Should do better, bounceback candidates, emerging programs, etc

[Mr.Right]

Hobart should do better because of very lax admissions and a beautiful campus. Shaun Griffin has done an admirable job since the position went Full-Time about 10 years ago. Steinrotter was always Part-time before that. They play a physical style and it certainly is not the most attractive but I thought they were an NCAA team last year and felt they got snubbed.

Adam Clinton at RPI does a very good job with what he has to work with. RPI is a hockey an football school and does not support soccer in any way. They are very disciplined and work hard under Clinton. They are ugly to watch and have always had issues scoring goals but he gets his teams into the NCAA's and always plays a challenging schedule. He desperately wanted the Skidmore job when it opened up a couple years ago but failed to snag it. His 2008 RPI team was one of their better teams in their history. They were very dangerous, had 2 legit strikers up top and pressed teams like mad. That was an entertaining team and if he had the talent no doubt he would play attractive soccer considering his background was from the national recognized Clifton Park Soccer Club. His father started the club and they always played total futbol at the club.

Union has under performed forever for Jeff Guinn. They should be better than they are and the only reason they went to the NCAA's in 2005 was because of Ftorek up top. He then transferred to Midd and won the NCAA Title in 2007.

MR, don't you mean RPI's 2009 team, which went 13-2-2 (in regular season), both losses being to that "forever under-performing" Union team, before losing 1-0 to your Williams in the second round of the NCAAs?

NOPE....2009 RPI was a pretty good side but they had graduated a couple guys from that 2008 side that affected them. In 2008 at Babson they lost in the 1st Round of the NCAA'S to Stevens, the eventual NCAA runner-up and a team that dispatched Amherst in the NCAA Semi's 4-1, and they were the better team than Stevens. If I remember correctly they lost in the last minute or in OT but they had the better of possession and some very dangerous chances in that game and deserved to win it. Had they beaten Stevens that day I would be willing to bet they could have gone as far as they ever had in the NCAA's. It was not meant to be. In 2009 they lost to eventual NCAA Semi-Finalist Williams st home 1-0 but they had few good looks in that game and while they had a better overall record in 2009 they were a more dangerous side in 2008.

[1970s NESCAC Player]

Hobart should do better because of very lax admissions and a beautiful campus. Shaun Griffin has done an admirable job since the position went Full-Time about 10 years ago. Steinrotter was always Part-time before that. They play a physical style and it certainly is not the most attractive but I thought they were an NCAA team last year and felt they got snubbed.

Adam Clinton at RPI does a very good job with what he has to work with. RPI is a hockey an football school and does not support soccer in any way. They are very disciplined and work hard under Clinton. They are ugly to watch and have always had issues scoring goals but he gets his teams into the NCAA's and always plays a challenging schedule. He desperately wanted the Skidmore job when it opened up a couple years ago but failed to snag it. His 2008 RPI team was one of their better teams in their history. They were very dangerous, had 2 legit strikers up top and pressed teams like mad. That was an entertaining team and if he had the talent no doubt he would play attractive soccer considering his background was from the national recognized Clifton Park Soccer Club. His father started the club and they always played total futbol at the club.

Union has under performed forever for Jeff Guinn. They should be better than they are and the only reason they went to the NCAA's in 2005 was because of Ftorek up top. He then transferred to Midd and won the NCAA Title in 2007.

MR, don't you mean RPI's 2009 team, which went 13-2-2 (in regular season), both losses being to that "forever under-performing" Union team, before losing 1-0 to your Williams in the second round of the NCAAs?

NOPE....2009 RPI was a pretty good side but they had graduated a couple guys from that 2008 side that affected them. In 2008 at Babson they lost in the 1st Round of the NCAA'S to Stevens, the eventual NCAA runner-up and a team that dispatched Amherst in the NCAA Semi's 4-1, and they were the better team than Stevens. If I remember correctly they lost in the last minute or in OT but they had the better of possession and some very dangerous chances in that game and deserved to win it. Had they beaten Stevens that day I would be willing to bet they could have gone as far as they ever had in the NCAA's. It was not meant to be. In 2009 they lost to eventual NCAA Semi-Finalist Williams st home 1-0 but they had few good looks in that game and while they had a better overall record in 2009 they were a more dangerous side in 2008.

And RPI did beat Union in 2008 at Union 1-0, if I recall, before losing to SLU in the LL semis.  Of course, Union knocked off Hobart on penalties in the LL semis, before losing the final to a strong SLU side, led by then freshman sensation, Brendan Gorman.

[Part_Bart]

At the risk of merging the playing style thread and this thread, worth noting that many of the LL coaches have had to adjust recruiting and tactics to account for SLU's sustained dominance.  Kudos to SLU for forcing the other coaches to react!

Vassar has been building a more tactical approach, but struggle with physicality (making games v. Hobart, Union and Skidmore more challenging).  Skidmore and Union are following RPI's defensive approach (hard to lose if the other team can't score, eh), making these matches intense but not thrilling. Seems to my eyes that Hobart (who has beaten SLU two years - home and away) has adapted its game planning, recruiting and hiring (as noted - the assistant coach is an SLU alum) -- all to help them to beat SLU.  Lots of injuries led to a rough early season in 2016 or they would have danced.  Not sure I buy Union on the rise. Not sure what to make of Skidmore given who graduated. Absolutely sure RPI will be very competitive. Pretty sure Vassar and Hobart will be competitive.  Curious to see Bard and Ithaca (the former for year two under the new coach, after Andrew McCabe's unfortunate passing, the latter in a new conference with a new coach) compete. Both RIT and Clarkson will be competitive.

And now a little bait for Clotpoll.....

Seems like roster sizes have been growing the past few years. My guess is that this is due in some part to the link to enrollment -- particularly at private liberal arts colleges (LAC) and some to chance (college coaches make 30 offers hoping to get seven or eight commits. Some years they get ten, etc.).  But mostly I think the roster growth is due to (a) more talent distribution and (b) more injuries. On talent distribution: there are now literally thousands of kids who come from similar-level club programs and who have the grades and money to attend the top 150 D3 colleges that have competitive soccer -- all with about the same soccer potential.  On injuries, the NCAA data on season-ending injuries suggests a small uptick over the past decade.  The data on the number of players who miss games due to injury is harder to get. My half-baked assessment of UAA, NSCAC, Empire, Liberty League and SUNYAC teams suggests that more kids are being held out for concussions, there are more knee and ankle injuries, and that the rosters are bigger (save at SUNYAC, which seems to have a roster limit that may be SUNY-driven). Moreover, the speed and strength of players is greater than a decade back (e.g., I believe that every LL men's soccer team now has dedicated strength coaches and year-around soccer-specific training programs). It may be that soccer skills are greater than a decade ago, but that is not the difference-maker in increased injury.

[sokermom]

At the risk of merging the playing style thread and this thread, worth noting that many of the LL coaches have had to adjust recruiting and tactics to account for SLU's sustained dominance.  Kudos to SLU for forcing the other coaches to react!

Vassar has been building a more tactical approach, but struggle with physicality (making games v. Hobart, Union and Skidmore more challenging).  Skidmore and Union are following RPI's defensive approach (hard to lose if the other team can't score, eh), making these matches intense but not thrilling. Seems to my eyes that Hobart (who has beaten SLU two years - home and away) has adapted its game planning, recruiting and hiring (as noted - the assistant coach is an SLU alum) -- all to help them to beat SLU.  Lots of injuries led to a rough early season in 2016 or they would have danced.  Not sure I buy Union on the rise. Not sure what to make of Skidmore given who graduated. Absolutely sure RPI will be very competitive. Pretty sure Vassar and Hobart will be competitive.  Curious to see Bard and Ithaca (the former for year two under the new coach, after Andrew McCabe's unfortunate passing, the latter in a new conference with a new coach) compete. Both RIT and Clarkson will be competitive.

And now a little bait for Clotpoll.....

Seems like roster sizes have been growing the past few years. My guess is that this is due in some part to the link to enrollment -- particularly at private liberal arts colleges (LAC) and some to chance (college coaches make 30 offers hoping to get seven or eight commits. Some years they get ten, etc.).  But mostly I think the roster growth is due to (a) more talent distribution and (b) more injuries. On talent distribution: there are now literally thousands of kids who come from similar-level club programs and who have the grades and money to attend the top 150 D3 colleges that have competitive soccer -- all with about the same soccer potential.  On injuries, the NCAA data on season-ending injuries suggests a small uptick over the past decade.  The data on the number of players who miss games due to injury is harder to get. My half-baked assessment of UAA, NSCAC, Empire, Liberty League and SUNYAC teams suggests that more kids are being held out for concussions, there are more knee and ankle injuries, and that the rosters are bigger (save at SUNYAC, which seems to have a roster limit that may be SUNY-driven). Moreover, the speed and strength of players is greater than a decade back (e.g., I believe that every LL men's soccer team now has dedicated strength coaches and year-around soccer-specific training programs). It may be that soccer skills are greater than a decade ago, but that is not the difference-maker in increased injury.

I think that the number of quality/skilled players has improved.  The sheer amount of clubs and the growth of soccer (fitness programs, year round leagues, etc.) has been very steep.  So these players are all spreading out to D3 programs making them somewhat balanced.  Having said that, can you elaborate a bit on your take on the RIT and Clarkson programs?

[1970s NESCAC Player]

Seems like roster sizes have been growing the past few years. My guess is that this is due in some part to the link to enrollment -- particularly at private liberal arts colleges (LAC) and some to chance (college coaches make 30 offers hoping to get seven or eight commits. Some years they get ten, etc.).  But mostly I think the roster growth is due to (a) more talent distribution and (b) more injuries. On talent distribution: there are now literally thousands of kids who come from similar-level club programs and who have the grades and money to attend the top 150 D3 colleges that have competitive soccer -- all with about the same soccer potential.  On injuries, the NCAA data on season-ending injuries suggests a small uptick over the past decade.  The data on the number of players who miss games due to injury is harder to get. My half-baked assessment of UAA, NSCAC, Empire, Liberty League and SUNYAC teams suggests that more kids are being held out for concussions, there are more knee and ankle injuries, and that the rosters are bigger (save at SUNYAC, which seems to have a roster limit that may be SUNY-driven). Moreover, the speed and strength of players is greater than a decade back (e.g., I believe that every LL men's soccer team now has dedicated strength coaches and year-around soccer-specific training programs). It may be that soccer skills are greater than a decade ago, but that is not the difference-maker in increased injury.

To the extent that roster sizes may have grown, at least in strong academic conferences like LL, NESCAC, and UAA, that may also be attributable, in part, to (a) loss of JV or reserve programs, and (b) availability of practice players due to class and lab scheduling.  Coaches keep as many players as the administration will permit, so that younger players have an opportunity to develop at the varsity level.  That was not a concern in the past, when schools regularly fielded JV or reserve squads.  Also, with so many players being unavailable due to labs and late afternoon classes, keeping a small squad (e.g., less than 25) might yield insufficient practice numbers on a regular basis.  I've heard coaches at multiple schools express this exact concern.  Finally, at the end of the day, most coaches like a large squad, if for no other reason than it provides more players to push the starters for spots, preventing them from getting too comfortable.  Increased competition often brings out the best in a team.

[PaulNewman]

This is another interesting issue.  I tend to think that larger rosters are a good thing IF the culture of a school supports that and the coach can thread the needle in terms of satisfaction level for players 16 thru 22 and then 23 through 30-30+.  I've admired Rothert at Loras for apparently keeping as many as 45-50 kids very involved.  The very large rosters appears to be typical for at least several of the Iowa schools.  These teams often serve as their own fraternities.  Overall, I fall on the side of believing that's a positive, but I have some ambivalence insofar as the identification with the soccer group makes things too comfortable and prevents exploring other groups and other aspects of the college.  FWIW, I've noticed that even kids who lose interest or get cut still tend to hang with the soccer group.  Some become team managers, some party with the group, and some become the team's biggest fans.  Kenyon had one such former player turned fan who would show up at OWU games in a cape with a sword chanting non-stop and trying to get the attention of Coach Martin.

[Clotpoll]

hr]
And now a little bait for Clotpoll.....

Seems like roster sizes have been growing the past few years. My guess is that this is due in some part to the link to enrollment -- particularly at private liberal arts colleges (LAC) and some to chance (college coaches make 30 offers hoping to get seven or eight commits. Some years they get ten, etc.).  But mostly I think the roster growth is due to (a) more talent distribution and (b) more injuries. On talent distribution: there are now literally thousands of kids who come from similar-level club programs and who have the grades and money to attend the top 150 D3 colleges that have competitive soccer -- all with about the same soccer potential.  On injuries, the NCAA data on season-ending injuries suggests a small uptick over the past decade.  The data on the number of players who miss games due to injury is harder to get. My half-baked assessment of UAA, NSCAC, Empire, Liberty League and SUNYAC teams suggests that more kids are being held out for concussions, there are more knee and ankle injuries, and that the rosters are bigger (save at SUNYAC, which seems to have a roster limit that may be SUNY-driven). Moreover, the speed and strength of players is greater than a decade back (e.g., I believe that every LL men's soccer team now has dedicated strength coaches and year-around soccer-specific training programs). It may be that soccer skills are greater than a decade ago, but that is not the difference-maker in increased injury.

Partbart, I dunno what to make of expanded rosters. It's definitely happening, and it's bled up into D1. There are probably a bunch of different reasons, and I think that whatever the reason, it's here to stay.

From my perspective, it's all one giant excuse. A good manager can run a meaningful practice with three players, and a truly good player wouldn't accept a shirt he hadn't earned, so to me, all I see are excuses. Shoot me.

Every D3 coach in every sport knows players will be lost to late classes and labs every day. That's part and parcel of getting to coach guys who are students first. However, a solid 18-21 man group is more than enough to generate a good daily practice session. One of the things I'd do as a D3 coach is devote- at minimum- one entire weekly practice session, in-season, to film work and game planning. I'd probably devote another in-season weekly session to yoga and stretching.

The prevailing idea in NCAA soccer is to base everything you do on your team's ability to press for 90'. That leads to roster expansion to accommodate liberal substitution, and many of the factors you mentioned (academics, concussions, serious injury) further swell team rosters. However, I'm betting that some coach is soon going to attempt to make a serious run going no more than 15-16 deep with playing time and playing a style that allows a properly periodised player to make it thru 80-90 minutes of every single game. Talent and tactics- empowered to stay on the pitch for a maximum of minutes- will beat waves of fresh runners.

[Ommadawn]

Every D3 coach in every sport knows players will be lost to late classes and labs every day. That's part and parcel of getting to coach guys who are students first. However, a solid 18-21 man group is more than enough to generate a good daily practice session. One of the things I'd do as a D3 coach is devote- at minimum- one entire weekly practice session, in-season, to film work and game planning. I'd probably devote another in-season weekly session to yoga and stretching.

I suspect that a lot of D3 programs already do devote as much as a full training session per week to film work during the heart of the season.  I'm not sure about the yoga and stretching, but "regen" sessions are quite popular these days.

The prevailing idea in NCAA soccer is to base everything you do on your team's ability to press for 90'. That leads to roster expansion to accommodate liberal substitution, and many of the factors you mentioned (academics, concussions, serious injury) further swell team rosters. However, I'm betting that some coach is soon going to attempt to make a serious run going no more than 15-16 deep with playing time and playing a style that allows a properly periodised player to make it thru 80-90 minutes of every single game. Talent and tactics- empowered to stay on the pitch for a maximum of minutes- will beat waves of fresh runners.

I would be interested in your thoughts about how many of the top D1 programs (e.g., UConn) roll with 12-14 players yet still manage to play a style unlike the type you are advocating.  It's like they hear you on the "talent" part, but not the "tactics" part of your equation.

[Part_Bart]

... Having said that, can you elaborate a bit on your take on the RIT and Clarkson programs?

Clarkson coach entering his third year, having taken over after the previous coach got into trouble with the law (the criminal case is settled, the civil case is, I think, still ongoing). Came from Vassar and has done a very nice job of stabilizing program and getting some good wins. I could see them placing anywhere from 4th to 9th in LL for 2017. 

RIT always fields a competitive team and the coach seems to favor quick, technical and smallish players. This leads to some tough match-ups against physical teams (and there are four of them in LL and they play SUNY Brockport, too). In 2016, they were in the hunt for the 4th conference playoff spot until the last two weeks.

I'd be comfortable encouraging consideration if the academics of these places fit a young man's interests and abilities.

[Saint of Old]

Agree with Clarkson.
Coach has done fairly well, but then again he wasn't trying to build a program while being framed by a crooked DA and police.

http://amsterdamnews.com/news/2016/sep/29/and-then-there-was-justice/

Former Clarkson Coach beat a charge brought against him with 0 evidence due to his race, and now is suing the police and DA who tried to frame him in civil court.

New Clarkson Coach has good pedigree from Vassar, but was also n all-time great player for Plattsburgh, while playing for Chris Waterbury.

I call RIT, Dr. Jeckeyll and Mr. Hyde...
Team could win any game or lose any game, been that way for some time.

[Mid-Atlantic Fan]

Haven't read everything in this thread but has St. Thomas been mentioned as a potential candidate for emerging programs? Went from 9-8-2 in 2014 to 12-7-1 and losing in the conference final in 2015 to 20-2-3 in 2016 and the Final 4. According to their website and schedule release, St. Thomas graduated six seniors but is expected return over 60% of their goal scoring and their top goalie. I think they can be considered an emerging team at this point.

[Clotpoll]

Every D3 coach in every sport knows players will be lost to late classes and labs every day. That's part and parcel of getting to coach guys who are students first. However, a solid 18-21 man group is more than enough to generate a good daily practice session. One of the things I'd do as a D3 coach is devote- at minimum- one entire weekly practice session, in-season, to film work and game planning. I'd probably devote another in-season weekly session to yoga and stretching.

I suspect that a lot of D3 programs already do devote as much as a full training session per week to film work during the heart of the season.  I'm not sure about the yoga and stretching, but "regen" sessions are quite popular these days.

The prevailing idea in NCAA soccer is to base everything you do on your team's ability to press for 90'. That leads to roster expansion to accommodate liberal substitution, and many of the factors you mentioned (academics, concussions, serious injury) further swell team rosters. However, I'm betting that some coach is soon going to attempt to make a serious run going no more than 15-16 deep with playing time and playing a style that allows a properly periodised player to make it thru 80-90 minutes of every single game. Talent and tactics- empowered to stay on the pitch for a maximum of minutes- will beat waves of fresh runners.

I would be interested in your thoughts about how many of the top D1 programs (e.g., UConn) roll with 12-14 players yet still manage to play a style unlike the type you are advocating.  It's like they hear you on the "talent" part, but not the "tactics" part of your equation.

D1 teams that don't rotate their squads, yet play boomball? Check the results. UConn is a team that fields guys who look like decathletes, yet they wilt come tournament time.

[Part_Bart]

I suspect that a lot of D3 programs already do devote as much as a full training session per week to film work during the heart of the season.  I'm not sure about the yoga and stretching, but "regen" sessions are quite popular these days.

Yes! Worth noting that most of the competitive D3 programs now have access to a strength and conditioning coach/training program. While this counts against the total hours per week of contact time, most teams are expecting these coaches to put their athletes through sport-specific strength work, dynamic stretching (and re-generation), etc -- often five or six hours' devoted to this (from 20 total contact hours while in season, not including travel) each week.

It seems like the use of video analysis has been growing to where clubs and high school programs are starting to dabble.  There are very useful video marking tools (e.g., Coaches Eye and Dartfish are the two I've used, albeit for a sport that is not soccer. There are many other vide marking tools).  For D3 programs, the limitation is staff. Less than 1/4 of the 400 plus D3 men's teams have a full-time assistant (about 1/4 still have a part-time head coach...). So, finding staff time to DO the analysis is challenging given the real needs of practice, compliance, recruiting, and other staff duties. Again, the top 100 or so programs are finding ways to do the video prep work (student managers, injured players, course projects for some class or student, etc.).

As an aside, my guess is that the next step in the athletic department arms race will be nutrition.  The Power 5 conferences (D1) have been pursuing this angle with training tables, athlete snack bars, nutritional counseling, etc, for some years. The secondary benefits are pretty powerful. Good ideas propagate pretty quickly across coaches, so the  idea of doing more with nutrition (and this is NOT A GATORADE AD), combined with strength/conditioning, and the mantra of a 24 hour athlete (eat, sleep and train well) is likely to catch on with the well-funded D3 programs (NESCAC, UAA, Centennial, Liberty, etc). Curious to hear from others if they have knowledge this happening.

[Clotpoll]

Already happening, even in middle of the pack D3 schools.

Quality of athletic trainers is a big variable. For most D3 programs I've seen, trainers are ice, tape, whirlpool guys with rare exception. Most I've met are still afraid of kinestheology tape. Dynamic stretching, yoga? Yeah, right.

My son is really fortunate, as his team has a terrific trainer who designed & supervises offseason running, gym work and nutrition, as well as in-season mandatory recovery...the whole nine yards.

[Mr.Right]

Trainers can be a valuable asset to a team if they are doing all that but they can also be known to "baby" some of these kids which can affect team morale after a while.