Face-off revisited

[molo]

I don’t really follow pro very closely, but I just read a story on IL about a game in which the coach chose not to dress a FOGO yet his team still won. Evidently, Currier, discussed in a thread about underrated players, took some face-offs. The team lost almost all the face-offs but still managed to win. I wonder if this strategy is relevant to the college game, where since rosters are not limited, there is less strategy about whether to dress, say, a FOGO, or a dm, which appears to have been consideration in the pro game.
Still, it’s interesting to contemplate trying to win games without using the lax equivalent of a kicker.

[CU77]

As a senior at Princeton, Currier took 202 faceoffs and won 114. He was a FO who didn't GO.

https://goprincetontigers.com/sports/me ... rier/10859

[PulpExposure]

I don’t really follow pro very closely, but I just read a story on IL about a game in which the coach chose not to dress a FOGO yet his team still won. Evidently, Currier, discussed in a thread about underrated players, took some face-offs. The team lost almost all the face-offs but still managed to win. I wonder if this strategy is relevant to the college game, where since rosters are not limited, there is less strategy about whether to dress, say, a FOGO, or a dm, which appears to have been consideration in the pro game.
Still, it’s interesting to contemplate trying to win games without using the lax equivalent of a kicker.

It worked for the PLL as the shot clock was revised this year to be incredibly shorter when you win a faceoff. You only get 32 seconds after winning a faceoff, so the strategy was to concede the faceoff but drive them backwards (defensive exit) so the team has a lot shorter time to get a good shot on goal.

Good breakdown by Dan Arestia here.

Unless the NCAA similarly changes the shot clock, I don't see this being a viable strategy for the college game.

[Njlaxx11]

More of a PLL thing then a college thing.

[kramerica.inc]

PLL is going to have an issue to address shortly.
They still allow for the kneeling moto grip which has its advantages in gaining possession over the standing neutral grip.
That's fine, but the current crop of fogos headed to the PLL will have been using standing neutral grip for years. And I dont see the NCAA allowing the moto grip ever again.
That will certainly give moto guys like Baptiste a longer shelf life as he ages. But what happens when the new crop outnumbers the old? Will PLL coaches and league favor the neutral grip that favors athleticism over specialization? Or will the new fogos have to spend time being indoctrinated into the moto grip after being drafted? will there be a change or transition?
Something interesting to watch.

[jersey shore lax]

I don’t really follow pro very closely, but I just read a story on IL about a game in which the coach chose not to dress a FOGO yet his team still won. Evidently, Currier, discussed in a thread about underrated players, took some face-offs. The team lost almost all the face-offs but still managed to win. I wonder if this strategy is relevant to the college game, where since rosters are not limited, there is less strategy about whether to dress, say, a FOGO, or a dm, which appears to have been consideration in the pro game.
Still, it’s interesting to contemplate trying to win games without using the lax equivalent of a kicker.

It worked for the PLL as the shot clock was revised this year to be incredibly shorter when you win a faceoff. You only get 32 seconds after winning a faceoff, so the strategy was to concede the faceoff but drive them backwards (defensive exit) so the team has a lot shorter time to get a good shot on goal.

Good breakdown by Dan Arestia here.

Unless the NCAA similarly changes the shot clock, I don't see this being a viable strategy for the college game.

really stupid yesterday when you had a 2 minute non releasable penalty - teams scores about 30 seconds into penalty and wins the face off and only has 32 seconds to shoot, they waist time getting fogo and lsm off and wind up taking a bad shot as shot clock was winding down, the man down team clears the ball and kills the balance of the penalty.

[jersey shore lax]

I don’t really follow pro very closely, but I just read a story on IL about a game in which the coach chose not to dress a FOGO yet his team still won. Evidently, Currier, discussed in a thread about underrated players, took some face-offs. The team lost almost all the face-offs but still managed to win. I wonder if this strategy is relevant to the college game, where since rosters are not limited, there is less strategy about whether to dress, say, a FOGO, or a dm, which appears to have been consideration in the pro game.
Still, it’s interesting to contemplate trying to win games without using the lax equivalent of a kicker.

Atlas won 84.4% of face offs and lost to the Cannons 19-12
Chrome won 90% of faceoffs and lost to the Waterdogs 10-7

While the Archers won the face offs 85.7% and also won the game, they either goat called for a shot clock violation or forced a bad shot at least 7-10 times making the posessions after f/o much closer .

the only close f/o game was Redwood winning 56% and also winning the game 13-8.

[wgdsr]

I don’t really follow pro very closely, but I just read a story on IL about a game in which the coach chose not to dress a FOGO yet his team still won. Evidently, Currier, discussed in a thread about underrated players, took some face-offs. The team lost almost all the face-offs but still managed to win. I wonder if this strategy is relevant to the college game, where since rosters are not limited, there is less strategy about whether to dress, say, a FOGO, or a dm, which appears to have been consideration in the pro game.
Still, it’s interesting to contemplate trying to win games without using the lax equivalent of a kicker.

It worked for the PLL as the shot clock was revised this year to be incredibly shorter when you win a faceoff. You only get 32 seconds after winning a faceoff, so the strategy was to concede the faceoff but drive them backwards (defensive exit) so the team has a lot shorter time to get a good shot on goal.

Good breakdown by Dan Arestia here.

Unless the NCAA similarly changes the shot clock, I don't see this being a viable strategy for the college game.

really stupid yesterday when you had a 2 minute non releasable penalty - teams scores about 30 seconds into penalty and wins the face off and only has 32 seconds to shoot, they waist time getting fogo and lsm off and wind up taking a bad shot as shot clock was winding down, the man down team clears the ball and kills the balance of the penalty.

would've been funny to watch if neither team wanted to pick up the gb and it just sat there for a while.

[jersey shore lax]

I don’t really follow pro very closely, but I just read a story on IL about a game in which the coach chose not to dress a FOGO yet his team still won. Evidently, Currier, discussed in a thread about underrated players, took some face-offs. The team lost almost all the face-offs but still managed to win. I wonder if this strategy is relevant to the college game, where since rosters are not limited, there is less strategy about whether to dress, say, a FOGO, or a dm, which appears to have been consideration in the pro game.
Still, it’s interesting to contemplate trying to win games without using the lax equivalent of a kicker.

It worked for the PLL as the shot clock was revised this year to be incredibly shorter when you win a faceoff. You only get 32 seconds after winning a faceoff, so the strategy was to concede the faceoff but drive them backwards (defensive exit) so the team has a lot shorter time to get a good shot on goal.

Good breakdown by Dan Arestia here.

Unless the NCAA similarly changes the shot clock, I don't see this being a viable strategy for the college game.

really stupid yesterday when you had a 2 minute non releasable penalty - teams scores about 30 seconds into penalty and wins the face off and only has 32 seconds to shoot, they waist time getting fogo and lsm off and wind up taking a bad shot as shot clock was winding down, the man down team clears the ball and kills the balance of the penalty.

would've been funny to watch if neither team wanted to pick up the gb and it just sat there for a while.

Could you imagine if Quint had to fill the dead time taking about who was the original Lucy burger?
5-8 Club's Juicy Lucy or Matt’s Bar the Jucy Lucy.

[youthathletics]

Would love to see the results a poll from all the PLL and NCAA players/coaching staff, that is completely anonymous, and asks very specific questions on the state of the FO in lacrosse.

Maybe the PLL did this on a smaller scale when they modified the rules with the help of a retired FO player that has a vested interest in the position and those they coach/train.

[Njlaxx11]

Would love to see the results a poll from all the PLL and NCAA players/coaching staff, that is completely anonymous, and asks very specific questions on the state of the FO in lacrosse.

Maybe the PLL did this on a smaller scale when they modified the rules with the help of a retired FO player that has a vested interest in the position and those they coach/train.

but the pll is almost completely different then HS/College. shorter field, their shot clock vs college is much quicker, 2 point goals, etc.

this FO strategy worked cause of the diminished shot clock for the team that wins the FO. they only get 32 seconds - from what i've seen most teams don't even sub off in that time. what's worse is the clock resets to 32 if you hit a pipe or something.

i coach in NJ and we don't have a shot clock. i know the MIAA uses one. i'm sure if the shot clock was on and diminished in HS/College, this strategy would be most effective. but for now - having a dominant FOGO is the way to go, IMO.

[youthathletics]

Would love to see the results a poll from all the PLL and NCAA players/coaching staff, that is completely anonymous, and asks very specific questions on the state of the FO in lacrosse.

Maybe the PLL did this on a smaller scale when they modified the rules with the help of a retired FO player that has a vested interest in the position and those they coach/train.

but the pll is almost completely different then HS/College. shorter field, their shot clock vs college is much quicker, 2 point goals, etc.

this FO strategy worked cause of the diminished shot clock for the team that wins the FO. they only get 32 seconds - from what i've seen most teams don't even sub off in that time. what's worse is the clock resets to 32 if you hit a pipe or something.

i coach in NJ and we don't have a shot clock. i know the MIAA uses one. i'm sure if the shot clock was on and diminished in HS/College, this strategy would be most effective. but for now - having a dominant FOGO is the way to go, IMO.

My intent in the post was to get an under the hood / inside look on how players 'truly' feel about it as a hole. My guess is that they are not entirely thrilled about the position.

[Unknown Participant]

Quint raised this point several times in the games where Farrell/Babtiste were facing off: put O mids on the wings and immediately attack the cage instead of futzing around w/subbing. Seems like a valid point esp. w/Farrell since he is useless with the ball in his stick and seemed to have half as many turnovers as FO wins.

[PulpExposure]

i coach in NJ and we don't have a shot clock.

My oldest kid plays in NJ HS and I wish we had a shot clock

But the college version, not the stupid PLL version of this year.

[FOGO_Daze]

THe PLL 32 second clock is terrible. It is rushing the game and forcing turnovers and making the game sloppy. I hope NCAA does not consider this.

[Farfromgeneva]

i coach in NJ and we don't have a shot clock.

My oldest kid plays in NJ HS and I wish we had a shot clock

But the college version, not the stupid PLL version of this year.

You're coaches or in your roles do you play up on the ball outside the box, try to force the offense to do something, or sit and chase off ball movement and wait? Just curious as a crappy rec league coach trying to do better for his son. At my level and in georgia, I force ball movement on opponents and try to push transition as much as possible though on the offensive end it is either the clearing better athlete taking a shot or dumping to a crease kid opposite side (cant call it a skip pass but sort of) and/or turnover. Nobody plays behind the crease in this league hardly at all, though. Finally got one kid who listens to try creeping around the crease backside end of season and it worked, if only they all listend half as much...

[PulpExposure]

i coach in NJ and we don't have a shot clock.

My oldest kid plays in NJ HS and I wish we had a shot clock

But the college version, not the stupid PLL version of this year.

You're coaches or in your roles do you play up on the ball outside the box, try to force the offense to do something, or sit and chase off ball movement and wait? Just curious as a crappy rec league coach trying to do better for his son. At my level and in georgia, I force ball movement on opponents and try to push transition as much as possible though on the offensive end it is either the clearing better athlete taking a shot or dumping to a crease kid opposite side (cant call it a skip pass but sort of) and/or turnover. Nobody plays behind the crease in this league hardly at all, though. Finally got one kid who listens to try creeping around the crease backside end of season and it worked, if only they all listend half as much...

Generally it depends on the opponents honestly. If they're good enough to deal with pressure and beat it, they'll go by the guy (who likely will overcommit and then be out of position), and then that leaves you essentially man down. If they're smart enough, they'll draw the resulting slide and then pass to the open guy for an easy open look. Against teams like this, we tend to more pack it in and play zone.

For those opponents or even individual matchups who struggle with pressure on their gloves (whether skill or they panic), we send our kids at them.

I would always encourage pushing in transition though. Easiest to score in unsettled situations, and if you have the shorties or poles to threaten, send them. Obviously if you have a pole who can't catch or throw reliably, that kid stays by the crease, but if you have one with handles...go at it. We played a team earlier this year who sent two of their poles crashing downfield at any change of possession and it was actually pretty damn fun to watch. And more importantly, really disruptive.

Make sense?

[Farfromgeneva]

i coach in NJ and we don't have a shot clock.

My oldest kid plays in NJ HS and I wish we had a shot clock

But the college version, not the stupid PLL version of this year.

You're coaches or in your roles do you play up on the ball outside the box, try to force the offense to do something, or sit and chase off ball movement and wait? Just curious as a crappy rec league coach trying to do better for his son. At my level and in georgia, I force ball movement on opponents and try to push transition as much as possible though on the offensive end it is either the clearing better athlete taking a shot or dumping to a crease kid opposite side (cant call it a skip pass but sort of) and/or turnover. Nobody plays behind the crease in this league hardly at all, though. Finally got one kid who listens to try creeping around the crease backside end of season and it worked, if only they all listend half as much...

Generally it depends on the opponents honestly. If they're good enough to deal with pressure and beat it, they'll go by the guy (who likely will overcommit and then be out of position), and then that leaves you essentially man down. If they're smart enough, they'll draw the resulting slide and then pass to the open guy for an easy open look. Against teams like this, we tend to more pack it in and play zone.

For those opponents or even individual matchups who struggle with pressure on their gloves (whether skill or they panic), we send our kids at them.

I would always encourage pushing in transition though. Easiest to score in unsettled situations, and if you have the shorties or poles to threaten, send them. Obviously if you have a pole who can't catch or throw reliably, that kid stays by the crease, but if you have one with handles...go at it. We played a team earlier this year who sent two of their poles crashing downfield at any change of possession and it was actually pretty damn fun to watch. And more importantly, really disruptive.

Make sense?

Thanks for reply.

I get it at the college level wondering with kids and development whats best. Winning obviously but I’m dealing with kids. It’s easy to force a bad pass from an opponent if you don’t give them time but I wonder if I shirt change aspects of zone and team defense. By doing that regularly. It’s the second slide or bad pass recovery off the ground that gets us but it doesn’t seem as bad as letting them “set up” and have my kids chase theirs off ball. Perhaps an age / level issue too since im dealing w 3-5th graders and really really focuses on development and shutting down the dad who put his kid in a travel league over winter didn’t know what GLE was prior despite his kid playing for 3yrs now but comes back from that $2,000, 6 week winter league talking like an expert and thinking his kid is getting a scholly. Im mostly teaching teamwork, responsibility to the unit, put bodies on the ground legally, always run, etc. we also can’t three pass clear so it’s either goalie chucking the ball to midfield to attack or one man clear with one of my three bets athletes and hope they can set something and his teammates are downfield in time to help out when the clearing kid inevitably is doubled or triple teamed. (Teaching appropriate spacing and movement on offense is my largest challenge really)

[MDlaxfan76]

i coach in NJ and we don't have a shot clock.

My oldest kid plays in NJ HS and I wish we had a shot clock

But the college version, not the stupid PLL version of this year.

You're coaches or in your roles do you play up on the ball outside the box, try to force the offense to do something, or sit and chase off ball movement and wait? Just curious as a crappy rec league coach trying to do better for his son. At my level and in georgia, I force ball movement on opponents and try to push transition as much as possible though on the offensive end it is either the clearing better athlete taking a shot or dumping to a crease kid opposite side (cant call it a skip pass but sort of) and/or turnover. Nobody plays behind the crease in this league hardly at all, though. Finally got one kid who listens to try creeping around the crease backside end of season and it worked, if only they all listend half as much...

Generally it depends on the opponents honestly. If they're good enough to deal with pressure and beat it, they'll go by the guy (who likely will overcommit and then be out of position), and then that leaves you essentially man down. If they're smart enough, they'll draw the resulting slide and then pass to the open guy for an easy open look. Against teams like this, we tend to more pack it in and play zone.

For those opponents or even individual matchups who struggle with pressure on their gloves (whether skill or they panic), we send our kids at them.

I would always encourage pushing in transition though. Easiest to score in unsettled situations, and if you have the shorties or poles to threaten, send them. Obviously if you have a pole who can't catch or throw reliably, that kid stays by the crease, but if you have one with handles...go at it. We played a team earlier this year who sent two of their poles crashing downfield at any change of possession and it was actually pretty damn fun to watch. And more importantly, really disruptive.

Make sense?

Thanks for reply.

I get it at the college level wondering with kids and development whats best. Winning obviously but I’m dealing with kids. It’s easy to force a bad pass from an opponent if you don’t give them time but I wonder if I shirt change aspects of zone and team defense. By doing that regularly. It’s the second slide or bad pass recovery off the ground that gets us but it doesn’t seem as bad as letting them “set up” and have my kids chase theirs off ball. Perhaps an age / level issue too since im dealing w 3-5th graders and really really focuses on development and shutting down the dad who put his kid in a travel league over winter didn’t know what GLE was prior despite his kid playing for 3yrs now but comes back from that $2,000, 6 week winter league talking like an expert and thinking his kid is getting a scholly. Im mostly teaching teamwork, responsibility to the unit, put bodies on the ground legally, always run, etc. we also can’t three pass clear so it’s either goalie chucking the ball to midfield to attack or one man clear with one of my three bets athletes and hope they can set something and his teammates are downfield in time to help out when the clearing kid inevitably is doubled or triple teamed. (Teaching appropriate spacing and movement on offense is my largest challenge really)

I suspect this brings back fond, frustrating memories for many of us!
Keep at it, they get better...encourage the passing, the touches, as much as possible...best kids will still dominate, but that extra pass will start to happen in time...

At least it's not the transition of coach pitch to kid pitch in baseball, where everything grinds to no action for a year or two... a lot of kicking dirt and picking daisies...thank goodness that after a year of that my son told me he wanted to just focus on lax...coaching both in the same season was rough...

Back to FO..agree the PL shot clock is way too fast and has unintended consequences IMO.

[SCLaxAttack]

i coach in NJ and we don't have a shot clock.

My oldest kid plays in NJ HS and I wish we had a shot clock

But the college version, not the stupid PLL version of this year.

You're coaches or in your roles do you play up on the ball outside the box, try to force the offense to do something, or sit and chase off ball movement and wait? Just curious as a crappy rec league coach trying to do better for his son. At my level and in georgia, I force ball movement on opponents and try to push transition as much as possible though on the offensive end it is either the clearing better athlete taking a shot or dumping to a crease kid opposite side (cant call it a skip pass but sort of) and/or turnover. Nobody plays behind the crease in this league hardly at all, though. Finally got one kid who listens to try creeping around the crease backside end of season and it worked, if only they all listend half as much...

Generally it depends on the opponents honestly. If they're good enough to deal with pressure and beat it, they'll go by the guy (who likely will overcommit and then be out of position), and then that leaves you essentially man down. If they're smart enough, they'll draw the resulting slide and then pass to the open guy for an easy open look. Against teams like this, we tend to more pack it in and play zone.

For those opponents or even individual matchups who struggle with pressure on their gloves (whether skill or they panic), we send our kids at them.

I would always encourage pushing in transition though. Easiest to score in unsettled situations, and if you have the shorties or poles to threaten, send them. Obviously if you have a pole who can't catch or throw reliably, that kid stays by the crease, but if you have one with handles...go at it. We played a team earlier this year who sent two of their poles crashing downfield at any change of possession and it was actually pretty damn fun to watch. And more importantly, really disruptive.

Make sense?

Thanks for reply.

I get it at the college level wondering with kids and development whats best. Winning obviously but I’m dealing with kids. It’s easy to force a bad pass from an opponent if you don’t give them time but I wonder if I shirt change aspects of zone and team defense. By doing that regularly. It’s the second slide or bad pass recovery off the ground that gets us but it doesn’t seem as bad as letting them “set up” and have my kids chase theirs off ball. Perhaps an age / level issue too since im dealing w 3-5th graders and really really focuses on development and shutting down the dad who put his kid in a travel league over winter didn’t know what GLE was prior despite his kid playing for 3yrs now but comes back from that $2,000, 6 week winter league talking like an expert and thinking his kid is getting a scholly. Im mostly teaching teamwork, responsibility to the unit, put bodies on the ground legally, always run, etc. we also can’t three pass clear so it’s either goalie chucking the ball to midfield to attack or one man clear with one of my three bets athletes and hope they can set something and his teammates are downfield in time to help out when the clearing kid inevitably is doubled or triple teamed. (Teaching appropriate spacing and movement on offense is my largest challenge really)

I suspect this brings back fond, frustrating memories for many of us!
Keep at it, they get better...encourage the passing, the touches, as much as possible...best kids will still dominate, but that extra pass will start to happen in time...

At least it's not the transition of coach pitch to kid pitch in baseball, where everything grinds to no action for a year or two... a lot of kicking dirt and picking daisies...thank goodness that after a year of that my son told me he wanted to just focus on lax...coaching both in the same season was rough...

Back to FO..agree the PL shot clock is way too fast and has unintended consequences IMO.

Grandkids are at that awkward Little League transition to kid pitch. I forgot how big, no HUGE, umpires have to make the strike zone to keep teams from scoring ten runs an inning - all on walks! If your bat can touch the pitched ball it's going to be a called a strike.