Desko

[orangehipfan]

Undetermined. I know we'll be playing Albany on the road in April. I can see at least UNC and Notre Dame being played at CNS (hopefully when the sun is out). We're due to get at Hobart at home also.

Hop, Cornell, UVa and Duke would be road games anyways. If we continue our series with Colgate, we're due to play in Hamilton.

Our 2 year deals with Rutgers and Navy are over. Don't yet know who the replacements are.

Also, will the coaches vote to push the ACCT back to the last weekend of the season (freeing up late April for another regular season game).

Thank You, I appreciate the info. I wasn't sure f a decision had been made on the logistics of the schedule.

 

[SUFan44]

This whole thing is similar to Syracuse basketball.

Where are we going? Where is the team trending? Are we an antiquated product, or one that 17-year olds want to be a part of?

 

[kirbivore]

Agreed it’s more equal but a solid coach adapts to that. Every sport changes over periods of time and the good coaches are able to adapt. That’s why they are at the top of their game for 20+ years. Don’t get me wrong Desko is a good coach and has had a hell of a career but I think the game is past him now.

We need a coach that is able to adapt to lacrosse as it is today cause it’s not the same but as it was 5+ years ago. Our playing style, player development and recruiting isn’t where it should be or where it has been.

The game is changing and Desko's response is derp.

 

[tbonezone]

Game threads may be emotional, but so what. You either said it, or you didn't.

so open up a chatroom for lax games. vent like vesuvius.

 

[orange79]

so open up a chatroom for lax games. vent like vesuvius.

Chat room is always open

 

[OrangeDW]

Lol the last time you posted on this board was after the Colgate loss.

In fact, looking at your small history on the lacrosse forum, you have only posted after a loss. Literally not one other time. Just hit and run trolling.
View attachment 162786

He pulls the same routines on all the boards. I’m amazed that more haven’t caught on and he’s still allowed to do it.

 

[ClvrUsrnm]

He pulls the same routines on all the boards. I’m amazed that more haven’t caught on and he’s still allowed to do it.

Have we tried simply ignoring him?

 

[OrangeDW]

Have we tried simply ignoring him?

I prefer to make a stink in hopes that drawing attention to what he’s actually doing will eventually get him banned.

 

[creatorsgam]

I prefer to make a stink in hopes that drawing attention to what he’s actually doing will eventually get him banned.

Agreed. The schtick is old. This isn’t Syracuse dot com, and it should stay that way.

 

[OrangeDW]

Agreed. The schtick is old. This isn’t Syracuse dot com, and it should stay that way.

“We stink. Sad really”
“Oh my head”
“How far we’ve fallen”
“The Coach is the greatest! Lock him up! We love you_______!”
“I’m going to eat an entire pizza, a dozen wings, and drink a 24 rack of...UC/Genny Cream Ale/insert stereotypical CNY beer”

Same routine, always. Complete troll.

 

[longtimefan]

Honestly, IDK if I'm in the "fire Desko" camp or not. But I do think there are some legitimate issues with the program that need to be addressed, and SOME changes in the coaching staff are warranted. Apologies in advance for the length of this.

Yes, recruiting is a concern, but I think the issue is less about "why don't we get a ton of the best players each year?" and more "what do we do when we get them?" While not every top recruit is going to dominate like he did in high school -- guys get hurt, bodies change, weaknesses are exposed, interest levels decline -- it seems like we consistently have more guys not pan out than other top programs.

Equally worrisome, even the guys who aren't stud recruits fall short of expectations (Seebold, DiPietro, Lauder and Klan are on this path): McKinney was the nation's no. 60 recruit; I think he had four points in four years. Thorpe was no. 53; he struggled to get playing time, got hurt, and left. Ford was top-100; he left because he couldn't play his way into the rotation. Chavez had a decent rep coming it; he didn't stick around. Carlin was decent as a sixth middie, but not much was expected of him. Fusco kind of fizzled as a senior, as LSM became more of a speed position. This isn't new -- remember what a monster scorer Grimm was in high school, or what a big deal Wardwell was supposed to be? -- but it's disconcerting.

Sidebar: We also seem to struggle to keep some good young guys playing and interested. How can Wisnauskas and Maltz not be good enough to play here, but key players when they get to a better (at least recently) program in College Park?

To be fair, Desko has gotten a ton out of guys who were un-recruited (Salcido) or under-recruited (Rice, Mullins, Brooks, Harris). But that's the kind of thing you want to focus on as the coach of a program trying to get back to the top levels (see Babers, Dino) rather than one that has a place there and is letting it slip away.

To the coaching staff: Some will see this as ageist, but I think the fact that the youngest member of our staff is in his early 50s (mid-50s if we focus on paid staff) does not get teenagers to come here, and to connect with them once they arrive ... and I say that as someone who falls between Desko and Roy III in age. Yes, John Danowski is 60-ish, but Matt Danowski and Ned Crotty are anything but; kids in high school have probably seen them play. Bill Tierney has Matt Brown as his no. 2. Pietro has Bobby Benson as his OC. And so on. *Some* of what attracts some kids to come to a school is the change to play for someone they can remember as a stud player. That can't really happen with SU's staff.

Again, I don't intend this as a claim that people my age can't coach effectively, but our staff (with the possible exception of Rogers, who I haven't seen recruit) comes across like a bunch of 60-year-old guys. I recently stumbled over a video of Donahue speaking at some clinic in a monotone "all this is old hat and I really don't want to be here" tone. I can't imagine kids wanting to play for that ... hell, I can't imagine it inspiring their parents. Just to be clear, not every coach can be fiery, and every staff needs a nuts-and-bolts tactician, but I don't see this staff inspiring anyone.

As long as I'm going full-on "diversify the coaching staff," maybe it's not the best idea that all five members came up through the OHSL, and three of those are from the same (storied, but declining) high school program. It wouldn't be the worst idea to go poking around Ward Melville or Garden City or maybe Cold Spring Harbor and hire the coach as a college assistant (and, by the way, immediately improve your ability to recruit in a lacrosse hotbed where you're traditionally lost players to Carolina and Hopkins). SU's idea of doing this is dipping a toe in the water by hiring Ryan Powell to do ... something.

Finally -- apologies for the length -- there's an elephant in the room that I think makes it impossible for SU to return to the dominance of the '80s and '90s: SU is essentially as expensive as an Ivy, but most of its programs aren't as good. A lacrosse recruit who's focused on the education has a number of other options ... hell, in CNY, he could go to Cornell or Colgate or Hamilton and probably get just as much in scholarship money. And as the game has expanded, look at who we're recruiting against, just in the ACC: Duke, UVa and Notre Dame are more selective/have better academic reps (and UNC is comparable to SU) ... AND they have better weather. A CNY kid who doesn't want to (or can't afford to) leave the state can play the game and get a quality education at Albany or Binghamton for a helluva lot less money (a buddy's daughter recently finished at Bingo, which she chose over SU, BC and Ge*rget*wn. She got a car as a graduation present because he saved so much cash). And we can't sell "you'll be closer to home" to kids from the midwest anymore, now that OSU, Marquette and Michigan have decent programs.

Note on underachieving recruiting classes: It was the 2014 freshman class where this is most noticeable. Our class was on par with Maryland's, but they won national titles while we missed championship weekends. Forkin was no. 20 and had seven points as a freshman, but never did anything after the academic struggles or the trip to JUCO. Maltz (no. 18) bailed early; he was a key contributor to a national title in Terp-land. Weston (no. 33) scored about 14 career points in three years and never got above the second midfield. Ferrigan (no. 39) couldn't win the keeper's job; he left for Delaware. McGinley (no. 61) got kicked out of school after he got drunk and punched some people on M Street (and got KTFO in the process). Evans (no. 1) was a solid player, but expectations for him were so high as to be unattainable. Firman (no. 17) was really the only guy in that class who met expectations.

Thinking forward--and that's what needs to be done, rather than wallow in post-mortems--your "elephant in the room" is perhaps the biggest obstacle faced by this program. SU, like all private colleges, is very expensive.
So there is an immediate disadvantage vs.public schools, ie. UVa, UNC, Ped St, OSU, etc.The Ivies have enough money to cover their athletes' expenses, with or without athletic scholarships. To me, our peer lacrosse schools are JHU, ND, and Duke. We should be measured against those 4. I think we lead Hopkins, are even with the Domers, and trail Duke (although we have handled them head-to-head recently).

Now, player development and X's & O's require another thread, and input from someone who understands the nuts and bolts of the sport better than I. (Although I've been following the program since Verne Doctor.)

 

[creatorsgam]

“We stink. Sad really”
“Oh my head”
“How far we’ve fallen”
“The Coach is the greatest! Lock him up! We love you_______!”
“I’m going to eat an entire pizza, a dozen wings, and drink a 24 rack of...UC/Genny Cream Ale/insert stereotypical CNY beer”

Same routine, always. Complete troll.

“We love you Jimmy!”

 

[Hoo's That]

Thinking forward--and that's what needs to be done, rather than wallow in post-mortems--your "elephant in the room" is perhaps the biggest obstacle faced by this program. SU, like all private colleges, is very expensive.
So there is an immediate disadvantage vs.public schools, ie. UVa, UNC, Ped St, OSU, etc.The Ivies have enough money to cover their athletes' expenses, with or without athletic scholarships. To me, our peer lacrosse schools are JHU, ND, and Duke. We should be measured against those 4. I think we lead Hopkins, are even with the Domers, and trail Duke (although we have handled them head-to-head recently).

Now, player development and X's & O's require another thread, and input from someone who understands the nuts and bolts of the sport better than I. (Although I've been following the program since Verne Doctor.)

Courtesy of Mike Bloomberg's $1.5 billion, JHU is about to match the Ivies' financial aid policies. IDK how that will affect their lacrosse teams.

 

[orangecuse]

Thinking forward--and that's what needs to be done, rather than wallow in post-mortems--your "elephant in the room" is perhaps the biggest obstacle faced by this program. SU, like all private colleges, is very expensive.
So there is an immediate disadvantage vs.public schools, ie. UVa, UNC, Ped St, OSU, etc.The Ivies have enough money to cover their athletes' expenses, with or without athletic scholarships. To me, our peer lacrosse schools are JHU, ND, and Duke. We should be measured against those 4. I think we lead Hopkins, are even with the Domers, and trail Duke (although we have handled them head-to-head recently).

Now, player development and X's & O's require another thread, and input from someone who understands the nuts and bolts of the sport better than I. (Although I've been following the program since Verne Doctor.)

I think you hit the biggest nail on the head in regards to SU's high expense relative to the public school's, etc. in today's lacrosse landscape. When we were King of the Mountain, the related shollie limit wasn't as much as a detriment when going after quality/top guys because if you were worth a darn, SU was THE school along with a select couple of others, now it's night and day. So, if you're a top player in the game, why go to the 'Cuse when there are so many other great choices, and in many cases, lower costs and higher academics as you allude? Combine that with a program that hasn't made it to Championship Weekend in 6 years or win a title in a decade, the prestige of SU has faded and continues more and more with each passing year.

Unfortunately, there's no easy answer to change SU's current plight in the modern era of lacrosse, and I feel that what we have seen the past few years is likely what our new normal will be moving forward. Even with new blood, coaches, etc., it doesn't change the underlying main issues; cost of attendance, shollie limitations, the game's continued growth, and legitimately equal, if not often better options at other institutions. Re-evaluating the expectations will be a huge adjustment for the fan base, but it's today's lax landscape.

 

[DoubleDee]

I know a guy in girls high school lax that says these schools who want to build the program are giving free rides to kids. He gets a lot of local girls to go west because of the financial gain. That probably plays a part no?

 

[Laxwizard22]

I haven’t been able to post as much as I’ve wanted to recently, but I figured I’d thrown in a couple opinions. First hats off to this group of kids-they had a great season and when they lost to Colgate, they showed tons of maturity by righting the ship and growing into a top 15 team. It’s also not like we just lost to bingo-Loyola is year in and year out a top 10 program as of late. Here’s my biggest issue: I truly like Desko and respect what he’s done. I also think Donahue is arguably the smartest lacrosse mind in the game. However like others have said, something has to change. Doesn’t have to be Desko, maybe just one of the assistants.
Someone said earlier how the 2 biggest issues with the program have a strong correlation w Rodgers-recruiting and defense. I’m sorry we do have a ton of talent coming in the next 2 classes no doubt, but with Syracuse’s legacy and facilities we should be signing top 10 classes EVERY year. A lot of people (including myself) were excited about this 2018 class. If I recall correctly, they were still ranked the 16th best class in the country by IL (something along those lines). I live in the CNY area, and I can name 6-7 section 3 players that will be playing division 1 lacrosse out of Ny state that could very well be wearing orange in the future. That never used to happen. I also realize that the game is growing and we won’t dominate the local landscape like we used too. However we should have at least 3-4 out of those 6-7.
The defense has also been a problem. Did we have GREAT moments at times this season defensively? Yes. But, you have 3 seniors starting at close D, and have 3 really good/somewhat experienced guys you can go to at LSM plus a reliable athlete at SSDM in Dearth/great goalie in Porter. This defense should have been top 5 or 10 in the country. My apologies for the long post, but I just had a ton to get off my chest

 

[kingtidge]

This is indeed a reflection point for the program. Reminds me of Pasqualoni decision in 2004. Solid coach who’s lost a step. Critical we don’t hire a Greg Robinson. Need to know who we want and go get him.

Feels similar TBH...

Program that started under Desko at an elite level...

The game has evolved and changed and level of competition has improved, and it's grown.

Not sure Desko's approach and way he does things has evolved enough with it.

The days of dominating the sport as the #1 team are over, but we should still be a top 5 team consistently and we should be making final fours regularly.

We should at least be able to keep up with the Jones' in that regard ...and it's not happening.

Now we have a whole new generation of recruits that only know syracuse as a middling top 20 team at best.

Feels like a lost decade.

 

[HtownOrange]

I know I am late to this party, after the letdown yesterday I figured it would be better to hold off posting until I remove emotion from my post. Apologies for the length:

- Desko ran the program as a corporation, expecting wins to never decrease, think GM during the 1970's and 1980's.
- SU could simply make an offer and recruits were clamoring to play for SU (and a few other elites)
- Markets change, so did major lacrosse
- Desko fell behind NOTE: While most other schools would love SU's success while Desko "fell behind" it simply is not SU standards (see 11 championship trophies - SU is the lacrosse equivalent of Oklahoma in football)
- Desko has improved in his actions, though he has not landed the recruits SU fans are accustomed to see on the field
- Competition has improved
- Talent levels have improved
- Roy Simmons Junior installed a great system, fast, physical, fun (should it be fast, fysical, fun or perhaps phast, physical phun), he won a lot, too.
- Desko's early years (you remember, when he won five trophies) were marked by fast teams, beating everyone in transition. Only UVA, Princeton and Johns Hopkins were the real competition on an annual basis
- Desko teams of the past few years were noted for slow ball, physical play and the 1 point victory; not very exciting and not very effective for championships
- Desko is a elite level coach, calling excellent plays, usually managing the clock very well (UNC and Loyola excepted!), but - from my point of view - relies on his savvy too much and not enough on the player's on field judgment - Think more traditional football than basketball - which is a killer in a continuous action game versus a set play game.
- Tucker Dordevic missed the season. DO NOT undervalue this loss. It remains to be seen whether he gets back to where he was, but the loss certainly cost SU a lot on offense.
- This team gelled very well once they got into the season. We started off as the Cardiac 'Cuse or Kardiac Kids (your choice)
- We saw a second half of the season stretch where the team played historical SU lacrosse: Pedal to the medal, balls to the wall, all out speed, punishing opponents for making mistakes.
- We routinely saw multiple scorers, no team can shut down the entire SU offense.
- Our defense overall, periodic brain flatulances aside, was an elite level defense.
- The above makes me think that Desko has turned the corner and is returning to his roots of a fast, physical, fun team.
- Who can fill Desko's shoes? Serious question. Any elite level coach will get paid where they are at without the scrutiny of 11 championships staring him down. Think elite football and basketball: Nobody wants to follow a legend. SU will not bring in a quality human being AND excellent lacrosse coach. SU has a mentality that it's employees be good people, not win at any cost (which is why Boeheim and Babers are excellent fits, they are essentially GOOD guys who happen to be great coaches)

Conclusion: With Desko having turned back to his roots in style of play, Tucker Dordevic returning and a very good, deep squad, with a few excellent recruits, I don't see Desko going anywhere, nor Wildhack in a rush to replace him. If Desko has not turned the corner, fails to land a few key recruits and improve in the post season, THEN Wildhack will make a move. The reality is that Desko is still better than 90% of the coaches out there and coach worthy of replacing Desko is not going to simply jump to SU, they already have a good situation. Wildhack will have to watch the up and coming coaches, but has not pressure at this time to replace Desko.

Just another Orange fan opinion.

 

[WestFairO]

Gall-o-way
Gall-o-way
Gall-o-way!

John Galloway is building up Jacksonville lacrosse after 2 championships at Syracuse

 

[Delmar]

During the Duke-Richmond game one of the commentators mentioned more than a few times that Duke was the team of the decade. When was Syracuse the team of the decade? Only once, and that happened from 2000 to 2009 when Desko was coach. The 80's probably go to JHU. The 90's belong to Princeton. SU won 5 championships in the 2000's.
I will grant that the discussion is valid. But I hope people will realize how rare it is for coaches who follow a legend to have any success at all. Desko did that, and despite the criticism going on now, that achievement can never be taken away from him.
The transition from a successful coach is always painful. Starsia is an obvious comparison, but his removal also happened in the context of a murder, and a complete loss of control of the program. That's not what is happening at SU. Perhaps a better comparison is Denny Crum at Louisville.
While we are debating this, Hopkins is having the same discussion.

 

[Newhouse_83]

"- Desko ran the program as a corporation, expecting wins to never decrease, think GM during the 1970's and 1980's.
- SU could simply make an offer and recruits were clamoring to play for SU (and a few other elites)
- Markets change, so did major lacrosse
- Desko fell behind NOTE: While most other schools would love SU's success while Desko "fell behind" it simply is not SU standards (see 11 championship trophies - SU is the lacrosse equivalent of Oklahoma in football)
- Desko has improved in his actions, though he has not landed the recruits SU fans are accustomed to see on the field
- Competition has improved
- Talent levels have improved
- Roy Simmons Junior installed a great system, fast, physical, fun (should it be fast, fysical, fun or perhaps phast, physical phun), he won a lot, too."

#PPP. I like that.

Lots of strong analysis in some of the recent posts, especially the idea of "peer programs" (and well-chosen ones at that) and the idea that running this program equates to heading a corporation. Agreed that we trail Dook and are slightly ahead of Hopkins, though I think ND holds an advantage in that Corrigan gets more out of the talent he's had and, more importantly, has done better than SU on the defensive side of the ball recently -- ND typically has an outstanding goalie, one if not two all-conference-type SSMs and had a monster LSM in Sexton. This enables that team to be a threat to go to Championship Weekend even without a ton of guys who are necessarily elite athletes.

To the idea of "program as corporation," we're lacking in one, and possibly two, key areas. The first is a succession plan -- the idea that Jim Boeheim had a Mike Hopkins for *years* until Boeheim decided to stay longer than most people expected. We can make a solid guess at the plan for the next head coaches at Duke and Denver -- two other strong programs run by older guys -- and can probably conclude that the next JHU coach is someone currently in the program. SU? The youngest guy, Scaramuzzino, is early 50s, and not on the payroll. There's a ton of talk about Galloway, but it's hard to be certain when a guy's building a name for himself in another part of the country. Someone like that could be a hot property when the next Utah comes along and wants a young guy with energy. This is a big disadvantage for this program.

My sense is that the next coach probably needs to be a young-er, hyper-kinetic ass-kicker likely now at, or with strong connections to, a selective or selective-ish private university north of the Mason-Dixon line (If you were drawing a blueprint for SU's next basketball coach, you'd end up with a profile like Bobby Hurley's, right?). Shea or Tiffany could have been that guy until they hit the big time. Another option would be a no. 2 at a good program with the experience and the chops to lead a program like ours (but we're probably not getting Matt Danowski when his dad retires in 2024). Now? I don't know enough about which mid-major programs are making things happen, but a program with the size and profile of 'Nova's or a guy with av resume like Kevin Cassese's is probably a starting point.

We need to remember, also, that Roy Jr. put the program on the map by innovating. At a time when many programs played stall-ball, he was recruiting athletes -- Kotz and Nelson and Curry and Beardsley, and turning 'em loose -- few programs would've recruited the Gaits because they (at the time) played one-handed. Many programs play fast now; we need to be looking for other weaknesses in the system to exploit.

The other question -- probably for Wildhack -- is what's the vision to measure success in the program?

Lots of people here long for the good ol' days when we had the first- or second-most national titles in a decade, but that ain't happening anymore, with anyone, with a 12.6-scholarship limit. As much as I dislike ND, I think the expectation and the approach that exists there is probably reasonable for SU: Recruit a certain nucleus of smart, responsible, above-average D-1 players (Jack Near is an example) to build from goalie/defense forward, then stir in a couple talented offensive guys every year who might be able to tip the scales ... Kavanagh, Perkovic, Garnsey, Costabile, Wynne, and Gleason all come to mind, with a nucleus of guys like Dearth -- a 50-ish prospect who probably didn't turn a ton of heads. Boeheim does a version of this -- long, lean wing players who work in the 2-3. Sure he had Coleman and Forth and Siock and Hawkins, but he didn't build teams around them. I'm not saying build a team to play stall-ball, but build one that wins the games it's supposed to win, and rarely blows leads (did anyone here not know we were toast once ND got a decent lead this year?). Not as exciting to watch, but "Cardiac Cuse" isn't playing on Memorial Day weekend. Yes, we used to run other teams off the field on talent alone -- just like Boeheim's teams from the mid-80s until a decade or so ago -- but with so many other schools playing lacrosse, and scholarships limited, those days are over.

Finally, I'm seriously concerned about the program's chances in the future if we don't evolve and adapt. Some more big schools in states full of talented, athletic kids are going to see that an Ohio State can run a solid lax program with the change it finds in the couch cushions at the football offices. And when Texas and/or Florida and/or USC launch men's programs (the latter two already field good women's teams), we're not gonna see Dordevic or Mullins or Seau or Schoonmaker or Van Rapphorst or Crance coming to CNY, or even to the ACC. If SU's not ready, its world is gonna change, and it'll be ugly.

 

[Toga]

During the Duke-Richmond game one of the commentators mentioned more than a few times that Duke was the team of the decade. When was Syracuse the team of the decade? Only once, and that happened during the 2000's to 2009 when Desko was coach. The 80's probably go to JHU. The 90's belong to Princeton. SU won 5 championships in the 2000's.
I will grant that the discussion is valid. But I hope people will realize how rare it is for coaches who follow a legend to have any success at all. Desko did that, and despite the criticism going on now, that achievement can never be taken away from him.
The transition from a successful coach is always painful. Starsia is an obvious comparison, but his removal also happened in the context of a murder, and a complete loss of control of the program. That's not what is happening at SU. Perhaps a better comparison is Danny Crum at Louisville.
While we are debating this, Hopkins is having the same discussion.

I totally had thought of the Denny Crum analogy yesterday.

 

[Geode]

Good thread. There seems to be a bit more balance in people's opinion than just the drive-by whack job screaming for a new coach.

Lot's of good points made in this thread:

• Landscape has changed, a lot more competition and money in the game
• Kids have more options
• The SU lax brand has arguably tarnished some
• SU is not a cheap school and schollies are a problem when kids know they have other options
• Agree, there are giants who may eventually add Lax (SEC type schools)
• Succession plan for coaching is not known? However, SU players seem to be leading in developing the game in other parts of the country, this seems more like a positive than a negative.
• What is the SU lax identity? the run & gun days seem to be gone. There was some of that this year but our identity seems to be more "Cardiac Cuse" than anything the past decade...

I think all of these add to the unknown of what will become of SU Lax in an eventual post Desko era. I'm not even remotely qualified to speculate on coaching ability so I won't. However, I do wonder what the Lax alumni think of the state of the program and is their opinion even a consideration?

Much like basketball, I believe the ACC lax programs will be fine. The programs in this conference are all proven winners and kids want to play the best competition. This includes SU. Do things need to change? Probably. However, I also think this is a situation where a new coach doesn't solve the world's problems. There will likely need to be a few layers to this.

 

[PhatOrange]

I think talk of age is ridiculous. Maybe you get younger with some recruiters but talk of motivation and X and Os and things like that is stupid. Just look at football coaches. They can motivate. John Danowski is 65. Corrigan has to be 60, Lars Tiffany is early 50's, Andy Shay, Tambroni and Tillman are all 49.

I don't know what Desko's deal is. Are their schemes that awful? IDK. I think he relied on a bunch of Micheal Jordan's over the years and not having those caliber players sort of expose the schemes.

Talk of parity ? Sure talent is spread around more, there's no denying it, but is there really parity ? it doesn't seem to effect a handful of traditional schools.

Teams left right now:

Penn State (sure newbie team but not a newbie coach)
Loyola
Yale
Penn
Virginia
Maryland
Duke
Notre Dame

Same as it ever was if you ask me. And it's like this every year except you don't see Syracuse. And the board is wrought with a bunch of excuses.

Yale, Penn, Duke and Notre Dame - all expensive schools with way more stringent academic standards than Syracuse. Oh and Loyola, MD tuition is higher than Syracuse so there's that to.

I have several coaches I would make a play for (one being Andy Shay) but I'm all in on Dan Chemotti. No better pedigree imo. What he's done at Richmond is remarkable. Played for Messerre and played for John Danowski. In terms of influences it doesn't get any better than that imo. Has a NYS title, has 2 NCAA titles. Was an All-American and played professionally. He's a Syracuse guy.

 

[JeremyCuse]

I know I am late to this party, after the letdown yesterday I figured it would be better to hold off posting until I remove emotion from my post. Apologies for the length:

- Desko ran the program as a corporation, expecting wins to never decrease, think GM during the 1970's and 1980's.
- SU could simply make an offer and recruits were clamoring to play for SU (and a few other elites)
- Markets change, so did major lacrosse
- Desko fell behind NOTE: While most other schools would love SU's success while Desko "fell behind" it simply is not SU standards (see 11 championship trophies - SU is the lacrosse equivalent of Oklahoma in football)
- Desko has improved in his actions, though he has not landed the recruits SU fans are accustomed to see on the field
- Competition has improved
- Talent levels have improved
- Roy Simmons Junior installed a great system, fast, physical, fun (should it be fast, fysical, fun or perhaps phast, physical phun), he won a lot, too.
- Desko's early years (you remember, when he won five trophies) were marked by fast teams, beating everyone in transition. Only UVA, Princeton and Johns Hopkins were the real competition on an annual basis
- Desko teams of the past few years were noted for slow ball, physical play and the 1 point victory; not very exciting and not very effective for championships
- Desko is a elite level coach, calling excellent plays, usually managing the clock very well (UNC and Loyola excepted!), but - from my point of view - relies on his savvy too much and not enough on the player's on field judgment - Think more traditional football than basketball - which is a killer in a continuous action game versus a set play game.
- Tucker Dordevic missed the season. DO NOT undervalue this loss. It remains to be seen whether he gets back to where he was, but the loss certainly cost SU a lot on offense.
- This team gelled very well once they got into the season. We started off as the Cardiac 'Cuse or Kardiac Kids (your choice)
- We saw a second half of the season stretch where the team played historical SU lacrosse: Pedal to the medal, balls to the wall, all out speed, punishing opponents for making mistakes.
- We routinely saw multiple scorers, no team can shut down the entire SU offense.
- Our defense overall, periodic brain flatulances aside, was an elite level defense.
- The above makes me think that Desko has turned the corner and is returning to his roots of a fast, physical, fun team.
- Who can fill Desko's shoes? Serious question. Any elite level coach will get paid where they are at without the scrutiny of 11 championships staring him down. Think elite football and basketball: Nobody wants to follow a legend. SU will not bring in a quality human being AND excellent lacrosse coach. SU has a mentality that it's employees be good people, not win at any cost (which is why Boeheim and Babers are excellent fits, they are essentially GOOD guys who happen to be great coaches)

Conclusion: With Desko having turned back to his roots in style of play, Tucker Dordevic returning and a very good, deep squad, with a few excellent recruits, I don't see Desko going anywhere, nor Wildhack in a rush to replace him. If Desko has not turned the corner, fails to land a few key recruits and improve in the post season, THEN Wildhack will make a move. The reality is that Desko is still better than 90% of the coaches out there and coach worthy of replacing Desko is not going to simply jump to SU, they already have a good situation. Wildhack will have to watch the up and coming coaches, but has not pressure at this time to replace Desko.

Just another Orange fan opinion.

Good post with some excellent points.

I would certainly agree that Dekok was and still is an elite level coach, I think that is really undeniable. Your point about relying to much on savy versus on field judgement is a very interesting point and one I hadn't really thought of. Competition, Partiy, rise of other programs has all affected the landscape and its clear we and other schools like JHU have not adapted fast enough. Recruiting has been better the last few years after it really fell down in the 13-15 classes but this upcoming class was hurt big time by the late decommit of the best player to Michigan and through 3 waves has zero UA all-americans while schools like Duke and UVA have about 6 each. I am not even going to get into the 2020 decommit debacle.

I do think there a few issues you raised that I disagree with slightly. You noted that: "We saw a second half of the season stretch where the team played historical SU lacrosse: Pedal to the medal, balls to the wall, all out speed, punishing opponents for making mistakes". I am not sure thats 100% accurate. SU did push transition when it was there especially on turnovers which we did seem to do more of this year and you saw some of that tic tac toe passing that made SU famous. However, that was more of the exception versus the rule in my opinion. I can recall countless times when SU had a semi or secondary fast break and SU pulled up or chose not to take a shot. Guys like Kennedy would push it every now and then but I think our preference was still to get the ball in the offense half sub and start working the ball around. I think what we saw in the middle of the year was that SU especially in the 2nd half of games would start to wear down an opponents D due to dominating at the X or a locked in D (see Hobart/Duke) and SU would start attacking earlier in the clock then we had been. Now I am not saying that the current system is wrong as even UVA scaled it back this year after turning the ball over like it was going out of style the first two years under Tiffany but I didn't see SU and Desko turn back to that fast break style of SU lax in the 2nd half of the season. Flashes yes, but it didn't appear to me that we where making a conscious effort to run run run and to be honest I am not sure we have the players to do that on the roster even if we wanted to.

The other point you made about who could possibly replace Desko is the one I really disagree with. I never understood that type of argument. You see it sometimes on the bball board about JB and there was some of that on the fball board with guys saying if Dino can't do it no one can just close the program. Would someone replacing Desko have big shoes to fill? Of course. But being afraid of the unknown can't stop a school or an AD from making change. You noted that it would be almost impossible to bring in both a good person and an excellent coach, why is that? There are plenty of those guys in the game today and if the Syracuse job came open trust me there would be no lack of interest from across the lax world. I am not saying that Desko needs to be let go tomorrow but when you have to start using that kind of reasoning as to why a coach should stay on, that is a bad sign.