Bittersweet News

Bill Wagner is reporting on his blog that according to his sources, top Navy lacrosse assistant coach John Tillman is leaving Annapolis to take the head coaching job at Harvard. Tillman and Princeton assistant Dave Metzbower were rumored to be the two finalists to replace longtime coach Scott Anderson, who stepped down as head coach after 20 years to take a position within the athletic department. Metzbower allegedly took his name out of consideration this morning. Harvard is expected to make an official announcement later today.

Most Navy lacrosse fans figured this day would come eventually. Tillman is an excellent coach who devised some very productive offenses for Navy. He deserves this chance, and probably would have been hired away long ago if there were more head coaching opportunities in Division I. He leaves some awfully big shoes for Richie Meade to fill. I expected Navy’s offense to undergo a bit of a transition this year with the graduation of Ian Dingman. Now it’s almost guaranteed.

UPDATE: Official announcements from Navy and Harvard.

Loose Change

Lots of chatter popping up in the last couple of days:

  • In the “ignorance is bliss” category, we have PJ’s Monday presser. Talk about a list of things you wish you didn’t know… Kaipo’s in a neck brace, none of the punters are consistent, the secondary’s all hurt, and Greg Thrasher is in PJ’s doghouse. Yeesh. I guess there’s a silver lining in that Rashawn King is recovering well from his shoulder injury, but anyone who didn’t like PJ’s media day optimism can feel better knowing that it’s back to business as usual.
  • Navy will once again be an NCAA lacrosse tournament quarterfinal host this year. The ability to host events like these were a big reason why Navy-Marine Corps Memorial Stadium made the switch to FieldTurf, so it’s nice to see that move pay off. It’ll be nicer if it’s a Navy home game this year.
  • The unending football conference affiliation talk resumed as Chet talked to Ron Snyder about the difficulties of finding bowl games as an independent. Conference membership means a lot more than bowl game access, though. I still don’t think that this will happen anytime soon, if at all.
  • Navy’s been sold out of Army-Navy tickets for a while. Now Army is too. If you want tickets, looks like you’ll be headed to Stubhub or eBay.
  • Scout.com’s Temple site previews Navy (subscription required). For those without a subscription, it’s very complimentary, saying that Navy “might be the second-toughest team on the schedule.” In case you’re wondering, Temple plays Penn State this year.
  • Some Air Force Academy grad wants to play pro baseball. I don’t really care that much as long as this doesn’t become a habit; the Air Force will do what it thinks is best for itself. But will people PLEASE stop comparing every scrub that wants to turn pro to David Robinson? By the time Robinson played his first game in San Antonio, he had already been an Olympic medalist, a Naismith Award winner, a Wooden Award winner, on the cover of Sports Illustrated, and led Navy to the Elite Eight in the NCAA tournament. That is a far, far cry from being one of thousands of players struggling to find a place in minor league baseball. Robinson is one of the best players in the history of his sport. Karl Bolt is not. It makes a difference when the Navy or Air Force is considering an athlete’s fate.
  • Bill Wagner offers a look at college recruiting, including Billy Lange’s approach.
  • ESPN.com talks Patriot League basketball as part of their “Shoot Around” series.

I’m Not Crazy

OK, maybe I really did hear Chet say something about playing Maryland again in 2010. The Examiner talks about that, plus Army-Navy and an update on a Baltimore bowl game, here. Clearly, Navy football is a centerpiece of Baltimore’s future plans.

I might be sane, but the same can’t be said for everyone on the internet. This is why drinking and blogging don’t mix, kids. Don’t let it happen to you. (The A-minus in academics is a nice touch.)

Making Lemonade

With the recent introduction of Cindy Timchal’s first full recruiting class, about the only thing left for the fledgling Navy women’s lacrosse program to do is to play their first varsity game. That will probably happen in February, and I’m sure it will be a feel-good event with plenty of smiles and comments about what a great day it is for Navy sports. I’ll probably join in the celebration. My celebration, though, won’t be without concern.

I have nothing against women’s lacrosse. My unease is over any sport being added. It just seems to run counter to everything that’s been said about adding another varsity sport at the Naval Academy over the last few years. One of the best things about the athletic department at Navy is their openness, especially when compared to a lot of other schools. The “Ask the AD” section on Navysports.com, for example, is a great way for fans to get straightforward answers to their questions. Questions about adding another varsity sport are among the more common topics. Here’s one about ice hockey:

Q: An April 8, 2004 article on USCHO.com mentioned the Naval Academy recently received funding for a new hockey arena. This appears to be a big step in the direction of hockey becoming a varsity sport at the Naval Academy. In a previous response to a similar question, you said “…the two biggest hurdles we have to cross are finding appropriate resources and an adequate facility.” With the facility problem out of the way, what else stands in the way? Is there a possibility of fielding an NCAA Division I hockey team for the 2005-06 season? I would be interested in any information you can give me on your progress. Thank you. – asked by: Lance Wheeler –

A: Lance, the biggest hurdle we have is generating the annual resources necessary to sustain a competitive Division I hockey program. The operating budget can be close to half-a-million dollars for travel, uniforms, equipment, staff, supplies, and other related expenses. One thing we don’t want to do is field a varsity team without a chance to succeed.

I’m not into doing anything half way, and supporting 30 programs at this time is a real stretch on our resources. Taking on the addition of ice hockey would be another stretch, and the money would have to come from existing allocations. Unless we can find a way to generate supplemental funding in a realistic and legitimate way, we’re going to have to continue to study ice hockey as a potential varsity sport. I am, however, ambitiously approaching this project in hopes that varsity status could become a reality somewhere down the road.

Note the comment about the “real stretch on our resources.” But that’s for hockey; everyone knows that hockey would be a huge financial commitment as far as coaching, facilities, recruiting, equipment, and travel. Adding a women’s lacrosse team should be a little less demanding, right? The women’s lacrosse section seems to have disappeared from the site. There is a question about it tucked away under “Lacrosse,” though:

Q: Will Navy ever field a women’s lacrosse team? The sport is growing tremendously. – asked by: Dan Collins –

A: I think the Club women’s lacrosse program has done an outstanding job over the last few years, and I believe that women’s lacrosse in Maryland, at any institution, is a natural. Right now, however, we’re fielding 30 Division I programs, which is a stretch on our resources and support. There are a number of Clubs that would like elevation to varsity status, but it’s going to be difficult to do that until we find more opportunities for funding. I would, however, like to see it happen in the short term, if possible.

Once again we get a comment about a “stretch on our resources” and the need for an additional funding source. Well, we have a women’s lacrosse team now. Does that mean we received the funding for it? According to Chet in the official release announcing the team, “resources have been allocated.” That doesn’t sound like a new funding source to me; that sounds more like rearranging what we already had. There’s no mention of a new funding source in Bill Wagner’s writeup, either. There was something else, though:

Bolstering the case for adding women’s lacrosse is the fact Naval Academy leaders recently decided to increase the percentage of females in the Brigade of Midshipmen. That figure is growing from 17 to 20 percent, which means there will be approximately 150 more women in the brigade within a few years.

And there’s the key. Without a new revenue stream to apply to a women’s lacrosse program, the push to add women’s lacrosse wouldn’t have come from inside the athletic department. It had to have come from above; that means the superintendent.

VADM Rempt made it his mission to change the culture of the Naval Academy. More specifically, he wanted to change the way female mids are perceived by their male counterparts and create a better environment for women in general. Among the more high-profile examples of this were the changing of the lyrics to the alma mater and pushing the (COUGHridiculousCOUGH) Lamar Owens sexual misconduct court martial. Rempt’s aforementioned decision to increase the percentage of women admitted to USNA is another measure taken to reach that goal.

Adding a women’s lacrosse team would be a good way to account for 35-40 of the 150 women that the Naval Academy will add over the next four years. I firmly believe that athletics programs help to attract good candidates who otherwise would not consider the Naval Academy. That being said, I have two basic problems with the whole situation:

In case you haven’t been able to tell, my first problem is with the money and resources needed to maintain the team. If a new funding source hasn’t been identified, that means women’s lacrosse is being funded by budget cuts for the other 30 varsity teams. It isn’t like any of them were rolling in cash to begin with, either. Being forced to tell existing programs to suck it up is a lousy way to start a new program. Hopefully this won’t lead to any of our other sports eventually going the way of the now-defunct fencing team. That might be a little on the drama queen side, and it’s pure speculation on my part; but I’d still watch my back if I played squash or sprint football.

Money isn’t the only resource that’s at a premium. Land is too. As in practice fields. Where is this team going to practice? With football, men’s lax, men’s and women’s soccer, sprint football, platoon drill, and intramurals, grass is in pretty short supply on the Yard. If any club sport wants a field to use, they’re apparently going to have to reclaim more land from the Severn.

The second problem is that VADM Rempt’s plan isn’t going to work. (CAUTION: Non-sports-related rambling ahead.) The Supe was right about one thing: the Naval Academy could be a better environment for women. I wrote in another post here that people with an axe to grind against athletes at USNA use the mistakes of one as an indictment against all of them. The same can often be said for women. When one screws up, there are some who start grumbling about women in general. One woman is left being held indirectly accountable for the mistakes of someone else, even if in reality she’s a model midshipman. The way to eliminate that kind of mindset is not to admit more women. In order to admit more, the school will have to lower admission standards for women so that there are more to choose from. Doing that is going to mean more “screwups,” which will reinforce bad attitudes rather than eliminate them. The answer is to be even more selective so that the ones that do come to USNA are a bunch of fire-breathing ass-kickers ready to shine. Opinions are personal decisions that are made by individuals.  They aren’t going to change by authoritarian means; to make the attempt will only breed resentment. The culture will change when these people realize that their ideas are being proven wrong. Jennifer Harris singlehandedly changed more attitudes as her name was etched into the walls of Memorial Hall than any superintendent could ever do. As they say from the moment you first step onto the yard as a plebe– leadership by example. It’s what every midshipman respects.

It’s ironic that the timing of all this talk of a new “flagship” women’s program is at a point when the Navy women’s soccer team just completed the most successful season in any women’s sport in the history of all three service academies. They were Patriot League champions, had a win over a top 10 team, were a legitimate top 20 team themselves, and advanced to the second round of the NCAA tournament. Add a nationally respected coach and one of the finest facilities in the country… If that isn’t a flagship program, then what is? This isn’t the time to be cutting their budget. This is the time to scrape together as much money as we can find to try to add to the momentum.

My concern over the women’s lacrosse team should not be interpreted as malevolence. These women are still going to be wearing the Blue and Gold, and as such they will be one more team for me to live and die by. My worries are no reason not to offer the support and admiration I give to every other team. But it’s that support of the other 30 teams that causes me to worry about the effects of the 31st.

It isn’t like there’s anything sinister behind this. Hell, I could be completely nuts and there actually was a new funding source. I doubt it, though. So for now I can only sit back and cheer the team on while Chet G. tries to make lemonade out of the apparent lemon that was handed to him. Time will tell if he succeeds.

My I-Day Manifesto

The two best pieces of advice you can give to someone who’s about to head off to Plebe Summer are to keep a sense of humor, and to remain anonymous as long as possible. Don’t do anything that will make a detailer remember you. For my plebe summer roommate, that second part was a bit of a problem.

It wasn’t any fault of his own, really. He is the best athlete I’ve ever known, recruited to play both soccer and lacrosse. When you are that high-profile of a recruit, the detailers already know who you are. Everyone ends up getting some time in the “spotlight” eventually during Plebe Summer, but my roommate had the honor of being first. When the detailers wanted to drop the platoon for pushups, it wasn’t unusual to hear the process begin with one of them yelling, “You’re just here to play lacrosse!”

Fast forward a few years to 2003. In his book, Recruiting Confidential, David Claerbaut chronicles the college recruiting process experienced by his stepson, Chicago running back James Velissaris. James committed to the Naval Academy, and his family made the trip with him to Annapolis to see him sworn in on I-Day. When it came time to take the oath, though, James didn’t do it. Reading over the commitment papers, he felt that he was only there to play football; to him, that wasn’t reason enough to sign. Velissaris would end up playing for Harvard.

Two different stories, but with similar themes: sports as the primary motivation in choosing to attend the Naval Academy. As I was reading James Velissaris’ story, the same thought occurred to me as when I would hear my Plebe Summer detailers barking at my roommate: is there really anything wrong with that?

June has arrived. It is the time when a select group of high school seniors across the country are about to trade the cap and gown of the graduate for the dixie cup and whiteworks assigned to the Naval Academy’s lowest of the low. Included in this group preparing for the challenge of Plebe Summer are the athletes recruited to fill out the rosters of Navy’s several varsity sports. On I-Day, these athletes are going to face decisions of their own. Like James Velissaris, they might find themselves questioning their own motives. They shouldn’t. It is perfectly acceptable that being recruited to play a varsity sport would be someone’s main attraction to the Naval Academy. It should be expected, and in a lot of ways, encouraged.

Plenty of Academy alums would bristle at that thought. Some of these graduates seem to think that every midshipman-to-be that passes through the gates of USNA does so because each one of them is driven to have a career as a Navy or Marine Corps officer. Some of them are. Or at least they think they are. Let’s be real, now; how many 18 year-olds coming straight out of high school really have any idea what it means to be an officer in the Naval Service? I am a third-generation Academy graduate and spent my entire childhood surrounded by all things Navy. I thought I had a pretty good idea going into I-Day. It took all of 15 minutes of Plebe Summer for me to realize that I didn’t know squat. If most grads would take an honest look at their own experience, they’d probably admit the same thing. If a person doesn’t truly understand what being a Naval officer entails, then he can’t truly be dedicated to a Naval career from day one. It’s unfair to expect otherwise.

In fact, the Navy itself doesn’t expect it. Have you seen Navy advertising on television? A recent Navy ad shows three Navy officers who turned their Navy experience into successful civilian careers. All branches of the military use college money and other benefits to bring people to the recruiting office. The Marine Corps sells itself as an exclusive club. It’s true, obviously; but it’s also secondary to to what being a Marine really means.

There is a bit of a double standard at work here, too. Many of the same graduates and onlookers who cringe when a recruit says that he came to play football have no problem with other reasons that a midshipman might give. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone complain when a mid says that he came to USNA for the quality of the education. When someone comes to Annapolis because his father or brother or sister did, it’s generally regarded as a heartwarming nod to family tradition. How are these reasons any different? The Naval Academy does a lot to make itself attractive to applicants as a school. Athletics are a part of that, as are academic programs, extracurriculars, traditions, etc. Coming for any of these reasons is no different than coming to play a sport. None of them are the same thing as saying, “I want to be a Navy or Marine Corps officer.”

Those who question the mindset of these soon-to-be midshipmen need to remember the mission of the institution. It is not the job of the high school senior to be dedicated to a career of naval service; it is the job of the Naval Academy to motivate him to do so. As long as coaches are upfront with kids on the recruiting trail about the challenge that lies ahead, there really is no bad reason to come to USNA. That’s why the Navy is comfortable advertising about how it can help jumpstart a civilian career. Those who want to use their Navy experience to do so, can. But some of those people brought in by that ad might find that a Navy career is more rewarding than they realized, and they’ll stick around for a while. There’s a cliche at the Academy about how the guys who’d swear they would be in for life end up getting out as soon as their commitment is up, and the guys who’d swear they would get out as soon as possible end up becoming admirals. There’s some truth to that; no matter what you think going in, it isn’t until you’ve actually experienced the life of a Naval officer that you’d know if it is for you. Very few of these young men and women about to take the oath really know what’s waiting for them on the other side, but they’re willing to give it a try. The country needs people who are willing to give it a try, even if it doesn’t always work out in the end.

We should be thankful for each and every one of those who will raise their right hand on June 27th, regardless of why they’re doing it.

Treading Water

Washington Post lacrosse guru Christian Swezey tackles the top issue facing Division I lacrosse today: growth. Or more specifically, the lack thereof.

Lacrosse is exploding across the country. High school programs from Florida to Michigan to California are thriving, with more than 1,000 schools adding lacrosse over the last 25 years. But while Division III has matched that growth– doubling in size to 145 over the same time period– Division I has not. When Butler dropped its lacrosse program in January, it brought the total number of Division I lacrosse schools down to 56, only 6 more than where the division stood in 1982. So why hasn’t Division I lax matched the growth of the sport?

One popular explanation is Title IX. Division I women’s lacrosse has grown to 81 programs, with more being added every year (including at Navy next year). Unlike the men’s game, D-I women’s lacrosse stretches from coast to coast with programs at Cal, Stanford, Oregon, St. Mary’s, and UC Davis. A team from the midwest, Northwestern, has won the last two national championships. This kind of growth is possible because there is no women’s equivalent to football. Football eats up 85 scholarships at I-A schools and 63 at the I-AA level, so any idea of adding another men’s sport is already handcuffed if the school is to remain Title IX compliant.

Even without Title IX, though, money would still be an issue. Coaches’ salaries, recruiting, travel, equipment, and 12.6 scholarships aren’t cheap. Men’s non-revenue sports are usually the first to get cut at most schools, as any wrestling or gymnastics fan could tell you. It’s no surprise that colleges aren’t scrambling to add another one.

The dirty little secret, though, is that many people in the lacrosse community don’t want Division I to grow. Look at who some of the best teams in college lacrosse are: non-scholarship Ivy League schools, service academies, Johns Hopkins… If Division I grew to include I-A mega-schools like the those in the SEC and Big XII, what would happen to the traditional powerhouses? The answer is the same thing that’s happened in every other sport that these schools once dominated; eventually they’ll fade away as larger state schools with lower admissions standards take over. For some of the game’s biggest supporters, that isn’t very appealing. Lacrosse is still a tight-knit community in the Northeast, where everyone more or less knows each other. A lot of people want to keep it that way.

So where can growth in Division I come from? The answer might be Division II. Bellarmine is a small school (2,500) whose sports compete in Division II. The school started its lacrosse program in 2005, and in 2006 played its first full season in Division I. NCAA rules prohibit a school from fielding teams in both Division I and Division III. There is no such rule for Division II, though. Lacrosse is now the flagship program at Bellarmine, who is using the growing popularity of lacrosse to raise the school’s profile. The Bellarmine model could be a blueprint for other schools to follow.

One way or another, Division I needs to grow. Whatever other motives people might have, nothing is more important than giving more kids the opportunity to continue playing the game they love after high school. That’s supposed to be what it’s all about, right?

The Seeds of Discontent

When the field for the NCAA Division I lacrosse tournament was revealed, many lacrosse fans were left scratching their heads. As with NCAA tournaments in every sport, there was the usual questioning of which teams were invited to play and which ones were left to prepare for next year. This year, though, the most talk wasn’t about the fate of “bubble teams;” it was about the arrangement of the teams at the top.

Cornell got hosedCornell ended the regular season undefeated and atop both the media and coaches’ polls. The champions of the Ivy League had already defeated the two polls’ consensus #2, Duke, so it appeared that they would be the no-brainer #1 seed in the tournament. The selection committee, however, had other ideas. Duke received the #1 seed. Cornell fell all the way to #4, behind not only Duke but Virginia and Johns Hopkins as well.

Now, I have no problem with the media and coaches’ polls not being part of the committee’s selection or seeding criteria. They shouldn’t be. In fact, I don’t necessarily mind that Cornell is not the #1 seed, although they’d be my choice. I do have a problem with Cornell being seeded behind a 4-loss Johns Hopkins team, though. Maryland head coach Dave Cottle sheds some light on how that happened:

“There is a formula for seeding the tournament that is 50 percent results, 30 percent strength of schedule and 20 percent RPI,” said Maryland head coach Dave Cottle, a member of the selection committee.

I won’t go into the obvious conflict of interest involved with having tournament coaches as part of the selection committee. It’s a sham, but that’s not my point for today. For now, my objection is to the enormous weight placed on the strength of schedule and the over-reliance on the formula.

This won’t be a very popular argument. There are some people who feel that the world revolves around schedule strength. But there are two things that stick out as serious flaws of making simple strength of schedule a 30% chunk of the selection and seeding formula.

First, strength of schedule is already factored into the RPI. 75% of the RPI formula consists of opponent winning percentage plus opponent’s opponent winning percentage. By adding a separate strength of schedule component, you end up counting it twice. The end result is that the team’s winning percentage, which really should be the biggest factor in the formula, is marginalized.

Second, strength of schedule as a stand-alone measurement is meaningless. Having a tough schedule isn’t a team accomplishment. You don’t have to be good to lose to a top team; anyone can do that. Should a loss to Duke be more beneficial than a win over someone like Air Force or Canisius? It is now. If a team goes 0-14 but played the top 14 teams in the nation, that team will have the #1 strength of schedule. That means that a winless team gets 30% of the formula in determining the tournament’s top seed. Yes, I know you aren’t eligible for the tournament with a losing record. But does it make sense to use a system where that scenario is even theoretically possible?

Even if the formula is tweaked, that won’t solve all the problems there are in the selection system. When you read Cottle’s comments in the linked article as well as the comments of other committee members in other stories on the same subject, you get the sense that they were bound by the formula. If that’s the case, then what on earth is the point of having a committee? It doesn’t take a committee of lacrosse experts to churn out formula results. You can do that with any random guy off the street who’s handy with a spreadsheet. The committee is either obligated to seed teams according to their formula score or they like to project that image in order to justify their selections. Neither condition is appealing.

It’s never a good idea to sacrifice common sense for the “objectivity” of a math problem that is inherently flawed.

All Good Things…

Navy’s season ended Sunday evening in the first round of the NCAA lacrosse tournament with a 12-8 defeat at the hands of North Carolina.

Recaps: Baltimore Sun, Washington Post, Annapolis Capital

It’s a hard loss to take. Navy outshot UNC, but after scoring 4 goals in the first ten minutes, the Mids’ offense could only muster 4 goals out of 31 shots over the last three quarters. North Carolina trailed 6-5 at the half, but came out in the 3rd quarter playing a zone defense that seemed to catch the Mids off guard. The offense never recovered.

So, thus endeth the season. It’ll be a cold day in hell before I’ll ever call 11-4 with a Patriot League championship a disappointment. That said, I admit that I had higher hopes than a first-round loss for the senior seasons of Dingman, Billy Looney, Dow, Barger, Wallace, and Wallin. I really thought that this group had a chance to go far. And before I turn into Debbie Downer, in a way they did. They are, of course, the winningest class in Navy lacrosse history. I guess I just wanted more for these guys. They were a big part of what’s become a renaissance for Navy lacrosse. But as the saying goes, deserve’s got nothing to do with it. In the end, five UNC goals in the 4th quarter is all that matters.

One line in Bill Wagner’s recap caught my eye:

Meade knew it would be important for Navy to create a half-field, six-on-six type of game and prevent North Carolina from scoring in unsettled situations. His worst fears came to fruition as the Tar Heels got goals off fastbreaks, substitutions and rebounds.

Once upon a time, that was Navy’s bread and butter. The 2004 team lived off of running teams into the ground by sending in wave after wave of fresh-legged midfielders and scoring goals in transition. What happened to that? What’s changed? Not that there’s anything wrong with settling down and playing 6-on-6 lacrosse, of course. It’s simply a matter of style, and there’s obviously more than one way to win. But in three years, Navy went from the running and gunning team in lacrosse to a team where you hold your breath on every clear attempt. We’ve won both ways, so I’m not complaining as much as I am curious about the apparent shift in coaching philosophy. The only thing I can think of is perhaps the coaches don’t feel that the midfield is quite as deep, but that is just pure speculation.

Speaking of depth, there are a couple of obvious questions that need to be answered about next year’s team. Who’s next on the Ray Finnegan goalie production line, and how are we going to replace the sheer goal-scoring production of Ian Dingman? The answer to the first question will probably be Matt Coughlin, a rising junior who was a two-time All-American in high school and standout at NAPS. At 6-2, 209, he’ll definitely be the biggest goalie we’ll have seen between the pipes in Annapolis in a long time (should he win the job, of course). The answer to the second one might seem less apparent, but with Ian Dingman’s “Adventures in Commissioning” it’s a problem we’ve faced before. When Dingman sat out the 2005 season, John Tillman turned to his midfielders to pick up the slack. With an offense designed around Jon Birsner feeding cutting and slashing midfielders, Navy scored 157 goals in 2005 with all three starting midfielders and Birsner earning All-America honors. If that’s the route that Tillman wants to take the offense next year, he should have the horsepower to do it with Basil Daratsos, Terence Higgins, and Tim Paul.  Bruce Nechanicky looked like he was on his way to a fantastic season before going down to injury against Georgetown. He would fill Birsner’s role nicely. Nick Mirabito and his team-leading 44 points returns on the attack. If Tim Paul switches from attack back to the midfield next season, Nechanicky and Mirabito would probably be joined by Matt Guido or Matt Bitter. Jordan DiNola and Brendan Teague will once again anchor a solid defense.

With Bucknell and Colgate on the rise in the Patriot League, 2008 will be a very entertaining year.

Game Day

Tommy Wallin and the Mids hit the road to take on North Carolina in the first round of the NCAA lacrosse tournament today at 5:00. Television coverage will be handled by ESPNU, while Pete Medhurst has the radio call on WNAV beginning at 4:45. Gary Lambrecht takes a look at today’s games involving Baltimore-area teams here. 

Navy game notes

UNC game notes

Meanwhile, Lambrecht also wrote an excellent piece on life as a defensive midfielder. It’s a great look at the evolution of the game.