LaxPower Back-Up Stick

Madlax59 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 11:26 am

LaxDadMax wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2024 11:24 am

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2024 10:58 am ND @ UNC - I think Notre Dame wins this narrowly. After the letdown with Syracuse, ND makes UNC pay. No skin in this game.

Colorado @ Michigan -- have yet to see either team play. Ann Arbor by one? Like 9-8?

Duke @ Syracuse -- I wish I could "expect a running clock," but I think Syracuse lets them hang around for a while. Still, Syracuse 19, Duke 11.

Penn State @ Loyola - Hounds by five or so.

UVA @ Clemson - UVA by two, say 14-12. But I can absolutely see Clemson, the host, winning this.

Maryland @ Denver - Agree: not a must win in the traditional sense of salvaging something. But really important game, at mile-high Barton. Denver 8, Maryland 7.

My Picks

UNC by 3... The funeral here was premature
Michigan by 4 ... I think the close game against ASU is a positive not a negative
Loyola by running clock... Lion fans are lying if they think the coach will be there next year
UVA by 1... really a coin flip. Picking UVA because they have a better goalie
Terps by 2 .. At some point Denver has to be able to score. I'd put the over/under for this game around 14

Defensive showdown at UNC/ND game so far. Some poor shots and a few turnovers keeping score low 1-0 end of first quarter

OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 3:45 am

LaxDadMax wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2024 11:24 am I think the close game against ASU is a positive not a negative

Agreed! So glad someone else sees it this way. They clamped down and made the plays (draw controls, ground balls, converting on free position [can I get a witness, DMac?] and scoring goals) in crunch time when they needed to. I'm baffled as to why this come-from-behind, gut-it-out road win was considered by some as evidence of Michigan's lack rather than their mettle. Sometimes, a grind-it-out win is needed. Kudos to any team that is able to do that. A win's a win in my book--however ugly it might look on the stat page.

njbill wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 12:02 pm Announcers don’t seem to know the new rule which, OK, I didn’t know until a week ago, that the reason UNC held the ball at the end of the half was because they are man up and will get the ball at the beginning of the second half. The more I see of this rule, the less I like it.

njbill wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 12:02 pm Announcers don’t seem to know the new rule which, OK, I didn’t know until a week ago, that the reason UNC held the ball at the end of the half was because they are man up and will get the ball at the beginning of the second half. The more I see of this rule, the less I like it.

Madlax59 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 12:12 pm

njbill wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 12:02 pm Announcers don’t seem to know the new rule which, OK, I didn’t know until a week ago, that the reason UNC held the ball at the end of the half was because they are man up and will get the ball at the beginning of the second half. The more I see of this rule, the less I like it.

I would rather take the shot. And see TO, so wasted opportunity UNC

uncfan1013 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 1:35 pm UNC did not look good at the offense side but their defense was amazing. Besides the free position goals, UNC really stopped Notre Dame from scoring loads like they usually do. We just needed the offense to click.

Brownlax wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 1:38 pm

uncfan1013 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 1:35 pm UNC did not look good at the offense side but their defense was amazing. Besides the free position goals, UNC really stopped Notre Dame from scoring loads like they usually do. We just needed the offense to click.

UNC got outshot 34-17 and also had 18 turnovers.

Brownlax wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 1:38 pm

uncfan1013 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 1:35 pm UNC did not look good at the offense side but their defense was amazing. Besides the free position goals, UNC really stopped Notre Dame from scoring loads like they usually do. We just needed the offense to click.

UNC got outshot 34-17 and also had 18 turnovers.

uncfan1013 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 1:35 pm UNC did not look good at the offense side but their defense was amazing. Besides the free position goals, UNC really stopped Notre Dame from scoring loads like they usually do. We just needed the offense to click.

wlaxphan20 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 2:06 pm

Brownlax wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 1:38 pm

uncfan1013 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 1:35 pm UNC did not look good at the offense side but their defense was amazing. Besides the free position goals, UNC really stopped Notre Dame from scoring loads like they usually do. We just needed the offense to click.

UNC got outshot 34-17 and also had 18 turnovers.

Wasn’t able to see the game but 18 TO’s.. that is uuuuuuuuugly

Madlax59 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 2:28 pm

wlaxphan20 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 2:06 pm

Brownlax wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 1:38 pm

uncfan1013 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 1:35 pm UNC did not look good at the offense side but their defense was amazing. Besides the free position goals, UNC really stopped Notre Dame from scoring loads like they usually do. We just needed the offense to click.

UNC got outshot 34-17 and also had 18 turnovers.

Wasn’t able to see the game but 18 TO’s.. that is uuuuuuuuugly

I feel like I said this last year about UNC no senior leadership to step up, to be the girl to put the team on her back, no one to preach composure and wait for the better shot. Not sure if its too many "me" players or chemistry issues . Also wondering how much McCool and Cordingley are doing on a coaching front.

ultravisitor wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 2:31 pm So did other teams figure out the Denver defense before this season started?