Loyola Greyhounds 2022

[1766]

Rutgers is much better than the team that Loyola played last Sat.

What makes you say that exactly?

The large number of turnovers Hopkins had, many of which were unforced. Rutgers is unlikely to do that. Hopkins got off only 30 shots and scored 11 goals. I'd bet dollars to donuts Rutgers gets off 40-45 plus. With the goaltenders from Loyola facing more shots, the only question then becomes how many more goals will Rutgers score. Not an area of strength for Loyola from what we've seen so far this season. Hopkins defense didn't look particularly strong.


I don't expect they would play that way again though. It's a home game which will add some juice and Loyola, as bad as they have looked, is bound to put the puzzle together. That could be Sat. They have some good players. I also expect Hopkins to be better come B1G play. To have a competitive game and a chance to win, Loyola is going to have to piece it together though, provided Rutgers continues to progress. Loyola's fogo is going to have to have a good day. Rutgers will score on them if they don't. But this is sports and anything can happen and this is a must win for Loyola. That's why we play the games though. Line it up and get it on.

I think Rutgers is better than Hopkins, but saying Hopkins defense didn’t look particularly strong, in a game where the litany of turnovers you described, plus some woeful clearing, and being dominated on FOs in the 2nd half led to Loyola having a big possession edge and Hopkins held them to 10 goals doesn’t stand up to much scrutiny.

Same number of goals Rutgers allowed to Marist's vaunted offense, which just put up a big 4 piece on Richmond last weekend. That was despite Rutgers winning 75% of faceoffs.

Rutgers very well may be better than Hopkins but to state it as fact that they are "much" better — especially considering what happened the last time they played each other, along with the strength of the two teams' respective non-conference schedules this season — is pretty rich.

I'd expect a close game on Saturday in Loyola's home opener. They'd be putting themselves in a huge hole with a loss.

Ahhh, the ole transitive game score. That always works out so well. I always expect a close game. That's D1 lacrosse now.

This is a message board. Everything is an opinion until it happens. We went 2-1 last season against Hopkins. That's not an opinion. Hopkins still has some cache by name. Of course people want to play you. It's a winnable game and still a nice scalp. Good luck this weekend, I'll be rooting for you.

11 goals on 30 shots, half of which were on cage? That's not going to work against Rutgers when we play.

[HopFan16]

Heh, you win one playoff game in 30 years and immediately the condescension sets in.

Is the implication that Rutgers' non-conference schedule is weak because teams don't want to play them? Because it looks awfully similar to the schedule from 2020. Who isn't returning Brecht's call? Name names.

[1766]

Heh, you win one playoff game in 30 years and immediately the condescension sets in.

Is the implication that Rutgers' non-conference schedule is weak because teams don't want to play them? Because it looks awfully similar to the schedule from 2020. Who isn't returning Brecht's call? Name names.

No condescension. But no one is giving Hopkins anything either.

Army and Loyola were near or were top 10 teams to start the season. Princeton, who knows? We will find out. I would agree Hopkins has a very challenging schedule. Congratulations. Rutgers has a schedule very similar to many other teams.

I'll give you an entire conference instead of the teams. The Acc. Every team was approached. Not one would bite. Takes two to tango. Nevertheless, the schedule is fine. We will see exactly how fine at the end of the season.

[loyola2025]

Have to expect a 10-9 kind of game. While RU has the reputation for getting up and down the field, they've been more methodical this year and relied on their defense. As with previous Loyola games, Loyola's success will come down to whether or not the offense can win one-on-one match-ups. Felix is a good defender. Their shorties are generally pretty good and athletic. I think Kirst is the best goalie in the nation...but some think I'm off on that!

Loyola might be well served to actually step on the gas this week. It seems that playing against RU's set defense is much tougher this year than the last 2.

Of course, if your goalies can't get anywhere close to 50%, it won't really matter.

The problem from what i have seen is Olmstead and Lindley cannot dodge the bigger and stronger poles. Our offense is stagnant. we have a .24 shooting percentage compared to .42 of our opponent to date. 1 of 5 on emo.
Shooting Olmstead 1-11, James 3-14 i can keep going, we are not efficient, we were a quarter final team last year. I would expect more from a season group of players.

I am not feeling a win if we continue to play the way we have been playing. Hopkins were minus a few players that would have translated into goals.

[Laxfan#1969]

Heh, you win one playoff game in 30 years and immediately the condescension sets in.

Is the implication that Rutgers' non-conference schedule is weak because teams don't want to play them? Because it looks awfully similar to the schedule from 2020. Who isn't returning Brecht's call? Name names.

No condescension. But no one is giving Hopkins anything either.

Army and Loyola were near or were top 10 teams to start the season. Princeton, who knows? We will find out. I would agree Hopkins has a very challenging schedule. Congratulations. Rutgers has a schedule very similar to many other teams.

I'll give you an entire conference instead of the teams. The Acc. Every team was approached. Not one would bite. Takes two to tango. Nevertheless, the schedule is fine. We will see exactly how fine at the end of the season.

This is true regarding the schedule and the ACC. Multiple attempts made, no takers so that pretty much takes care of that conversation

Nobody at RU (fans anyway) don’t argue the fact that we would have liked to have one more “marquee” game in the OOC...just one more and the schedule would have been a perfect OOC balance...but you can’t schedule people if they don’t want to play

And not saying Rutgers is some historical juggernaut (they are not) that people are dogging...but the fact is RU wanted a game on the schedule with an ACC school, and it couldn’t get worked out...not because of RU

As far as last year...great, Hop won the last meeting...10-12 days earlier Rutgers beat them by 5-6 goals and won 2/3...it’s hard to beat someone 2 times in a season let alone 3..but that was last year...it’s over

This year the Rutgers v Hopkins game is gonna be great...I’d call it a pick em at this point...should be a good one but way too much to see before we get to that one

Now back to the game at hand. Should be a good one this weekend

Buckle up

[Laxfan#1969]

Have to expect a 10-9 kind of game. While RU has the reputation for getting up and down the field, they've been more methodical this year and relied on their defense. As with previous Loyola games, Loyola's success will come down to whether or not the offense can win one-on-one match-ups. Felix is a good defender. Their shorties are generally pretty good and athletic. I think Kirst is the best goalie in the nation...but some think I'm off on that!

Loyola might be well served to actually step on the gas this week. It seems that playing against RU's set defense is much tougher this year than the last 2.

Of course, if your goalies can't get anywhere close to 50%, it won't really matter.

The problem from what i have seen is Olmstead and Lindley cannot dodge the bigger and stronger poles. Our offense is stagnant. we have a .24 shooting percentage compared to .42 of our opponent to date. 1 of 5 on emo.
Shooting Olmstead 1-11, James 3-14 i can keep going, we are not efficient, we were a quarter final team last year. I would expect more from a season group of players.

I am not feeling a win if we continue to play the way we have been playing. Hopkins were minus a few players that would have translated into goals.

I’m gonna hold off a partial evaluation on this team until after the Towson and Lafayette games next week.

I posted a few weeks back that this Loyola team will look much different in late March and April then it looks now

Issue #1 is goaltending followed by face off consistency. Get those back above 50% and in the face off case maybe 60% and Loyola is a much better team. The defense will be fine and get better every week...

Offensively they will figure it out. Poitras and James will produce. Those guys are gonna make plays...they have in the past. Kamish couldn’t walk for most of the summer and is still recovering...he’s doing it on the fly...he will get better (although he had no issues vs Hop) as the year goes on if he stays healthy...I like Higgins...he’s gonna be a huge contributor this year...he’s still learning.

The Hounds need more from the 5th year guys. The leaders. And I think it’s gonna happen...not giving up on Loyola

Saturday might be tough, Rutgers is very good, big athletes all over the place but I’ll post it hear...win or lose I still like Loyola to win the PL...maybe I’m a fool but I think this team will be winning a lot of games soon...maybe Saturday

[1766]

Heh, you win one playoff game in 30 years and immediately the condescension sets in.

Is the implication that Rutgers' non-conference schedule is weak because teams don't want to play them? Because it looks awfully similar to the schedule from 2020. Who isn't returning Brecht's call? Name names.

No condescension. But no one is giving Hopkins anything either.

Army and Loyola were near or were top 10 teams to start the season. Princeton, who knows? We will find out. I would agree Hopkins has a very challenging schedule. Congratulations. Rutgers has a schedule very similar to many other teams.

I'll give you an entire conference instead of the teams. The Acc. Every team was approached. Not one would bite. Takes two to tango. Nevertheless, the schedule is fine. We will see exactly how fine at the end of the season.

This is true regarding the schedule and the ACC. Multiple attempts made, no takers so that pretty much takes care of that conversation

Nobody at RU (fans anyway) don’t argue the fact that we would have liked to have one more “marquee” game in the OOC...just one more and the schedule would have been a perfect OOC balance...but you can’t schedule people if they don’t want to play

And not saying Rutgers is some historical juggernaut (they are not) that people are dogging...but the fact is RU wanted a game on the schedule with an ACC school, and it couldn’t get worked out...not because of RU

As far as last year...great, Hop won the last meeting...10-12 days earlier Rutgers beat them by 5-6 goals and won 2/3...it’s hard to beat someone 2 times in a season let alone 3..but that was last year...it’s over

This year the Rutgers v Hopkins game is gonna be great...I’d call it a pick em at this point...should be a good one but way too much to see before we get to that one

Now back to the game at hand. Should be a good one this weekend

Buckle up

While Rutgers doesn't have the history of some schools in lacrosse, it has a better one that many others. Rutgers has been playing lacrosse for over 100 years. They were named National Champion pre -NCAA 2 times. They've made the NCAA quarterfinals 7 times and the tournament 10 times. They've won roughly 600 games, produced 200 All American's and 10 Hall of Fame player/coaches. Rutgers doesn't have Hopkins' history, but a lot of great men have gone through the program seeing success. The alumni are extremely proud of it.

[MDlaxfan76]

Heh, you win one playoff game in 30 years and immediately the condescension sets in.

Is the implication that Rutgers' non-conference schedule is weak because teams don't want to play them? Because it looks awfully similar to the schedule from 2020. Who isn't returning Brecht's call? Name names.

No condescension. But no one is giving Hopkins anything either.

Army and Loyola were near or were top 10 teams to start the season. Princeton, who knows? We will find out. I would agree Hopkins has a very challenging schedule. Congratulations. Rutgers has a schedule very similar to many other teams.

I'll give you an entire conference instead of the teams. The Acc. Every team was approached. Not one would bite. Takes two to tango. Nevertheless, the schedule is fine. We will see exactly how fine at the end of the season.

This is true regarding the schedule and the ACC. Multiple attempts made, no takers so that pretty much takes care of that conversation

Nobody at RU (fans anyway) don’t argue the fact that we would have liked to have one more “marquee” game in the OOC...just one more and the schedule would have been a perfect OOC balance...but you can’t schedule people if they don’t want to play

And not saying Rutgers is some historical juggernaut (they are not) that people are dogging...but the fact is RU wanted a game on the schedule with an ACC school, and it couldn’t get worked out...not because of RU

As far as last year...great, Hop won the last meeting...10-12 days earlier Rutgers beat them by 5-6 goals and won 2/3...it’s hard to beat someone 2 times in a season let alone 3..but that was last year...it’s over

This year the Rutgers v Hopkins game is gonna be great...I’d call it a pick em at this point...should be a good one but way too much to see before we get to that one

Now back to the game at hand. Should be a good one this weekend

Buckle up

While Rutgers doesn't have the history of some schools in lacrosse, it has a better one that many others. Rutgers has been playing lacrosse for over 100 years. They were named National Champion pre -NCAA 2 times. They've made the NCAA quarterfinals 7 times and the tournament 10 times. They've won roughly 600 games, produced 200 All American's and 10 Hall of Fame player/coaches. Rutgers doesn't have Hopkins' history, but a lot of great men have gone through the program seeing success. The alumni are extremely proud of it.

Tru dat. And should be.

Terrific program. I played against a Tom Hayes team (Hayes had 5 of those tournament teams and 4 of QF's) and did a little summer coaching with him...I enjoyed the coaching...didn't enjoy the pummeling they gave me as a freshman in my first scrimmage in college, freshman fall...long day, a lot of bruises. Ton of terrific players.

But what 2 years did they get named National Champion?
I must be missing that...though I see 1928 claimed on the Rutgers site...sorta.

But not on the USILA site.

https://usila.org/sports/2015/10/27/GEN_1027151106.aspx

[1766]

Heh, you win one playoff game in 30 years and immediately the condescension sets in.

Is the implication that Rutgers' non-conference schedule is weak because teams don't want to play them? Because it looks awfully similar to the schedule from 2020. Who isn't returning Brecht's call? Name names.

No condescension. But no one is giving Hopkins anything either.

Army and Loyola were near or were top 10 teams to start the season. Princeton, who knows? We will find out. I would agree Hopkins has a very challenging schedule. Congratulations. Rutgers has a schedule very similar to many other teams.

I'll give you an entire conference instead of the teams. The Acc. Every team was approached. Not one would bite. Takes two to tango. Nevertheless, the schedule is fine. We will see exactly how fine at the end of the season.

This is true regarding the schedule and the ACC. Multiple attempts made, no takers so that pretty much takes care of that conversation

Nobody at RU (fans anyway) don’t argue the fact that we would have liked to have one more “marquee” game in the OOC...just one more and the schedule would have been a perfect OOC balance...but you can’t schedule people if they don’t want to play

And not saying Rutgers is some historical juggernaut (they are not) that people are dogging...but the fact is RU wanted a game on the schedule with an ACC school, and it couldn’t get worked out...not because of RU

As far as last year...great, Hop won the last meeting...10-12 days earlier Rutgers beat them by 5-6 goals and won 2/3...it’s hard to beat someone 2 times in a season let alone 3..but that was last year...it’s over

This year the Rutgers v Hopkins game is gonna be great...I’d call it a pick em at this point...should be a good one but way too much to see before we get to that one

Now back to the game at hand. Should be a good one this weekend

Buckle up

While Rutgers doesn't have the history of some schools in lacrosse, it has a better one that many others. Rutgers has been playing lacrosse for over 100 years. They were named National Champion pre -NCAA 2 times. They've made the NCAA quarterfinals 7 times and the tournament 10 times. They've won roughly 600 games, produced 200 All American's and 10 Hall of Fame player/coaches. Rutgers doesn't have Hopkins' history, but a lot of great men have gone through the program seeing success. The alumni are extremely proud of it.

Tru dat. And should be.

Terrific program. I played against a Tom Hayes team (Hayes had 5 of those tournament teams and 4 of QF's) and did a little summer coaching with him...I enjoyed the coaching...didn't enjoy the pummeling they gave me as a freshman in my first scrimmage in college, freshman fall...long day, a lot of bruises. Ton of terrific players.

But what 2 years did they get named National Champion?
I must be missing that...though I see 1928 claimed on the Rutgers site...sorta.

But not on the USILA site.

https://usila.org/sports/2015/10/27/GEN_1027151106.aspx

Sorry, you are correct. It's 1. My apologies.

Were those the days of freshmen not being allowed to play varsity?

[MDlaxfan76]

Heh, you win one playoff game in 30 years and immediately the condescension sets in.

Is the implication that Rutgers' non-conference schedule is weak because teams don't want to play them? Because it looks awfully similar to the schedule from 2020. Who isn't returning Brecht's call? Name names.

No condescension. But no one is giving Hopkins anything either.

Army and Loyola were near or were top 10 teams to start the season. Princeton, who knows? We will find out. I would agree Hopkins has a very challenging schedule. Congratulations. Rutgers has a schedule very similar to many other teams.

I'll give you an entire conference instead of the teams. The Acc. Every team was approached. Not one would bite. Takes two to tango. Nevertheless, the schedule is fine. We will see exactly how fine at the end of the season.

This is true regarding the schedule and the ACC. Multiple attempts made, no takers so that pretty much takes care of that conversation

Nobody at RU (fans anyway) don’t argue the fact that we would have liked to have one more “marquee” game in the OOC...just one more and the schedule would have been a perfect OOC balance...but you can’t schedule people if they don’t want to play

And not saying Rutgers is some historical juggernaut (they are not) that people are dogging...but the fact is RU wanted a game on the schedule with an ACC school, and it couldn’t get worked out...not because of RU

As far as last year...great, Hop won the last meeting...10-12 days earlier Rutgers beat them by 5-6 goals and won 2/3...it’s hard to beat someone 2 times in a season let alone 3..but that was last year...it’s over

This year the Rutgers v Hopkins game is gonna be great...I’d call it a pick em at this point...should be a good one but way too much to see before we get to that one

Now back to the game at hand. Should be a good one this weekend

Buckle up

While Rutgers doesn't have the history of some schools in lacrosse, it has a better one that many others. Rutgers has been playing lacrosse for over 100 years. They were named National Champion pre -NCAA 2 times. They've made the NCAA quarterfinals 7 times and the tournament 10 times. They've won roughly 600 games, produced 200 All American's and 10 Hall of Fame player/coaches. Rutgers doesn't have Hopkins' history, but a lot of great men have gone through the program seeing success. The alumni are extremely proud of it.

Tru dat. And should be.

Terrific program. I played against a Tom Hayes team (Hayes had 5 of those tournament teams and 4 of QF's) and did a little summer coaching with him...I enjoyed the coaching...didn't enjoy the pummeling they gave me as a freshman in my first scrimmage in college, freshman fall...long day, a lot of bruises. Ton of terrific players.

But what 2 years did they get named National Champion?
I must be missing that...though I see 1928 claimed on the Rutgers site...sorta.

But not on the USILA site.

https://usila.org/sports/2015/10/27/GEN_1027151106.aspx

Sorry, you are correct. It's 1. My apologies.

Were those the days of freshmen not being allowed to play varsity?

Shortly thereafter. My freshman fall was 1976.

My sister, 3 years younger, watched the game with my dad...she remarked that her HS girls' team could have beaten my team, as we dropped so many passes...really ugly. I'd been the tender on the MSA champ the prior spring, so was used to really top play. I'd turned down my dad's alma mater in Charlottesville for Hanover the prior winter...

After we played Navy that next spring, my dad took me aside after the game and said it wasn't too late to transfer to UVA...but I'd already started holding hands with my future bride of now 41 years. I gave up 17 after never having had more than 9 scored on me in a game before. 83 shots, 51 on net, 34 saves, at the time an NCAA record. Another day of many bruises!

Those first two years were rough in the net, but by my junior year we broke well into the top 10, defeating Cornell who had been unbeaten in the Ivies for 5 years as I recall.

Rutgers was (and is) first rate, no question about it. Tom was very nice to me as well, seemed like a good guy when I did a couple of summer camps with him. Did you play on those Hayes' teams?

[1766]

Heh, you win one playoff game in 30 years and immediately the condescension sets in.

Is the implication that Rutgers' non-conference schedule is weak because teams don't want to play them? Because it looks awfully similar to the schedule from 2020. Who isn't returning Brecht's call? Name names.

No condescension. But no one is giving Hopkins anything either.

Army and Loyola were near or were top 10 teams to start the season. Princeton, who knows? We will find out. I would agree Hopkins has a very challenging schedule. Congratulations. Rutgers has a schedule very similar to many other teams.

I'll give you an entire conference instead of the teams. The Acc. Every team was approached. Not one would bite. Takes two to tango. Nevertheless, the schedule is fine. We will see exactly how fine at the end of the season.

This is true regarding the schedule and the ACC. Multiple attempts made, no takers so that pretty much takes care of that conversation

Nobody at RU (fans anyway) don’t argue the fact that we would have liked to have one more “marquee” game in the OOC...just one more and the schedule would have been a perfect OOC balance...but you can’t schedule people if they don’t want to play

And not saying Rutgers is some historical juggernaut (they are not) that people are dogging...but the fact is RU wanted a game on the schedule with an ACC school, and it couldn’t get worked out...not because of RU

As far as last year...great, Hop won the last meeting...10-12 days earlier Rutgers beat them by 5-6 goals and won 2/3...it’s hard to beat someone 2 times in a season let alone 3..but that was last year...it’s over

This year the Rutgers v Hopkins game is gonna be great...I’d call it a pick em at this point...should be a good one but way too much to see before we get to that one

Now back to the game at hand. Should be a good one this weekend

Buckle up

While Rutgers doesn't have the history of some schools in lacrosse, it has a better one that many others. Rutgers has been playing lacrosse for over 100 years. They were named National Champion pre -NCAA 2 times. They've made the NCAA quarterfinals 7 times and the tournament 10 times. They've won roughly 600 games, produced 200 All American's and 10 Hall of Fame player/coaches. Rutgers doesn't have Hopkins' history, but a lot of great men have gone through the program seeing success. The alumni are extremely proud of it.

Tru dat. And should be.

Terrific program. I played against a Tom Hayes team (Hayes had 5 of those tournament teams and 4 of QF's) and did a little summer coaching with him...I enjoyed the coaching...didn't enjoy the pummeling they gave me as a freshman in my first scrimmage in college, freshman fall...long day, a lot of bruises. Ton of terrific players.

But what 2 years did they get named National Champion?
I must be missing that...though I see 1928 claimed on the Rutgers site...sorta.

But not on the USILA site.

https://usila.org/sports/2015/10/27/GEN_1027151106.aspx

Sorry, you are correct. It's 1. My apologies.

Were those the days of freshmen not being allowed to play varsity?

Shortly thereafter. My freshman fall was 1976.

My sister, 3 years younger, watched the game with my dad...she remarked that her HS girls' team could have beaten my team, as we dropped so many passes...really ugly. I'd been the tender on the MSA champ the prior spring, so was used to really top play. I'd turned down my dad's alma mater in Charlottesville for Hanover the prior winter...

After we played Navy that next spring, my dad took me aside after the game and said it wasn't too late to transfer to UVA...but I'd already started holding hands with my future bride of now 41 years. I gave up 17 after never having had more than 9 scored on me in a game before. 83 shots, 51 on net, 34 saves, at the time an NCAA record. Another day of many bruises!

Those first two years were rough in the net, but by my junior year we broke well into the top 10, defeating Cornell who had been unbeaten in the Ivies for 5 years as I recall.

Rutgers was (and is) first rate, no question about it. Tom was very nice to me as well, seemed like a good guy when I did a couple of summer camps with him. Did you play on those Hayes' teams?

What a story, thank you for sharing. 41 years. Congratulations!

83 shots is an obscene amount. I'm surprised you were able to walk off the field after that. I've never heard of stats like that before. I'm even more shocked that record was broken?

Yes, I played for Tom a bit after you were in school He was great to play for, but I didn't realize how great until I was out in the real world. A titan of the game, no doubt. I hope he sees lacrosse, even in it's different form, being played in the Olympics. When it is, I will toast one to him. He's done a tremendous amount of work over a long period, as have a number of others, to see this happen.

I remember those camps. From my understanding, he created what was the lacrosse camp back then. I could be wrong but I am not aware of one prior.

[MDlaxfan76]

Heh, you win one playoff game in 30 years and immediately the condescension sets in.

Is the implication that Rutgers' non-conference schedule is weak because teams don't want to play them? Because it looks awfully similar to the schedule from 2020. Who isn't returning Brecht's call? Name names.

No condescension. But no one is giving Hopkins anything either.

Army and Loyola were near or were top 10 teams to start the season. Princeton, who knows? We will find out. I would agree Hopkins has a very challenging schedule. Congratulations. Rutgers has a schedule very similar to many other teams.

I'll give you an entire conference instead of the teams. The Acc. Every team was approached. Not one would bite. Takes two to tango. Nevertheless, the schedule is fine. We will see exactly how fine at the end of the season.

This is true regarding the schedule and the ACC. Multiple attempts made, no takers so that pretty much takes care of that conversation

Nobody at RU (fans anyway) don’t argue the fact that we would have liked to have one more “marquee” game in the OOC...just one more and the schedule would have been a perfect OOC balance...but you can’t schedule people if they don’t want to play

And not saying Rutgers is some historical juggernaut (they are not) that people are dogging...but the fact is RU wanted a game on the schedule with an ACC school, and it couldn’t get worked out...not because of RU

As far as last year...great, Hop won the last meeting...10-12 days earlier Rutgers beat them by 5-6 goals and won 2/3...it’s hard to beat someone 2 times in a season let alone 3..but that was last year...it’s over

This year the Rutgers v Hopkins game is gonna be great...I’d call it a pick em at this point...should be a good one but way too much to see before we get to that one

Now back to the game at hand. Should be a good one this weekend

Buckle up

While Rutgers doesn't have the history of some schools in lacrosse, it has a better one that many others. Rutgers has been playing lacrosse for over 100 years. They were named National Champion pre -NCAA 2 times. They've made the NCAA quarterfinals 7 times and the tournament 10 times. They've won roughly 600 games, produced 200 All American's and 10 Hall of Fame player/coaches. Rutgers doesn't have Hopkins' history, but a lot of great men have gone through the program seeing success. The alumni are extremely proud of it.

Tru dat. And should be.

Terrific program. I played against a Tom Hayes team (Hayes had 5 of those tournament teams and 4 of QF's) and did a little summer coaching with him...I enjoyed the coaching...didn't enjoy the pummeling they gave me as a freshman in my first scrimmage in college, freshman fall...long day, a lot of bruises. Ton of terrific players.

But what 2 years did they get named National Champion?
I must be missing that...though I see 1928 claimed on the Rutgers site...sorta.

But not on the USILA site.

https://usila.org/sports/2015/10/27/GEN_1027151106.aspx

Sorry, you are correct. It's 1. My apologies.

Were those the days of freshmen not being allowed to play varsity?

Shortly thereafter. My freshman fall was 1976.

My sister, 3 years younger, watched the game with my dad...she remarked that her HS girls' team could have beaten my team, as we dropped so many passes...really ugly. I'd been the tender on the MSA champ the prior spring, so was used to really top play. I'd turned down my dad's alma mater in Charlottesville for Hanover the prior winter...

After we played Navy that next spring, my dad took me aside after the game and said it wasn't too late to transfer to UVA...but I'd already started holding hands with my future bride of now 41 years. I gave up 17 after never having had more than 9 scored on me in a game before. 83 shots, 51 on net, 34 saves, at the time an NCAA record. Another day of many bruises!

Those first two years were rough in the net, but by my junior year we broke well into the top 10, defeating Cornell who had been unbeaten in the Ivies for 5 years as I recall.

Rutgers was (and is) first rate, no question about it. Tom was very nice to me as well, seemed like a good guy when I did a couple of summer camps with him. Did you play on those Hayes' teams?

What a story, thank you for sharing. 41 years. Congratulations!

83 shots is an obscene amount. I'm surprised you were able to walk off the field after that. I've never heard of stats like that before. I'm even more shocked that record was broken?

Yes, I played for Tom a bit after you were in school He was great to play for, but I didn't realize how great until I was out in the real world. A titan of the game, no doubt. I hope he sees lacrosse, even in it's different form, being played in the Olympics. When it is, I will toast one to him. He's done a tremendous amount of work over a long period, as have a number of others, to see this happen.

I remember those camps. From my understanding, he created what was the lacrosse camp back then. I could be wrong but I am not aware of one prior.

yes, as they say in sales 'always be closing' ...and my philosophy, "every day is a new opportunity to close the deal.' But basically I'm lucky.

It was indeed a rough game. We had a bunch of terrific football-first athletes, tough competitors, but only a handful of true lax players, certainly not 'enough'. I'd make a flurry of saves, make an outlet pass, hit the stick of the midfielder but dropped and here they come on another fast break. They threw wave after wave of midfielders at us. Jeff Long was their best player and he had a field day. Met him many years later at a Nike Blue Chip where my son was playing, he recalled that day in '77 'fondly'.

Funny story, my dad had played against Navy a couple of times for UVA, he was the tender on their '52 championship team, and he'd told me stories of being housed above the gym, fed hot dogs and baked beans...during the games a division of plebes would be marched behind the opposing goal to raz the tender, at quarter they'd form up and march to the other end...on our visit we too were housed above the gym, fed hot dogs and baked beans, but on our trip they had a concert in the gym that night...Fleetwood Mac...needless to say we didn't get much sleep. Plebes came out in force, same drill.

Those first two years we didn't win many games, but my team loved nothing more than a good fight...won those...never did understand dropping sticks and gloves much less taking off helmet...

We got better in my junior year as the complement of serious lax players increased and the winningest HS coach in history, Bill Ritch of Sewanhaka, 'retired' to 20 minutes outside of Hanover. Dud Hendrick persuaded Coach Ritch to come assist and we suddenly had a huge boost to our play.

Funny, I just checked the record book...Duke's tender in 1975 had 37 against Drexel...that's been the most in DI since 1971 NCAA, so I didn't actually break the record...there's been higher in DII and DIII...my dad had 35 against I think Army back in his day. He and Bob Catzen hold that UVA single game record.

I too hope we eventually have lax in the Olympics...hope it's the full field game though. Heck of a lot of teams around the world made it to the World Games in Israel...my son helped coach the New Zealand Men's National Team and had a blast.

[Farfromgeneva]

Heh, you win one playoff game in 30 years and immediately the condescension sets in.

Is the implication that Rutgers' non-conference schedule is weak because teams don't want to play them? Because it looks awfully similar to the schedule from 2020. Who isn't returning Brecht's call? Name names.

No condescension. But no one is giving Hopkins anything either.

Army and Loyola were near or were top 10 teams to start the season. Princeton, who knows? We will find out. I would agree Hopkins has a very challenging schedule. Congratulations. Rutgers has a schedule very similar to many other teams.

I'll give you an entire conference instead of the teams. The Acc. Every team was approached. Not one would bite. Takes two to tango. Nevertheless, the schedule is fine. We will see exactly how fine at the end of the season.

This is true regarding the schedule and the ACC. Multiple attempts made, no takers so that pretty much takes care of that conversation

Nobody at RU (fans anyway) don’t argue the fact that we would have liked to have one more “marquee” game in the OOC...just one more and the schedule would have been a perfect OOC balance...but you can’t schedule people if they don’t want to play

And not saying Rutgers is some historical juggernaut (they are not) that people are dogging...but the fact is RU wanted a game on the schedule with an ACC school, and it couldn’t get worked out...not because of RU

As far as last year...great, Hop won the last meeting...10-12 days earlier Rutgers beat them by 5-6 goals and won 2/3...it’s hard to beat someone 2 times in a season let alone 3..but that was last year...it’s over

This year the Rutgers v Hopkins game is gonna be great...I’d call it a pick em at this point...should be a good one but way too much to see before we get to that one

Now back to the game at hand. Should be a good one this weekend

Buckle up

While Rutgers doesn't have the history of some schools in lacrosse, it has a better one that many others. Rutgers has been playing lacrosse for over 100 years. They were named National Champion pre -NCAA 2 times. They've made the NCAA quarterfinals 7 times and the tournament 10 times. They've won roughly 600 games, produced 200 All American's and 10 Hall of Fame player/coaches. Rutgers doesn't have Hopkins' history, but a lot of great men have gone through the program seeing success. The alumni are extremely proud of it.

Tru dat. And should be.

Terrific program. I played against a Tom Hayes team (Hayes had 5 of those tournament teams and 4 of QF's) and did a little summer coaching with him...I enjoyed the coaching...didn't enjoy the pummeling they gave me as a freshman in my first scrimmage in college, freshman fall...long day, a lot of bruises. Ton of terrific players.

But what 2 years did they get named National Champion?
I must be missing that...though I see 1928 claimed on the Rutgers site...sorta.

But not on the USILA site.

https://usila.org/sports/2015/10/27/GEN_1027151106.aspx

Sorry, you are correct. It's 1. My apologies.

Were those the days of freshmen not being allowed to play varsity?

Shortly thereafter. My freshman fall was 1976.

My sister, 3 years younger, watched the game with my dad...she remarked that her HS girls' team could have beaten my team, as we dropped so many passes...really ugly. I'd been the tender on the MSA champ the prior spring, so was used to really top play. I'd turned down my dad's alma mater in Charlottesville for Hanover the prior winter...

After we played Navy that next spring, my dad took me aside after the game and said it wasn't too late to transfer to UVA...but I'd already started holding hands with my future bride of now 41 years. I gave up 17 after never having had more than 9 scored on me in a game before. 83 shots, 51 on net, 34 saves, at the time an NCAA record. Another day of many bruises!

Those first two years were rough in the net, but by my junior year we broke well into the top 10, defeating Cornell who had been unbeaten in the Ivies for 5 years as I recall.

Rutgers was (and is) first rate, no question about it. Tom was very nice to me as well, seemed like a good guy when I did a couple of summer camps with him. Did you play on those Hayes' teams?

What a story, thank you for sharing. 41 years. Congratulations!

83 shots is an obscene amount. I'm surprised you were able to walk off the field after that. I've never heard of stats like that before. I'm even more shocked that record was broken?

Yes, I played for Tom a bit after you were in school He was great to play for, but I didn't realize how great until I was out in the real world. A titan of the game, no doubt. I hope he sees lacrosse, even in it's different form, being played in the Olympics. When it is, I will toast one to him. He's done a tremendous amount of work over a long period, as have a number of others, to see this happen.

I remember those camps. From my understanding, he created what was the lacrosse camp back then. I could be wrong but I am not aware of one prior.

yes, as they say in sales 'always be closing' ...and my philosophy, "every day is a new opportunity to close the deal.' But basically I'm lucky.

It was indeed a rough game. We had a bunch of terrific football-first athletes, tough competitors, but only a handful of true lax players, certainly not 'enough'. I'd make a flurry of saves, make an outlet pass, hit the stick of the midfielder but dropped and here they come on another fast break. They threw wave after wave of midfielders at us. Jeff Long was their best player and he had a field day. Met him many years later at a Nike Blue Chip where my son was playing, he recalled that day in '77 'fondly'.

Funny story, my dad had played against Navy a couple of times for UVA, he was the tender on their '52 championship team, and he'd told me stories of being housed above the gym, fed hot dogs and baked beans...during the games a division of plebes would be marched behind the opposing goal to raz the tender, at quarter they'd form up and march to the other end...on our visit we too were housed above the gym, fed hot dogs and baked beans, but on our trip they had a concert in the gym that night...Fleetwood Mac...needless to say we didn't get much sleep. Plebes came out in force, same drill.

Those first two years we didn't win many games, but my team loved nothing more than a good fight...won those...never did understand dropping sticks and gloves much less taking off helmet...

We got better in my junior year as the complement of serious lax players increased and the winningest HS coach in history, Bill Ritch of Sewanhaka, 'retired' to 20 minutes outside of Hanover. Dud Hendrick persuaded Coach Ritch to come assist and we suddenly had a huge boost to our play.

Funny, I just checked the record book...Duke's tender in 1975 had 37 against Drexel...that's been the most in DI since 1971 NCAA, so I didn't actually break the record...there's been higher in DII and DIII...my dad had 35 against I think Army back in his day. He and Bob Catzen hold that UVA single game record.

I too hope we eventually have lax in the Olympics...hope it's the full field game though. Heck of a lot of teams around the world made it to the World Games in Israel...my son helped coach the New Zealand Men's National Team and had a blast.

Don’t finish 3rd

The one I like, other than “coffee is for closers!”, is “visualize, realize, actualize”

[10stone5]

re: Rutgers

Pre-NCAA era championships
(2) – 1928 USILA Co-Champions,
1955 USILA Division II Co-Champions Laurie Cox Trophy

Funny, I just checked the record book...Duke's tender in 1975 had 37 against Drexel.

They lost to Tom Hayes’ Drexel team, those Hayes teams could
sling the rock.

[MDlaxfan76]

re: Rutgers

Pre-NCAA era championships
(2) – 1928 USILA Co-Champions,
1955 USILA Division II Co-Champions Laurie Cox Trophy

Funny, I just checked the record book...Duke's tender in 1975 had 37 against Drexel.

They lost to Tom Hayes’ Drexel team, those Hayes teams could
sling the rock.

ahh, thanks. Best of DII.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... ssociation

I hadn't realized Rutgers was in that division in those years. I'm not that old!

But the USILA itself does not recognize Rutgers for "National Championship" in either of those years.
https://usila.org/sports/2015/10/27/GEN_1027151106.aspx

Of course, what difference does it make really? Rutgers has had many, many terrific teams and many terrific players over a long, storied history in the sport.

That was my only point in agreeing with 1766.

[NovaHound]

If I were a Rutgers fan I would like my chances against the Hounds tomorrow. As I Hound fan I think we need to play a near flawless game which we haven't done in some time.

I expect to see Coach MVA mix things up tomorrow on offense to mitigate the Rutgers transition game. Some of that may include leaving Poitras and Higgins on the field playing both ways, similar to the Hounds last possession last week. Both of them are fast and capable and we have to take advantage of the transition. Just my 2 cents...

And were gonna need to settle on a goalie to build some consistency with the the defense. We'll see who starts ? I haven't a clue. I just hope they eat their Wheaties for breakfast and make at least 10 saves, although I suspect we'll need more than that to pull off a big upset.

[1766]

If I were a Rutgers fan I would like my chances against the Hounds tomorrow. As I Hound fan I think we need to play a near flawless game which we haven't done in some time.

I expect to see Coach MVA mix things up tomorrow on offense to mitigate the Rutgers transition game. Some of that may include leaving Poitras and Higgins on the field playing both ways, similar to the Hounds last possession last week. Both of them are fast and capable and we have to take advantage of the transition. Just my 2 cents...

And were gonna need to settle on a goalie to build some consistency with the the defense. We'll see who starts ? I haven't a clue. I just hope they eat their Wheaties for breakfast and make at least 10 saves, although I suspect we'll need more than that to pull off a big upset.

Every team Rutgers has played so far this season has packed it in except for Marist. If not for great goalie play on both sides, that game could have easily been 20 goal type of game. It was a track meet.

Loyola does what Loyola does. I don't think they will completely alter how they play, which means there is potential for an up and down game at times I would think. I can foresee an entertaining game. To your point, Loyola is going to need one of their goalkeepers to have a game. Rutgers will likely get off somewhere around 45 - 50 shots. If Loyola gets similar goalie play as they have, that will translate to somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 goals. Maybe more. Loyola's offense would be in a challenging position to score that many against the RU defense. They are going to need the goaltender to step up.

As is often the case, groundballs are going to be a huge stat.

[Loyolalax]

If I were a Rutgers fan I would like my chances against the Hounds tomorrow. As I Hound fan I think we need to play a near flawless game which we haven't done in some time.

I expect to see Coach MVA mix things up tomorrow on offense to mitigate the Rutgers transition game. Some of that may include leaving Poitras and Higgins on the field playing both ways, similar to the Hounds last possession last week. Both of them are fast and capable and we have to take advantage of the transition. Just my 2 cents...

And were gonna need to settle on a goalie to build some consistency with the the defense. We'll see who starts ? I haven't a clue. I just hope they eat their Wheaties for breakfast and make at least 10 saves, although I suspect we'll need more than that to pull off a big upset.

Every team Rutgers has played so far this season has packed it in except for Marist. If not for great goalie play on both sides, that game could have easily been 20 goal type of game. It was a track meet.

Loyola does what Loyola does. I don't think they will completely alter how they play, which means there is potential for an up and down game at times I would think. I can foresee an entertaining game. To your point, Loyola is going to need one of their goalkeepers to have a game. Rutgers will likely get off somewhere around 45 - 50 shots. If Loyola gets similar goalie play as they have, that will translate to somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 goals. Maybe more. Loyola's offense would be in a challenging position to score that many against the RU defense. They are going to need the goaltender to step up.

As is often the case, groundballs are going to be a huge stat.

Spot on post, with weather going to be a little cold, faceoffs and gbs are vitally important. Savio cannot win it himself, he needs to use his wings. It might be he does not have confidence in the wings and tries to win them himself.

MVA does not change his stripes very often. We need to have more of a motion offense, off ball picks, pass down pick down. All very simple but effective. Plus will our offense be able to handle the extremely physical Rutgers D. We are not putting points on the board with a 24% shooting percentage. We will have to shoot 80 times on goal to get 20 on the board.

SSDMs are getting better, Savio and Rezanka are doing well. Benus, Macgillicuddy and Sherwood are the Achilles heel. Benus a 5th year, time to move on, not playing like he did last year, but thats what you get when you dont play fall ball and show up on day one of practice. The group they had in the fall against a strong Villanova team did very well, where are they?

It may be time to look what some younger players can do, what we have been doing has not been working very well.

My prediction, Rutgers by 4

[1766]

If I were a Rutgers fan I would like my chances against the Hounds tomorrow. As I Hound fan I think we need to play a near flawless game which we haven't done in some time.

I expect to see Coach MVA mix things up tomorrow on offense to mitigate the Rutgers transition game. Some of that may include leaving Poitras and Higgins on the field playing both ways, similar to the Hounds last possession last week. Both of them are fast and capable and we have to take advantage of the transition. Just my 2 cents...

And were gonna need to settle on a goalie to build some consistency with the the defense. We'll see who starts ? I haven't a clue. I just hope they eat their Wheaties for breakfast and make at least 10 saves, although I suspect we'll need more than that to pull off a big upset.

Every team Rutgers has played so far this season has packed it in except for Marist. If not for great goalie play on both sides, that game could have easily been 20 goal type of game. It was a track meet.

Loyola does what Loyola does. I don't think they will completely alter how they play, which means there is potential for an up and down game at times I would think. I can foresee an entertaining game. To your point, Loyola is going to need one of their goalkeepers to have a game. Rutgers will likely get off somewhere around 45 - 50 shots. If Loyola gets similar goalie play as they have, that will translate to somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 goals. Maybe more. Loyola's offense would be in a challenging position to score that many against the RU defense. They are going to need the goaltender to step up.

As is often the case, groundballs are going to be a huge stat.

Spot on post, with weather going to be a little cold, faceoffs and gbs are vitally important. Savio cannot win it himself, he needs to use his wings. It might be he does not have confidence in the wings and tries to win them himself.

MVA does not change his stripes very often. We need to have more of a motion offense, off ball picks, pass down pick down. All very simple but effective. Plus will our offense be able to handle the extremely physical Rutgers D. We are not putting points on the board with a 24% shooting percentage. We will have to shoot 80 times on goal to get 20 on the board.

SSDMs are getting better, Savio and Rezanka are doing well. Benus, Macgillicuddy and Sherwood are the Achilles heel. Benus a 5th year, time to move on, not playing like he did last year, but thats what you get when you dont play fall ball and show up on day one of practice. The group they had in the fall against a strong Villanova team did very well, where are they?

It may be time to look what some younger players can do, what we have been doing has not been working very well.

My prediction, Rutgers by 4

I am a Rutgers fan so I can't speak in depth about Loyola's players outside of what I have seen while watching them play. I think you nailed it as well. Motion offense and ball movement are the best way to attack the Rutgers defense. Our SSDM are very good and our close D is the same. Isolations against them isn't going to be the best strategy if you are Loyola. I think it would behoove Loyola to run as much as they can. While it will open up NASCAR opportunities, it is a better option than allowing the defense to get set up. Early offense will likely promote better looks. The issue with that is it puts more pressure on your goalie. He will see more shots himself.

I've watched Loyola with one eye for a long time. I don't see them doing anything different stylistically than they have done before. That's Loyola lacrosse and I would think they are going to run when they can. There is a lot of respect for the Loyola program inside the walls of Rutgers. Coach Brecht was an assistant there, and Loyola's long time AD Joe Boylan was at Rutgers before that. He was a great person and true lover of lacrosse. Coach Toomey is to be commended as well. While a certain conference won't schedule games with Rutgers now, Loyola has always been an easy add. Coach Toomey isn't afraid of anyone.

[MDlaxfan76]

Why wasn't Shafer starting?