Message
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is no formal shot clock in college lacrosse, what are you talking about?
The ref can issue a stall warning when he feels the offense is not trying to create enough offense or generate enough shots. When the official issues a shot clock, the team has then 30 seconds to generate a shot Obviously this is very subjective. There is no shot clock similar to what you see in the NBA or College Basketball.
I assume your son doesn't play in the IAC as the IAC plays college rules unlike several other private school leagues.
VA and MD publics still played little by FEDERATION rules.
Not sure who you are responding to, but I was arguing that there SHOULD be a 90 sec possession/shot clock to minimize the advantage a team gets with a dominant FOGO. The girls have it, so should the boys.
The girls also don't wear helmets and can't check sticks.. The shot clock rule that college and iac use are perfectly fine and allow teams to play at a slower pace if they need to, as not every team has the horses to run the entire game.
NP jumping in. Have you ever even SEEN a college women's lacrosse game? They clearly check and there is no way that you can say that the pace is 'slower'. They also play two 30-minute halves instead of easy, breezy quarters where players get a break every 15 minutes. Those women can run circles around your ignorant butt.
Ok well first i did not say the womans game is slower you misread what i was trying to say which was the current rules in place now allow mens teams to play at a slower pace if that is what would help them win games. Also lets be real checking in girls vs boys is not even close when it comes to physicality and where you are allowed to check. Finally, do girls wear pads and helmets?? Do these things have an effect on the boys during hot springs and summers on turf fields???
Do women's lax teams have rosters that go 50 deep? Do women's lax teams have specialists like LSMs and FOGOS who are on and off the field in 10 seconds flat more often than not? Do women's lax teams play on smaller fields than their male counterparts? I played men's collegiate lax and coached women's lax at all levels. The women's game is far more physically demanding. Sorry your precious boy gets a little more sweaty during his 90 second middie run. Most female lacrosse starters play 80% of the game or more (provided it isnt a blowout) with few chances to rotate out at the HS level.
Anonymous wrote:I played four years of Division I women's lacrosse (close defense) and have coached (HS) as well. The shot clock is even more necessary in the women's game than the men's game because of the great difficulty of LEGALLY causing a turnover through checking when the ball carrier is skilled. Even with the shot clock, dominance of the draw can be devastating in the women's game because it is so difficult to force turnovers. Because of the higher element of physicality and the long poles on defense, there's really no question that caused turnovers are more of a factor in the men's game.
With that said, I think the men's game as well would benefit from a "real" shot clock, not the current stall warning variety which can be manipulated (for example, college refs will start their 'mental stall warning' clock again if the coach of the team on offense calls a time-out) to make it less impactful in the final minutes of a game.
Glad to see some girls' lacrosse talk on the thread but it doesn't have to be adversarial -- at my undergrad school the men's and women's leaders were good friends and the men's fundraising association has generously merged with the women's association (the men's association has more big ticket donors).
I don't disagree, but don't you think the "free draw" (used by just about every decent local athletics conference around DC) after a certain goal differential offsets, to an extent, the importance of draw control? Also, while rules about checking across the body, checking "up" and the like do make it difficult to force a turnover, the lack of a pocket in the stick and certain rules meant to help the defense (like dangerous propulsion) can work to a good defense's advantage, especially those defenses that have been taught to focus on body position over check. Not denying that caused turnovers are more of a factor in the men's game, just throwing some items out there.
Anonymous wrote:dont give me the "we live in CT but our kid goes to Episcopal"
you comment every week in the Washington Post HS rankings in several sports in both male and female..........
Well since you have the time to check WaPo for my comments, check gametimect.com and Greenwich Times. I post in both of those under the same UN as well. And re: my WaPo posting - since you apparently have so much free time to read (and oddly recall) my WaPo comments, you saw the ones about Rye playing Robinson (and applauding them for doing so). I only knew about that game before it happened because Rye is about 2 minutes from the Greenwich border and gets run in the Greenwich times (as a ton of RCDS kids come from Greenwich). Next.
Anonymous wrote:Brunswick was the best team Landon faced all year. They would have ran through the IAC this year. EHS and Prep were BAD this year.
Shockey had over 40 points for the Bears this Spring - he is more than a FOGO. He or Epstein will get Wash Post POY.
As someone who attended at least five Brunswick games this year and 3 Landon games (we live in CT but one of our kids goes to Episcopal another to Brunswick). I can say, without hesitation, that while Landon was the best team Brunswick faced all year, the opposite is not at all true. I give credit to Brunswick for doing what the other NE Preps wont do (scheduling decent OOC opponents) but there is a reason they duck the Dariens of the world, even this season in which they have one of their best teams ever. They cannot compete, day in and day out, with an IAC-esque schedule. The talent and depth isn't there. As a one-off, does Brunswick beat EHS, Prep and STA this season? Probably. But, if they had to play Prep, then Episcopal, then Landon, then Bullis, then STA w a similar non-con schedule as the rest of the IAC, 3-2 would be a good conference record for them. Not a knock on the program, just the reality.
Oh, and Shockey had nowhere near 40 points for Landon, pls cite your source on that one. He is more a MF than a traditional FOGO, but he was primarily a FOGO. He would be a deserving POY, although it would be unusual for a specialist to get it, but he doesnt need you inflating his stats to get it.
Anonymous wrote:Brunswick was probably the best team Landon played. They will finish top 5 if they win out.
Brunswick would struggle to be a top 3 team in the IAC this year...and this is coming from a Brunswick alum who only sees the school through rose colored glasses. Landon handles them (that we know). Bullis likely does as well. And then having to face the caliber of teams like SSSA, Episcopal, and Prep night in and night out would make it rough on them.
Anonymous wrote:10000000% shockeyAnonymous wrote:All met player of the year?
Can a guy who is basically a FOGO make a legit claim to the All Met POY? I agree he is a SICK FOGO but he is just that - a Face-off, Get-off guy. Not a knock, it is an amazing specialized skill (and one that I lacked as a middie growing up) and he is beyond impressive at it.