2021 UAlbany MLAX Next Up @ University of Vermont, Virtue Field, Burlington, VT: Wednesday, April 28, 2021 4:00 PM (Rescheduled)

[AlbanyFan2018]

3 hours ago, dslyank said:

This is going to sound lame; but I still feel UA is a far superior team overall to VM. Sure VM has won 4 straight but there has been extenuating circumstances each time. Two were played in absolute downpours in Vermont {I know weather is same for both teams, but home team really has an advantage knowing the field conditions, especially in inclement weather.} Both games this year really decided by one bad UA qtr (2nd first game, 3rd yesterday.) I know everyone {me included }is sick of the excuses; but yesterday VM was playing for their season a loss to UA and brook (IMHO VM will lose to brook) would end their season. With the Hartford cancellation UA win or lose yesterday could finish no better than tied for third. THIS had to have an effect on the mentality and focus {or loss thereof] of both teams--VM in a positive way and UA negative.

The inconsistency of UA's game is simply maddening. Sure they have flaws, all teams do. The defense seems to lose focus at times & prone to errors and missed assignments {especially when fatigued.} The offense seems to lack a leader and prone to the mistake of TRYING TO HARD. Except face-offs and goalie save %age UA won pretty much every statistical category including ground balls, caused T/Os and clears, and shot ON goal. Coach in the TU article says he KNOWS UA is a better team than they showed this year. IMHO opinion he is correct and IMHO certainly a better team than VT, in spite of our record against them the last couple of years.

ps. Have I recently mentioned that UA is a very young team overall and young often equates to inconsistency.

Can't explain the inconsistency other than coaching and preparation. I think the team is young on the fringes, but the main guys are not. Attack Patterson, grad student, Yunker, Jr. Hogg Sophomore. Most of the middies other than Salit and Tucker are on the older side with John and Goldsmith, 5th years, Burgmaster a senior. The defense is not young, and we have a grad student as the goalie. I'm not trying to split hairs with you, but I think the issues are much more than this being a young team.

Completely agree with you about the lack of leadership on offense, and I think some of that was the revolving door of trying to figure out which pieces work best together. I have never understood the idea that Patterson could be that alpha attack guy with the ball in his stick. I don't know how Marr saw that, and Patterson always seemed to better on the move and having someone feed him. I'm willing to cut them a bit of slack with the Tehoka situation, but they probably should have made a more decisive decision sooner, and I don't know what happened at this point that caused the staff to act, but clearly Tehoka not being on the team was going to have an impact because he had the ball so much in his stick.

I have felt this for a while, and have said that with the loss of that last great class as well as some key coaches was a big hit, and it has just seemed that since then there has been a helter skelter aspect to this team.

[McFan]

You guys are much more knowledgeable on lacrosse than I am but doesn't it, again, really come down to face offs?  Lose by two w/ how many less possessions?  It's the age old question (and forget TD for a minute) but why can't we get an average face off guy.  I know we're just under 50% on the year but in the four losses we are 39%.  In those loses that's 25 xtra possessions.  In the two losses to UVM they had 18 xtra possessions right?  I've gotta think even if we turned that into 10 xtra possessions we win at least one of those games and our defense looks much better.  

[dslyank]

4 hours ago, McFan said:

You guys are much more knowledgeable on lacrosse than I am but doesn't it, again, really come down to face offs?  Lose by two w/ how many less possessions?  It's the age old question (and forget TD for a minute) but why can't we get an average face off guy.  I know we're just under 50% on the year but in the four losses we are 39%.  In those loses that's 25 xtra possessions.  In the two losses to UVM they had 18 xtra possessions right?  I've gotta think even if we turned that into 10 xtra possessions we win at least one of those games and our defense looks much better.  

McFan you are right-on. For UA it is & has always come down to face-offs. UA wins when it can stay around 50% OR has a dominant goalie who can get the O the ball, when the face-off "team" is sub par. It has always been about # of possessions for UA.

[dslyank]

5 hours ago, AlbanyFan2018 said:

I'm not trying to split hairs with you, but I think the issues are much more than this being a young team.

Agree 100%; UA issues are much more than age; notice it really was only a post script in my rant. Agree lack of an on the field leader bigger issue. I think what I am really trying to say, this leadership has to come from the young guys. I have not really seen much from the seniors. Also not splitting hairs but due to covid, Yunker and others, really experience wise are not what their grade level indicates. No fall ball, fewer games, long lay offs are not conducive to building experience and leaders. Also Agree, Patterson has always been more effective off ball & even as the forth attack. Lastly on age: Vermont most definitely and pretty sure Stoneybrook, have considerably more seniors. juniors, and grad transfers than does UA.                                                                                 

Edited April 29, 2021 by dslyank

[dslyank]

Here is a bizarre theory for you. If a goalie cannot catch a shot cleanly might as well let it score. Swatting the shot aside or worse knocking it back out front; probably worse than letting the goal in. Even if the goalie is a 50-60% goal saver, don't catch it cleanly and there is a very large chance you are NOT going to save the next one. Swat it aside and more than likely all you are doing is wearing out your defense, making it even more likely you are not going to save the next shot. Making your defense play another 80 seconds {god I hate the shot clock}; if you can't stop the shot cleanly, might as well let it score and give your face-off guy his 50% chance [assuming of course you have a 50 or +50% face-off guy.]

TOLD YOU IT WAS BIZARRE. Have a good laugh, fire away, squash the theory into the mud or maybe just ignore me!