Upsets, momentum, game-swings...

[Riss]

After a crazy sprink break trip in which FSU was upset by the Gophers, who lost to Gtech and Auburn a few days before, I wanted to start a discussion on the role of intensity and overall "bringing it" has had this year. I feel Auburn for the most part wanted it more than we did for the majority of that game and were able to pull out a great win (6-5). A few days later, feeling rather demoralized, we were able to beat an excellent FSU team in OT. We brought a lot of intensity to GBs, playing body position defense and possessing the ball and with some luck were able to win in OT. The contrast in our team emotions b/w the two games couldnt have been greater. Looking at the Michigan/Arizona/BYU situation and some other "discrepancies," and since we're not covered on sportscenter, I was wondering if some other teams wanted to comment on how their level of intensity has effected them so far.

[Kyle Berggren]

It's a plague for some teams. We lost to LInfield because we didn't have that spark, although the game wasn't out of reach (11-7), we just didn't have it. Against UVSC, I don't know if it was the drive or what, but we were not ourselves, and UVSC couldn't help but score, 17-4. The next day we played pretty well, especially considering the people we were missing, and lost a close game to a good Boise St. team. The intensity was there, the guys rallied together, but we couldn't really put it together on Offense. Same story against Western Washington, but our goalie kept us in it, and we got a spark early enough to come back for the win. At the same time, we controlled the tempo against a very good PLU team earlier in the season, and pulled it out.

I think it has to do with leadership. I played on a team that would do anything to win a game. We scrapped for every victory we got. Every game, someone would put the team on their back, and carry us to victory. Some days it would be me, other days my co-coach. The team rallied around one or two players, do everything we could to make those players better, and play the role needed that day. I haven't seen too many teams that are lead well on the field, not step up to the plate. Last season I was very fortunate to have a player named Liam Millhiser, and he didn't have to say a word to anyone to lead. He just did it with his hustle on O and D. I think every team needs at least one leader at each position. Someone has to be the man everyone leans on. I'm actually pretty sure, that the team oriented offense I put in this year, may have hampered our leadership early on. The players wanted someone to lead, and it simply did not allow for it very easily.

[beckner11]

Our team is going to some of the same trouble, with trying to get the "spark". After finishing the season #1 in the nation at B, you'd think that we had something to prove in A and would come ready to play in every game. Unfortunately this hasn't been the case. We did lose 7 guys, including our 2 best defenders....1 to our schools NCAA division 1 football team (he was the best 1-on1 defender I have EVER seen...also made our school's division 1 baseball team but elected not to play) and the other to new NCAA division 1 Robert Morris lacrosse program. Those 2 were silent leaders who could single handedly control games. We are sitting at an even 3-3 record, however if we had the spark we should legitamately be 5-1. The one game we actuallly came to play we gave #15 Lindenwood a very good game, just didn't have the #'s that they did and wore down towards the end. We're filled with freshman right now who are still trying to adjust to the game play style, but they have the talent. Too bad intensity isn't something that can be taught!