think that McComber played that much, Yunker did and as I said has an ankle or lower leg injury of some kind,  was limping pretty good in the 4th.   I had a roster with me and checked when guys played.   

Personally I think they were trying some different combinations of guys on both sides of the field.  May be trying to see who will step up - I have no insight at all, just my gut.  Didn't see many obvious injuries except Yunker [and an injury late in the game to one of the subs].  Ron Jon was walking on the sideline with his jacket on all game.    Lots of different guys on offense especially.  I agree that Tehoka may NOT be the guy to be up on top.  Didn't seem do as well from there.  He was being doubled and tripled a lot.  He still has to learn not to hang onto the ball and force and pass it quick!

I do agree, bad passes, not in sinque yet or whatever.  Looked a little disorganized some times. 

Of course we have to remember that this was a scrimmage!!  Coaches try things out.

By the way Altimari took many more of the faceoffs than Jones did.  As I said up top Colgate only got 4-6 outright wins on the FO,  most of them were won by their wings!  We also did get maybe 3 outrights.   Even when our wings got a few they seems not to know what to do with the ball and lost it or made bad passes.  

 

 

Still interesting that McComber didn't see a bit more time. I'll have to go back and check but I think Altamari was one of the top ranked FOGO's coming out of high school, and I think committed somewhere else and came to UA very late in the process. I do think that you have to give one of them the nod because there are so many adjustments that need to take place as the competing FOGO's battle during a game. Hard to get into a rhythm if you keep swapping out. However, as you said have to win the ground balls.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, AlbanyFan2018 said:

think Altamari was one of the top ranked FOGO's coming out of high school, and I think committed somewhere else and came to UA very late in the process. I do think that you have to give one of them the nod because there are so many adjustments that need to take place as the competing FOGO's battle during a game. Hard to get into a rhythm if you keep swapping out. However, as you said have to win the ground balls.

From Altamari bio:

Ranked the #6 incoming faceoff specialist in Class of 2017 by Inside Lacrosse...  Championship Offensive MVP in 2017. ... 70% face-off winner with 150 ground balls and 14 goals as a senior.

Jones not rated but  list as 70% career winner; whereas Altamari's 70% listing is for his senior year. IMHO, I would still like to see Marr name a #1 face-off person and #2 only occasionally subbed if #1 tired/hurt/totally ineffective? My vote for what its worth Altamari #1.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...