UMD 8, BYU 4 (Fri. 3/21) FINAL
55 posts
• Page 4 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
-
umdulax1 - Premium
- Posts: 338
- Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 1:55 pm
- Location: Duluth, MN
Sloppy game, I don't think I ever watched a BYU game where the ball hit the ground that much and many times they were unforced errors. Soft defensive play around the crease too. They look like they need someone to take on a leadership role. Why isn't Monteath on the team this year? If UMD can learn to clear consistently and take care of the ball between the boxes they will be very dangerous in Dallas.
SLN
-
OldRamAlum83 - Rookie
- Posts: 71
- Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:41 pm
- Location: TX
The thing that stuck out for me is that BYU seemed to play the game with no passion....no sense of urgency. UMD made a number of unforced errors just inviting BYU to take control and they never seized the opportunity. Of course, some of that is due to UMD's stellar defense, but it still seemed that BYU approached the game like they were just waiting for their opponent to fold.
-
CATLAX MAN - Premium
- Posts: 2175
- Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 6:11 pm
- Location: San Francisco, CA
I thought UMD played great defense, but just couldn't understand their clears or lack there of, maybe they had never seen the BYU ride package before but that was tough to watch. They had plenty of time and would just Gilman for no reason.
They definately had far more chances even with the poor clearing, and unforced errors. The UMD ride was much better in the second half, and gave BYU some trouble.
They definately had far more chances even with the poor clearing, and unforced errors. The UMD ride was much better in the second half, and gave BYU some trouble.
Ham and Eggs, a days work for a chicken. A lifes work for a pig.
-
BB - Veteran
- Posts: 136
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 9:29 am
CATLAX MAN wrote:The thing that stuck out for me is that BYU seemed to play the game with no passion....
I've only seen them twice this year, but I couldn't agree more...the biggest problem with losing Harris and Monteath from last year is not losing the talent, but losing the emotion/passion.
BYU '96
Texas A&M '02
Texas A&M '02
-
byualum - Premium
- Posts: 921
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 6:23 pm
- Location: Parker, CO
the lax wrote:Interesting game. If I were BYU I'd have to believe we gave that game away and if I were UMD I'd have to believe we should have won by more.
Great point!
BYU's ride is very good, they would double the middy carrying the ball in the box while locking the adjacents. This made it very difficult for Duluth to get in their settled offense.
I thought it was a great game, a little sloppy, but very physical. You could tell Duluth wanted the game more.
Oh, and I'll take that coke...
- Woda
- Rookie
- Posts: 58
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 5:10 pm
LacrosseHub Recap: BYU v. Minnesota-Duluth, Friday, March 21
The Minnesota-Duluth Bulldogs won a MCLA battle last night against BYU, beating the Cougars 8-6.
BYU's offense was slowed down against Minnesota-Duluth. The low goal production was due to the strong performance of M-D's defensive unit and the general sloppiness of BYU's offense.
M-D's defense played an intelligent and physical game. They were always in good defensive position and had a stick on the hands of BYU's attack unit. They communicated well and had help with early slides against Manning, Heir and Grow. M-D also cleared the crease area with big hits.
BYU's offense looked very sloppy throughout the game. Against M-D, they missed scoring opportunities around the crease and EMO. It looked like they lacked leadership and fortitude. Throughout the second half, they were desperate and tried to force passes to the crease or just threw the ball away. (Grow has great vision but forced many passes) It was frustrating to watch because you know the offense is so talented, but they threw the game away with costly errors.
The Minnesota-Duluth offense also deserves credit for the low score. They were disciplined and patient with the ball. They had cutters moving off ball and gave the BYU defenders lots to think about. Many times, M-D capitalized on back cuts and finding open men on the backside. Minnesota-Duluth players, Pitzl and Nelson, did a good job picking the right time to dodge and forced early slides. BYU's defense had a difficult time with slide packages. It looked like they were not communicating on the field.
Both goalies played stellar games. Kikimoto and Launert made many big saves and pushed the ball back up the field. If either goalie had a bad game, the score would have been much different. Both showed why they are the top goalies in the MCLA.
BYU's Coach Lamb had his team double outside the box anytime a clearing midfielder or LSM brought the ball over the midfield line. I think that this strategy works well with BYU's speed and depth, but they make themselves vulnerable to unsettled situations. Teams that have solid defensive midfielders, LSMs, and active attackmen will push the ball and capitalize in transition and broken opportunities.
I am sure BYU will bounce back and be a contender come playoff time. They need to limit their errors on offense and hope their defense gels. Where will this win place Minnesota-Duluth in the polls?
BYU's offense was slowed down against Minnesota-Duluth. The low goal production was due to the strong performance of M-D's defensive unit and the general sloppiness of BYU's offense.
M-D's defense played an intelligent and physical game. They were always in good defensive position and had a stick on the hands of BYU's attack unit. They communicated well and had help with early slides against Manning, Heir and Grow. M-D also cleared the crease area with big hits.
BYU's offense looked very sloppy throughout the game. Against M-D, they missed scoring opportunities around the crease and EMO. It looked like they lacked leadership and fortitude. Throughout the second half, they were desperate and tried to force passes to the crease or just threw the ball away. (Grow has great vision but forced many passes) It was frustrating to watch because you know the offense is so talented, but they threw the game away with costly errors.
The Minnesota-Duluth offense also deserves credit for the low score. They were disciplined and patient with the ball. They had cutters moving off ball and gave the BYU defenders lots to think about. Many times, M-D capitalized on back cuts and finding open men on the backside. Minnesota-Duluth players, Pitzl and Nelson, did a good job picking the right time to dodge and forced early slides. BYU's defense had a difficult time with slide packages. It looked like they were not communicating on the field.
Both goalies played stellar games. Kikimoto and Launert made many big saves and pushed the ball back up the field. If either goalie had a bad game, the score would have been much different. Both showed why they are the top goalies in the MCLA.
BYU's Coach Lamb had his team double outside the box anytime a clearing midfielder or LSM brought the ball over the midfield line. I think that this strategy works well with BYU's speed and depth, but they make themselves vulnerable to unsettled situations. Teams that have solid defensive midfielders, LSMs, and active attackmen will push the ball and capitalize in transition and broken opportunities.
I am sure BYU will bounce back and be a contender come playoff time. They need to limit their errors on offense and hope their defense gels. Where will this win place Minnesota-Duluth in the polls?
- LacrosseHub
- Water Boy
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 7:30 pm
55 posts
• Page 4 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
Return to Live Action Game Reports
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests