Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Powellfan, post: 3856891, member: 4819"] Nice post, agree with pretty much everything, especially the Seebold stuff. But I want to push back against some of the defensive stuff. I do think the defense played better in the second half, though I think that was mostly due to Porter actually finally making some saves. Wykoff did get switched off Smith in favor of Murphy and that seemed to help as well. But I feel like every game we are all making excuses for the defense, saying things like, "well only 8 of the 10 goals were in settled situations ...". Not attacking you by any means because we all do it, but I just have to think at this point in the year, aren't' those kind of excuses/qualifiers part of the problem? RMU got goals off of the sub game which really shouldn't be happening at this point in the year and lots in transition, which, fine it happens, but the goals given up were really bad. On one, Murphy went to the literal defninition of no-man's land and didn't pick up the open man leading the break, or his man parked on the crease, which led to an easy goal. Our offensive midfielders are really really bad on defense. That may just be part of the game but I see Syracuse get opposing o-mids stuck on defense and they put up much more of a fight than anything I see from Syracuse. One RMU player got the ball at x, close to the end line and NO ONE PICKED HIM UP until he scored on the doorstep without anyone around him. Curry was the closest, but again, no communication and no one had any clue of whose man it was. This has been going on all season. All season. Another time, the RMU ball carrier swam through two o-mids (I think it was Quinn and Cook) and scored an easy goal despite getting double teamed. There is just something fundamentally wrong with the way this team is getting taught how to play defense. It's maddening (as you can tell). [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?