Wednesday, May 22nd, 2013
Enough is enough already. Division I lacrosse, supposedly the world’s fastest game on two feet, has crawled to a torturous pace on the offensive end.
Take the most recent Syracuse game. Yes, reserve goalie Dominic Lamolinara made a fantastic, helmet-deflecting save to thwart one final Army rally with three seconds left in last weekend’s Orange 10-9 win over the Cadets in the Dome to move SU to 2-0. (They head into an early-season showdown at number-one Virginia Sunday afternoon.)
» Syracuse goalie Matt Lerman joins us as a special guest on The Juice on The Cuse podcast
» Does college lacrosse need a shot clock? Leave your thoughts below
But until the NCAA looks at tweaking the game with the addition of a shot clock, too many coaches, who for the most part are a conservative lot to begin with, are going to continue to play it safe with the ball in the attack zone. That especially holds true of a team with the lead, and in this case Lamolinara might have never been called upon to be the game’s final hero.
The Orange had the ball in the final minutes with that slim one goal margin, content to run out the clock by keeping the play within the attack box as required following an official stall warning. They were only shooting on goal if there was a clear opportunity.
If not for an Orange turnover and one last Army possession which resulted in Lamolinara’s final and most important save of the game, the action would have ended in the ‘Cuse offensive end, the team passing and weaving, but not shooting, in keeping the ball from the swarming Cadet defense which had to gamble, until the clock struck zero.
» More Orange Watch with Brad Bierman: The game that changed the fate of Syracuse lacrosse
Similar scenarios have become commonplace in the sport. Look at the last two national championship game final scores; 6-5 in 2010 and 9-7 last season, games pitting pretty evenly matched teams against each other. Single digit scoring simply does not inspire excitement.
We’ve heard the arguments against the change, such as why should the NCAA make changes for complaining fans and a better TV product by “forcing” the action to be more fast-paced with shots on goal?
Or, how are smaller Division II and III programs (and perhaps the JUCO ranks as well) supposed to comply by adding several thousand dollar shot clocks to scoreboards on meager budgets?
To both, we say hogwash.
Division I lacrosse, like football and basketball before it, is now TV programming, filling the many hours of inventory on the ESPN channels, regional sports networks and other stations. TV programming needs eyeballs to attract advertisers, and those eyeballs, in today’s fast-paced, video-game world, want action.
In the Gait and Powell eras of Orange lax, high school players and college foes alike were mesmerized by the pace at which SU played the game, attacking relentlessly with fabled midfield play setting up an amazing list of All American attackmen the past 30 years.
As to the cost of shot clocks argument, every program, no matter the size, has benefactors who live and bleed lacrosse at that particular school. There’s no way that if a shot became part of the rule book that these wealthy friends of the programs would let the several thousand dollar cost of such a device be a deterrent.
The NCAA lacrosse rules committee has some work to do this off-season, the sport needs to keep evolving as it continues to grow, and the debate of speeding up the game by instituting a shot clock figures to continue.
Tags: Army, Lacrosse, Orange Watch, Shot clock, Syracuse, Virginia
More From: Brad Bierman
By all means, let’s have a shot clock already. My guess is that the rules committee will add one this next go-round. I’m looking forward to seeing what field lacrosse looks like with a shot clock but no two-pointer.
A shot clock would ruin the creative nature of lacrosse based on quick formation switches, individual battles, setting up, and so forth. A lot of the game will be lost and it will just turn into basketball which is less creative than lacrosse.
The reason why lacrosse bares many elements of soccer is because teams can play at their pace. Soccer can easily be a fast paced game with incorporating styles of quick passes and long balls similar to barcelona, and lacrosse also has this option of play with speeding up or slowing down the game, which is CRUCIAL in creating a tempo for your team. Just because certain teams play slower than some, which is definitely the case, doesn’t mean we should add a shot clock. Heck, the best sport in the world doesn’t use a shot clock, because like lacrosse, it’s about creativity. The popularity of lacrosse has nothing to do with its pace; it’s still a growing sport!
Some games will inevitably be low scoring games, some will of course be high scoring ones. Like some teams will play faster as opposed to some being slower. This is not to say speed is the only factor as to why there are low scoring games, lets not forget that teams do have a defense (some playing very well), and some teams also have players playing below form. There are many variables to contribute to why there are low scoring games that have nothing to do with pace. A game could consist of fast paced movement, up and down the field, and still be a low scoring game. There are these things called turnovers.
Stall warning, good addition: it’s innovative, unique, and puts a new element to the game. A shot clock? Well, seems like the only purpose for it is to make the fastest sport on two feet faster for the sake of being faster.
The current game of playing keep away is garbage. How can anyone say its exciting and fun to watch. I attended su during the gait years and loved following them during the powell years. I would rather watch paint dry than watch a game these days…