So there’s this..

[PhatOrange]

Everyone’s forgotten us already. Until 2016, we had as many losses in the semis as UNC had total appearances in the Final 4.

my mistake. oversight

 

[HtownOrange]

Syracuse has left it roots as a offensive run-and-gun, fast-break, or otherwise offensive judgernaut team that would out shoot a team until they scored more points and do so quickly and decisively. With top level talent, even though the super talents may not be lining up to play for SU, there is no excuse not to play historical Syracuse lacrosse. Even the early season Albany team could not have beaten SU had they played the fast game and run Albany into the ground. Top to bottom, no team has more talent.

The set offense and switching out players once you cross midfield on every change of possession is killing the traditional fast paced game. This also allows defenses to get set and stops teh fast break momentum, as well as the junk ball scavenger that is trailing the fast break. The prinicples are no different from hoops, get the steal or stop, change direction, don't let opponent get set in defensetake high percentage shots with numbers for clean up. This demoralizes defenses and runs down starters. How many times did we see Syracuse run it for several minutes, score at will and show their might? And then how many times did they fall back into the slow ball game, trade midfielders every time they crossed midfield, and give momentum to the opponent.

I am not sure why Desko has left his roots and why he refuses to use the team he has to its fullest advantage, but he needs to reverse course and get the SU game back to its funnest state. A fun offense will draw the best talent. Recruiting is an issue but if he does not want to recruit, then be honest and step down. Recruiting is part of every Division I sport, it is part of the job and a key responsibility and duty for any head coach.

I like Desko and he knows how to win. He needs to step up and repeat what got him there in the first place.

Apologies for the rant. Just venting...

 

[OrangeXtreme]

The set offense and switching out players once you cross midfield on every change of possession is killing the traditional fast paced game. This also allows defenses to get set and stops teh fast break momentum, as well as the junk ball scavenger that is trailing the fast break. The prinicples are no different from hoops, get the steal or stop, change direction, don't let opponent get set in defensetake high percentage shots with numbers for clean up.

.

You'd prefer to play offense with two Defensive Middies and a Long Pole?

 

[HtownOrange]

You'd prefer to play offense with two Defensive Middies and a Long Pole?

I prefer the middies play both ways, at least to start a possession, i.e. a fast break. Too many times the team just pulled up, even when we had numbers or defenders our of position, wasted time and swapped out specialists which allowed the opponent to do the same. Then came the slow down game and the offense stood still too often.

Perhaps if the offense moved more, creating openings for shots, I would be less opined to rely on the fast break. When the offense was in motion, shots were created angoals scored, so that system can work, the Orange did not execute it well consistently. From my perspective, the team scored more, reacted better and even played better when the fast break was employed.

While I appreciate the efforts of some individuals to step up and create, it was not a "team" concept. Obviously I cannot pinpoint whether that falls on coaching, the players' "game IQ", the players' physical skills limits, self discipline to run plays, or other issues, but I can opine that the team did not play a consistent offense in the set offense scheme.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

I've seen us waste too many possessions because a D-Mid took an ill advised shot.

 

[HtownOrange]

I've seen us waste too many possessions because a D-Mid took an ill advised shot.

That is a fair point. Middies don't play both ways like they used to.

 

[SkyTopBus44]

exactly. He's a great coach and Denver isn't good because of parity. They're good because of Tierney.

Look what has happened to Princeton since he left. Maybe it was also an administration shift in academic standards but can’t say that losing the coach did not truly impact the program.

 

[Dodger44]

Life moves forward, you can't live in the past. The past is your legacy. Recruits look at the recent past. You have to change or life moves past you. Is SU keeping up with the world of Lacrosse ? Running back football recruits don't come to SU because of the # 44. They can't relate to SU RBs from the past. Parity does exist, but the great programs keep up with the parity. Nothing but the Final Four and National Championships should always be the goal and recruiting players and assistant coaches who can get you there. Making excuses isn't the answer. This is a results driven world.

 

[Hoo's That]

Look what has happened to Princeton since he left. Maybe it was also an administration shift in academic standards but can’t say that losing the coach did not truly impact the program.

Tierney left because the administration shifted academic standards. He wasn’t going to be allowed to bring in as many “marginal for an Ivy” players as he had before. They started to decline while he was still there and when Denver came calling he listened.

 

[tbonezone]

tierney left princeton and went to denver when he was 58 and turned a nobody into a national champ. more impressive than danowski's resume imo.

 

[PhatOrange]

tierney left princeton and went to denver when he was 58 and turned a nobody into a national champ. more impressive than danowski's resume imo.

Makes ya wonder if Desko could do the same thing. Cough

 

[longtimefan]

I think this is perception without much basis in fact. It's a good argument for teams like Syracuse who aren't on top anymore. Point to parity instead of the coaching staff.

There have been 46 titles and only 10 teams have ever won a title.

The final fours have been dominated by the same teams; whether the 80s, 90s or 2000s.

Let Define our blue bloods - Syracuse, UVA, Hopkins, UNC, Duke, Maryland, Cornell, Princeton(Denver), Loyola,

It should be noted both Loyola and Towson had FF appearances in the 90s and both played in title games. You could argue both are old blue bloods.

(when did parity become 'a thing' is there a year onward we should examine?)

The Final Four has slotted 76 teams since 2000.

Here are your outliers with appearances:

ND - 4
Towson - 2 (had title game appearance in the 90's)
UMass - 1
Navy - 1
Delaware - 1
Brown - 1 (had a FF appearance in the 90's)
Ohio State - 1
Yale - 1
Albany - 1

Outliers - 13 appearances
Blue Bloods - 63 appearances

I won't deny that other schools are more competitive now and there's more schools playing but parity is not affecting the blue bloods the way some people think it is.

Syracuse comprises 9 of the 63 appearances but zero in the last 5 years. We're struggling now with the outliers (Bryant, Towson, Army) as well as the bluebloods. For Syracuse it's an across the board thing.

"Parity" may not be the right word. Maybe the term should address the opening of horizons for the former also-rans of a niche sport.

Let's look at the historical record:

The NCAA tourney began in the 70's, and 4 schools won the championship that first decade--Cornell, UMd, UVa, and Hopkins.

In rhe 80's, two new winners--UNC and SU.

In the 90's, only 1--Princeton.

In the 00's--none, not a single solitary new champion.

In the 10's, 4-- Duke, Loyola, Denver, and Yale (and still a year to go).

Something is happening. How would you describe it?

 

[Hoo's That]

"Parity" may not be the right word. Maybe the term should address the opening of horizons for the former also-rans of a niche sport.

Let's look at the historical record:

The NCAA tourney began in the 70's, and 4 schools won the championship that first decade--Cornell, UMd, UVa, and Hopkins.

In rhe 80's, two new winners--UNC and SU.

In the 90's, only 1--Princeton.

In the 00's--none, not a single solitary new champion.

In the 10's, 4-- Duke, Loyola, Denver, and Yale (and still a year to go).

Something is happening. How would you describe it?

The new guys were all senior-heavy teams. Duke has been able to sustain their program beyond that team, while Denver and Loyola have not. IIRC, Yale is pretty senior-heavy on offense. Finding a way to replace Reeves (I didn’t say someone) will be a very tall order. They’ll still be good, but IMO they won’t be another Princeton.

Is it really parity if one team, usually loaded with seniors, from a non-traditional power conference does really, really well? To me, parity is more than one team from the AE, NEC, SoCon, etc., making the tournament and that doesn’t seem to be on the horizon unless someone upsets Albany in the AE tournament.

 

[longtimefan]

The new guys were all senior-heavy teams. Duke has been able to sustain their program beyond that team, while Denver and Loyola have not. IIRC, Yale is pretty senior-heavy on offense. Finding a way to replace Reeves (I didn’t say someone) will be a very tall order. They’ll still be good, but IMO they won’t be another Princeton.

Is it really parity if one team, usually loaded with seniors, from a non-traditional power conference does really, really well? To me, parity is more than one team from the AE, NEC, SoCon, etc., making the tournament and that doesn’t seem to be on the horizon unless someone upsets Albany in the AE tournament.

What if there are 5 leagues that can get multiple teams in, and are threats to win the whole thing?

 

[PhatOrange]

What if there are 5 leagues that can get multiple teams in, and are threats to win the whole thing?

The 'parity' teams are occasionally threats to win the whole thing. To me parity would be teams like Bryant and Richmond and Fairfield and Michigan CONSISTENTLY being viable threats to win the whole thing. Once in awhile they might be like Ohio State was and maybe that is parity but I feel like the 90's had lots of one offs to. They just didn't win it.

If parity is definited as teams that have won the whole thing, that's fair, except Denver is coached by Tierney - so I can't include them. That leaves Loyola - who had two FF appearances in the 90's playing for 1 title - and Yale. Teams like Yale will get it done once in awhile. Brown and Penn had FF's in the 90's to and so did Towson.

Until the traditional blue blood teams aren't dominating the FF then I can't really point to 'parity' as the reason for Syracuse's demise.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Until the traditional blue blood teams aren't dominating the FF then I can't really point to 'parity' as the reason for Syracuse's demise.

The reason is simple. Our recruiting has been "off" for a while.

Ben Reeves was Class of 2014, from Pal-Mac.

This is who SU brought in at A/M for 2014:
Luke Schwasnick (Oceanside)
Tyler Ford (Owego)
Pat Carlin (Vestal)
Brennen Ferguson (Niagara-Wheatfield)
Brad McKinney (Watertown)

We also brought in Tim Barber (who was a two year JUCO), and Gale Thorpe (who would have been a senior this year).

Not exactly earth shaking.

 

[laxsummit]

McKinney was actually ranked higher by IL than Reeves (60 vs 77) but the point of your post is correct.

 

[laxsummit]

McKinney was actually ranked higher by IL than Reeves (60 vs 77) but the point of your post is correct.

 

[JeremyCuse]

The reason is simple. Our recruiting has been "off" for a while.

Ben Reeves was Class of 2014, from Pal-Mac.

This is who SU brought in at A/M for 2014:
Luke Schwasnick (Oceanside)
Tyler Ford (Owego)
Pat Carlin (Vestal)
Brennen Ferguson (Niagara-Wheatfield)
Brad McKinney (Watertown)

We also brought in Tim Barber (who was a two year JUCO), and Gale Thorpe (who would have been a senior this year).

Not exactly earth shaking.

This X 1000. The 2014 class was supposed to just be a supplemental class for the great 2013 class which was ranked #2 overall. Instead the 2013 class was a huge bust and the 2014 was somehow worse. If not for transfers and hitting on some younger guys in later classes the last few years would have been really really bad record wise. That list is scary to read save for Tim Barber who was a very good player.

 

[laxsummit]

This X 1000. The 2014 class was supposed to just be a supplemental class for the great 2013 class which was ranked #2 overall. Instead the 2013 class was a huge bust and the 2014 was somehow worse. If not for transfers and hitting on some younger guys in later classes the last few years would have been really really bad record wise. That list is scary to read save for Tim Barber who was a very good player.

Yep. At least 2013 netted Firman, 2014 Fusco. I wonder how Jordan Evans would be viewed/remembered if he had not been the #! recruit and not wearing #22. Thought he was a good player somewhat similar to a Solomon. Best laid plans sometimes go awry and set back for a few years but Cuse began to recover with the last few classes and an upswing is upon us

 

[tbonezone]

Something is happening. How would you describe it?

not much difference from the other sports. typically about 10 teams max with a legit chance to win the title.
fewer universities field lacrosse so the pond is that much smaller. you list 11 colleges with quality programs.
throw in ND ,the hounds, the service schools and the recent emergence of albany and that's your pond.
congrats to yale. they made a big splash but has yet to do it consistently. expect the usual suspects next year.

 

[tbonezone]

Makes ya wonder if Desko could do the same thing. Cough

personally i think he deserves the chance to try . stoneybrook is a lovely campus.