Re: NESCAC
Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2024 9:03 am
Maybe the Trinity and Conn dads will chill after yesterday being exactly how it's always been.....
I know what you're saying - we've been used to them putting up close to 29 the past few years.shorelax12 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 8:56 amNot sure that you can say that Tufts "reloaded" based upon yesterday's game. Putting the final score aside, seemed like a good battle between two very good goalies, Tufts definitely has a good one between the pipes. This week will be the real test for Tufts. Did not see any of the Bowdoin game, but did catch a bit of Middlebury, they looked pretty solid.SaltCounty wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 7:12 amHamilton just scored 20+ goals for the 1st time since they joined the NESCAC.
Amherst can't afford to overlook them at 0-1
Viewed every game yesterday, watching some more than others.
My best attempt at rankings:
1) Middlebury
2) Bowdoin
3) Tufts
4) Amherst
5) Wesleyan
6) Williams
7) Conn
8) Hamilton
9) Trinity
10) Colby
11) Bates
Middlebury had the best win & Bowdoin's box score is a result of a Trinity Goalie who stood on their head.
If both survive their midweek tests - winner has a case for #1
Tufts reloads & still plays dangerously fast - but they may not have the marquee player they've had in past seasons.
Their defense/starter looked solid through 3Q and 32 shots, only giving up 4
I'd say for 4-9... we won't really know, till we know.
Solid take, especially regarding Hamilton - I didn't see that coming. If they can upset Amherst on Saturday, they're the early leader for surprise of the season.SaltCounty wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 7:12 amHamilton just scored 20+ goals for the 1st time since they joined the NESCAC.
Amherst can't afford to overlook them at 0-1
Viewed every game yesterday, watching some more than others.
My best attempt at rankings:
1) Middlebury
2) Bowdoin
3) Tufts
4) Amherst
5) Wesleyan
6) Williams
7) Conn
8) Hamilton
9) Trinity
10) Colby
11) Bates
Middlebury had the best win & Bowdoin's box score is a result of a Trinity Goalie who stood on their head.
If both survive their midweek tests - winner has a case for #1
Tufts reloads & still plays dangerously fast - but they may not have the marquee player they've had in past seasons.
Their defense/starter looked solid through 3Q and 32 shots, only giving up 4
I'd say for 4-9... we won't really know, till we know.
Tufts blew them out. It was not even a game. Tufts was up by double digits at half time and had a little bit of a scoring drought in the third and then took out all their starters. They dominated them on faceoff. The Conn goalie stood on their head and if it was not for him the score would have been 30 to 9.SaltCounty wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 9:06 amI know what you're saying - we've been used to them putting up close to 29 the past few years.shorelax12 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 8:56 amNot sure that you can say that Tufts "reloaded" based upon yesterday's game. Putting the final score aside, seemed like a good battle between two very good goalies, Tufts definitely has a good one between the pipes. This week will be the real test for Tufts. Did not see any of the Bowdoin game, but did catch a bit of Middlebury, they looked pretty solid.SaltCounty wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 7:12 amHamilton just scored 20+ goals for the 1st time since they joined the NESCAC.
Amherst can't afford to overlook them at 0-1
Viewed every game yesterday, watching some more than others.
My best attempt at rankings:
1) Middlebury
2) Bowdoin
3) Tufts
4) Amherst
5) Wesleyan
6) Williams
7) Conn
8) Hamilton
9) Trinity
10) Colby
11) Bates
Middlebury had the best win & Bowdoin's box score is a result of a Trinity Goalie who stood on their head.
If both survive their midweek tests - winner has a case for #1
Tufts reloads & still plays dangerously fast - but they may not have the marquee player they've had in past seasons.
Their defense/starter looked solid through 3Q and 32 shots, only giving up 4
I'd say for 4-9... we won't really know, till we know.
But 19 goals (16 in 3Q) is still a good turnout.
Not to mention, against a goalie many have been gleaming about on this forum the past few weeks...
It was a good game - Shots were 15-14 after the 1st quarter.
Conn continues to look like they're headed in the right direction.
The Tufts starter had 12 saves - including several within 5 yards
Did you mean 7.5 pt favorite in the first half?!?!!!humpdaddy wrote: ↑Thu Feb 29, 2024 3:49 pm This forum is full of lunatics if we are seriously setting Tufts as a 7.5 pt favorite vs Conn. Below is a realistic game preview from someone who actually understands this conference and has a brain (not bias at all).
Prior to diving in, I think we should acknowledge the obvious fact that Dannolfo was camped out in the bushes of MIT last Sunday to watch the Conn/Amherst scrimmage. A game that Conn reportedly lost 11-1...? In anticipation to this, I can confirm that Nagle chose not to play any of his #1s knowing that sneaky Dannolfo was imbedded in the well-manicured hedges of the MIT campus. Now on to Saturday's preview....
Final from Bello: 14 - 12 Conn (cry). Yes, the mighty ole Jumbos fall in Week 1. Will Rice has a nice game (15 saves, par for the course), but it was the Camel defense that really shined. Jumbo's players were shut down by the Camel's back end, no one could beat big Zach Bucher off the left side and the rangy Henry Cabot was all over the field. While the Jumbos dominated the faceoff X, their run-and-gun style on offense proved to be disadvantage against a discipline Camel defense. Tufts did not choose their shots wisely and this ultimately cost them. On the other end of the field, the Tuft's defense over-extended themselves with bold doubles and the Camels made them pay with sharp passing and selfless playmaking. McAvoy and Atkins (2 goals, 4 assists each) were tremendous distributors which lead to goals from Horkan and Tenzer (3 goals, 1 assist each). Camels also got several goals in transition and junior middie McLaughlin man-handled the middle of the field. Resulting, Dannolfo soils his pants walking off Bello (out of embarrassment) and ruins his new Jordans. The Camels return to New London with a Week 1 W and all is right in this great world.
Same!! Love that kid!! If you think about it, based on remaining eligibility, Tufts starting attack could be Bredahl, Boyden and Swank (not to mention Bruun!) and the starting midfield could be Kelleher, Alf and either Tags or Regnery. They chose to move on as opposed to a lot of players at top ranked D3 schools.Unknown Participant wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 11:23 pmI miss Swank.ah23 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 11:02 pmYour memory is correct! It worked perfectly against Middlebury, but it blew up in RIT's face when they tried the same thing against Tufts the next day in the semis. They put an undersized SSDM on Tommy Swank and took forever to adjust/move away from it. Swank ended with five goals (and ~3-4 misses that hit a pipe).Unknown Participant wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 10:55 pm Ok thx. Now I remember seeing that at the NCAAs at Bello. Thought it was weird then (but my memory is not getting any better).
Look, we all understand what happened in the game, but it was certainly not a defining moment for either team. Other than a few posters, I do not think that many on this forum expected Conn to walk away with the win. Tufts was clearly the better team, but there were certainly some positives for Conn on the day, but definitely some takeaways on things that need to be improved, mostly the unforced errors, Tufts will make you pay every time. Obviously, both teams will improve over the season, but as I said earlier, you cannot say that Tufts reloaded based upon that game. Frankly, I think that some of Tufts players that have been touted on this forum were not that impressive, but very impressed with #20. Tufts goalie definitely took some momentum away from Conn.The12lov3 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 9:24 amTufts blew them out. It was not even a game. Tufts was up by double digits at half time and had a little bit of a scoring drought in the third and then took out all their starters. They dominated them on faceoff. The Conn goalie stood on their head and if it was not for him the score would have been 30 to 9.SaltCounty wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 9:06 amI know what you're saying - we've been used to them putting up close to 29 the past few years.shorelax12 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 8:56 amNot sure that you can say that Tufts "reloaded" based upon yesterday's game. Putting the final score aside, seemed like a good battle between two very good goalies, Tufts definitely has a good one between the pipes. This week will be the real test for Tufts. Did not see any of the Bowdoin game, but did catch a bit of Middlebury, they looked pretty solid.SaltCounty wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 7:12 amHamilton just scored 20+ goals for the 1st time since they joined the NESCAC.
Amherst can't afford to overlook them at 0-1
Viewed every game yesterday, watching some more than others.
My best attempt at rankings:
1) Middlebury
2) Bowdoin
3) Tufts
4) Amherst
5) Wesleyan
6) Williams
7) Conn
8) Hamilton
9) Trinity
10) Colby
11) Bates
Middlebury had the best win & Bowdoin's box score is a result of a Trinity Goalie who stood on their head.
If both survive their midweek tests - winner has a case for #1
Tufts reloads & still plays dangerously fast - but they may not have the marquee player they've had in past seasons.
Their defense/starter looked solid through 3Q and 32 shots, only giving up 4
I'd say for 4-9... we won't really know, till we know.
But 19 goals (16 in 3Q) is still a good turnout.
Not to mention, against a goalie many have been gleaming about on this forum the past few weeks...
It was a good game - Shots were 15-14 after the 1st quarter.
Conn continues to look like they're headed in the right direction.
The Tufts starter had 12 saves - including several within 5 yards
The Jumbos will get ALOT better as the season progresses. Might have sone hiccups along the way but once again they have young talent and seem to be in a good position to compete on the national stage.
Chipzhoo wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 10:20 amAgree with all that you said but would only note that there was a reason for all those Amherst TOs. If you watched the game, you know the Midd defense was swarming. Midd withstood substantially similar numbers in their 2023 matchup with nearly the same result. Midd will need to solve FO disparity to have any meaningful shot beyond their Nescac aspirations.smoova wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 9:19 am
I think Amherst is better than the result vs Midd might indicate - Lord Jeffs committed a whopping 10 turnovers in the first quarter which spurred the early Midd run and offset Kopp's strong performance at X. They only had 6 turnovers in the entire second half, which was more evenly played (8-8).
Think this is a good take. Replacing a ton of production on offense + returning their starting goalie and three poles who started 20+ games last year = going to look more like a "normal" lacrosse team early on.
IMO Regnery (20) and Ettinghausen (13) will be better (or at least more prolific) than those two. Don't know a ton about Ettinghausen, but he seems like more of a pure wing shooter/outside threat than Adam was. I think Regnery could be their next ball-dominant dodger/distributor. Super versatile and can initiate from pretty much anywhere; pretty sure the only reason he played middie as a freshman was because they had three senior All-Americans at attack and they had to get him on the field.#20 saw a lot of playing time last year and he reminds me of Austin Carbone based on his speed. #13 reminds me of Bryce Adam. If those two can get anywhere near the output of those former greats, they’ll be right back in contention.
Look, we all understand what happened in the game, but it was certainly not a defining moment for either team. Other than a few posters, I do not think that many on this forum expected Conn to walk away with the win. Tufts was clearly the better team, but there were certainly some positives for Conn on the day, but definitely some takeaways on things that need to be improved, mostly the unforced errors, Tufts will make you pay every time. Obviously, both teams will improve over the season, but as I said earlier, you cannot say that Tufts reloaded based upon that game. Frankly, I think that some of Tufts players that have been touted on this forum were not that impressive, but very impressed with #20. Tufts goalie definitely took some momentum away from Conn.
I had to go way (way) back to make sure I wasn't misremembering this, but...both JBFortunato and pcowlax talked about him as an incoming freshman in the 2020 thread and for whatever reason that stuck in my head even though he barely played in '21 or '22. Credit to them, only reason I knew who he was going into 2023.
I saw parts of both games via stream, and honestly it was hard to tell if Tufts and Bowdoin are that dominant or if Conn and Trin just are not very good at all. It felt like the latter despite all the hype on this forum. Conn was outmanned and Trin looked desperate and played dirty at times.
Think this is a really talented Swarthmore team that's turned some heads the past few years and returns almost everyone. I'm sure they'll put together a better showing but was not too impressed by Amherst this weekend and think match up wise Swarthmore sizes up well almost everywhere. We'll see in a week or so but no shot this is an easy one for AmherstUnknown Participant wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 11:29 pmWhy? IMO, if Amherst is even a shell of itself from 2020 to 2023, mammoths handle Swarthmore easily. What am I missing? Sprinfield eh, but Hammy could be a test. You never know with that non-New England Nescac team.