Johns Hopkins 2021

[DocBarrister]

What Q doesn't speak to is that most everything that Q is touting about Petro is standard fair for the top coaches of the top programs.

Respectfully, Matt, I don’t think that’s quite true.

Petro is not only one of the Blue Jays’ greatest coaches, but was also one of the sport’s greatest players. He would have been a Hall of Famer as a coach if he were not already in the Hall as a great player.

Hard to name another player and coach combination quite like him.

DocBarrister

[MDlaxfan76]

Admission standards were raised and it became far more difficult to get in players than anytime in the past.

Not sure they qualify as all-everything, but there were limits:

According to a friend Bob Benson complained often about not getting Rambo and Heacock in.

viewtopic.php?p=137566#p137566

And I do not find it difficult to believe that those limits are tightening under RD.

I'm wondering if someone can clear up my curiosity/confusion on the admissions issue.

Here's how it looks from the outside; please feel free to correct me if any of this is wrong. In all the following I'm talking about recruiting at Hopkins going back to roughly 2011, which would appear to coincide both with the period of "peak early recruiting" and with the timespan people have in mind when they talk about top administration tightening limits.

1. Whatever filter Admissions was applying, it seems to have been applied largely (if not entirely) pre-commitment. Every year, you'd see 10-15 commitments being announced from HS underclassmen, and 3+ years later the great majority of those kids would matriculate at Homewood. You had a few decommits along the way, but no indication that the bulk of those were for academic reasons.

2. It would seem to follow logically that Admissions must have been tolerating a relatively wide range of academic outcomes. There would be no way to know with precision how a recruit's academic record would develop during the multiyear interval between the initial commitment and the formal application. If ~90% of commits still ended up getting the eventual OK, then Admissions must either have been accepting a certain number of underperformers, or else restricting initial commitments to a subset of kids perceived as especially low-risk.

3. If that's true, though, then it seems incomplete just to say "standards were raised." The comparison between pre- and post-2010 (or whatever year you want to use) isn't apples-to-apples: the administration's priorities may well have changed, but at the same time so did the basic nature of what the program was asking Admissions to do. It's one thing to ask Admissions for help on a kid with a known but underwhelming transcript; it's another to ask for preclearance on a kid with no real high school GPA, based solely on a best guesstimate of whether he might or might not be an academic risk.

4. So, first question: Is it possible that from the administration's perspective, "tightening limits" looked like a fair and rational tradeoff in exchange for acquiescing in the lax program's desire to go to an earlier and earlier timeline? Something like, "We'll believe you if you say you need to go earlier to be competitive, but to mitigate our risk we're going to need to do a more stringent screening up front?" Was there even a sense of, "You want the consideration the program was getting in 1995 or 2005? Fine, bring us a junior the way you used to. You want the old latitude, give us the old timeline?"

5. How did the actual mechanics of this work? Was it more like developing a shortlist of recruits with strong mutual interest and only then bringing the case to Admissions as a last step before commitment? Or was Petro seeking preclearance from Admissions on a larger number of potential recruits during the initial evaluation stages? In other words: when we hear "Petro couldn't get [player x] in," are we talking about somebody who was all but committed until Admissions said no, or more likely somebody whose name Petro ran by Admissions but never got to pursue seriously in the first place?

Had to chuckle at notion that Benson was complaining about not getting Rambo and Heacock in...after all Bobby got in!

I'd be very surprised to learn that those two were actually inadmissible at Hopkins as lax recruits. Seems far more likely that they simply chose a different school...now, that might have been because they believed Hopkins would be a more difficult academic environment or it may have been because of other factors.

The comment about #38 and certainly others over the years is true. Plenty of guys who could have cut it, indeed excelled, at Ivies, have been in the program. But let's be serious, the range has long been very wide. There's been no AI target ala the Ivies that Hop needs to hit each year. Very different with the DIII programs at Hopkins, their targets are quite tough and have grown way tougher recently.

Where I think it's fair to say that 'standards' are higher is that there's less latitude in the actual academic experience for youngsters without the skills and motivation to cut it academically. Still paths through it, but not the same as yesteryear.

On the other hand, it's reasonable to think that there's been tension over this with Admissions, made all the more intense by the ridiculousness of ER.

Also a pretty good guess that the latitude from the Administration for fouling up is much less, whether in the classroom or out of it. The clout of the program, indeed of all athletic programs is likely markedly less.

But the idea that Hopkins' "slide" was due to an inability to get recruits through Admissions really doesn't make sense.

[Matnum PI]

Hard to name another player and coach combination quite like him.

I agree. Whole-heartedly. My point is that I can talk endlessly about how hard-working my kid is and why he should get into Harvard and... The competition is stiff. Being hard-working isn't enough.

[Chitown]

Admission standards were raised and it became far more difficult to get in players than anytime in the past.

Not sure they qualify as all-everything, but there were limits:

According to a friend Bob Benson complained often about not getting Rambo and Heacock in.

viewtopic.php?p=137566#p137566

And I do not find it difficult to believe that those limits are tightening under RD.

Here's how it looks from the outside; please feel free to correct me if any of this is wrong. In all the following I'm talking about recruiting at Hopkins going back to roughly 2011, which would appear to coincide both with the period of "peak early recruiting" and with the timespan people have in mind when they talk about top administration tightening limits.

Had to chuckle at notion that Benson was complaining about not getting Rambo and Heacock in...after all Bobby got in!

I'd be very surprised to learn that those two were actually inadmissible at Hopkins as lax recruits. Seems far more likely that they simply chose a different school...now, that might have been because they believed Hopkins would be a more difficult academic environment or it may have been because of other factors.

The comment about #38 and certainly others over the years is true. Plenty of guys who could have cut it, indeed excelled, at Ivies, have been in the program. But let's be serious, the range has long been very wide. There's been no AI target ala the Ivies that Hop needs to hit each year. Very different with the DIII programs at Hopkins, their targets are quite tough and have grown way tougher recently.

Where I think it's fair to say that 'standards' are higher is that there's less latitude in the actual academic experience for youngsters without the skills and motivation to cut it academically. Still paths through it, but not the same as yesteryear

But the idea that Hopkins' "slide" was due to an inability to get recruits through Admissions really doesn't make sense.

MD76, too many gratuitous kicks at JHU. Where do you get your information? Were you the Director of Admissions? Maybe all Baltimore "cocktail party talk". Where do you get your info that makes you "chuckle". Your attitude is a little too pretentious.
The Ivy League cuts "corners" to get athletes admitted. How did Yale's hockey team get all the players to win the NC a number of years ago? I hear they all had perfect scores on the ACTs and SATs. Same with Brown's hockey team a few years ago. Of course Cornell is famous for making sure all their Hockey players meet Rhode Scholarship standards. Harvard? Hockey of course and their basketball team? Hire the former Indiana Coach, and a few years later, presto. Harvard has high caliber players. Just by chance? Or was there an understanding when the Coach was hired?

Lacrosse was and is a minor "preppy" sport played for the most part by children of the Middle Class. It has grown, but the number of Div. 1 schools playing the sport has grown slowly. Reasons? Title lX. not revenue producing, and its expense. Big football schools are not expanding into lacrosse (Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers and Maryland have played for decades). Mainly because of Title lX. That is one reason why the Ivy League and JHU can continue to be competitive in Lacrosse..

A friend, who was in executive recruiting, told me "When people who are in their 40s, 50s, 60s, etc want to tell you where they went to college, it is probably because they didn't accomplish much of note the rest of their lives".

JHU is an excellent academic institution, with an accomplished student body who are happy with their undergraduate experience. 80% of the undergraduates go on to graduate school. No pretentious "chuckles" or gratuitous kicks are acceptable here.

We have a great lacrosse tradition, and I am confident that it will be great again. The AD and Alanna are extremely competent and both have lacrosse backgrounds. This search will be extensive and thorough. We will be OK.

Coach Pietramala deserves to move on "gracefully". The lacrosse coach community will rally and say properly nice things about him. But change is sometimes good: like a shot of adrenaline for both parties. It was getting "stale". Time to move on.

I apologize MD76 if I got too pointed, BUT I defend my alma mater.

[DocBarrister]

Hard to name another player and coach combination quite like him.

I agree. Whole-heartedly. My point is that I can talk endlessly about how hard-working my kid is and why he should get into Harvard and... The competition is stiff. Being hard-working isn't enough.

Yes, absolutely agree.

And never underestimate good luck and timing as one of many other important factors.

DocBarrister

[HopFan16]

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/ ... cted/56324

Said thanks but no thanks:
Alberici

Contacted by Hopkins:
Nadelen
Raymond
Tierney
Chemotti
Murphy
Shay
Milliman
Casseese

Notably not contacted (yet) according to IL:
Marr

I can shed a little bit more light about the guys in the middle column seeing as IL apparently wants to protect all of them. Pretty sure all of those guys have had formal interviews with Hopkins except Shay and Casseese. Our next coach is very likely from that group, with Nads and Chemotti the top two IMO.

[MDlaxfan76]

Admission standards were raised and it became far more difficult to get in players than anytime in the past.

Not sure they qualify as all-everything, but there were limits:

According to a friend Bob Benson complained often about not getting Rambo and Heacock in.

viewtopic.php?p=137566#p137566

And I do not find it difficult to believe that those limits are tightening under RD.

Here's how it looks from the outside; please feel free to correct me if any of this is wrong. In all the following I'm talking about recruiting at Hopkins going back to roughly 2011, which would appear to coincide both with the period of "peak early recruiting" and with the timespan people have in mind when they talk about top administration tightening limits.

Had to chuckle at notion that Benson was complaining about not getting Rambo and Heacock in...after all Bobby got in!

I'd be very surprised to learn that those two were actually inadmissible at Hopkins as lax recruits. Seems far more likely that they simply chose a different school...now, that might have been because they believed Hopkins would be a more difficult academic environment or it may have been because of other factors.

The comment about #38 and certainly others over the years is true. Plenty of guys who could have cut it, indeed excelled, at Ivies, have been in the program. But let's be serious, the range has long been very wide. There's been no AI target ala the Ivies that Hop needs to hit each year. Very different with the DIII programs at Hopkins, their targets are quite tough and have grown way tougher recently.

Where I think it's fair to say that 'standards' are higher is that there's less latitude in the actual academic experience for youngsters without the skills and motivation to cut it academically. Still paths through it, but not the same as yesteryear

But the idea that Hopkins' "slide" was due to an inability to get recruits through Admissions really doesn't make sense.

MD76, too many gratuitous kicks at JHU. Where do you get your information? Were you the Director of Admissions? Maybe all Baltimore "cocktail party talk". Where do you get your info that makes you "chuckle". Your attitude is a little too pretentious.
The Ivy League cuts "corners" to get athletes admitted. How did Yale's hockey team get all the players to win the NC a number of years ago? I hear they all had perfect scores on the ACTs and SATs. Same with Brown's hockey team a few years ago. Of course Cornell is famous for making sure all their Hockey players meet Rhode Scholarship standards. Harvard? Hockey of course and their basketball team? Hire the former Indiana Coach, and a few years later, presto. Harvard has high caliber players. Just by chance? Or was there an understanding when the Coach was hired?

Lacrosse was and is a minor "preppy" sport played for the most part by children of the Middle Class. It has grown, but the number of Div. 1 schools playing the sport has grown slowly. Reasons? Title lX. not revenue producing, and its expense. Big football schools are not expanding into lacrosse (Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers and Maryland have played for decades). Mainly because of Title lX. That is one reason why the Ivy League and JHU can continue to be competitive in Lacrosse..

A friend, who was in executive recruiting, told me "When people who are in their 40s, 50s, 60s, etc want to tell you where they went to college, it is probably because they didn't accomplish much of note the rest of their lives".

JHU is an excellent academic institution, with an accomplished student body who are happy with their undergraduate experience. 80% of the undergraduates go on to graduate school. No pretentious "chuckles" or gratuitous kicks are acceptable here.

We have a great lacrosse tradition, and I am confident that it will be great again. The AD and Alanna are extremely competent and both have lacrosse backgrounds. This search will be extensive and thorough. We will be OK.

Coach Pietramala deserves to move on "gracefully". The lacrosse coach community will rally and say properly nice things about him. But change is sometimes good: like a shot of adrenaline for both parties. It was getting "stale". Time to move on.

I apologize MD76 if I got too pointed, BUT I defend my alma mater.

Yikes, I actually root for Hopkins, too.
My post must have either been misunderstood or struck a raw nerve.

I chuckled at Benson in particular. Let's just say he wouldn't have been on that list that includes #38.
Yeah, I guess that was gratuitous. I apologize.

I'm involved at Hopkins, guest lecturer, sole non-alum on a board in the Whiting School. Interface with both undergrads and grads. Bunch of buddies went to Hopkins, several lax players, next door neighbor and friend is one of the all-time Hop lax greats, and on and on.

But it's not my alma mater, so I respect your desire to speak for Hopkins.

But I'm also quite sure I know a heck of a lot more about Ivy admissions than you do apparently. I serve on my alma mater's lacrosse friends board, only hiatus was when my son chose to play at another Ivy. I know the #'s, the range, the latitude that can be given, the #'s for different sports, etc, etc. And of course there's a range for athletes. No kidding. But the target requirements are very real and enforced by the League and the Presidents.

Yes, it's not the same as for Big 10 Hopkins lax and that's entirely ok by me. That said, I would agree with posters who think there's going to be continued pressure in this area going forward. The DIII sports have had a big change in their targets. One of my friends is Hopkins' winningest coach and I've had the pleasure to meet a number of sports' coaches. It's challenging. Yet, they do remarkably well with it.

I quite agree about Title IX's impact on the number of D1 men's programs, but I don't agree that JHU and the Ivies are doomed to second class position ala football, at least not until big, big money intrudes. I hope that's never. But I'm already a dinosaur, so whaddya gonna do?

Seriously, no offense was intended.

And BTW, I hope and expect that there will be a day when Petro is honored very enthusiastically by Hopkins fans. Huge part of the history.

My dad was good friends with Bob Scott, so he was my vision of an iconic Hopkins coach, but each generation of little kids has had theirs.

[HopFan16]

Some more color from Chris Jastrzembski:

https://twitter.com/Chris_Jast/status/1 ... 9638380545

Interviewed:
Dan Chemotti
Peter Milliman
Mike Murphy
Shawn Nadelen
Greg Raymond
Seth Tierney

"Finalists":
Nadelen
Chemotti
"One or two others"

Mostly jibes with what I've been hearing

Both Nads and Chemotti would be superb hires. As long as Chemotti doesn't leave for Duke in 3 years when Dano calls it quits

[houndace1]

Some more color from Chris Jastrzembski:

https://twitter.com/Chris_Jast/status/1 ... 9638380545

Interviewed:
Dan Chemotti
Peter Milliman
Mike Murphy
Shawn Nadelen
Greg Raymond
Seth Tierney

"Finalists":
Nadelen
Chemotti
"One or two others"

Mostly jibes with what I've been hearing

Both Nads and Chemotti would be superb hires. As long as Chemotti doesn't leave for Duke in 3 years when Dano calls it quits

If Hopkins does get Nadelen, heck even if they get Chemotti- they're both fantastic hires IMO. Have consistently done great things with their programs in a relatively short time.

I believe Hopkins will have a bounce back for 2021. Maybe a couple rough edges to smooth out - but i believe the cupboard left by Petro will be utilized and coached effectively by these finalists for the next couple years

[44WeWantMore]

Admission standards were raised and it became far more difficult to get in players than anytime in the past.

Not sure they qualify as all-everything, but there were limits:

According to a friend Bob Benson complained often about not getting Rambo and Heacock in.

viewtopic.php?p=137566#p137566

And I do not find it difficult to believe that those limits are tightening under RD.

Here's how it looks from the outside; please feel free to correct me if any of this is wrong. In all the following I'm talking about recruiting at Hopkins going back to roughly 2011, which would appear to coincide both with the period of "peak early recruiting" and with the timespan people have in mind when they talk about top administration tightening limits.

Had to chuckle at notion that Benson was complaining about not getting Rambo and Heacock in...after all Bobby got in!

I'd be very surprised to learn that those two were actually inadmissible at Hopkins as lax recruits. Seems far more likely that they simply chose a different school...now, that might have been because they believed Hopkins would be a more difficult academic environment or it may have been because of other factors.

The comment about #38 and certainly others over the years is true. Plenty of guys who could have cut it, indeed excelled, at Ivies, have been in the program. But let's be serious, the range has long been very wide. There's been no AI target ala the Ivies that Hop needs to hit each year. Very different with the DIII programs at Hopkins, their targets are quite tough and have grown way tougher recently.

Where I think it's fair to say that 'standards' are higher is that there's less latitude in the actual academic experience for youngsters without the skills and motivation to cut it academically. Still paths through it, but not the same as yesteryear

But the idea that Hopkins' "slide" was due to an inability to get recruits through Admissions really doesn't make sense.

MD76, too many gratuitous kicks at JHU. Where do you get your information? Were you the Director of Admissions? Maybe all Baltimore "cocktail party talk". Where do you get your info that makes you "chuckle". Your attitude is a little too pretentious.
The Ivy League cuts "corners" to get athletes admitted. How did Yale's hockey team get all the players to win the NC a number of years ago? I hear they all had perfect scores on the ACTs and SATs. Same with Brown's hockey team a few years ago. Of course Cornell is famous for making sure all their Hockey players meet Rhode Scholarship standards. Harvard? Hockey of course and their basketball team? Hire the former Indiana Coach, and a few years later, presto. Harvard has high caliber players. Just by chance? Or was there an understanding when the Coach was hired?

Lacrosse was and is a minor "preppy" sport played for the most part by children of the Middle Class. It has grown, but the number of Div. 1 schools playing the sport has grown slowly. Reasons? Title lX. not revenue producing, and its expense. Big football schools are not expanding into lacrosse (Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers and Maryland have played for decades). Mainly because of Title lX. That is one reason why the Ivy League and JHU can continue to be competitive in Lacrosse..

A friend, who was in executive recruiting, told me "When people who are in their 40s, 50s, 60s, etc want to tell you where they went to college, it is probably because they didn't accomplish much of note the rest of their lives".

JHU is an excellent academic institution, with an accomplished student body who are happy with their undergraduate experience. 80% of the undergraduates go on to graduate school. No pretentious "chuckles" or gratuitous kicks are acceptable here.

We have a great lacrosse tradition, and I am confident that it will be great again. The AD and Alanna are extremely competent and both have lacrosse backgrounds. This search will be extensive and thorough. We will be OK.

Coach Pietramala deserves to move on "gracefully". The lacrosse coach community will rally and say properly nice things about him. But change is sometimes good: like a shot of adrenaline for both parties. It was getting "stale". Time to move on.

I apologize MD76 if I got too pointed, BUT I defend my alma mater.

Yikes, I actually root for Hopkins, too.
My post must have either been misunderstood or struck a raw nerve.

I chuckled at Benson in particular. Let's just say he wouldn't have been on that list that includes #38.
Yeah, I guess that was gratuitous. I apologize.

I'm involved at Hopkins, guest lecturer, sole non-alum on a board in the Whiting School. Interface with both undergrads and grads. Bunch of buddies went to Hopkins, several lax players, next door neighbor and friend is one of the all-time Hop lax greats, and on and on.

But it's not my alma mater, so I respect your desire to speak for Hopkins.

But I'm also quite sure I know a heck of a lot more about Ivy admissions than you do apparently. I serve on my alma mater's lacrosse friends board, only hiatus was when my son chose to play at another Ivy. I know the #'s, the range, the latitude that can be given, the #'s for different sports, etc, etc. And of course there's a range for athletes. No kidding. But the target requirements are very real and enforced by the League and the Presidents.

Yes, it's not the same as for Big 10 Hopkins lax and that's entirely ok by me. That said, I would agree with posters who think there's going to be continued pressure in this area going forward. The DIII sports have had a big change in their targets. One of my friends is Hopkins' winningest coach and I've had the pleasure to meet a number of sports' coaches. It's challenging. Yet, they do remarkably well with it.

I quite agree about Title XI's impact on the number of D1 men's programs, but I don't agree that JHU and the Ivies are doomed to second class position ala football, at least not until big, big money intrudes. I hope that's never. But I'm already a dinosaur, so whaddya gonna do?

Seriously, no offense was intended.

And BTW, I hope and expect that there will be a day when Petro is honored very enthusiastically by Hopkins fans. Huge part of the history.

My dad was good friends with Bob Scott, so he was my vision of an iconic Hopkins coach, but each generation of little kids has had theirs.

People say "Everybody forgets exactly what you said, but nobody forgets exactly how you made them feel." Chic was already coaching, but Scotty was omnipresent, and he always made this non-star at an Olympic sport feel like a valued part of JHU Athletics.

Off-topic, but Steve Muller had that gift also.

[MDlaxfan76]

nicely said

[MDlaxfan76]

I went to the Bob Scott Lacrosse Camp each year and was/am the proud owner of a signed first edition copy of Lacrosse: Technique and Tradition.

Budnitz was another my pop's great pals...many stories.

I made sure that my son went to Dave's camps at Hopkins and he became a Junior Jay at at age 6! Always was impressed by the way Dave interacted with the youngsters and how his players did as well.

[jhu06]

xanders has more. I guess it was leak day at homewood. Only new stuff was players wanted Marr who hasn't been contacted and shay was. the army coach pulled himself out of consideration.
https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/ ... cted/56324

chemotti/nadelen are interesting combos. A program outsider and a former player. Says a lot about the improvement of the loyola/towson programs over the last decade that their guys are finalists. Some of you who are smart can tell us what staffs they'd bring with and which of our current guys/future incoming guys would/would not fit and who they could bring with them as transfers. As of right now we need a first midfield, 3 close d, 3 ssdms, 3 lsms, and 2 goalies for next year.

Quint's spent almost as much time at hopkins lacrosse games as unnamed superfan and unlike superfan actually played the game and at a high level to boot and to write on the program/petro and not discuss the problems he hinted at in the interview w/lsn and on air for years was not good. Lacrosse is a boys club to the media that cover it, we get it.

[jrn19]

xanders has more. I guess it was leak day at homewood. Only new stuff was players wanted Marr who hasn't been contacted and shay was. the army coach pulled himself out of consideration.
https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/ ... cted/56324

chemotti/nadelen are interesting combos. A program outsider and a former player. Says a lot about the improvement of the loyola/towson programs over the last decade that their guys are finalists. Some of you who are smart can tell us what staffs they'd bring with and which of our current guys/future incoming guys would/would not fit and who they could bring with them as transfers. As of right now we need a first midfield, 3 close d, 3 ssdms, 3 lsms, and 2 goalies for next year.

Quint's spent almost as much time at hopkins lacrosse games as unnamed superfan and unlike superfan actually played the game and at a high level to boot and to write on the program/petro and not discuss the problems he hinted at in the interview w/lsn and on air for years was not good. Lacrosse is a boys club to the media that cover it, we get it.

Xanders report is basically boys club level of reporting. Put a little bit out there but not enough to actually report on anything and protects the coaches he’s probably buddy-buddy with

[DocBarrister]

Some more color from Chris Jastrzembski:

https://twitter.com/Chris_Jast/status/1 ... 9638380545

Interviewed:
Dan Chemotti
Peter Milliman
Mike Murphy
Shawn Nadelen
Greg Raymond
Seth Tierney

"Finalists":
Nadelen
Chemotti
"One or two others"

Mostly jibes with what I've been hearing

Both Nads and Chemotti would be superb hires. As long as Chemotti doesn't leave for Duke in 3 years when Dano calls it quits

My complete wild-swing guess? Finalists: Nadelen, Chemotti, AND Murphy.

My wager: Murphy.

Frankly, all three would be a great catch for Hopkins. Would be an honor to have any one of them.

DocBarrister

[Farfromgeneva]

coach T at hofstra had the hops recruits for the last 5 yrs where would they be? his x's and 0's are as good as anyones

He coaches on Long Island where some of the best players in the entire country are. Feel like he should be able to land at least one or two of them

How does the CAA do, out of conference? Generally?

Hopkins regularly travels to the island for a regular season games. Amherst, MA too

When is the last time Blue Jays landed top LI talent? Crawley? 7 years ago?

Hopkins literally landed a Top 70 recruit out of Long Island in this recruiting class.

Also, for “how does the CAA do out of conference”, Towson made a Final Four and QF in the last 5 years; UMass beat Ohio State and Yale this year, Yale 3 years ago, went 15-1 back in 2012 and made the NCAA Tournament in 2018. Drexel made the QF’s in 2014. There’s lots of cases of CAA teams doing really well; if I go further back to 06 and 07 they put teams in the Final Four those two years. The CAA does well. Hofstra doesn’t.

I always though Dano failed in 06 not getting past UMass. Sure Doc Schneider was on an incredible run. Best goalie I’ve seen in the last 20yrs IMO, Drew Adams was close too. And they had a stud offensive player, can’t recall if it was Zywicki or Sean (Morrison?) as well as a Reed (Jake or Jack I’m getting old) so a great player in each section of the field but that was a talented Hofstra squad. Whoever their star offensive player was, maybe Shanahan, was excellent at the dive back when it was fairly common and before made illegal.

[Farfromgeneva]

Epstein also call all recruits saying he is not going anywhere and he hopes all 2020 honor their commitments. He is looking forward to getting 2020's on campus and on the field.

That’s leadership. Way to go, Joey!

Yep. That young man is a leader.

DocBarrister

Has any player been a 3 time captain for Hopkins (with extra eligibility...Maybe he gets a 4th)?

Greg Raymond—the only three time captain

More impressively as a long stick.

[DocBarrister]

Epstein also call all recruits saying he is not going anywhere and he hopes all 2020 honor their commitments. He is looking forward to getting 2020's on campus and on the field.

That’s leadership. Way to go, Joey!

Yep. That young man is a leader.

DocBarrister

Has any player been a 3 time captain for Hopkins (with extra eligibility...Maybe he gets a 4th)?

Greg Raymond—the only three time captain

More impressively as a long stick.

Excellent point, FFG.

DocBarrister

[Wheels]

xanders has more. I guess it was leak day at homewood. Only new stuff was players wanted Marr who hasn't been contacted and shay was. the army coach pulled himself out of consideration.
https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/ ... cted/56324

chemotti/nadelen are interesting combos. A program outsider and a former player. Says a lot about the improvement of the loyola/towson programs over the last decade that their guys are finalists. Some of you who are smart can tell us what staffs they'd bring with and which of our current guys/future incoming guys would/would not fit and who they could bring with them as transfers. As of right now we need a first midfield, 3 close d, 3 ssdms, 3 lsms, and 2 goalies for next year.

Quint's spent almost as much time at hopkins lacrosse games as unnamed superfan and unlike superfan actually played the game and at a high level to boot and to write on the program/petro and not discuss the problems he hinted at in the interview w/lsn and on air for years was not good. Lacrosse is a boys club to the media that cover it, we get it.

Did a preview for another platform for the UR-MD game earlier this season (and for last season, too). UR's offense this year was more midfield-based than last year. Lots of pairs sets with midfielders on the mid-wings to get them to the middle where defenders had to make tough slide-no slide decisions. They had 3 big, strong 1st line midfielders. Last year, they were more attack based and had 2 elite attackmen. One graduated and the other (Lanchbury) is a slick Canadian midfielder. On defense, Chemotti will throw in a really cool zone that looks like a basketball match-up zone. It will look like man but is actually a zone. Within a single possession, they'll press way out with their defensemen but then fall back into a zone or less aggressive man. Pretty cool defensive packages. They'll jump into 10-man rides that have different looks but will also sit way back in a soft ride that clogs lanes. They did all of this in their season opening game, which says a ton about Chemotti's ability to prep his teams to throw multiple looks on defense and in the ride game.

How does this fit Hop's returners? I wouldn't worry about that. Chemotti tweaks his game plans to fit his players. Switching from an attack heavy to midfield heavy offense from last to this year shows that. Lots of defensive looks shows that. A guy like Zinn would thrive in Chemotti's midfield-oriented offense, but Epstein would shine in his attack-oriented offense. UR didn't have big SSDMs, so Chemotti is used to that. That multiple defense can slow down any offense. He's a really good coach. What he's done at UR is high level for a still pretty new program.

[youthathletics]

Still going with Cassese until he’s ruled out. Fits the academic acumen of a top academic school from the PL, one of the few coaches with a player centric mentor on staff, academic navigation experience in recruiting, only negative..loves Bethlehem, but JHU provides a solid 5-7 years of stability.