Tenacious D?
I may piss a lot of people off with this piece but it needs to be stated. Now that my season is over and I can be a fan again, I enjoyed what I think is probably the greatest lacrosse weekend of the year in terms of total games aired. Obviously, you can argue that memorial day weekend could be the best lacrosse weekend of the year in terms of competitiveness but I like the first round of the NCAA tournament, getting 8 hours of lacrosse a day for 2 straight days (not even counting D3 games as well that I usually have streaming simultaneously on my phone). And as I take a break from watching strictly D3 games for the last 3 months, I can turn my attention to the DI games aired on ESPN+ and I noticed something this weekend that I can’t help but point out. Where is the defense being played at the Division I level?
Did I piss anyone off yet? Am I gonna get canceled for such a bold claim? I will expand upon this, as not to go on a tirade without at least defending my position. It’s not that I think Division I lacrosse doesn’t play defense, or even plays bad defense necessarily. I just see time after time teams that play mostly a man to man scheme refuse to slide to the opposition and as a defensive minded coach, I find it incredibly frustrating.
Ok what am I talking about? I just said it. Teams don’t slide. Like at all. I watched a lot of games this weekend. Saw it a lot in the Hopkins game, UVA, Duke, Denver, pretty much almost every game. And I am not talking about teams are not sliding because their defenders aren’t getting beat. It’s not like the defensemen are constantly dominating their one on one matchups every time. I am talking about teams flying down the allies, just blowing by their matchups, and no one sliding. Saw some players in the Georgetown game, literally with their backs turned while their short sticks were getting swept over the top. So what’s the deal? Where’s the help in the man to man defense?
So this is the time in the article where I play devil’s advocate to myself, in part to provide some insight and context, and in part as to not totally alienate what little audience I have out there in blog land. It isn’t just like all the DI defensive players are out there saying “hey I got my man, you guard yours, good luck.” I know that some guys are going to be trusted with the top matchups, and will be left on an island more or less. It’s incredibly difficult to play defense at the college level. No coach is going into any of these games without being completely prepared and ready to deploy a winning game plan. There are a lot of factors that are taken into consideration. If a team has more of a ‘matchup’ defensive identity, that could be a viable strategy. If you are going up against players like Joey Spallina, Brennan O’Neill, and Connor Shellenberger, sliding might not be the best game plan. If you show to their face, these guys (among others) are elite passers that can see through the defense, and pick them a part. You may inadvertently create offense for the other team by over sliding. It also depends on how teams are structured. Most teams have their best offensive weapons at attack. Maybe you put your two short sticks on the other teams 5th and 6th best offensive threats and trust those matchups. I can tell you as a coach who likes playing the odds, if I can do everything to stop the other team’s top 3 or 4 players, you may have to allow the idea of giving something up to come forth in your brain. What am I willing to give up in order to stop the other team’s top guys? If the other teams 5th and 6th best players both have a few goals apiece, is that going to be enough for them to win the game? Can we live with that? Is it worth not sliding off the other team’s # 1 in order to find out? That’s the game you play as a coach and I know these guys are going in with a game plan they feel will give them the best chance of success.
And some of it is just team identity. They just have more trust in their defensive scheme and their athletes. Whether it’s their approaches, how they hedge or show, and how much room the give up/concede, some teams are really good at not sliding. A couple off the top of my head are Army and Denver. They are two programs that will trust matchups in win more times than not. Especially on the inverts. These 2 teams are notorious for looking to not send aggressive help to their short sticks. Instead they will funnel players to spots on the field, they believe will allow their goalie the greatest odds of saving the ball. It’s all about analytics. And I can respect that. If you have an absolute stud short stick that can lock down other team’s first line middies, then I wouldn’t slide to him either.
Ok back to the topic. Now that I was able to at least defend the coaches decision making portion of it, it is still frustrating to know that there is a system in place to allow help that is being underutilized. In both Duke and UVA’s first round wins, I saw almost the same play. One of their poles just got straight up beat coming up from below GLE, climbing the hash marks, and taking top side. Both the UVA and Duke poles respectively rode hips to a point and then before deciding to throw the big slap/lift combo to disrupt the shooter, they went for the over the head trail check. Both got beat to the middle and were subsequently scored on. These plays kill me. I saw # 6 for Lehigh blow by his LSM matchup multiple times against Hopkins without so much as a hedge. It isn’t the one on one defense that is frustrating (except for the over the head checks). I’ll say it again, one on one defense is hard man! These offensive guys playing now are really good, way better than when I played that’s for sure. It’s just plain hard to guard a guy one on one. It just baffles me that when a guy runs right into the middle of the field without getting touched, I just can’t help but think, “yo, someone just slide!” Just have a hot guy and a two slide. And you might say, “hey idiot, the 3 teams you just mentioned (Hopkins, Duke, UVA) all won their first round games so whatever they are doing must be working.” Ok I’ll give you that. I could argue back that they also played 3 of the weaker teams in the field in terms of their overall record/RPI/SOS/etc, and still gave up double digits to them (except Duke) but I won’t. However, I will say this. there were only 4 teams this weekend that were able to hold their opponents to single digit margins, and two of those teams play an aggressive man to man defensive scheme that require frequent sliding and recovering. Those teams are Maryland (who may have had the best defensive performance of the tournament so far) and Notre Dame. I won’t lie to you, I am a fan of the way they play. Matchups aren’t as important to them, because their scheme relies on sliding and recovering, on-ball pressure, making the other team have to beat you with skill over brute athleticism, and the best principle of all, providing help to your on-ball teammate. To me, this is the style that I love, but again it’s the principle of man to man defense. You have to be able to send help and you have to recover fast. I believe this is the best version of man to man defense because not only are you challenging the other team to have to read what you are doing, vs just running by their defender, but to me requires a greater skill set and higher level of IQ to master. You have to be good at defending in all areas of the field, not just one. You have to understand all spots in the defense. And above all, you have to be an elite communicator for it all to work. And if you can master it, it will allow you to disrupt the other team’s offense in a way that will give your team a high chance of success. Don’t believe me? Think just matching up based on athleticism and body composition is the way to go? Click the YouTube link below. Time marker 2minutes and 35 seconds. You’ll see why I favor having help ready at all times.
KASEY BURST
The HC at the University of Dubuque, Kasey brings all things college lacrosse to your inbox.