Harvard Gameday… | Page 23 | Syracusefan.com

Harvard Gameday…

cuselaxss26 said:
He isn’t that bad tho. What mean is for how much he plays he doesn’t turn it over a ton. Will he make mistake of course but our seniors have made more then him. Why say bad cause he just doesn’t produce anything. I get that i really do. But he isn’t so bad can’t be fixed or so bad he shouldn’t even touch field. He has shown some nice moves n even feeds at times. Just think kid to scared to be himself or try ANYTHING. He has been mugged few times n got thru it. He can handle the ball not saying he’s a sticktictian. But he isn’t totally terrible. Think coaches just need to work with mostly on his confidence. He has pick up some tough gbs. He also only sophomore seeing extensive time. But he doesn’t produce anything on O.

Think you least gotta work with him as i see potential in him but who’s to say coaches work on the things he lacks as much as they could or should. Clearly they think he better then other as haven’t switched him yet. I’m not basing him just off production tho i think he does need to produce. But he hasn’t cost us to where ur like why. He really doesn’t change the game or help but he also doesn’t hurt either. Think he had better chance then hottle (mostly his size).

I just see kid who at times shown flashes of skill but just to dam scared to try to be that guy. As seems most of 2nd line besides bear all their trying to do is draw slide n feed attack. That hottle / mccarthy arnt dodging to score but to only look for attack. Which could be what they’re told i don’t know. They both just seem to not want to be a go getter or wanna please upper class men or told to do so. They’re both just very shy with ball when comes to shooting.
Expand...
He was really bad on Sunday
 
Anyone in the know aware if Harvard is on the schedule next year or if it was a one off? Not sure I want to see them again right now but they made for 2 crazy games this year.
 
GoSU96 said:
He was really bad on Sunday
Expand...
Why? cause he had 2 turnovers ? which is most he has had in single game. Only 8 turnovers all year from a sophomore ? who logs wings O n D . Think that’s not bad really. English had 7 this pass game hiltz had 4-5maby. Point is ur expecting a sophomore to be better then two seniors who made more mistakes n played terrible for most of it. Point being he isn’t that bad just young not enough experience. He isn’t gonna win ya the game but he also isn’t gonna lose it for you either. Wish he could produce more on O. But with all the other studs we have don’t think they ask him to be another. Think for what his role has been he is solid n had potential. Also the whole team was bad sunday for most of it. Why was it only him ?
 
All i’m saying is the kid besides not being Offensive production threat he has had a decent year for sophomore starting for first season of high D 1 lacrosse. He isn’t flashy or highly smart or least his plays. But he’s least trust worthy to play n not make or break it. Which prob what they want with all the other guys. Last thing i’ll say is i just think kid in the times he has flashed when he tries actually he has potential. Maby isn’t gonna be a hiltz or even a rhoa. But think he can be a very solid maby even little weaker O of person english for us.
 
cuselaxss26 said:
All i’m saying is the kid besides not being Offensive production threat he has had a decent year for sophomore starting for first season of high D 1 lacrosse. He isn’t flashy or highly smart or least his plays. But he’s least trust worthy to play n not make or break it. Which prob what they want with all the other guys. Last thing i’ll say is i just think kid in the times he has flashed when he tries actually he has potential. Maby isn’t gonna be a hiltz or even a rhoa. But think he can be a very solid maby even little weaker O of person english for us.
Expand...
What i mean by not flashy or highly smart in his play is he isn’t making these crazy plays or high iq plays. He makes the basic or simple play which is totally fine specially someone so new to this level. Making the simple or basic play isn’t always a bad thing. N what ment weaker o person english, is can be like english play wing O n D just might not have the production of english but could be better then him on the D side. To say he was bad don’t think is true. Specially sunday when half team was bad. 8 turnovers for whole year from a 2nd line mid (sophomore) who’s on the wings n plays D think is pretty good. Think every guy that’s not the top guys have a certain role n their playing that role.

i just don’t think the kid has cost us to warrant being called bad. Could he do more like score sure. But i’ll take him how he is if ment him scoring more means more turnovers or other mistakes.
 
Dcuse said:
Both English and Hiltz failed at this in the last 2 games.
Expand...
english almost threw it away with a lame pass to start the possession ! ball was free rolling towards the sideline on a too casual flip. one other live note . the video is great but the audio sucks. can't hear the ref calls at all. and i don't know if this was ESPN or replay but there were some unbelievably long breaks after penalty calls. delay drew many boos.
 
Last edited:
ForCuseSake said:
I think you have to have superhuman athleticism to do everything they ask English to do any better than he does.

Matt Abbott, one of the original Human Clears, was fast AF. Even he didn’t run first line middie, first team SSDM, FO wing and designated clock killer.

English is a top flight dodger, SSDM and clock killer. Asking him to also be the go-to wing shorty on face offs in this age of parity is cray cray to me.

The fact that he performs all of those roles at an elite level, with some inconsistency, is a testament to how talented he is.

I wish the staff had a reasonable alternative for one or two of those roles to give him a breather.
Expand...
Matt Abbott was truly a joy to watch play the game. I wish we'd had him during the covid era and he could have had a 7 year college career, like some of these dudes seem to pull off these days!

Seriously. I saw him play maybe his sophomore year at Cornell when it was still that Tuesday evening game on the road and I just watched him the entire game. Phew, effortless class and skill.
 
GoSU96 said:
He was really bad on Sunday
Expand...
Three quarters of the team was "bad" on Sunday.

He's a very good athlete and will become a better lax player over next two years. Someone mentioned his goal vs Duke where he beat McGuire... reminder, that was a one goal game.

Question... what's going on with Cordes? Is he battling injuries or just not performing in practice?
 
tech37 said:
Three quarters of the team was "bad" on Sunday.

He's a very good athlete and will become a better lax player over next two years. Someone mentioned his goal vs Duke where he beat McGuire... reminder, that was a one goal game.

Question... what's going on with Cordes? Is he battling injuries or just not performing in practice?
Expand...
Yup, that goal 1v1 against McGuire was a thing of beauty! I'm bullish on this kid's future at 'Cuse.
 
Last edited:
tech37 said:
Three quarters of the team was "bad" on Sunday.

He's a very good athlete and will become a better lax player over next two years. Someone mentioned his goal vs Duke where he beat McGuire... reminder, that was a one goal game.

Question... what's going on with Cordes? Is he battling injuries or just not performing in practice?
Expand...
i think cordes has better shot then mccarthy n hottle. Think he is a good feeder also n been on cuse for while so sure he knows what we do. But hasn’t played since bear took over on second line. Why think should mix mccarthy/hottle/cordes to go with bear as each of those 3 bring diff style.

But if ya watch mccarthy n hottle dodge you can see their not dodging to try score. Their dodging to draw n move it on. As said could be the plan they do the dodging n move ball to attack for finish. Also to just give first line breather. Grant think they should be more then that. But yea mccarthy move on mcguire was sweet also the one game he had a nice move into a sweet assist. As said he had shown some flash plays. Just think kid doesn’t try to be that guy just role player.
 
cuselaxss26 said:
i think cordes has better shot then mccarthy n hottle. Think he is a good feeder also n been on cuse for while so sure he knows what we do. But hasn’t played since bear took over on second line. Why think should mix mccarthy/hottle/cordes to go with bear as each of those 3 bring diff style.
Expand...
Re Cordes... we only see what goes on on game days and not what happens during the week at practice. Maybe he's hurting or maybe the other three on 2nds just outperforming him? My guess, he's banged up.

I think fans should consider the 2nds a supporting cast, there mainly to give the 1sts a rest, and if they should score as all three have, it's bonus points.

Losing Birtwistle didn't help things...
 
Last edited:
yea but think if could maby drop english with 2nd line move bear up (as thompson would been thought but he back at attack full time) that way 2nd line has a senior presence with them. Maby can help talk them thru what to do or how to attack. But yea to me their just there to give first line breather n to not try do to much or cost us. Which i get but same time if can get them to point they can produce decent amount only makes your team more dangerous. But like said have no idea what goes on at practice .
 
tech37 said:
Re Cordes... we only see what goes on on game days and not what happens during the week at practice. Maybe he's hurting or maybe the other three on 2nds just outperforming him? My guess, he's banged up.

I think fans should consider the 2nds a supporting cast, there mainly to give the 1sts a rest, and if they should score as all three have, it's bonus points.

Losing Birtwistle didn't help things...
Expand...

Not sure if he got hurt or not. If I remember correctly he took two pretty poor shots against Notre Dame, then they inserted Anderson who has played well. I kind of think he was benched, but not sure. He didn't play against Duke or Harvard. In the eight games since the Hopkins game (when he had four points), he has shot 2-13 with two assists. The Hopkins game was great, but since then it's been a rough go. Anderson has been shooting 4-7 in three games since replacing him in the Notre Dame game.

I do think we need more production out of the second line. I understand the expectations aren't as high as they are for the first line, but you need to get something out of that unit.

Since the Notre Dame game, Hottle and McCarthy have combined to go 1-11 shooting, with one assist, and five turnovers. That is not even close to good enough. Last year the second line group of Rhoa, Jake Stevens and Birtwistle combined for 61 points in 18 games. I know the second line has gone through a ton of personnel changes due to injuries and performance, but we aren't getting close to that kind of production this year.

I think the hope of the second line is that you see a spark, or improvement that lets you believe that player could join the first line when the time comes. Would you want Hottle or McCarthy to be a first line midfielder next year? Sorry, not trying to be negative, but I would be very concerned if you told me one of those two was supposed to replace English on the first line next year. McCarthy I can see the athleticism and I think there is a good player there, but he's had serious shooting issues this year, and is having trouble asserting himself. I like Hottle, but I think his shooting power holds him back from being a first line midfielder. I wonder to myself if he would be a better attackman, but I also don't want him to play attack for SU.
 
Long one here so fair warning.

It was a rollercoaster in the dome. I did not feel like we were playing that bad in the first quarter. Had some solid looks at the cage that we did not quite finish. Meanwhile Harvard is getting similar quality looks but the ball is finding the back of the cage. It was really the second quarter where the doom and gloom set in. Offensively we were getting in our own way more often than they were shutting us down. Some dumb turnovers and missed gimmies from Hiltz, English looking all over the place, some routine passes on the clear getting dropped, losing the speed battle a couple times in transition, hottle dropping his entire freaking stick on a turnover, McCool struggling. Still it felt like a game where the offense was going to get going once they got out of their own way. We had some quality looks where we just didn't finish. My main concern was the defensive end where we had a lot of guys allowing separation 1v1 and McCool not getting saves.

Lowest point in the game was in the third quarter when we are trying to finally get that third goal and English drops a routine pass from Rhoa, picks up the gb, and then immediately throws it away, all fairly close to where I was sitting. Started to really lose my cool then and would have said any number of terrible things in the game thread if I was watching from home. If there is one game to not feel guilty about saying wild stuff in the game thread it is this one!! A lot of these plays were a reflection or a recurring problem all year, our lack of depth for midfield athletes at all positions. The fact that English is still ALIVE right now, let alone still playing, is a testament to his insane motor.

But the main point is this - yes this team is guilty of some undisciplined and sloppy play, but at no point this season have I felt like the issue is a lack of effort, or a lack of desire to win. I was on the opposite side of the benches, so watching the replay I was pleased to see the level of commraderie and support guys were giving eachother after goals and in timeouts. Guys were smiling, hugging eachother, arms around shoulders, gassing eachother up after goals, trying to get the crowd going, and several other things that showed a clear high level of intensity and motivation. After the Caccamo goal to cut it to 4 my confidence was quickly growing. Gait is always looking as calm as ever, but his players do not play or act at all passive during games. His sideline demeanor does not reflect the overall attitude of the team he coaches, which is anything but passive.

The other thing is that it is just hard as hell to play 4 quarters of clean lacrosse, especially with the intensity of a playoff game. I came away from this game with a tremendous amount of respect for coach Bryne and the Harvard team, but how are Harvard fans feeling about giving up 7 goals in the 4th quarter and only scoring 4 in the second half? How are Harvard fans feeling about 4 4th quarter penalties? The Caccamo one was the only slighty questionable one (thought it was more like a trip than a push), but the others were clear as day! What on earth was that guy thinking cross checking spallina in the face as his head is down for a gb at that point in the game?? He has time to think it through and decides to bum rush him with his hands completely separated on his stick. They were extremely lucky to not get two locked in minutes for that. How do they feel about Ip trying to plow through three guys on their final settled possession? As mad as we get at our own teams sloppy/undisciplined moments, our opponents are always guilty of similar errors.

I am not saying we should stop critiquing players and staff when these bad plays happen. I think both players and staff are implicated in some of the trends this season. Just keep in mind that the reason these mistakes occur is not because guys are disinterested. This is not a team that was doing kegstands the night before and just want the season to end so they can enjoy their summer. They were laying it all on the line for a win and never gave up. If Gait and co.'s message is just keep the calm groovy vibes going and things will work themselves out, then we do not see that late game comeback and we do not see the high levels of emotion from the players. This team has flaws, but they do not shy away from a challenge, and they hate losing, so the staff is doing something right.
 
DomeHolmes said:
No, we probably don’t, but if their goalie doesn’t stand on his head and we don’t hit pipes, they lose by 5+. They clearly played better in the first 40 minutes though.

We had 12 unforced turnovers, and they had I believe 7 more saves than us, so they made up 19 of the possessions we gained (by dominating face offs), between their goalie and our sloppiness. (Those 19 lost possessions for us had very little to do with Harvard’s other nine guys on the field out playing us). They also only had two more forced turnovers than us, so it was as much us beating ourselves as it was them beating us.

They clearly won three things. The first 40 minutes, ground balls (not including face offs) and goalkeeping. We clearly won face offs, shots, shots on goal, dominated the last 20 minutes, and made better adjustments. So in my eyes, we played fairly evenly, but we just made one more play than them.

We have also fought uphill battles with penalties all year, and were overdue to have a game where we were less penalized.

I read the three pages of the Harvard lacrosse forum. (They obviously don’t care about lacrosse as much as we do). There was not one post in three pages where someone felt that “they dominated the game but lost”. Quite the opposite, it seems like they expected it and gave us credit for being more clutch than them.
Expand...
Great points. I agree with you. At least in terms of how I evaluate a team though, I look for:

On offense
-who wins the 1v1 matchups
-who moves without the ball
-who finds the open players
-who limits turnovers
-who shoots better

On defense
-who wins the 1v1 matchups
-who slides to help (and who doesn’t slide to help too early)
-who creates turnovers
-who clears better

And which goalie plays better

Man-up and Man-down teams are also important (kind of like special teams in football)

I think Harvard was better than us at almost every one of those measures above (except for man-up and man-down performance), but I think we won because we dominated face-offs (even the man-up run we had in the 4th was only possible because we dominated the face-offs). We dominated face offs, so we got a lot more possessions, which means more shots and more shots on goal. Their goalie finished the game with a 46% save percentage, which is not that good. It was still obviously better than McCools 29% save percentage, but wait ‘til you see Princeton’s goalie, Croddick! He’s excellent.

In years past, it’s been the opposite, and we’ve lost playoff games just because we got dominated at face-offs, even though we were the better offense and defense. I used to hate that feeling! I may be in the minority, but I think the face-off should be removed from the game. In the end though, face offs domination can only carry a team so far, and if we don’t play better on offense, defense, and in goal, then even if we dominate face-offs against Princeton, it still won’t be enough.

Also I’m thrilled that lacrosse will be in the ‘28 LA Olympics, and although Sixes is not ‘real lacrosse’, I am looking forward to watching a lacrosse game where face-offs are basically eliminated. May the best ‘team’ win (unfortunately, it may be Canada)
 
1:40 which saved a season:

10:28 Luke Rhoa [7-11]

10:13 Harvard penalty 1:00 cross check unreleaseable

10:00 Trey Deere from Spallina (Man-Up) [8-11]

9:49 Chuck Kuczynski from Thomson (Man-Up) [9-11]

9:11 Trey Deere from Hiltz (Man-Up) [10-11]

8:49 Luke Rhoa from Leo [11-11]
 
DomeHolmes said:
No, we probably don’t, but if their goalie doesn’t stand on his head and we don’t hit pipes, they lose by 5+. They clearly played better in the first 40 minutes though.

We had 12 unforced turnovers, and they had I believe 7 more saves than us, so they made up 19 of the possessions we gained (by dominating face offs), between their goalie and our sloppiness. (Those 19 lost possessions for us had very little to do with Harvard’s other nine guys on the field out playing us). They also only had two more forced turnovers than us, so it was as much us beating ourselves as it was them beating us.

They clearly won three things. The first 40 minutes, ground balls (not including face offs) and goalkeeping. We clearly won face offs, shots, shots on goal, dominated the last 20 minutes, and made better adjustments. So in my eyes, we played fairly evenly, but we just made one more play than them.

We have also fought uphill battles with penalties all year, and were overdue to have a game where we were less penalized.

I read the three pages of the Harvard lacrosse forum. (They obviously don’t care about lacrosse as much as we do). There was not one post in three pages where someone felt that “they dominated the game but lost”. Quite the opposite, it seems like they expected it and gave us credit for being more clutch than them.
Expand...

Sorry to inquire again but curious where this harvard lacrosse forum is, usually I can find most teams message boards even with google I am coming up empty. Can you link to it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,053
Messages
5,130,819
Members
6,100
Latest member
Kimmel1989

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
192
Guests online
2,337
Total visitors
2,529
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom