<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Salisbury Cruises By Tufts For The Men&#8217;s NCAA Division 3 Lacrosse Championship</title>
	<atom:link href="http://laxallstars.com/salisbury-cruises-by-tufts-for-the-ncaa-mens-division-3-lacrosse-championship/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://laxallstars.com/salisbury-cruises-by-tufts-for-the-ncaa-mens-division-3-lacrosse-championship/</link>
	<description>Lacrosse Media Outlet / By Players, For Players / Grow The Game</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 01:54:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://laxallstars.com/salisbury-cruises-by-tufts-for-the-ncaa-mens-division-3-lacrosse-championship/#comment-11224</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 15:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://laxallstars.com/?p=28790#comment-11224</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SU definitely underestimated Tufts last year. This year the game plan was evident and I think it had to do with the fact that Berkman perhaps felt embarassed last year and wanted redemption/revenge (maybe more so than the players). SU&#039;s defense was good but not great, but it did more than it needed to in order to stop a Tufts offense that is decent (but not great) in 6 on 6 situations. Where they excelled was dropping EVERYBODY in the hole on transition and conceding the clear (for the most part). Limiting Tufts transition opporunites was the key to keeping them from scoring.

While SU was on offense it was clear that they were well prepared to exploit Tufts &quot;slide and recover D&quot;. They were waiting for the Tufts slide and then SU was moving the ball inside very well. Most of the early goals were from inside 5 yards. If you&#039;re reading this and saying &quot;isn&#039;t that the point of offense?&quot; then you haven&#039;t seen Tufts D this year; they slide almost every time whether it&#039;s necessary or not.  If the initial look wasn&#039;t there SU would continue to dummy dodge and wait for a matchup (like a SSDM on Bradman, who had a great game), and then exploit that.

Unfortunately, a lot of the position players for Tufts also had a hard time getting in the groove. Not sure if you give the credit for that to the gulls play or nerves or whatever but these were not great performances out of the typically oustanding players.

I&#039;d also say that unfortunately faceoffs and goalie play (which have been a strong point all year for tufts) were severely lacking. Bad games happens sometimes and it&#039;s unfortunate that it all played out the way it did in the biggest game of the year. Neither goalie was seeing the ball particularly well and while Tufts dominated faceoffs at RIT they were having a hard time on Sunday. 



On a related note, the refing was particularly bad for a championship game. I don&#039;t mean to make it sound like a reason or excuse why Tufts lost (they got outplayed) but I was surprised how many seemingly obvious calls were missed. It was probably on both sides but as a Tufts fan I noticed more bad or missed calls against Tufts. At one stretch (I believe in the 3rd) SU was offsides for about 13 or 14 seconds and the ref didn&#039;t even turn his head around to look (despite him being in front of the Tufts bench and everyone screaming). If memory serves they went offsides again on the very next Tufts possession and it was not called. I think they finally got called offsides on the 3rd time they went off in a span of about 2-3 mintues (though it may have been the second time, and if so, I applogize for the misinformation). Another obvious missed call I remember was during a faceoff when the players were fighting for the draw (and therefore no other players can make contact) a SU player was lifting the stick of the Tufts faceoff guy in order to disrupt the draw. I know that refs miss calls and make mistakes but my measuring stick for reffing is usually my &quot;common sense rule&quot;; I try to be objective throughout and if at the end of the game the reffing sticks out to me as much as the play then I believe they did a bad job.

Congrats to the Seagulls on another NC.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SU definitely underestimated Tufts last year. This year the game plan was evident and I think it had to do with the fact that Berkman perhaps felt embarassed last year and wanted redemption/revenge (maybe more so than the players). SU&#8217;s defense was good but not great, but it did more than it needed to in order to stop a Tufts offense that is decent (but not great) in 6 on 6 situations. Where they excelled was dropping EVERYBODY in the hole on transition and conceding the clear (for the most part). Limiting Tufts transition opporunites was the key to keeping them from scoring.</p>
<p>While SU was on offense it was clear that they were well prepared to exploit Tufts &#8220;slide and recover D&#8221;. They were waiting for the Tufts slide and then SU was moving the ball inside very well. Most of the early goals were from inside 5 yards. If you&#8217;re reading this and saying &#8220;isn&#8217;t that the point of offense?&#8221; then you haven&#8217;t seen Tufts D this year; they slide almost every time whether it&#8217;s necessary or not.  If the initial look wasn&#8217;t there SU would continue to dummy dodge and wait for a matchup (like a SSDM on Bradman, who had a great game), and then exploit that.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, a lot of the position players for Tufts also had a hard time getting in the groove. Not sure if you give the credit for that to the gulls play or nerves or whatever but these were not great performances out of the typically oustanding players.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d also say that unfortunately faceoffs and goalie play (which have been a strong point all year for tufts) were severely lacking. Bad games happens sometimes and it&#8217;s unfortunate that it all played out the way it did in the biggest game of the year. Neither goalie was seeing the ball particularly well and while Tufts dominated faceoffs at RIT they were having a hard time on Sunday. </p>
<p>On a related note, the refing was particularly bad for a championship game. I don&#8217;t mean to make it sound like a reason or excuse why Tufts lost (they got outplayed) but I was surprised how many seemingly obvious calls were missed. It was probably on both sides but as a Tufts fan I noticed more bad or missed calls against Tufts. At one stretch (I believe in the 3rd) SU was offsides for about 13 or 14 seconds and the ref didn&#8217;t even turn his head around to look (despite him being in front of the Tufts bench and everyone screaming). If memory serves they went offsides again on the very next Tufts possession and it was not called. I think they finally got called offsides on the 3rd time they went off in a span of about 2-3 mintues (though it may have been the second time, and if so, I applogize for the misinformation). Another obvious missed call I remember was during a faceoff when the players were fighting for the draw (and therefore no other players can make contact) a SU player was lifting the stick of the Tufts faceoff guy in order to disrupt the draw. I know that refs miss calls and make mistakes but my measuring stick for reffing is usually my &#8220;common sense rule&#8221;; I try to be objective throughout and if at the end of the game the reffing sticks out to me as much as the play then I believe they did a bad job.</p>
<p>Congrats to the Seagulls on another NC.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Salisbury Tufts Highlights - 412 Lax</title>
		<link>http://laxallstars.com/salisbury-cruises-by-tufts-for-the-ncaa-mens-division-3-lacrosse-championship/#comment-5743</link>
		<dc:creator>Salisbury Tufts Highlights - 412 Lax</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 05:02:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://laxallstars.com/?p=28790#comment-5743</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Connor Wilson&#8217;s D3 review, he&#8217;s probably still crying over a NESCAC school losing  [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Connor Wilson&#8217;s D3 review, he&#8217;s probably still crying over a NESCAC school losing  [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 29guesswhere</title>
		<link>http://laxallstars.com/salisbury-cruises-by-tufts-for-the-ncaa-mens-division-3-lacrosse-championship/#comment-11193</link>
		<dc:creator>29guesswhere</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 May 2011 22:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://laxallstars.com/?p=28790#comment-11193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I wonder if the heat played a role a little in Tufts&#039; play? That kind of heat gets to you since the Northeast doesn&#039;t get that type of weather until August. Maybe it didn&#039;t and worlds ugliest color scheme just got thumped.  ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wonder if the heat played a role a little in Tufts&#8217; play? That kind of heat gets to you since the Northeast doesn&#8217;t get that type of weather until August. Maybe it didn&#8217;t and worlds ugliest color scheme just got thumped.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://laxallstars.com/salisbury-cruises-by-tufts-for-the-ncaa-mens-division-3-lacrosse-championship/#comment-11181</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 May 2011 18:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://laxallstars.com/?p=28790#comment-11181</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I don&#039;t think SU was fully prepared last year.  This year, they were, and it really showed.  Bradman knew how to dodge their defense and managed to do so with impunity.  It helped greatly that SU was finding the back of the net from distance.  Last year they couldn&#039;t hit the broadside of a barn and Tufts didn&#039;t have to extend as much.  This year?  Not the case at all.

What was more impressive though was the Gull Defense.  Disciplined but aggressive and they were excellent in transition, where Tufts usually flourishes.  A VERY impressive team at Salisbury this year.  Fast, talented, creative, and all that within a Berkman system. Dominant.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think SU was fully prepared last year.  This year, they were, and it really showed.  Bradman knew how to dodge their defense and managed to do so with impunity.  It helped greatly that SU was finding the back of the net from distance.  Last year they couldn&#8217;t hit the broadside of a barn and Tufts didn&#8217;t have to extend as much.  This year?  Not the case at all.</p>
<p>What was more impressive though was the Gull Defense.  Disciplined but aggressive and they were excellent in transition, where Tufts usually flourishes.  A VERY impressive team at Salisbury this year.  Fast, talented, creative, and all that within a Berkman system. Dominant.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 412 Lax</title>
		<link>http://laxallstars.com/salisbury-cruises-by-tufts-for-the-ncaa-mens-division-3-lacrosse-championship/#comment-11180</link>
		<dc:creator>412 Lax</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 May 2011 17:55:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://laxallstars.com/?p=28790#comment-11180</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The picture of Bradman might have been the only time Tufts touched his person. Supa soft defense compared to last year&#039;s group.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The picture of Bradman might have been the only time Tufts touched his person. Supa soft defense compared to last year&#8217;s group.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
