Virginia Tech

[Matnum PI]

Lacrosse program signs seven

The Virginia Tech lacrosse program welcomed seven new members in their 2021 class, beginning with National Signing Day on Wednesday November 11 and continuing into this past week. It is a decorated group of talented athletes that Head Coach John Sung is ecstatic about having the opportunity to have join the program.

“Our staff with Coach Shimp and Coach Gebhard did a really great job of evaluating the talent and finding the kids who fit into what we are trying to do and who all really wanted to be Hokies,” Sung said of the recruiting period. “Some of the highlights of the 2021 class is that we have more Under Armour All-Americans in this class than we have ever had, with multiple All-Americans and some of them have earned that two or three times.”

Sung continued talking about the mentality of the young women who signed.

“This is a class of winners, they are all from top prep schools from across the country and their goal is to compete for ACC and NCAA championships,” he said. “I think this class will definitely usher in the next phase of lacrosse at Virginia Tech because it is our second cycle of recruits here and this class has always seen Virginia Tech as a top 20 program.

“This is the first time that every member of the class committed after September 1 of their junior year which was big for us,” Sung said of the new recruiting calendar.

Below is a look at each signee: [more]

[Matnum PI]

2021 Schedule: https://hokiesports.com/news/2021/1/19/ ... se-program

[PANJlacrosse]

I was a big fan of Kayla Frank when she was at Moorestown (NJ) high school, where she was a 2 time All American. I got to watch Virginia Tech play online a few times last year and she had a very strong freshman year in the abbreviated season. US Lacrosse had her touted as one of the Top Returners to the Hokies this year: "One of the top freshmen in the nation, Frank led the Hokies in points (45) and assists (22). She also had 15 ground balls and 10 caused turnovers." https://www.uslaxmagazine.com/college/w ... tech-women

A friend's son attending Virginia Tech said Frank has left the team. She is no longer listed on the roster. While I do not know the reason why she left, there are too many red flags with the HC and stories about his treatment of players in past years. I hope that Frank ends up at program that is a better fit and I look forward to seeing her play again.

[Dr. Tact]

I was a big fan of Kayla Frank when she was at Moorestown (NJ) high school, where she was a 2 time All American. I got to watch Virginia Tech play online a few times last year and she had a very strong freshman year in the abbreviated season. US Lacrosse had her touted as one of the Top Returners to the Hokies this year: "One of the top freshmen in the nation, Frank led the Hokies in points (45) and assists (22). She also had 15 ground balls and 10 caused turnovers." https://www.uslaxmagazine.com/college/w ... tech-women

A friend's son attending Virginia Tech said Frank has left the team. She is no longer listed on the roster. While I do not know the reason why she left, there are too many red flags with the HC and stories about his treatment of players in past years. I hope that Frank ends up at program that is a better fit and I look forward to seeing her play again.

Fan of certain players on that team, not a fan of their coach

[Lax247]

I was a big fan of Kayla Frank when she was at Moorestown (NJ) high school, where she was a 2 time All American. I got to watch Virginia Tech play online a few times last year and she had a very strong freshman year in the abbreviated season. US Lacrosse had her touted as one of the Top Returners to the Hokies this year: "One of the top freshmen in the nation, Frank led the Hokies in points (45) and assists (22). She also had 15 ground balls and 10 caused turnovers." https://www.uslaxmagazine.com/college/w ... tech-women

A friend's son attending Virginia Tech said Frank has left the team. She is no longer listed on the roster. While I do not know the reason why she left, there are too many red flags with the HC and stories about his treatment of players in past years. I hope that Frank ends up at program that is a better fit and I look forward to seeing her play again.

Fan of certain players on that team, not a fan of their coach

wow I wonder where she will end up.

[Cletus]

Regarding the game vs Duke yesterday, it was frustrating at times watching the Hokies on attack. Seems like they hadn't given much thought to strategy apart from give it to Petty and see if she can dodge her way to the goal. Or dish it off to Emma and let her try, or let the rookie #22 dodge and cradle into the 8 meter, be suffocated by Duke's swarming slides, find no one to pass to, (not sure she was even looking) and then cradle her way back outside the 12 and pass it to someone else to have a go at 1 on 1. No passing, no set plays, just try to dodge to the cage. I don't care how talented one is, they weren't going to go 1 on 1 yesterday with the way Duke was defending. I'll freely admit, I'm seeing this from a fan's perspective. I don't know strategy and I've never coached the way some of you have. (I'm hoping you'll weigh in Mr. seacoaster, and anyone else who knows a thing or three about strategy.)

[8meterPA]

They definitely missed KF, she is a special player

[seacoaster]

I didn't watch this game, but my guess is that 8MPA is right: VTech missed Frank, and Duke probably figured VT out in the first half. Looks like Duke held Tech to 2 goals in the second half? Ouch.

Was Duke in man to man? Against a decent man to man defense, which slides to help, you need (1) players who can draw slides (beat their defender), (2) players who can pass well under pressure, and (3) players who understand how to follow the slide into a slot to catch and shoot. Cletus's description suggests that there was a breakdown between (1) and (2) -- or Duke just played very good defense with well timed help.

[Bart]

I didn't watch this game, but my guess is that 8MPA is right: VTech missed Frank, and Duke probably figured VT out in the first half. Looks like Duke held Tech to 2 goals in the second half? Ouch.

Was Duke in man to man? Against a decent man to man defense, which slides to help, you need (1) players who can draw slides (beat their defender), (2) players who can pass well under pressure, and (3) players who understand how to follow the slide into a slot to catch and shoot. Cletus's description suggests that there was a breakdown between (1) and (2) -- or Duke just played very good defense with well timed help.

Duke played man all game. In the first part they did have a bit of trouble with the on ball pick up top and switched. After they figured that out, and got a different goalie in, they completely shut down the unimaginative offensive sets run by VT. I thought Duke did a great job up top with their communication and switching up top.

[seacoaster]

I didn't watch this game, but my guess is that 8MPA is right: VTech missed Frank, and Duke probably figured VT out in the first half. Looks like Duke held Tech to 2 goals in the second half? Ouch.

Was Duke in man to man? Against a decent man to man defense, which slides to help, you need (1) players who can draw slides (beat their defender), (2) players who can pass well under pressure, and (3) players who understand how to follow the slide into a slot to catch and shoot. Cletus's description suggests that there was a breakdown between (1) and (2) -- or Duke just played very good defense with well timed help.

Duke played man all game. In the first part they did have a bit of trouble with the on ball pick up top and switched. After they figured that out, and got a different goalie in, they completely shut down the unimaginative offensive sets run by VT. I thought Duke did a great job up top with their communication and switching up top.

Thanks Bart.

[Bart]

I didn't watch this game, but my guess is that 8MPA is right: VTech missed Frank, and Duke probably figured VT out in the first half. Looks like Duke held Tech to 2 goals in the second half? Ouch.

Was Duke in man to man? Against a decent man to man defense, which slides to help, you need (1) players who can draw slides (beat their defender), (2) players who can pass well under pressure, and (3) players who understand how to follow the slide into a slot to catch and shoot. Cletus's description suggests that there was a breakdown between (1) and (2) -- or Duke just played very good defense with well timed help.

Duke played man all game. In the first part they did have a bit of trouble with the on ball pick up top and switched. After they figured that out, and got a different goalie in, they completely shut down the unimaginative offensive sets run by VT. I thought Duke did a great job up top with their communication and switching up top.

Thanks Bart.

I also thought VT could improve on their off ball movement and occupying adjacent defenders. There was some but I thought it was more window dressing and I do not know how much purpose there was to it. VT only had 2 assists. I would imagine they will be better in the offensive end the next go around.

[laxagainsthumanity]

VT scored 5 goals in the first 15 minutes, and 3(!) in the last 45(!). Why? Because the Duke defense figured out how to play the weave and dodges up top and VT didn't throw anything new at them. I was surprised how un-dynamic the Hokies attack was.

[laxagainsthumanity]

On a more positive note, VT did a great job neutralizing Jenner on the draw. DCs were tied at 11 apiece, and VT was extremely successful in making them into 50/50s - Jenner came away with four, only one or two of which were clean wins.

[8meterPA]

VT scored 5 goals in the first 15 minutes, and 3(!) in the last 45(!). Why? Because the Duke defense figured out how to play the weave and dodges up top and VT didn't throw anything new at them. I was surprised how un-dynamic the Hokies attack was.

Yes, but as mentioned by someone else - the goalie switch may have made the difference. The first goalie let in a number of what I thought were pretty easy goals. Replacement goalie only allowed 1.

[laxagainsthumanity]

Yes, but as mentioned by someone else - the goalie switch may have made the difference. The first goalie let in a number of what I thought were pretty easy goals. Replacement goalie only allowed 1.

Sure, the first goalie had a tough day, the second goalie played great. But VT was also taking much better shots prior to the goalie change. The goalie alone doesn't slow the rate of goals from 1 every 3 minutes to 1 every 15 minutes.

[Cletus]

What was the offense VT was running early in the Virginia game where they seemed to be successful? They had 3 players behind goal line extended and they were passing back and forth between the three and then hitting cutters going to cage. Why did they stop doing that? Why did it seem like they deteriorated into ball at the top of the fan 1 on 1 attempts to go to goal again, just like they did in the Duke game, and failing, just like they did in the Duke game. VT obviously has veteran talent along with exciting young talent. One example is first year attacker Whitney Liebler. The play-by-play announcer informed viewers during the game yesterday that Liebler left high school after her junior year and signed with VT. She passed over her senior year because of covid. But watching this young woman play, one would never know. She plays with aggression, confidence and poise.

On another note, one thing I couldn't help but be saddened by was watching the rover (I think they're referred to as?) running and running and chasing and chasing as the Hoos passed the ball around the perimeter. I saw no benefit to this, but what do I know. It just seemed like a principle that the coaching staff had decided on and there is no grey area. Black and white--when the opposition has the ball, we will pursue them relentlessly while they pass the ball around the perimeter. To what end? Disrupt their offense? I didn't witness that.

Anyway, that's my rant on some of the philosophies of VT. I think they could be better if they adjusted some of their strategies that sound good in theory, but don't translate to success in practice.

[LaxGuy17]

What was the offense VT was running early in the Virginia game where they seemed to be successful? They had 3 players behind goal line extended and they were passing back and forth between the three and then hitting cutters going to cage. Why did they stop doing that? Why did it seem like they deteriorated into ball at the top of the fan 1 on 1 attempts to go to goal again, just like they did in the Duke game, and failing, just like they did in the Duke game. VT obviously has veteran talent along with exciting young talent. One example is first year attacker Whitney Liebler. The play-by-play announcer informed viewers during the game yesterday that Liebler left high school after her junior year and signed with VT. She passed over her senior year because of covid. But watching this young woman play, one would never know. She plays with aggression, confidence and poise.

On another note, one thing I couldn't help but be saddened by was watching the rover (I think they're referred to as?) running and running and chasing and chasing as the Hoos passed the ball around the perimeter. I saw no benefit to this, but what do I know. It just seemed like a principle that the coaching staff had decided on and there is no grey area. Black and white--when the opposition has the ball, we will pursue them relentlessly while they pass the ball around the perimeter. To what end? Disrupt their offense? I didn't witness that.

Anyway, that's my rant on some of the philosophies of VT. I think they could be better if they adjusted some of their strategies that sound good in theory, but don't translate to success in practice.

I suspect VT was overloading behind the cage to keep the backer low, allowing time and space for cutters up top. UVA seemed to adjust by following the cutters deeper before passing off. At least that’s what it looked like. As far as the chaser on VT, I have yet to figure out what they see in that strategy except wearing out that poor #12 by the first half. The theory is put pressure on passers, but she almost never gets there before The ball is passed away. The result is a tired defender not pressuring anyone and an open cutter, which both Teams seemed to find rather easily.

[Cletus]

I suspect VT was overloading behind the cage to keep the backer low, allowing time and space for cutters up top. UVA seemed to adjust by following the cutters deeper before passing off. At least that’s what it looked like. As far as the chaser on VT, I have yet to figure out what they see in that strategy except wearing out that poor #12 by the first half. The theory is put pressure on passers, but she almost never gets there before The ball is passed away. The result is a tired defender not pressuring anyone and an open cutter, which both Teams seemed to find rather easily.

Thanks for the helpful feedback, LG.

[Brownlax]

What was the offense VT was running early in the Virginia game where they seemed to be successful? They had 3 players behind goal line extended and they were passing back and forth between the three and then hitting cutters going to cage. Why did they stop doing that? Why did it seem like they deteriorated into ball at the top of the fan 1 on 1 attempts to go to goal again, just like they did in the Duke game, and failing, just like they did in the Duke game. VT obviously has veteran talent along with exciting young talent. One example is first year attacker Whitney Liebler. The play-by-play announcer informed viewers during the game yesterday that Liebler left high school after her junior year and signed with VT. She passed over her senior year because of covid. But watching this young woman play, one would never know. She plays with aggression, confidence and poise.

On another note, one thing I couldn't help but be saddened by was watching the rover (I think they're referred to as?) running and running and chasing and chasing as the Hoos passed the ball around the perimeter. I saw no benefit to this, but what do I know. It just seemed like a principle that the coaching staff had decided on and there is no grey area. Black and white--when the opposition has the ball, we will pursue them relentlessly while they pass the ball around the perimeter. To what end? Disrupt their offense? I didn't witness that.

Anyway, that's my rant on some of the philosophies of VT. I think they could be better if they adjusted some of their strategies that sound good in theory, but don't translate to success in practice.

I suspect VT was overloading behind the cage to keep the backer low, allowing time and space for cutters up top. UVA seemed to adjust by following the cutters deeper before passing off. At least that’s what it looked like. As far as the chaser on VT, I have yet to figure out what they see in that strategy except wearing out that poor #12 by the first half. The theory is put pressure on passers, but she almost never gets there before The ball is passed away. The result is a tired defender not pressuring anyone and an open cutter, which both Teams seemed to find rather easily.

At the end of the game when they needed the ball back all they did was chase the ball with zero defense on the adjacents. I was dumbfounded and felt bad for the girl doing all the unnecessary running by herself while everyone else was packed in on defense.

[watcherinthewoods]

What was the offense VT was running early in the Virginia game where they seemed to be successful? They had 3 players behind goal line extended and they were passing back and forth between the three and then hitting cutters going to cage. Why did they stop doing that? Why did it seem like they deteriorated into ball at the top of the fan 1 on 1 attempts to go to goal again, just like they did in the Duke game, and failing, just like they did in the Duke game. VT obviously has veteran talent along with exciting young talent. One example is first year attacker Whitney Liebler. The play-by-play announcer informed viewers during the game yesterday that Liebler left high school after her junior year and signed with VT. She passed over her senior year because of covid. But watching this young woman play, one would never know. She plays with aggression, confidence and poise.

On another note, one thing I couldn't help but be saddened by was watching the rover (I think they're referred to as?) running and running and chasing and chasing as the Hoos passed the ball around the perimeter. I saw no benefit to this, but what do I know. It just seemed like a principle that the coaching staff had decided on and there is no grey area. Black and white--when the opposition has the ball, we will pursue them relentlessly while they pass the ball around the perimeter. To what end? Disrupt their offense? I didn't witness that.

Anyway, that's my rant on some of the philosophies of VT. I think they could be better if they adjusted some of their strategies that sound good in theory, but don't translate to success in practice.

I suspect VT was overloading behind the cage to keep the backer low, allowing time and space for cutters up top. UVA seemed to adjust by following the cutters deeper before passing off. At least that’s what it looked like. As far as the chaser on VT, I have yet to figure out what they see in that strategy except wearing out that poor #12 by the first half. The theory is put pressure on passers, but she almost never gets there before The ball is passed away. The result is a tired defender not pressuring anyone and an open cutter, which both Teams seemed to find rather easily.
[/quot

The momentum in this game changed when uva defense went from the backer they have been playing to date this season to man. VT was ready for the backer and they found the seams efficiently early, but they could not adjust to the switch. It was pretty obvious and it was disappointing that the broadcast crew could not point this out.