Here we go again with the Face Off

[SCLaxAttack]

Part of me loves the athleticism and strength I see when two really good FOGOs go head to head for 15-30 seconds - like two wild animals fighting for herd dominance - to see who'll finally take possession. The other part is in complete agreement with posters like dmac and believe withholding the ball is not part of the essence of the game. In my opinion the latter should win out. As such, I wish refs would just call the rule as written: no extended withholding - clamp and rake or scoop in one motion.

The only method of hand placement I'm against is one that would prevent the ball from leaving the crosse, i.e. placing your thumb on the ball while cradling. The moto grip in and of itself doesn't prevent a ball's release. If an attack or defensemen found some way to better shoot or defend using a moto grip would that also be illegal?

[CU77]

My solution: have both FOGO stickheads flat on the ground, the ball between them. Then the best move is a quick swipe at the ball, and after that it's an ordinary ground-ball situation.

Or, we could keep the start the way it is if flexible heads could be banned. It's the ridiculous specialized flexible heads that allow an unbudgeable clamp.

But now we're back to "fix the sticks", and why that isn't possible is still deeply mysterious to me, but whatever ...

[DMac]

Q's idea in IL is interesting. All dressed players (I assume SS middies, he doesn't say that) must take a draw in coach's chosen order (like a batting order), no 2nd try until the list is completed. If the next up is in the box or hurt, Q says that team forfeits that fo. Maybe just go to next name instead...

I don't like that idea at all, why would you do that? There's always going to be someone who is the best, right? Enforce the rules and may the best man win. It's that way at every other position and face offs are just one part of the game (see OSU-Cornell) so why can't a FOGO be as dominant as an attackman might be?

[FMUBart]

Part of me loves the athleticism and strength I see when two really good FOGOs go head to head for 15-30 seconds - like two wild animals fighting for herd dominance - to see who'll finally take possession. The other part is in complete agreement with posters like dmac and believe withholding the ball is not part of the essence of the game. In my opinion the latter should win out. As such, I wish refs would just call the rule as written: no extended withholding - clamp and rake or scoop in one motion.

The only method of hand placement I'm against is one that would prevent the ball from leaving the crosse, i.e. placing your thumb on the ball while cradling. The moto grip in and of itself doesn't prevent a ball's release. If an attack or defensemen found some way to better shoot or defend using a moto grip would that also be illegal?

Yeah 15 -30 seconds at a faceoff is real athleticism...maybe watch more WWE? Nothing better than watching a fogo head downfield with the ball on the back of his stick, what a joke that is!

[kramerica.inc]

If you don't win that intial clamp, it's not happening. No more scrums and little to no wing play.

This is what drives me crazy as well. This is completely inaccurate. You haven't seen the "FOGO" who wins the clamp, lose the faceoff (possession)? I see it all the time... specifically because of wing play. Likewise, how about the times they get into a "wrestling" match, someone wins the clamp, are you saying the wings don't come into play then? Man oh man...

Sure. That occasionally happens. Glad the wings are there to play defense.
Tell me about all those clean wins and swipes to the wingmen we're seeing these days.
Wait. There aren't any. That has gone away with the kneeling Moto.

Another thing that shows the demise of wing play?
Lefty Fogos. You know why that's the Haute thing?
Because no one uses their wings any more. It's a 1v1 clamp race. And lefties can push the ball forward and scoop (keep) the ball 3 feet further in front of a righty on fast breaks.

[RumorMill]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDTYptbr-sE

I'm sure there's only a couple examples
But above is one. In the first quarter alone you have multiple faceoffs that are decided by wing play (both good wing play and questionable). Also have two violation calls on Penn St. for exactly what a lot of people are complaining about (witholding and carrying the ball in the back of his stick). First faceoff alone, Cornell wins clamp, pitches ball out and Penn State ends up with possession because of wing play.

Anyhow. Haters gonna hate.

[nrthcrosslax]

https://www.youtube.com/embed/ui7AzW74X9k

[Can Opener]

It would help to understand what "problem" the rules committee is trying to solve. The FO doesn't seem to be causing any imbalance in results. As I have shared earlier, in 2019 only 5 FO specialists had a winning percentage over 2/3. Of those 5, only 2 played for a top 20 team. Of the top 10 FO guys last year, only 3 played for a top 20 team. https://stats.ncaa.org/rankings/change_sport_year_div

You can't look at stats in a vacuum. You are looking at one year extrapolating that to the entire issue. If you go back and look at past years and compare FO win %, you will see a very big trend with respect to win percentages that demonstrates why there was a change. The NCAA has stats going back to the 2001. Up until 2015, every year there were at most 2 guys that had win % of .660. I even looked at how many guys were winning FO above .600% (figuring that was a decent cross section of top FO guys) and most years it was between 6 and 8 guys had FO win percentages over .600. Some other tidbits from those years between 2001 and 2015:

• In most years, the highest FO win percentage was in the high .680.

• Prior to 2014, there had been a grand total of 3 guys that had a season where their FO win percentage was in excess of .700% - their FO win% was .712, .723 and .726, respectively. And in all 3 of those years, their team made the playoffs

• The most guys having a FO win % in excess of .600 was in 2007 when 12 guys did it

• The highest FO win percentage ever was .726 by Kevin Massa of Bryant and Bryant did go to the NCAA that year

• After 2007, when the first double digit number of guys had in excess of .600 win %, every year except 2008 and 2009 had a double digit number of guys winning FOs in excess of .600

After 2015, things start to drastically change. Whether that is a change in sticks, I don't know but the top FO win percentages took off:

• In just 4 years - 2016 through 2019, 10 times an individual player had a season with a win percentage in excess of .700 (obviously there were some guys repeating the feat over multiple years.) - remember it was only done 3 times between 2001 and 2015

• The prior high of win percentage was in 2013 of .726 - that was blown out of the water. The top win percentage is now .791 by TD in 2018

• Over the last 2 years, that old top win percentage of .726 would have finished 3rd and would be 3rd right now in the 2020 season

• Further, the high for number guys winning in excess of .600 was 18 in 2019

• Obviously 2020 is a wash but the stats were even worse, 2 guys were over .700, one guy was just below at .695 and there were 21 guys that had a FO win percentage above .600. Some of that would shake out some as the season progressed but I doubt it would have been much different than 2019

But, if you don't think there is an issue with FOs just a little digging demonstrates that last year's stat demonstrate a concerning trend line that was not heading in the right direction.

Steel Hop -- Thanks for digging in. I think you are saying that the number of guys at the very high end (winning more than 60%) has gone from "double digits" historically to 18 in 2019. I will offend some folks with this statement, but very few people are concerned with the 9 guys in 2019 on your list from Hampton, Air Force, Mercer, Cleveland State, Marist, St. Joe's, Hobart, UMass Lowell and Detroit Mercy. Other than TD, the other 9 guys on the 60% list didn't have a big impact. Of the NCAA final four that year, Penn State had the #15 guy, UVA had the #21 guy, and Duke had the #41 guy. In the final game, TD went 17 for 24 but his team lost 13-9. Notably, Petey LaSalla went only 4 of 16 in his reps against TD, but LaSalla scored two goals off his four wins for Virginia. So much for the "FO specialists aren't real athletes" argument.

Similarly, on your concern that more guys went over 70% during the most recent four complete seasons, who really cares that a couple guys got really, really good at faceoffs through remarkable hard work? There were only 9 times (not 10) when win rates topped 70% and 5 of those results were produced by TD and Trevor. Do the other guys on the 70% list merit a rule change??? Those guys included the FO specialists from Hartford, Jacksonville & Hampton.

The bottom line to the stats is that two guys have produced at historical levels recently that will probably never be achieved again. There are two basic responses: (1) crack a cold one and toast their excellence; or (2) change the rules to maybe slow them down. I'm thirsty.

[pcowlax]

1+ to that. In the interest of work I am not replying to each of these as I would like but these rule changes are a solution in search of a problem. As noted, the majority of this trend in historic seasons is actually 2 generational guys. The vast majority of other such seasons are by guys on losing teams. To say that there is a ongoing trend towards a large number of guys over 60% is to butt into the mathematics of Lake Wobegon. And who cares if the top guys win 60% vs 55% like back in the never were halcyon days of yore? You are talking literally 1 or maybe 2 more wins per game. Across all sports specialists are better than they used to be because of the time people now spend on such things. Kramerica, I appreciate that you faced off and coach it. Question, did you have a you when you were a kid? The reason you used to be able to instruct an athlete for a few weeks on FO and have him be competitive was NOT due to the grip, it was because the “specialists” were not that specialized. Your 1971 or 1982 FO guy had not spent 9 summers before college at FO camp, gotten years of private training and spent thousands of hours watching YouTube videos and practicing it. The reason that FOGOs now might not be able to survive on the field (not at all true for all of them) is not because the old school guys were better lax players but because the old school guys spent much less time working on FO and more on field skills. If that is what you want then fine but rules changes will not being that back. And to reiterate what I said earlier in this, I completely fail to see the logic in saying that going to standing/neutral makes the position much more nuanced with moves and counters etc AND that it will remove dominant specialists and allow guys to just step in and face off. The more complex something it, the more it rewards years of singleminded practice and dedication. I’m not sure why either it would be considered desirable to change something that rewards such dedicated practice into something anyone can do. Saying that now tons of people can be competitive because we weeded out the persistent practitioners does not sound like much to recommend a change to me.

[DMac]

You're assuming that the reason for the changes is that someone is too good, too dominant. I don't believe that's the case at all. In 71 and 80 you couldn't bend and twist your stick and use it like tongs to pick the ball up or clamp it to the ground the way they do today. That's what I believe it's all about. Back to that essence thing.

[wgdsr]

You're assuming that the reason for the changes is that someone is too good, too dominant. I don't believe that's the case at all. In 71 and 80 you couldn't bend and twist your stick and use it like tongs to pick the ball up or clamp it to the ground the way they do today. That's what I believe it's all about. Back to that essence thing.

hey dmac, you do realize this is an ironic post, no?

[wgdsr]

If you don't win that intial clamp, it's not happening. No more scrums and little to no wing play.

This is what drives me crazy as well. This is completely inaccurate. You haven't seen the "FOGO" who wins the clamp, lose the faceoff (possession)? I see it all the time... specifically because of wing play. Likewise, how about the times they get into a "wrestling" match, someone wins the clamp, are you saying the wings don't come into play then? Man oh man...

Sure. That occasionally happens. Glad the wings are there to play defense.
Tell me about all those clean wins and swipes to the wingmen we're seeing these days.
Wait. There aren't any. That has gone away with the kneeling Moto.

Another thing that shows the demise of wing play?
Lefty Fogos. You know why that's the Haute thing?
Because no one uses their wings any more. It's a 1v1 clamp race. And lefties can push the ball forward and scoop (keep) the ball 3 feet further in front of a righty on fast breaks.

this isn't really true. most faceoff guys get big chunks or their faceoff wins from their wings. ierlan has been an exception more and more as he's aged (and matta was well into the 60s, too), but most faceoff men:
- get big chunks of gbs/wins from their wings (baptiste for example got 45% from them).
- rely on their wings to help keep the other teams' wings off them for some of their own gbs.
- lose faceoffs that they've gotten the clamp/directional because their wings didn't do the above.

ierlan's an exception. and clean wins are quick clamps and ball's out for a fogo gb. that's a problem now or that's what we're trying to do with new rules? again.

[Typical Lax Dad]

If you don't win that intial clamp, it's not happening. No more scrums and little to no wing play.

This is what drives me crazy as well. This is completely inaccurate. You haven't seen the "FOGO" who wins the clamp, lose the faceoff (possession)? I see it all the time... specifically because of wing play. Likewise, how about the times they get into a "wrestling" match, someone wins the clamp, are you saying the wings don't come into play then? Man oh man...

Sure. That occasionally happens. Glad the wings are there to play defense.
Tell me about all those clean wins and swipes to the wingmen we're seeing these days.
Wait. There aren't any. That has gone away with the kneeling Moto.

Another thing that shows the demise of wing play?
Lefty Fogos. You know why that's the Haute thing?
Because no one uses their wings any more. It's a 1v1 clamp race. And lefties can push the ball forward and scoop (keep) the ball 3 feet further in front of a righty on fast breaks.

this isn't really true. most faceoff guys get big chunks or their faceoff wins from their wings. ierlan has been an exception more and more as he's aged (and matta was well into the 60s, too), but most faceoff men:
- get big chunks of gbs/wins from their wings (baptiste for example got 45% from them).
- rely on their wings to help keep the other teams' wings off them for some of their own gbs.
- lose faceoffs that they've gotten the clamp/directional because their wings didn't do the above.

ierlan's an exception. and clean wins are quick clamps and ball's out for a fogo gb. that's a problem now or that's what we're trying to do with new rules? again.

Absolutely....Plenty of teams use wings. Those players can be difference makers.

[Surfs_Up]

Who says the essence of the game requires lumber yard sticks and no flex heads? This constant argument from DMAC is ridiculous. Technology evolves and so does the game. People get better, the equipment gets better. The position and game is fine. If nobody likes extended tie ups, then just limit a tie up to 30 seconds, and have the ref count down. Or 15 seconds, whatever.

Why try to eliminate a position that appeals to a group of kids. Aren't we trying to grow this game and add more people to have an interest in it? Or is this some special club that only the old school purists are allowed to participate in?

[BiasedFOGO5]

Hey,

Had to chime in. I am a fogo who has been training knee down for 8 years. This year I was a college senior and deeply saddened when the season was canceled. When the extra year of eligibility was given I was Pumped to be able to play again and have another shot to make an impact on the game and chose a new school to attend grad school. Lacrosse is the only reason I am going to grad school. Unfortunately IF this rule passes I fear I will not be able to contribute to the game as much as I have been able to the past.

Two other thoughts I had.

1. Knee down face offs will create a faster draw. But it will result in a 50- 50 groundball with the ball rolling uncontrolled in a 6 person scrum in the middle of the field. This rule makes it much more difficult to have a clean win, a fast break, or any sort of fast possession. I believe that no fan wants to watch 30 second - minute long sessions of players stabbing at a ground ball on the ground.

2. Rule changes decrease familiarity with the game. The face off is an integral part of the game and changing it will only create more confusion among casual fans, ultimately limiting growth and inhibiting lacrosse as a sport.

My athletic career has been dedicated to faceoff off and perfecting the technique and there hundreds of college FOGO’s like me. We face off knee down because it’s the best way to do it. Why would anyone want to watch low quality faceoffs between two people who do not know what they’re doing?

[BiasedFOGO5]

This link goes to a change.org page that I created in an attempt to influence this decision. I hope for both every college fogo that faces off knee down and the future of the game you all go sign the petition and make a difference!

http://chng.it/ZSRtn8yK

[kramerica.inc]

If you don't win that intial clamp, it's not happening. No more scrums and little to no wing play.

This is what drives me crazy as well. This is completely inaccurate. You haven't seen the "FOGO" who wins the clamp, lose the faceoff (possession)? I see it all the time... specifically because of wing play. Likewise, how about the times they get into a "wrestling" match, someone wins the clamp, are you saying the wings don't come into play then? Man oh man...

Sure. That occasionally happens. Glad the wings are there to play defense.
Tell me about all those clean wins and swipes to the wingmen we're seeing these days.
Wait. There aren't any. That has gone away with the kneeling Moto.

Another thing that shows the demise of wing play?
Lefty Fogos. You know why that's the Haute thing?
Because no one uses their wings any more. It's a 1v1 clamp race. And lefties can push the ball forward and scoop (keep) the ball 3 feet further in front of a righty on fast breaks.

this isn't really true. most faceoff guys get big chunks or their faceoff wins from their wings. ierlan has been an exception more and more as he's aged (and matta was well into the 60s, too), but most faceoff men:
- get big chunks of gbs/wins from their wings (baptiste for example got 45% from them).
- rely on their wings to help keep the other teams' wings off them for some of their own gbs.
- lose faceoffs that they've gotten the clamp/directional because their wings didn't do the above.

ierlan's an exception. and clean wins are quick clamps and ball's out for a fogo gb. that's a problem now or that's what we're trying to do with new rules? again.

You’ll still see clean wins and fast breaks. But I’ll respectfully disagree on the “most” part. I agree it’s fun to watch the top 10 fogos like TD in D1 lacrosse manipulate and use their wings. They have mastered the position and can do that. But as fun as it’s to watch, that’s the exception and not the rule. That’s not the case for the rest of D1, D2 , D3 and the hs leagues like the MIAA that also played by those old rules. It’s become a one man show at the X for much of what I was watching.

If the rules play out like I think, there should be less manhandling and withholding of the ball, I think we should see more contested gbs and fogos trying to use the wings. But we shall see how it’s written and how the players /coaches adjust to the new rules.

Having played and coached both styles, I think the fogos will be fine. Change is always scary. This change is not as scary as it sounds. It should be easy for most to pick up and relatively quickly. Master however...I actually think the players will enjoy it once they embrace it. TD’s twitter post is wholly wrong and spreading disinformation. There’s actually more moves and more variety in the o/u standing stance. But fogos will see that in the upcoming mos.

[DMac]

Who says the essence of the game requires lumber yard sticks and no flex heads? This constant argument from DMAC is ridiculous. Technology evolves and so does the game. People get better, the equipment gets better. The position and game is fine. If nobody likes extended tie ups, then just limit a tie up to 30 seconds, and have the ref count down. Or 15 seconds, whatever.

Why try to eliminate a position that appeals to a group of kids. Aren't we trying to grow this game and add more people to have an interest in it? Or is this some special club that only the old school purists are allowed to participate in?

Lumber yard sticks, ha! Let me know what lumber yard I can get one of those sticks from.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSoR9oGGpOc&t=42s
No one has ever said the essence of the game requires wooden sticks and no flex heads, you apparently don't understand the essence of the game. It doesn't matter the material the stick is made of/from, it's how it's being used. The ball is to be free always, never held. Again, watch the first thirty seconds of this video and you'll see the ball being withheld and picked up as if using tongs. This is what goes against the essence of the game, not what the material of the stick is. Respect the game whether your stick is made of wood or plastic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c1pPoN0Ghk&t=45s
This is the part that goes against the essence of the game, there is no place for this on a lacrosse field, but unfortunately this is the way people are being taught to face off (and why a HS FOGO just doesn't get it). If any other player on any part of the field tried to pick up a GB like that (clamp and rotate) they would be called for withholding the ball and FOGOs should be no exception (that might well be why the rules committee has yet again taken a look at the face off).
Oh, and nobody is trying to eliminate any position. As for growing the game and the casual fan, if you listen to them the FOGO will be eliminated as there will be a change of possession after every goal and only four face offs a game (maybe fewer if a team has possession on an EMO as a period ends). I don't care if a FOGO gets down on a knee, stands on his head, lies flat on his back or stomach, stands on one leg, uses a wooden or plastic stick, or uses a moto grip or neutral grip, whatever works for them is fine by me but clamping and withholding the ball is not. That is the only thing I would fix if I were on the committee. Respect the game.

[raddadsofficial]

1. Knee down face offs will create a faster draw. But it will result in a 50- 50 groundball with the ball rolling uncontrolled in a 6 person scrum in the middle of the field. This rule makes it much more difficult to have a clean win, a fast break, or any sort of fast possession. I believe that no fan wants to watch 30 second - minute long sessions of players stabbing at a ground ball on the ground.

2. Rule changes decrease familiarity with the game. The face off is an integral part of the game and changing it will only create more confusion among casual fans, ultimately limiting growth and inhibiting lacrosse as a sport.

My athletic career has been dedicated to faceoff off and perfecting the technique and there hundreds of college FOGO’s like me. We face off knee down because it’s the best way to do it. Why would anyone want to watch low quality faceoffs between two people who do not know what they’re doing?

Rule changes are never fun to deal with for current players, you've got my sympathy - I dealt with almost yearly rule changes back in my day as well. But I'm not sure that you're correct with these points. I definitely disagree with the idea that knee down/moto grip creates a faster draw - that just isn't the case from my experience. Aside from the fact that it takes time to stand up from this position, knee down/moto style has led to a greater emphasis on controlled exits compared to faceoffs in the past, which leads to the prolonged battles that just aren't fun for fans to watch. Moto grip grew in popularity because it undoubtedly leads to a stronger clamp - try pushing down on something with the top of your hand vs. your palm, the latter has much more force. People switched to knee down because fogos realized that a strong moto clamp and controlled exit was more reliable than a quick pinch & pop or rake and less predictable exit - so it made sense to start with a lower center of gravity and closer to the ball. Standing neutral face offs will lead to more move/counter diversity, faster exits, and more wing play simply because it will be much more difficult to get as close to the ball, put as much force into your clamp, and control your exit. All good things IMO.

There aren't really any kneeling/moto techniques that can’t be done standing/neutral. If anything, many moves (like rakes) are more difficult to pull off effectively when you're kneeling. The only major difference is control philosophy and exits - standing/neutral favors speed over control since you can’t put as much strength into your clamp. At the very least, I think these rules will lead to fewer lock ups on draws and a quicker start to play, which will be better for fans. I don't think many people are tied to the current FO era too strongly - you only have to go back five years or so to see a different dynamic play out. If anything, modern faceoffs are more of an anomaly for spectators/casual fans than what these rules are proposing. Personally, I've never had a problem with dominant FOGOs. I think the pace of play impact was just as big of a factor in this rule change. In terms of recent rule changes, I think it was a mistake to move the ball to the center of heads vs. closer to the throat - the latter favors FOGOs with quicker hands, but leads to cleaner, faster and more decisive wins over prolonged stalemates at the x. Its going to be a pain to get comfortable with neutral grip draws again, but I think this is for the best.

[raddadsofficial]

Having played and coached both styles, I think the fogos will be fine. Change is always scary. This change is not as scary as it sounds. It should be easy for most to pick up and relatively quickly. Master however...I actually think the players will enjoy it once they embrace it. TD’s twitter post is wholly wrong and spreading disinformation. There’s actually more moves and more variety in the o/u standing stance. But fogos will see that in the upcoming mos.

This is absolutely correct. TD is a baller, but he was egregiously off base in that "two moves" post. Standing/neutral grip will lead to a lot more variety and creativity. Excited for face offs to get weird again.