This is a link to an online petition that will be forwarded to the NCAA rules committee to stop the proposed faceoff rule changes sign the petition support the cause

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/faceoff-men-unite-again.html

Great idea! On it!

Thanks for posting, my son is devastated and confused at how adults would just decide to "fix what's not broke". This is a great position, yes there are inherent flaws, but all the F/O athletes know how to deal with it. Overall everything averages out, and it is a great, exciting part of the game that should be left alone. BTW, my 17 year old son is in the basement practicing as I write this, not out getting into trouble! Think about it, if there were real problems with the execution of the F/O, the F/O athletes would not all be so upset right now.

don't sign - rule change is awesome

Too late done by nearly 1000 so far, loser go cry somewhere else

Interesting who started that petition. Is it the turtle kid or Dad ?

Face offs are important. But don't deserve all the money some get for div 1

Maybe they ought to go back to facing off the way they did it in the 60's.
Same way the girls do it now.
NOT

The rule change will stand. What's wrong with the change anyway? That being said, you are welcome to waste your time and energy stressing over it.

They should have a face off to start the game then do away with it completely, men and women. They should give possession to the other team after every goal and have a shot clock.

This rule change is a good thing for the sport! The only thing better would be to eliminate the face offs except to start the game. Quick re-starts would help take the game tot he next level.

rules committee got it right, ball wedged in back of stick is not lacrosse. I hate an inferior team beating a superior team because of one skill of one none lacrosse player it is silly and anyway to eliminate that is a step in the right direction.

Even the name of the position is embarrassing...FOGO ='s Face off get off, meaning after you do your non-lacrosse skill get off the field and let a real player come on and play the real part of the game.

i like the rule change. The faceoff has become to specialized. What would be wrong if it became a ground ball battle?

A player running around with a misshapen stick head with ball in back of stick passing and shooting is a joke. Ball should not be allowed to be carried in back of stick.

I signed it, and others should as well. Rule change is just plain dumb

What's wrong is that more kids will be injured. I wonder if you will still be in favor when your the hospital with your son and he has a serious concussion.

Well said! I agree 100%

Modified heads and a one position only able to use the back of the head amounts to accepted cheating.

All equipment should conform to the conventional universal scooping, carrying and throwing of the ball.

Scrums are a part of the game. If the F/O kid is too small to compete in a scrum; then he will not be the F/O. It is a physical contact game.

Current rules allow for perfected unorthodox cheating techniques that are otherwise illegal to use at another point in the game.

FO/GO has become a unique weapon that fails to fully demonstrate many a F/O players additional true lacrosse acumen (if they have them) and thus harbors the distinct "gunslinger" advantage. (Why come off the field if he is otherwise a complete offensive player?)

Lacrosse has conformity to equipment across the board, but for too long; the kitchen has become a laboratory where the best modified pinched head that undergoes no scrutiny can thus become an unfair advantage.

DO NOT SIGN THE PETITION. Let the players measure up with equal equipment and scrutinized face off techniques.

Those who cry foul to this are upset that their blatant form of cheating has come under review and will voice their opinions that changes are tantamount to heresy.

I say it's about time.

From groundball battle ????? Dunb statement.

I think the rule change is pretty much a done deal.Maybe a shame but it is reality and everyone must move forward.

How is it a dumb statement?? Without clean wins:

1.The wing middies will be colliding around the ball more frequently, running in full force towards a loose ball.

2. The F/O men will Jam each other, increasing the chances of head collision.

3. Expect many more slashing injuries around the x area.

The "rule-makers" should be making changes that will reduce the chances of injury, not increase it!

Looks like you are in the minority! The petition is being signed by 1000s because the changes make no sense. You obviously have no idea what the face off position is all about. Go away and cry somewhere else.

Face Off men unite!! spread the word:

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/faceoff-men-unite-again.html

The simple fix to what your saying is to eliminate the face off!

To the jackwagon that called FOGO moves cheating...he probably had his kid re-classed...

Rule will not get passed, however, they may say you can only have in back of stick for 5 seconds...

FOGO is a skilled position and more important that any other position accept goalie. It is the one true mano v mano position on the field.

Some like it some don't but it shouldn't be changed just because you don't like it. Mis-shapen head equals cheating?

Come on now, using your hands is cheating the heads all get warped, you would know that if your kid played more.

Not going away as TV audience likes it...

This petition will not impact the rule change.

This is an excellent rule change which will marginalize dominant face off men and make the game better overall. I agree the term FOGO is illustrative of the problem. It is kind of like field goal kickers in football.

There are discussions on other forums about eliminating the after goal faceoff completely (think basketball). Generally there is more support for elimination rather than keeping the faceoff.

Rule change is a step in the right direction. You cannot tell me a lax stick was designed to scoop "upside-down".

More changes needed:

-Regulate stick design; limited sidewall depth, and width.

-"Doctored" sticks=3 minute unreleasable.

-Ban motorcycle grip.

The position is fine as is, eliminating it will make the game boring. Do some research and you will see that it has been tried before and it was a disaster. Clearly you don't like F/O but you are in the minority. You sound like a pathetic whining loser.

LOL - there are 319,000,000 people in the USA and 1,212 have signed the petition, I would say you are in the minority and the true majority don't really care.

But, to bring more awareness to your cause I nominate you to take the FOGO ice bucket challenge, dump a bucket of ice water over your head, if your head gets stuck in the ice bucket it is an illegal procedure and you will be forced to teach you kid how to play real lacrosse and not fogo wrestlemania lacrosse, you have 24 hours to accept this challenge and about 7 months to teach your kid how to play lacrosse.....good luck

So should there be no more groundballs either? As soon as the ball hits the ground it would be a turnover?

For all of you that want to change or eliminate, why? What is wrong with current state? How will game be improved without FO? Half of the people on the field get off--long pole middy, d middy O middy.

Field goal kickers are not football players, really? Why would you ban moto grip? What difference does that make?

the problem is small minded people that refuse to evolve with the times. We live in the concussion era and what you are all proposing is more concussions via this rule change.

Get rid of it all together? Why? you don't like it so we should just eliminate the entire FO? Give me a real reason and perhaps read the article that talked about what actually happened when they tried this in the late 70s.

The role is here to stay and just because someone is good enough to win a very high percentage of the time does not mean that the rule .

Maybe we should just take out the goalies and have a cover with four holes in it so everyone has the same chance of scoring. we don't want syracuse to win just because their goalie is the best on the planet...

Think about your arguments and what is driving you to make comments.

That is why the face off will be eliminated in a few years. This is the first step toward that happening. I don't like it but it will happen

The push for a shot clock certainly raises the argument for eliminating the post-goal faceoff. If the intent is to speed up action and force more shots, then the likely end-result is more goals. Setting up for a faceoff each time is a momentum killer.

Please, most FOGO kids are the best athlete on the field. The only reason they get off is because their teams are scoring so much the coach wants them ready for the next FO. To think otherwise is foolish. Perhaps you have not taken 20 FO in a game to know that it is a grueling process requiring, speed, skill, and yes ability to play lax better than your third string D-1 wanna be.

WHat happened, did your boy lose his starting FO position to someone else? That must be the reason for your hate.

Your son must go to Syracuse! That explains your negativity. You illustrated one important point. The game needs to grow, that's best for all of us. Citing the number of people in the US is meaningless since most of them don't even know what lax is. Keeping the most exciting part of the game intact only benefits the sport moving forward. The negativity only comes from those lacking a good face off man on their team, or out of frustration because they have not been able to perform well.

I am in favor of eliminating the face off all together and going to a quick restart which would greatly increase the excitement and speed of the game. But if the face offs are going to remain it is a great rule that the ball cannot be allowed to be carried in the back of the stick. Great face off men will still win that the same percentage but they will do it in a way that uses more actual lacrosse skills and techniques. The back of the crosse was never intended to carry the ball as evidenced by it's shape.

very interesting reply and yes, facing off is very grueling and that is why they don't have lacrosse players taking them, they don't want the real players getting tired.

All the parents who want the FOGO to go away should be careful about what they wish for. It just might come true and then the FOGOs will be taking some of your son's jobs. Easy to call them out now, it will be harder when the FOGO takes your young attack men/middy role from your boys.

What all of you don't realize is the focus that the FOGO position requires. In addition to hitting the wall and shooting an hour a day, the FOGOs are practicing their craft many more hours. The are specialized and focused like few others on the field. Take away their role and they are the kinds of people that will work to take away your son's position on the team.

If the rule stands, your son will be competing against one more kid that has the the laser focus that got him to be the best FOGO. Be careful what you wish for.

This rule will not marginalize a dominant FOGO and to think it will is shortsighted. This rule change will just develop a different set of skills used during the FO and you will still have a dominant FOGO under the new rules. They may be different players, but there will always be someone better than another at this position. This rule will have little effect beyond this season on FOGO's.
The FO is too important a part of the game to not have a specialized player at that position.

We can all keep going back and forth here, or just agree to diagree. I am beyond upset about this because of what it is doing to my HS son. F/O men are a tight nit group and if this happens it could ruin lives. Does anyone care about that? There are young men here that are about to start college on well deserved scholarships that came from hours of hard work and sacrifices made by the families. If you truly support youth sports you would realize that there is much more at stake than a rule change. Or you can snub your nose and say you don't care because it doesn't affect your son. Just remember that karma is a [lacrosse], and there could be a time that you need support from the lacrosse community for an issue that affect your kid.

You all have it wrong. the growth of this sport only comes from TV viewership. At a time when the NFL and football generally is under severe attack, lax gods should be looking to capitalize and promote safety. Should be promoting to all the fact that while there is contact, concussions happen less that xx% as compared to football.

Someone above talked about the FO killing momentum...have you ever watched a football game? Those guys huddle and substitute on every play and it is the best sport in the world to watch...so momentum is not affected by a huddle, why should it be by a FO?

TV audience, what do they like to see, a fumble where no one knows who has the ball or if his knee touched before he dropped it or a 75 yard run to the end zone. A lot more exciting to watch the run or the bomb than it is to watch a 2 yard power run.

If the geniuses who are making knew rules did any research, they would probably find that TV likes FOs...What TV likes is what will grow the sport so maybe one day your son could actually earn a living playing the game.

You want to make the game better and actually fill a stadium or you want to hold on to your youth and how you played?

I for one didn't grow up playing your game but having watched over the last 7 years I wish I did. That said, watching a kid P&P run down and score a goal is about the most exciting play in the game bar none. Only better if the kid P&Ps runs down and shoots only to have a goalie that stuffs him.

Growth of the game is not effected by the speed of play, growth of the game is effected by how many people you can get to buy a ticket to a game or watch it TV. People like excitement and FOs provide excitement that people actually cheer for.

For those that think it is not fair to have one player have such a great impact on the game. Have you ever seen a baseball game? The pitcher can't hit, generally can't run, but the good ones make more money than everyone else...

You want a big time sport? Keep the FO and all the excitement it brings to your sport. Start to market lax as the safer alternative to football. Don't create more collisions, eliminate them where possible.

Who cares which side of the stick is used? Pretty sure the TV viewers don't because they are not currently watching your game...

It's up to 1,900 now. But I was told this petition was written and posted by an rising 10th grade Face off student, not an MLL player, college student, or parent. Read the petition, the counters he presents, supporting safety facts. Read it, you might
have a different opinion.

The ones who just say get rid of the face off all together might want to take a look back to 1979 when they tried that, It failed. Badly and was reinstated within the year.

Great post!! Not sure why some are so negative about the F/O position. Must be a personal problem

Just another unintended consequence. And you are very correct, this will or could drastically alter a HS players athletic career that has been recruited under the current or was about to be recruited under the old rules. Some could be devastated.

"Jack wagon"???...your vehement response and amazing use of the language is just what is expected of the daddy whose kid hass pent thousands of your dollars on private coaching in perfecting the cheating technique as his little Johnny otherwise can't play with his peers....doesn't matter, my committed son is anxiously waiting to wreck the kid coming on a fast break who can't pass the ball out of his pinched and illegally modified head.

I'm sorry; do they sell the heads like that? Or is it not common knowledge of the various ways these kids and their daddy's heat, rebend and mold the heads. Can I walk into lax unlimited and buy one off the shelf where the ball doesn't fall out of the front or the back of the head???.....answer: NO.

THE TRUE SHAME IS THAT It's acceptable by the teams and coaches as well if their FOGO has it down. Let's all look the other way. If we don't see it; then it didn't happen, right? So then we should let slashing occur as well. It's illegal too. Let's shorten sticks as much as possible...oh, that's modified and illegal.

Yes Mr Jackwagon; your sons days of not having to actually go truly "Mano a Mano" are over.

And yes my kid plays. Too much actually. All year long. And when his stick heads warp; they warp with the sidewalls outward and obliquely thus widening the head. NOT pinching it.

Let's see what your son can do with an off the shelf stick and no pinching and no cheating.

Gonna be tough learning how to play real lacrosse for him. Better get some more private coaching. I can make a few recommendations of legit ones for you.

Not crying here but laughing that I can hear the "1000's" of petition signers who are crying. Crying all those tear$$$ of wasted private coaching money on the coaches who perfected this perverted form of cheating.

Now stop whining.

I think part of the issue involves the pinch and pop being a techinically specific skill that allows some smaller, quicker kids to succeed as FOGOs. If that goes away face-offs may morph into even more of a slugfest. As a result, teams may gravitate towards bigger, stronger kids to handle face-offs and these highly technical FOGO specialists could lose out.. The trend towards bigger and stronger is well underway anyway, but this just takes away another avenue for kids who may not have the physical size to outmuscle others.

Probably one of the dumbest coments I heard. You make no sense.

I didn't call you a jackwagon, but I wish I had...

I have a FOGO at home. Yes, he buys his heads at lax unlimited off the shelf. There are actually three model heads he has and none of them has been modified. Not even sure what that means.

SO you are aware, at least for my kid, the mesh forced into the back is what enables the ball to get pinched. It can't be too tight or the ball would not be able to be dislodged. The head itself eventually cracks from the pressure-which is why we now know which heads last the longest and there are three...

Yes, he also strings his own (over and over) so that he can in fact shoot where he wants to after he pinch and pops the other team and runs past your committed boy.

Best of luck to your son, clearly he is the best player that has ever stepped on a lax field and is a real man. The fact that you say he is ready to "wreck" another kid speaks volumes about you and unfortunately because of you, about him.


We all know who you are, we have seen you at every tournament shouting and yelling.

Like I said, I didn't call you a jackwagon, but wish I did as it is fitting.

The true shame is that your kid has to go home to a house where you live.

Get a life and perhaps show a little class every now and then. You will feel better about yourself once you stop laughing at the misfortune of others.

I also think that this is what is getting a lot of these parents bent out of shape. This was one of the last spots for small kids that aren't superstar attackman. Lax like all the other sports is going the route of the bigger athletes.

You must be the guy everyone is calling jackwagon...

No just know that my son isn't worried about a FOGO who put years of his time into trying to be a faceoff man. You know the old saying ..Don't put your eggs in one basket. Well that's what you and some other parents have done. You have failed your kids and they may have to suffer for it. Shame on you for being so farsighted.

I bet the players who play on wings love the rule change! More ground balls. Watch, now you will see those same FOGO's that didn't throw to their pole on wing because "pole might drop the pass" . What I always found funny about that is most LSM's have better stick skills than most FOGO's.

Should those wing guys start a petition also if this gets overturned? Thats what happens with our youth today, we teach them if they don't get their way we cry.

I have no issue with eliminating the FOGO. But that is not the same thing as eliminating face offs or the pinch and pop. My son is a midfielder who does face offs. He can play offense and defense and is a lacrosse player. He is the type of kid who should still have the ability to impact a game with his skill at the face off X. The change that needs to be made is one that reflects the fact that we all want lacrosse players playing the game. Make the face off players stay on the field until there is a shot, whistle or change of possession. That will ensure that real lacrosse players play and the skills that face off players bring are respected.

What stops the face off guys from facing off with the front of the stick closet to the ball?. Is there a rule for that? So just pinch and pop with the other side of the stick.

lol you obviously dont know [lacrosse] about faceing off my son committed D1 for fogo is probbly 20 times better on the field then your [lacrosse] son whos probably a scrub

A Jackwagon (useless bin on wheels made from cannibalized other Jackwagon pieces) will be where they place all of the useless FOGO's who can't play lax when the rules are changed

Tell us FOGO dads, why isn't the back of the stick with a pinched ball into a net too tight to fall out not allowed at any other time of the game? Might it be that there is an unfair advantage to such use?

All of your arguments are baseless and unsubstantiated cries petitioning for a cheating technique that has come under scrutiny for what it is.

I'm sure that the native Americans who formed this game would laugh at your whining. Then beat your pinched net ball etc FOGO with a real wooden stick and leave them in the dust.

End of discussion.

Look on he bright side; the bowling team needs some technically specific skills that smaller kids can apply there.

[lacrosse] scrub sons unite!! We call for a petition to stop calling us [lacrosse] scrubs!!
Some are just scrubs. Some are just [lacrosse]'s. But it's the rare combo that can become both a [lacrosse] and a scrub and that takes serious technical skills and the ability to run off of the field ASAP so real players can then play. (Wait a minute....does that mean we are closet FOGO's!??). Where do I sign???

To all FOGO parents,

Please disregard these mindless posts from bottom dwellers. this is an anonymous site so they happily post to whatever nonsense comes into their small little minds...

Especially the jackwagon guy. He is compensating for some other slight in life...

Yes Mr. Jackwagon, now that you have said argument over, it is over. You are a jackwagon and worse. Feel bad for your kid and your wife...Both are dealing with a mental case.

Did you re-class your son on your own or did he get forced to re-class because he couldn't keep up with all the reading and writing?

Oh wait, is that your little boy flunking out of first year? D-1 my a$$...

Forget to take the meds today?

Failed my kids because the rules changed? Really? Shame on me for being farsighted? What planet are your from? You must be the jackwagon after all...

Actually, taking action and getting your point across is a great message for our youth. You will learn this the hard weigh when your kid graduates from school and mine gives him a job...

Are you serious?? Truly pathetic. I bet your kids are really proud.

It's really insane how a rule change that is intended to better the sport and eliminate a move that is not allowed at any other time of the game is getting people so angry.

The best Face Off guys will still be the best. There is a very small percentage of really small and weak fogos that will not be able to compete anymore and that it it.

WHat kind of people speak this way? If you don't like the FOGO position fine, but is it necessary to put the kids down and call them names?

Mine takes FO for all lines but also plays his own line. He is getting recruited and all of the coaches we spoke to said they want him regardless, they are looking for athletes...

the people here who are making noise are the same ones that are upset at early recruiting because their kid isn't getting recruited.

nonetheless, have a little decency please.

My my.... Touched a nerve there, huh FOFO dad? (Not a typo; figure it out?)
So many attempts at insults yet so easily deflected.

My son is a triple reclass and is taking remedial shoelace tying so he can get into UNC.

ruin lives oh my god

The final word on all of the FOGO parents and their whining....


http://cheezburger.com/4341064448

Is that what you tell the goalies parents too? People get good at working hard and training for their position. This whole movement is driven by jealousy. Sad

These coaches that are crying and in favor of this change are all in favor if it benefits their team, for example the Coach of St Leo a D-3 Brad Jorgensen stated the following in inside lacrosse.

Saint Leo had the highest FO% in the country last year....and I love the new rule. FOGO's will adapt once they are done complaining.

Sounds honorable but when you look into his face off guy he is not a pinch and pop player (what a surprise),so this doesn't affect his team at all! if anything it helps

All of these coaches are not concerned with "the game" they are only worried about what is best for their team, just look at Desko at Syracuse once his faceoff guy started to struggle he started his crusade against faceoffs

They try to sound like they are doing it for the good of the game but it is all about their own team. I havent heard Danowski or Tillman complain.

My son is not a FOGO, and I am not a former lacrosse player parent. This is a rule change that affects face off guys who can't play lacrosse. That said, I do have empathy for this rule affecting kids who developed these skills. It is not some HS kid's fault that lacrosse decided to be different from nearly every other court or field sport where there is a change of possession after a score.

Ruins lives? Come on. It is just a kid's game. Nobody got cancer or died over this. And like Beast wrote, this rule affects everyone equally. The kids who are tough and adapt to technical changes the best will remain the best at the position.

I do respect what you're saying, but the pinch and pop takes thousands of hours to master, that is for those who have the wrist speed to begin with. That is on top of regular lax training. Some of these kids are Jrs and seniors who are committed to colleges and excited to demonstrate the sills they worked so hard at. I just think it's too drastic. They could start with a 3 second pop-out and see how that works first. A phase out would make more sense. And what about HS? When would those rules change? Just weird that colleges will be facing off one way while the HS game remains a pinch and pop world! I hope to god this does not pass, I know the colleges with strong F/O recruits can not want this. And for all you loudmouth bullies, why don't you think about the kids? I suspect many of the people coming on this forum don't even really care that much and are just jealous of the success and recognition that good F/O players take away from their son. I know I would not be commenting here if my son did not take F/Os. Try being constructive, not negative/attacking in your comments for the benefit of the game ALL OUR KIDS LOVE!

the rule hasn't been changed nor will it. Don't bother yourself with the back and forth of these stupid people, especially Mr. Jackwagon. He takes home the loser of the month prize on this board.

Maybe he can keep it up and win in Sept as well..

just as I thought, you are classless through and through.

Why don't you share your wisdom on some other topics? Nah, maybe keeping your simple thoughts to yourself is a better plan.

Good luck with UNC, thank god the kid is getting away from you!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgPYLMN92pI

Here is a tape of the greatest lacrosse game ever 25 years ago. Notice the crowds were a lot bigger for an NCAA championship game in 1989 versus now, which is pathetic and also not the main point. These face off guys were amazing. The wing play is amazing. Notice how fast the ball comes out of X and comes up. I don't believe this rule hurts good lacrosse players who face off. It hurts face off specialists who can't play lacrosse. Lacrosse and lacrosse players are better off with this rule change. Sorry to the kids who were specialists at pinched head squeeze moves. Practice new techniques and learn to play lacrosse so that the coach who recruited you doesn't see he is getting a one trick pony.

Agreed!
I respect the Harvard commit for taking this action. When one poster said "ruin lives" that may be an exaggeration, however this kid committed to what is arguably the best school in the country due to his unreal dedication to perfecting the F/O position. He is also a top student, but we all know that does not get you into Harvard. You must set yourself apart from the pack by being really special at some skill. He is just one example of this. Think what could be taken away. It is too late/very unlikely to train for another sport/musical instrument,science research and become the best, as this starts for most kids early on. This is not fair to these kids!

I just read through this chain and realized there are maybe two or three posters on the negative side. The use of language and writing styles are consistent over and over.

The person that responds to jackwagon (I guess he is used to being called this and in fact seems to like it), the guy that claims that everyone that likes F/O is whining and one I think is a mother claiming that making boys a FOGO was somehow a failure of parenting...really?

Same theme over and over, they are never going to listen to you or me or anyone. They are the small people no one likes and everyone thinks is insane. Don't bother responding to them and they will get bored and go away. Remember, this type of controversy in an anonymous forum is all that they have to look forward to. They enjoy seeing people upset, hurt or in pain. they thrive on it for some reason, let them have at it...

Thank you for that, I can think of at least 10 people who fit that description, and I won't say anything else about them to stay classy, but we all can probably say the same! F/O guys stay strong and united, we will get through this!

How about a rule change suggestion to do a face off crease? Like the goalie crease, a circle around X where the FOGOs can gladiator wrestle and can pinch and hold the ball in back of the stick, but only inside the face off crease. And the wings can rush the crease but not interfere until the ball is out. One poster suggested a 3 second pop rule. "The invisible pinch and pop clock", no thank you. It would be a debacle to trust referees with discretion on that one.

I'm the poster who wrote this doesn't ruin lives, it just changes the position. I don't think that even the most ardent supporters of the pinch and carry are against some limitations on it. So why not suggest one in the petition? I like the kid's moxie to do this face-off petition. The rule makers in this sport don't want the ball carried around everywhere on the back of the stick or stuck into it. Let's take this convo a little further constructively, what rule change do you suggest?

I like it, a step in a constructive conversation! BTW I'm the poster who suggested the three second pop. I see your point there. I just think having the ability to have a clean win needs to be a possibility.

why not say you have to get it out of the back of the stick prior to entering either the offensive or defensive zones

That sounds fair, and easy to enforce. Any other thoughts?

Or move the restraining line forward and enforce that a pop occurs before entering the box or consider a back of the stick pinch a possession and free the restraining line at that point

I like it also, would vote for that over a 3 second rule, but both are better than what they are proposing.

All great suggestions. That's why actual F/O specialists need to be included. We can come to a compromise that everyone can live with. How do we insure our suggestions are considered?

Email the rules committee.

Any rule change that still includes the ball in the back of the stick is horrible. The back of the stick is not intended to carry the ball.

Now you need FO Guys with great offensive lacrosse skills, eliminates half of the current crew. Now the wings just got a gift.The LSM just got more money.

Why, because you said so? Clearly you have nothing constructive to add, and are not educated on the position. Please go away

Lacrosse faced off the same way for decades... It's only a problem now because a small percent of kids decided to work their [lacrosse] off to improve.

Competition committee just reaffirmed why Lacrosse will never be viewed as more than the third world nation of sports to mainstream USA ...

....OH, And please don't for a second site Goddell and NFL comp committee changes... Goddell is only dreaming of ways exploit fans and players to protect their billion dollar Empire

you said it...this rule change is huge...say goodbye to the finesse fogo who excelled at technique. goodbye small weaker fogos. this takes us back to the scrap and claw faceoffs and makes tough wing players a premium to have on the roster. the rule change is clear that they want that ball out and "lets get it on!"

The best face off guys in the history of the sport were great players not just guys who mastered cheating! This rule will get the wings involved again like they were intended and make the FOGO need actual lacrosse skills. These are all good things for the game.

I proposed the face off circle earlier, and think many of these comments on top of it are very good. This poster is correct. It is inevitable that there will be rules against play to carry the ball in back of the stick. If the FOGOs want a better rule, they'd better propose a good one for the rule committee. There is no way that a face off rule will be adopted if it includes unlimited running around the restraining area with the ball in the back of the stick. Counting a ball picked up in the back of a stick as a possession is not going to fly either. Those are just guesses of mine and don't consider me an authority.

Basically the pieces of a better rule are:
1. No illegal heads. The game needs specific rules on pinched heads which are enforced like the curve on a hockey stick. There should be no such thing as a face off device that is not the same specs as a field player stick.
2. Players can pinch and pop the ball, but the space on the field to do this needs to be restrained. A face off circle area or a smaller restraining box. The current restraining box I don't believe will cut it with the rule writers.
3. Clarity on the debate over whether ball lifted on back of the stick is a possession to release the restrain. I don't think that having the ball pinched on back of stick should count, and that is why I like the face off circle. FOGO leaves the circle with the ball on the back of stick = loss of possession. FOGO pops ball out or passes it out before leaving the circle, then ok.

This rule happened to take away playing lacrosse in the back of the stick. A rule modification proposal to make it so FOGO's play less with ball in back of stick makes for a losing battle I believe.

Might be the most educated person in the world on the position. Their opinion does not agree with yours. Your scorn, therefore, represents you as a rather uneducated person.

That is not entirely true. Part of the outcry against FOGOs is the face off has changed a lot with the equipment changes and improvements. You could not do with a wooden head or an early 1980s plastic head what FOGOs can do today. FOGOs carrying the ball and making passes from back of the stick in the box is not something we were seeing decades or even a few years ago. The rules makers want to restrain that. For FOGOs to not get blasted by this rule, propose a middle ground. That has to include severely limits on carrying the ball backwards, so propose what you can live with I suggest.

DO you really think you will have the power to change things because you are a parent. It is what it is get use to it and move on. Change is good

I totally agree.

why is he not allowed an opinion? I agree with him, I like the rule change and IMHO the ball should not be allowed to be played in the back of the stick and I believe that all these great FOGO's will adapt and they will still be great FOGO's just different technique

Again someone who has NO idea what they're talking about! First of all, wooden head, really??? Second, if this new equipment is to blame then why is the most sought after head for faceoffs, the OG Blade, discontinued about a decade ago? (goes for about 500$ on ebay) Carrying the ball in the back after the win is a burden, no player wants that ball back there any longer than it needs to be. Forcing a earlier pop out is a great suggestion, because it still allows for a clean win, yet makes it harder for the F/O man to hold on if he is not a skilled player.

Everyone is allowed an opinion. I don't mind the ball in the back of the stick, but I have a FOGO that is executing that particular move at a very high level...So my opinion is biased and I know it. However, there is no opinion that changes one simple fact, more ground balls at the x necessarily means more injuries.

Four men charging the x at full speed (3 seconds) two men battling equals a scrum on most F/O. Scrums mean slashing and hitting and lots of people on the ground. Some of those people will twist ankles, some will get crushed and have a concussion. More contact equals more injuries at a time when the growth of the sport will come from football.

Seems to me the smart people coming up with new rules or rule changes should consider likelihood of injury and growth of the game as the two most important priorities...

How will new rules effect growth of the game? Well if growth comes from TV coverage, the scrums will not fare well. TV likes action it can see and follow. Scrums are just a big mess. The pinch/pop made Brandon Fowler a star in this sport because everyone (except Syracuse) loved watching him sprint down with the ball. I guess someone forgot to tell him he wasn't a lax player...

some of you don't like it because it adds to much importance to one position on the field. To that, the counter argument is to take a step back and look at the two or three money sports. Baseball think pitcher, football think QB or running back or WR, basketball think power forward, center, point guard. Every big sport has role players because role player perfect their skill and contribute to the success of the team. That is exactly what a FOGO does, whether you like the role or not...so it is here to stay.

I think everyone that has a FOGO simply gets offended by some of the mindless people that make comments like FOGO is not an athlete or doesn't know how to play lax. Those same people are cheering for my son and then come here and anonymously make hurtful comments. Makes people mad and I understand that also.

It is funny though, through years of this, not one person has ever voiced these comments to me face to face...

So, to each of you , of course you can have an opinion, but because many of us don't agree with you doesn't make my kid any less athletic and certainly doesn't make anyone a whiner (as that word gets thrown around but some).

My boy will be fine should the rule pass. Already figured out what to do and how because he is practicing every day...

But he won't have to change as the rule won't get implemented. 3600 signatures so far and image it will be closer to 5k by the 10th of sept.

Excellent post. I can also say from experience that returning to the techniques of the 80s will not move the game forward. I was a F/O man at that time for a top team, and went on to play D1 on a scholarship. I did very well pulling the ball out behind me, or to my wing. Today's methods are so much more exciting to watch. This position has evolved in a positive way I would not want to see my son F/O the way I did, it was messy, and yes there were a lot of injuries. I can see tweaking it a little but not allowing the ball in the back of the stick at all seems to be overreaching.

So 10K on signatures can make this go away????Really. Please tell me your name so I can see if you are who I think you are...Get real. The FOGO is here for now but the future doesn't look good. SO changes are coming. Sooner then I thought. I am fine either way. Just don't think the signatures will make any difference at all. We don't make the rules as parents.

Agreed, excellent post and thanks for the insight from the former F/O man.

I posted earlier that I don't think that carrying the ball on the back of the stick is playing lacrosse, and face off rules hurt non-lacrosse player FOGOs. In the youth game learn to play in addition to learning to face off. 5,000 signatures sounds good, but with over a million kids playing lacrosse and about 800,000 registered with US Lacrosse, I am not so confident that voice is loud enough. I think that if FOGOs can propose a rule rather than oppose this, it would be better embraced than a petition with 5,000 signatures. I do think it is an excellent point by the poster to note increased head or other injury in scrums as a consequence of this rule change. That WILL BE HEARD. It is your job now as FOGOs to propose an amended rule set for restraints on carrying the ball backwards, release rules, etc. The people who do lacrosse rules are not too with it - think invisible shot clocks - and can use some constructive help. If it is emphasized as a safety issue, the arguments are more powerful. That's my two cents as a non-FOGO Dad. Good luck!

Good, well thought out post, but the one point I disagree with you is when you say that "some of you don't like it because it adds to much importance to one position on the field. To that, the counter argument is to take a step back and look at the two or three money sports. Baseball think pitcher, football think QB or running back or WR, basketball think power forward, center, point guard." The difference I think between your example and the FOGO, is that in each of those 3 other sports, the team that was just scored upon will automatciavlly get the ball back. Obviously, this is not true in LAX. A superior FOGO will consistently win the majority of faceoffs and allow their team to keep possesion. I think the rule change is trying to somehow level the playing field for possesion (diminish teh baility for a superior FOGO to win teh majority of faceoffs), thus making the games tighter. I personally do not like the ball being stuck in the back of the stick, but if this rule were to stay unchanged, then I think there needs to be a shot clock, so that the faceoff win/possesion is made more even. I am also sure that the better FOGOs will adjust and come up with different techniques to stay on top.

some much good dialog once the insults subsided I just wanted to add that the face off rules have changed over the years and they are not the same for the last 40 years.

From what I remember in the early 70's was 1) the heads touched and 2) the ball was off the ground between the two pockets 3) sticks did not bend like they do now 4)no LSM's on the wings and probably the biggest thing was that the wings engaged as soon as the reached the "X" - and it did make for some big hitting, usually the biggest collision?contact of the games

The biggest strongest guy on the team took the faceoff and it was a clamp and pull back or a rake right to a wing. rarely did you have the wrestling match that we see now with the guys spinning in circles. The reason that you had so much more transition off the faceoff was not because of the ball being on the ground or wings getting it but because the F/O and SSM's stayed on the field and played regardless of who one the face off and you never heard a team win a faceoff and the bench yell "yellow".

It is no one single factor that has gotten us from "The old days" to where we are today but a series of subtle changes and I think this is another change that will have huge impacts on a relatively few players and no major impact on the game.

I am the FOGO dad from the above post. Thank you for the thoughtful comments in response, all good points.

One further note that I am not sure many people know. For D-1, the best FO percentage in the country in 2014 was 68%, the tenth best was 58%, the 42 best was 50%.


So while people may want parity as a result of the new proposed rules, I would venture to guess that the best kid in the country will still be around 70% next year. So the rules won't likely accomplish parity.

It means that the issue really comes down to the back of the stick vs scrums and injury.

That said, I know that through HS, the disparity in winning %s is far greater. The kid that wrote the petition (nice kid by the way) wins all the time. My kid (different age) wins all the time. As a result, the audience here which is most likely the parents of kids between 3rd grade and 12th grade, see it from a much different perspective and I understand that also. It must be hard to be losing a big HS game because the opposing FOGO never losses.

But in college D-1 lax, there is pretty good parity now and the truth is that if they left it alone as more pinch and pop kids get to that level, the playing field is level.

We should also note, the HS rules haven't changed, even if the NCAA adopts the HS will not, at least for this year. SO those kids will still be pinching and popping for the next HS season. As most tournaments we attended this summer play HS rules, I suspect we will see it all of next summer without regard to NCAA rules.

Interesting stats. I agree that there is probably more disparity in high school as opposed to college.

I just re-read the petition, does anyone know the main driver behind the possible rule swith with pinching and popping? It is not stated in the petition, not sure if that type of information is public.

The face off is a great part of the game and has been for a long time. It should remain an important part of the game, but it shouldn't have a disproportionate impact on the outcome. Lacrosse is a game of possessions. If you have a FOGO that wins north of 50% then that team has a huge advantage over their opponent. I can't think of another sport that has a "face off" like event that can alter the outcome of a game. Not allowing a player to hold the ball in the back of the stick is a fine change and will result in more ground balls and should mitigate the impact of having a FOGO that has mastered the pinch and pop - it's better for the game and is probably a better alternative to doing away with the face off entirely. And more injuries? Please, that's a lame excuse to not making changes.

It seems to me they can have more impact on possessions by clarifying the rule around the shot out of bounds. Totally subjective call about who was closer to the spot where the ball went out. Happens in every game 10 times a game, a race to that spot with a kid holding out his stick. No athletic talent there at all, just run and dive...

If they really were concerned about possessions they would have put in the shot clock on every play. clearly that was not their concern.

Safety is lame ? Ok, why?

Why is it better for the game to remove pinch and pop? I have heard several times but no one gives an answer. Please enlighten those of us that don't understand why the game will be better.

This is the quote from the man that runs the rules committee for NCAA
Hind said. “Faceoffs continue to be an important part of the game, but the committee feels that some of the current tactics being used are contrary to the spirit of the rule.”

You mean to tell me this is it? The spirit of the rule? Really Let's not use statistics let's go on a feeling "the spirit of the rule" like they sat down with the creator!
That is your main driver behind this proposed change, nothing more, except for a few crying coaches that didn't want to recruit a faceoff kid

You sound like a crying parent. Look at what you wrote and just put your name in there it's the same thing. If your kid wasn't a FOGO player you would care less like most people. Let them make changes. All things can't stay the same

Safety in and of itself isn't lame, but using improved safety as a reason to keep the face offs status quo is lame. GBs are part of the game and involving the wingmen (6 players in total vs. just the two FOGOs) will equalize the situation.

Shot clock is another good idea, the stall tactic blows...these are all good improvements to the game...Why are so many against the changes to the face-off, there is not another position on the field that can have the same impact on the game (it's totally disproportionate to any other aspect of the game)

You certainly aren't helping them with this argument.After what you said I hope they do make the changes

The pinch and pop is essentially "with holding" the ball for a brief period of time, which is illegal. Perhaps that's the reason?

Thanks for finding the reason (whether or not it is good or not) behind the proposed rule chnage. Seems as though a simple change would be to eliminate the pinch and pop (I happen to agree with that, think it goes against the rules for teh rest of the game), but also, if safety is a concern, then simply elimniate the wings from going into the circle. That would elimnate the possible collisions, and would still allow a good FOGO to shine.

What am I missing?

Different perspective for a minute and just my opinion. This change to the game is not a move forward, rather a move backward.

People got creative and used the tools available to them to create a new move--the pinch and pop. Rather than outlaw the move, those people should be thanked for creating something that is exciting and fresh, not too mention extremely successful and cuts down on bone crushing collisions (yes I know, the tough guys out there like the collisions). But as another poster pointed out, the best is only winning 70% of the time at the D-1 level...so lets not give this new move too much actual game impact as the best have always won around 70% of their moves. So the only difference is the amount of collisions and resulting injuries.

Even if the impact on possessions was great, isn't that why colleges try and recruit the best players? Football rule changes are just the opposite--move the PAT back so that the better kickers can get the points...give skill a chance to make the game more competitive for those willing to do the work. Move the line of scrimmage on the kickoff up so we will have less bone crushing hits. Make skill positions more skilled. Imagine if they outlawed the curve ball in baseball because one guy did it better than everyone else??? What if they said David Tyree can't use his helmet to catch the ball???

No, not that simple. This step backward makes the time it takes to F/O far longer and will just result in the two toughest guys on the field fighting each other for the ball. Completely taking away skill and athleticism and creating a fight. That is a step backward I/M/O.

Ball in the back of the stick is withholding ball from play? I guess they haven't seen a guy with the ball running around with the ball in the front? What is the difference? Ball is dislodged from the front or the back quite easily. They put the ball in the back because there is just enough grab to let the person lift the ball from the ground and move away from the other player. Hit that shaft with the ball in the back and I would argue it is in fact easier to dislodge as there is no pocket to protect the ball. Have you seen how easy it is for them to pop the ball out?

The premise that the back of the stick is some how a stronger position to interact with the ball is plainly false. If it were true no one would use the front pocket. So silly an argument, but one that the rules committee knows can easily manipulate those who haven't played the game.

I would prefer to d up against some poor soul with the ball in the back pocket every day of the week (played for many years and I for one like the new move because it adds some excitement to the game). Most of the people liking the rule-never played this game - or are stuck with the memories of how they played the game. It is those people and the rules committee that need to learn to accept the change and help grow the game rather than moving it backward...my opinion, but fire away...

It is time for the FOGO defenders and FOGO Dads to take a deep breath and accept this plain fact: the rule makers do not want lacrosse played with the ball on the back of the stick. Fight all you want, but that is what they are going to put into rule. I am not against pinch and pop, but I see the point in a rule against pinch and play. This thread keeps reverting back to the starting point of people complaining, and that along with a petition with 10K signatures is not worth much. Suggest something to have a rule you can live with to the rules committee that severely restrains carrying the ball on the back of the stick, and propose it or get run over. This is not a rule change that is happening because your sons are good at a skill, it is a rule change because the face off X has become an extension of HS varsity wrestling season into spring. And watching wrestling sucks.

when was the last time you watched a pinch and pop turn into a wrestling match? Please that is what the proposed rule will create. Silly comments from someone that knows better I suppose.

The rule will be the guys have 5 seconds to get it out, take it or leave it but you heard here first.

And for the record, signatures mean everything

Accept? Perhaps that is your way but certainly not mine as a fogo i will continue to push. Your way is the past, mine is the future and I will fight for it. Wish some more of you had my back

My family taught me to fight for what i believe and I believe strongly this is a mistake.

You are not alone! I think as a face-off community, we are all on this. It is such an honorable and awesome position to play. I still don't really get where all the negativity comes from. What I do know is that playing this position has been an awesome journey of hard work, like that most don't even know and would be shocked at if I elaborated. For one minute, consider what it has taken for the elite to get to where they are. And yes, they can and will "evolve" but they shouldn't have to, because the position is fine as is. I guess this is ultimately up to the college coaches to vote on. I can only hope they see what I see!

Pinch and pop is no better then just putting your glove on the ball and holding it in the pocket for a few seconds. The modern head designs are the only reason why pinch and pop even came about, not because it was ever intended to be part of the game. The change needs to happen to remove this unintended consequence of modern equipment design. Carrying the ball in the back of the head is simply not lacrosse. Most parents never played lacrosse so the spirit of the game means nothing to them. All these parents care about are the thousands they've spent on pinch and pop lessons being flushed down the toilet.

You have no clue what you are talking about. You are not worthy of a reply.

Talk about someone that can't accept change...

Leave the small minds alone to themselves. Better to spend your time having more people sign the petition. the more signatures the better, stronger the voice.

Very well said! I agree as do most others including the rules committee!

I'm not sure what the average score of a college game is but let's say 10-8, that's 18 faceoffs and then another 4 for the start of each quarter (assuming no penalty ad possession at the end of a quarter). So on average there are perhaps 22 faceoffs. If you have a kid that wins 70% of the time, your team will win 15 faceoffs vs. your opponents 7, so you have 8 more possessions. In a game that's easy to stall and control the ball that seems like too big of an impact for one specialized aspect of the game. I don't care if it's eliminating the pinch and pop or not, but since that one move came into play the faceoff has had a disproportionate impact on the game of lacrosse. The ball gets lodged in the back of the stick because the neck is very thin and the sidewall strings wedge against the sidewalls when the ball is in the back of the stick - to me someone's found a loop hole. My son's team has an excellent faceoff kid and we certainly benefit from his dominance at the faceoff X, but i'd love to see what would happen if the faceoff was a 50-50 groundball situation.

what others agree. there are 5000 people that disagree as well as 70% of the current d-1 coaches. You are dead wrong

I really wish people would think a little bit before they post. The best FO men in D-1 have been consistently at 70% for the last 20 years.

The attempt by people to say the pinch and pop has increased wins is patently false. So your 10-8 example does not change the possession outcome whether there is pinch and pop or there isn't pinch and pop. that is why changing the rule makes absolutely no sense. All you gain by the rule change is more collisions at the x, the best D-! guys will still gain possession 70 % of the time.

Remember, you are watching kids play, and clearly the advantage on that level is greater. My son is winning 90% of the time. And half of that is backwards between his legs to the wing. He will still win with the rule change because the other kids just aren't as strong and fast. The only difference to me--honestly--is the extra scholarship $ he can get if he scores three goals a game on a fast break.

High School rules are n ot changing so they will pinch and pop next year, we are only talking about d-1...

The only way your example makes sense is if the proposal was to eliminate the FO all together. Recall, they tried that and it hurt the game so they brought it back.

Wake up people!

Why are many people saying that the high school rules aren't changing? They already accepted the other rules changes at the HS level as of last week. If the face off rule becomes official like I think and hope it will the HS level will make the change if not this season than next.

First of all most games don't result in a 70% win, in college it's usually close to 50/50. Balls do not get "wedged" in the back of the stick, if that were true they would not pop out easily, and the kid would not run holding the stick out in front fearing the ball will fall out. You do realize it is a violation if the ball does not come right out on the first try. And for your great F/O guy, be happy you have him or you probably lose many more games. I wrote an earlier post where I talked about facing off back in the 80s. I rarely lost facing off the "old" way. I was dominant no doubt, same as my son is the new way. Could he adapt? Probably. I just don't see the point. You Will always have dominant F/O men. That does not make the game unfair, it's part of it. I have seen plenty of games lost where the F/O Wil percentage is north of 70% because the opposing team is just better. Fact is that today's methods of facing off require much more skill and practice to excel at. I also like the fact that it allows for more diversity in the type of player we see at the x. I personally love to see a small skinny little kid beat a big football player type. It adds excitement. I don't want to see a scrum every time. Been there done that, and it's old, like me! Not to mention I'd rather not increase my son's risk of concusion.

Do you really think the massive egos of the NCAA committe is going to change what they put down because of 5 people, 500 people or 5000 people? A petition and what we all think of any of their moves-- means NOTHING to them.

This is spot on. The faces may change, the haters may be quelled temporarily, but there will continue to be FOGO's and some will dominate more than others. And the best will still be in the 64-68% win range.

I guess at the college level things even themselves out a bit, so point taken on that aspect of the face off. So perhaps something needs to be done then at the youth level though - for one player to have such a disproportionate impact on a game (to use my prior example and your son's stellar face off winning percentage then your son's team has 18 more possessions - due to one player? You think that's fair?).

I just don't think it is about being fair. There will always be some that are better, some that are great. Those are the ones that get scholarships. At the college level they are all great, that's why it tends to even out a bit. This is life, same thing happens to the smart kids when they hit college.

You are forgetting that the rules committee only is making suggestions they are not the ones ultimately responsible. The proposals need to now be approved or modified. This process involves what the coaches think is best. I have a hard time believing that the majority of coaches will want this. My son is committed to a big program and we are visiting in a couple weeks, you know that this will be a topic I discuss with him, I will report back around the 8th and give everyone a heads up as to what he believes will happen on the 10th, voting day.

Not sure what they will do, but sitting on our hands will certainly not help. I for one signed the position and hope that the folks that vote on the proposed rules come to their senses. I think they will listen, but I am an optimist.

Was at Jake reed this year and there are always some that are better than the rest. the top two or three guys from each age bracket are all getting scholarships ranging from 20-50%.

Having talked to some of the families-not all- coaches that have committed these boys (no letter of intent signed) have said uniformly that their offers remain. I guess we just wait and see.

For those without FOGOs, hope they don't change some rule that effects your kids ability to shine...

He will never tell you that he wants the changes to go into effect. You already know what he will say so no need to report it. We will just see if it will happen

Coach has always been open and honest, no reason to think he would act any other way, no matter the outcome. Kind of irritating that you are so presumptuous! And as far as "reporting" it, You can close your eyes when I do, have the feeling there are others on this thread that may like to hear what I have to say.

What are the proposed rule changes attempting to correct in this great game? Is it the dominance of FO specialists? If so, many commentators have pointed out dominance has been a long standing issue and this change will do nothing. Is it to increase scoring? Do not see how grinding it out at X will help in that regard. A good pinch and pop player will generate more scoring opportunities. Is it because Syracuse can't win a National Championship with all that talent because they get crushed on faceoffs? It seems unclear why the change is needed.

One thing where there seems to be a consensus is that people do no like the FOGO. If FOGO is the issue, then any rule change should reflect the idea that a player taking faceoffs should need to stay on the field. They can't just win the draw and go to "yellow" so a real player can get on. They should stay on the filed until a shot on goal or change of possession, or at least some minimum period of time.

Also, while carrying the ball in the back of ones stick is certainly no advantage, any rule change could be narrower to allow for the pinch and pop and then putting the ball in the front of the stick within a set period of time (2-3 sec.) or before the ball enters the box. Anything to add Jackwagon?

This commentary just out in Inside Lacrosse, some very good points!


Quint Kessenich Aug 20, 2014

Share
Tweet
Opinion

Quint: Proposed Rules Fall Short, Committee Needs More Data

(Inside Lacrosse Photo: John Strohsacker)



So what in fact was accomplished? In my eyes, very little.

What upsets me the most is that the NCAA Rules Committee sat down without any MLL vs. NCAA lacrosse tempo stats and without consulting FOGOs. If college lacrosse is truly serious about addressing the issue of a slower tempo, then data is needed. The Committee did not rely on MLL data, a luxury of nearly 14 seasons of multiple rule incarnations, some of which the Committee considered. Can you imagine a corporate business meeting without stats, sales figures or appropriate data? How is a decision made without a statistical comparison of what NCAA lacrosse looks like now, compared to what it would look like with a shot clock and 2-point arc (like in MLL)? No competent organization in the world operates this way.

What is known about the methodology is questionable at best.

Were any FOGOs consulted with before or during the meetings? Constant adjustments to the face-off has FOGO Nation on eggshells every two years. Shouldn't the committee be using the expertise of Chris Eck, Alex Smith, Paul Cantabene or Greg Gurenlian? How can that hurt?

So now, after seven straight years of declining Final Four attendance, we live with the status quo and minor tweeks. I'm OK with it all, but based on the stats of 14 years of MLL I find these two statements to be comedic.

All the guy was saying is what you report on the 8th won't make a difference on the 10th

I agree with most of what you wrote, however, there is certainly no consensus regarding the FOGO position. Other than a few loudmouths on this board, the great majority of D-1, club coaches, and HS coaches like the position.

I'm going to start a petition that supports the face-off change. How many do you think would support that? Bam!

FOGO HAS GOT TO GO!!!!! Become real LAX players!!!!

Said no intelligent person ever

If you started a petition to eliminate the face off from the game it would most likely get about the same amount of signatures as this pathetic petition against a rule change that is intended to and will improve the game.

I am sure that after doing all those wrist exercises you will have another great use for your hands!!!!!lol

You are an a$$. No way around it. get a life, hope I am fortunate enough never to cross your path again.

Yes, you are quite the comedian. Hope you got a laugh, i certainly didn't

What is wrong with you people? Hope you are a kid...

The proposed news rules are suggestions to adapt the faceoff, not abolish it. Most people that have been around the game for a long time love the FO in lax. Nobody is suggesting to get rid of the face off.

The pinch/pop move is controversial because of the adaptations to head of the stick. The NCAA should focus on the technological "advances" the game has experienced in the equipment players use.

Narrower heads have led to fewer turnovers (no, I don't have empirical data, just a keen eye for how the game has evolved).

More turnovers = more unsettled situations. More unsettled situations = higher scoring. Higher scoring = well, you get it....

As far as the comment referring to old guys wanting to move the game backwards I'll say this: when stick heads weren't as narrow as they are today, the clamp & rake was the move and the technique is the much the same as the pinch & pop. Only difference? After winning the initial draw, the FO player had to push the ball out to his wingman or in front/behind him and fight for the loose ball. Hence, creating an unsettled situation.

So, I don't think this debate is about abolishing the faceoff position, or taking anything away from the importance of the faceoff player.

The issue is using the stick in a manner that gives a player an unfair advantage. Widen the head of the stick by a quarter inch at the mouth, and regulate stringing and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

To all the parents and players that have invested money and time to the faceoff position, relax. Your son will adapt to the new rules. His time invested in perfecting his craft has not been a waste.

For the record, as a "purist of the game" I don't think the back of the stick should be allowed to be used to advance the ball.

Let the arrows fly:)

Please, have another scotch and go to bed. Too early for you to be drunk posting...

There's a lot of anger from the small minority that loves the pinch and pop and carrying the ball in the back of the stick.

I definitely support the face-off change and hope that it can be quickly applied at the high school and youth levels.

At the college level the pool of face off men is smaller and all are elite. At the youth level a dominant faceoff man under the current rules can win 90%+ of their face offs and single handedly change the outcome of a 10 vs 10 game with a one person effort.

Anyone who is not a faceoff man should look for face off win percentages to be much closer to 50%. An elite FOGO should be considered winning around 60-65%

We have a strong FOGO yet it makes little sense to me that we are awarded posession after just about every single goal and at the start of every quarter.

Looking for the I support the rule change petition and ready to sign.

No I agree with him. Might get more attention then rule changes. Many people want to do away with it all together. Someone spearhead that petition.

"I'm going to start a petition that supports the face-off change. How many do you think would support that? Bam! "

Bam is what's going to happen to you when you start that position and we find who your sorry [lacrosse] is. Probably a loser whose scrub son rides the bench. Don't you realize that getting rid of a fogo will not get your kid any playing time? Only a jealous loser would make a comment like that!

It is a free country, all of you that support the rule change are free to organize a petition, have at it.

Your opinions are your own and I can understand why you feel that way, some kid is just much better than everyone else so he must be stopped...

You are the parents that think everyone should get a prize no matter how they performed? Get ready to play the MD teams where you are competing against boys a year older under the reclass argument...

Life is about competition and the message you are sending is --sorry kid, you are too good so you are not allowed to play anymore. Perhaps we should tell the really tall attackman that scores all the goals that he needs to tie one hand behind his back because the d poles can't keep up...

The only teams that have great fogos in all youth brackets are the AA squds from all the names you know. And all of those teams have excellent fogos, so you must be talking to us from B club , B HS ball.

Nobody will start a petition to get rid of the face off, or pinch/pop because that will force them to reveal who they are. Not too many would want their teammate knowing they don't have their backs. If someone actually stoops that low, they will deserve everything they get

I am on the other side of the argument, but do appreciate a well thought out post. Thank you, much better than the idiots...

I would point out, that the pinch and pop creates scoring through the most exciting play in the game--fast breaks. As a purist you surely recognize that all games evolve and new techniques often prove better than the old ones...Many examples in all of the major sports.

But again, thanks for your thoughtful post

Someone please spearhead you, annoying gnat. What's the matter, you can't start the petition yourself because you are a little worm who hides behind his computer?

Hey knuckle dragger, read closely if you can, the post was suggesting support of the change, not doing away with the fogo.

Sorry bro!! Just sick of fending off the nay-sayers! Me-BAD!!

REAL Sports change rules about equipment specs, throw up white flags to the best competition.
Micky Mouse rules

THIS ^ is the point. Calls in the hockey stick curvature rule, "Stickum" on wide receivers gloves, plaster in boxing gloves,PED's, corked bats etc.

FOGO if it is kept as is; needs to be regulated with respect to uniformity of head width; ball retention with inversion of stick head, thickness of stringing used to narrow head width and possible other factors.

A stick check before, during and after games with a stamp or seal of the official's approval of the above parameters would satisfy me.

Then go ahead and attempt your pinch and pop all day. The best FO guy will win based on ability, and not equipment modification which we all know to be the case. If you try to state otherwise; you are lying to yourself and us.

I propose no more long poles, against the spirit of the game. It's cheating and needs to be stopped!!

Please, my kid plays pinch and pop with off the shelf head from lax unlimited, strung by them. No secret formula, no special sauce...You think the 10-15 year olds are modifying heads? Not that I have seen.

So, I am fine with your stick uniformity proposal/regulation. If it makes the small percentage of naysayers go worry about something else, I am all for it.

WOW- you mean to say that if my 15 year old can win 90% of face offs, win every game for team, get noticed by college scouts, save me $$$$ by earning a scholarship...
Do you think he should train real hard... or just wait until all levels adopt rule change so he doesn't have to worry about all that extra hard work and stuff??

I think something also has to be done about the goalie position. My so won 90% of the face offs in a championship game but the goalie saved everything and we lost. Doesn't seem fair. I think the goalie head needs to be the same size as all the other players. I'm starting a petition.

Just tell everyone your son plays FOGO and not lacrosse because when they change the rules he can't adjust. My son doesn't like change.Rules are rules stop complaining all o you and grow up.

Be proud your son is an exceptional athlete:). I mean FOGO . athlete might be a strong word for most of them. Hey at least he's not throwing the ball against the wall. Just work on his 20 yard sprint off the field. Relax just having fun with you and trying to make a point that your arguments to not change the rules are pretty lame.

The face-off is not going away, so what is the purpose of this petition? Why are people so against a rule change that says you can't carry the ball in the back of the stick? By removing that technique you do not diminish the need for a great fogo.

I have a serious question:

Did the rule committee consider that poles should not be aloud at the x if the new rule passes? In the "old days", before pinch and pop, poles were never seen at the x. Poles should only be aloud in the defensive end. what we will eventually see at the x, is two poles battling it out in a scrum, sloppy, disgusting, dangerous mess. There will be absolutely no skill involved because even if the ball is raked out by a skilled fogo, the pole will scoop it up. Having a pole at the x is an unfair advantage. Yet another example of not considering ramifications of an ill-sighted recommendation

How is it an unfair advantage if both teams have a pole on the wings?

The way the LSM comes in swinging the pole it is a recipe for disaster. That is an area of concern. No one gets hurt by a pinch and pop.

I'm talking not just about that, but more importantly about a short stick vs. a pole at the x. The slashing injuries will be horrendous. A pole at the x is against the spirit of the x and provides an unfair advantage if the ball can not be carried cleanly out.

How is it unfair to have a P&P on both teams? Same argument, perhaps you have a long pole?

No poles should be aloud at the x, against the spirit. Poles are for defense, need to stay there. I don't really have a problem with them if there is no rule change, even though they still provide an unfair advantage. If a kid does not have the opportunity to use his skill to obtain a clean win, there will be no more skill in the f/o just a slash fest between 2 poles. Not lacrosse.

What do you mean in the old days? In the 80's and 90's they most certainly did have poles on the wings. 100% wrong on that one. Shorty sticks with their one handed swings slash way more dangerously.

All sports evolve and their rules evolve too. I like the proposed change.

In baseball they change the height of the pitching mound
In football they introduce 2pt conversion and are toying with moving back the extra point

I like the proposed change I think the facoeff play should require higher engagement from the wings, be a ground ball battle and results should be closer to 50/50 on a regular basis

[quote=Anonymous]What do you mean in the old days? In the 80's and 90's they most certainly did have poles on the wings. 100% wrong on that one. Shorty sticks with their one handed swings slash way more dangerously. [/quote

Poles were not used in the 800 at the x, not sure when it started. But should nor be aloud. Both players should use a short stick. There needs to be uniform equipment so the position comes down to skill.

If you are looking for 50/50 then just award the ball to the team that was on defense at the last score..
Will push the game in the wrong direction IMO.

Fogo isn't going away. If you have them FO with spoons, there will still be a player that win 62-66% of the time and be better than the rest.

I like the FO crease suggestion, can adjust the size of the crease to see what works. Not too small like a goal crease, but not too large like the restraining box.
IMO a full shot clock will solve the supposed FO dilemma. I don't think there is a problem, but obviously some do.

Your wrong..played in the 80's at a top college and was on the wing for every faceoff. Get over your nonsense already.

I think the crease or pop out before box are the best suggestions as well. It is a good place to start, and preserves the skill element. It may be enough. Small steps are always better than large. I am still shocked at how much hate and jealousy there is toward the FOGO. Fact is it is a real position that is here to stay. Forcing de-evolution is not what is needed. Tweaking some aspects is ok, and those who excel at the position at the D1 and pro level need to be involved in those conversations. And as for pinch and pop, my son is a successful face off man. He wins less than 50% with pinch and pop. That is also what I observe with other elite kids. That percentage is even less in college. It is a great move that is difficult to execute corrctly. It needs to be an option. A good face off man wins in many different ways, and that should be one. And for those saying that face off kids can't play, no fogo will last past the pinch and pop if they can't "play". They will be stripped of the ball by the wings if they don't have great stick skills and speed, have seen it to s of times. Kids that can win the clamp, but can't hold on to the ball.

We are talking about the actual guys facing off!!! NOT THE WING

The fogo position should remain exactly as it is today with one small rule change. The ball cannot be carried at all in the back of the stick. If a single step is taken with the ball in the back of the stick it should be a turnover at that spot.

Why?

Just one comment about all the concern for injuries - have you ever seen the college FOGO kids hobble off the field after taking a face off? I feel sorry for them. Some of them seem like they can hardly walk (I said some - not all). Today's College FOGOs probably started training for face offs during their High School days. Today kids are starting in 3rd grade. What will their knees look like ten years from now. Tough kids but honestly I don't think it is worth crippling yourself for life.

Someone who can be honest and say it nicely. Some of these kids are damaging themselves for life. It's not worth their future riddled with pain and arthritis. ...

great question.

So can you explain how it's UNFAIR if both face off players can use the same equipment and technique, to "pinch n Pop"??

Besides the petition voice your concern to the the decision makers

Here is a link to the list of current members on the lax rules committee:

http://web1.ncaa.org/committees/committees_roster.jsp?CommitteeName=MLACRULES

Here are all of the committee members' email addresses:

Joe Breschi breschi@unc.edu

Robert L. Scalise scalise@fas.harvard.edu

Mike Hardisky hardisky@msmary.edu

Bob Shillinglaw bobshil@udel.edu

John Jez john.jez@liu.edu

Jon Hind (chairman) jhind@hamilton.edu

Josh MacArthur wmacarthur@babson.edu

Doug Misarti misartid@kenyon.edu

start emailing the members expressing the displeasure with the proposed rules changes.

Here is a link to the results of a survey sent to all coaches and referees before the committee met to discuss proposed rule changes:

http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/Supp_No_9B_Survey_Detailed_Breakouts.pdf

Here is a link to the executive summary of the survey results:

http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/Supp_No_9A_Rules_Survey_Executive_Summary.pdf

Notably, the majority of coaches and refs believe the current state of the face off rules is just fine. And yet the committee messed with it any way. That's a pretty powerful argument. Why change something most interested parties believe is working well.

Also, the potential for player injuries (i.e., concussions) due to wing men running full speed into the face off area to pick up a ground ball needs to be emphasized. Hitting within 5 yards of a ground ball is still legal. Seems to me the committee's focus should be to take head shots out of the game. This will create more. This is a very strong argument too.

Is it fair that goalies hold the ball down with the back of their sticks, with old in it from play? Just sayin!

You sound like the folks that want to change the face off. If we want to cite "not in the spirit of the game, all poles need to go because that is not how the game was originally intended. See how silly that sounds! Evolution happens, deal with it.

I thought the survey would show the coaches totally against the rule changes but it doesn't..so this is a waste of time to sign a petition. What are we going to decide the rules as parents and kids . Give me a break. All this talk going back and fourth means nothing but hot air from the parents who's kids are FOGO's. I understand being upset but it's time to move on.

The rules committee is acting like Obama, unilateral decision making with lack of support from the other governing bodies.

agreed. adapt to the rule change and move on.

Sorry FOGO dad

I don't believe you are actually reading the results correctly. Numbers don't lie

Survey Question 2 - Just over 78% of ALL Coaches and Officials agreed that either Maybe or Yes that the face-off rules changes made before the 2013 season had a positive impact on the game.
Survey Question 11 - 71% of respondents (All Coaches & Officials) believe the "state of the game" is positive & somewhat positive as it relates to face-offs.
Survey Question 14 - 61% of respondents believe its Negative to Somewhat Negative that face-off players are prohibited from trapping the ball in the back of the stick.
Survey Question 15 - 61% of respondents provide Limited to No Support to "limit how long the ball may be carried in the back of the stick".
Survey Question 16 - The majority 66% of respondents provide Limited to No Support to make the cadence of the official saying "down, set, etc." consistent. Current rules call for the cadence to be staggered.
Survey Question 17 - The majority 73% of respondents provide Limited to No Support to prohibit face-off players, in the set position from having a knee down on the ground. Also I'm not a FOGO daddy, just a daddy of a attack-man who benefits greatly from a FOGO

Hey genius the survey was done before the rules committee met to give them a guide line.

Already crazy lacrosse parents of HS FOGOs who are pissed and worried about the relevance of the FOGO emailing college coaches to complain about this rule affecting their son, altering his athletic prospects, etc.

Yes, that should go well.

Not worried at all, my son will still be great. I just don't like that they want to change relevant aspects of the position, without thoroughly investigating, and collaboration with actual experts (you know, like the real world does). Maybe if you were more passionate about your son he wouldn't be riding the bench!

so legislators should consult experts (drug users) before enacting narcotics laws? or fast drivers before setting speed limits? no, of course not, so why talk to the Shammy disciples about how make rules that allow unfair advantage - I am pretty sure the NCAA rules committee is pretty qualified to make the rules

What does being passionate about your son's lacrosse have to do with how good a player he is or isn't? Only the kids can make it go on the field. Crazy and in need of some life balance. I feel bad for the kids who are parented this way. Daddy can't make junior a better player or go after the big bad wolf because of a face-off rule. Grow up pal.

I think that's pretty rude. Shommy is a great guy who really cares about the kids he teaches. My son was Shommy trained as IS NOT A CHEATER! In fact he is an advocate against cheating. Shommy does not teach cheating, that notion has been perprtuated by Gruenlien. He claims to teach different techniques, but if you watch him, he pinches and pops quite frequently and "goes early" a lot! The point you try to make is laughable, and makes no sense as it has absolutely nothing to do with sports, NCAA tried this before, remember what happened?? So clearly they need help making educated decisions d-bag.

This is a microcosm of what's happened in youth athletics over the past 20-30 years with the parents trying to run the asylum. The parents are always trying to get too involved while the kids are too busy playing play station to care. That's why the coaches immediately cross your kid off their recruiting list if they get a whiff of a helicopter mom or worse, dad. Go ahead, write the coaches.

My kid is not "crossed-off" , he is committed to a top program. Do you want to know how that happened?

Talent
Dedication
Sacrifice
Setbacks
Tears
Joys
Weekends stuck on the Jersey tpke
Wanting to quit
Training early in the morning on the weekends
Not playing x-box
$$$ in heads because they Crack every 2wks

PARENTAL SUPPORT

Do you really think I will abandon my son now? This has been a long road that has not come easy, our family has sacrificed so much to get our son to where he is now. Maybe you can try to understand that changing rules at whim is a big deal.

Well said

You are not worthy of a response.

I think he's worthy of a response and believe he's correct. You are obviously a very hands on dad.
Unless your kid is in the top 5% of the players in his grade, a dad's big mouth will chase many coaches away.

I think that's pretty rude. Shommy is a great guy who really cares about the kids he teaches. My son was Shommy trained as IS NOT A CHEATER! In fact he is an advocate against cheating. Shommy does not teach cheating, that notion has been perprtuated by Gruenlien. He claims to teach different techniques, but if you watch him, he pinches and pops quite frequently and "goes early" a lot! The point you try to make is laughable, and makes no sense as it has absolutely nothing to do with sports, NCAA tried this before, remember what happened?? So clearly they need help making educated decisions d-bag. [/quote]

I never said cheating I said unfair advantage, I think Shommy is so good at what he teaches that they are in part legislating against him, sort of closing the loop hole that his kids have been taking advantage of, I have heard him as well as many, many coaches say about facing off "if you ain't cheating you ain't trying" and the rules committee is top notch and they are looking out for the best interest of the game not what is in the best interest of one trainers technique. If this rule change goes through, and I hope it does, you will want to double down with Shommy who will teach these talented young men how to win under the new rules. He is the best. and those that know me well, and Matt is one of those people, I am an A Hole not a Dbag.

I don't mean this in a malicious way, but your son is a classic candidate for burnout once he gets to college. Sounds like your son has put in a lot of hard WORK and at times considered quitting because it was not FUN. Think about that a bit as a parent. This "long road"?!? He's likely not old enough to drive. A long road is a kid working his own way through college and taking 7 years to balance that out. Your kid plays a CHILD'S sport you are very guilty of taking too seriously for him, and that will have consequences. Last time I checked MLL players make very little and there isn't a rainbow at the end of this money wise. If your kid's memories of lacrosse when he looks back will be no fun and trolling about on the Jersey Pike, as a parent I feel bad for him. There is no excuse for not making and keeping a sport fun for a kid in his teens.

I never said cheating I said unfair advantage, I think Shommy is so good at what he teaches that they are in part legislating against him, sort of closing the loop hole that his kids have been taking advantage of, I have heard him as well as many, many coaches say about facing off "if you ain't cheating you ain't trying" and the rules committee is top notch and they are looking out for the best interest of the game not what is in the best interest of one trainers technique. If this rule change goes through, and I hope it does, you will want to double down with Shommy who will teach these talented young men how to win under the new rules. He is the best. and those that know me well, and Matt is one of those people, I am an A Hole not a Dbag. [/quote]

Well, I think cheating is unfair. My son is Shommy trained and I have not witnessed him ever teach the kids to cheat. I don't know how that got started, but I have never seen it. There is a war between Schommy and Gruenlien. How it got started, I don't know but they are both bringing out the worst at the X by antagonizing each other and need to stop. They both teach basically the same moves, and both pinch and pop. I would like to know exactly what you mean by "teach to cheat"? And I would beg to differ on your assessment of the rules committee being "top notch". They really needed much more research before coming to the decisions that they did. I think that is why those rules ultimately will not get passed.

He will be a senior this year and lacrosse means everything to him. He will be signing his letter of intent in a couple months to a great school. He is beyond excited about his future. Lacrosse not only opened doors for him, but inspired him to keep up his grades, knowing where he was going. The friendships he has made will last forever. If I made it sound like he had a miserable childhood, that could not be further from the truth. Lax bros sure know how to have fun, and get all the girls! For us, all those trips down the tpke were well worth it. I just want my son to be able to play in the same way he has all these years in college, without rules being changed for no reason that makes any sense!

Well, you are also not worth of a response. Simple minds like your and his (if he is a he) think alike...

I never said cheating I said unfair advantage, I think Shommy is so good at what he teaches that they are in part legislating against him, sort of closing the loop hole that his kids have been taking advantage of, I have heard him as well as many, many coaches say about facing off "if you ain't cheating you ain't trying" and the rules committee is top notch and they are looking out for the best interest of the game not what is in the best interest of one trainers technique. If this rule change goes through, and I hope it does, you will want to double down with Shommy who will teach these talented young men how to win under the new rules. He is the best. and those that know me well, and Matt is one of those people, I am an A Hole not a Dbag. [/quote]

on one side we have - Joe Breschi, Robert L. Scalise, Mike Hardisky, Bob Shilling, John Jez, Jon Hind, Josh MacArthur, Doug Misarti and on the other side we have a bunch of anonymous lax mommies. I will defer to the lacrosse coaches on this one

on one side we have - Joe Breschi, Robert L. Scalise, Mike Hardisky, Bob Shilling, John Jez, Jon Hind, Josh MacArthur, Doug Misarti and on the other side we have a bunch of anonymous lax mommies. I will defer to the lacrosse coaches on this one [/quote]

Remember what your John Hind tried a couple years ago? How did that work out for him?

Stop Judging! You have no idea if this kid will "burn out" any more or any less, than any other 10th grader working hard to achieve anything at this age!

BTW- it's not my son, but we all need to admit that any of these freakish hard working kids DO Deserve the adulation, and successes that come with it (admissions acceptance to a reach school, scholarship etc)...

About 6 years ago, this Country's culture began to start to vilifying the hard working, successful people in America... so why don't we stop worrying about the choices that other families make

Wow, 3AM? Not sure what to say about that other than hope you get some help. A little too tightly wrapped.

A little over 5,200 signatures in a sport where about 800,000 players registered with USL is not going to speak loud enough.

You couldn't be more wrong. The only people signing this thing are Face-Off players. Nobody else really cares, except the scrub dads who need to be bitching about something since their kid will never be recruited. 5000+ signatures in under two weeks is a very strong showing for a niche position and will be heard.

More than 5,000 people care about women's lacrosse mouthguard designs. OUCH.

Usually when people don't have anything intelligent to say the fall back to the wow 3am reply. This might be a news flash to a simple minded person but not everyone works 9-5. Some of us work overnights. My kid is not a FOGO, he is a goalie. But i love watching these FOGO's apply their trade. I hope it stays just the way it is. Instead of bitching get your kid some lessons so he can compete..

Don't get your point? You sound like a useless loser, just like your kid!

Last call! The petition will be forwarded on Sunday 9/7 if you support the cause sign it and help try to make a difference.

This is the link

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/faceoff-men-unite-again.html

The ball should not be allowed to be carried in the back of the stick during a lacrosse game. The rest of the fogo position should remain unchanged.

Any update on the petition?

The rule changes were finalized yesterday. No more carrying the ball in the back of the stick.

That flushing sound is all of the money for FOGO training. LMFAO.

Final. Go to inside lacrosse. No more back of the stick. Effective this season, 2015.

How so? Do you have a comprehension issue? The faceoff hasn't gone away. Adapt and compete.

Laugh all you want... the real FOGO will still dominate. They did 2 years ago and still will! Thanks for playing!

That $ can now go to wing training now that they will be more involved.

Why would you think the stud fogos will not still be great. My son has already adapted and is excited to play with the new rules. That's what great athletes do. Unlike yourself, and your bench warming son who will continue to be Losers for life! LMFAO

sad day for all fogo players, they will have to play within the rules and might even have to become lacrosse players. ground ball anyone?

Will high school and youth be adopting the changes as well?

by the way the $$$ equals blood, sweat and tears.... you should teach your child that and work habits.

I would think that all of lacrosse will adopt this rule change, and I hope they do. There is no point in letting the younger players use the pinch and pop when they cannot use it in college.

Most of the best fogo's will still be great but there are some that are small and weak that will no longer be able to dominate without the pinch and pop. All in all it's a change for the better of the game.

Involving more players is always a good thing. The wings will be valuable again. No more hiding your teams weakest middies on the wings so that he gets playing time without having to get a ground ball with your pinch and pop stud.

You are a classless [lacrosse]HOLE.

Are you talking pubic high school or prep school? Don't know about publics but the prep schools have always played college rules.

Not till 2016 season. Gives the boys time to transition. FOGOs will continue to spend as you say $$ money training and perfecting new techniques to remain dominant. I faced off back in the 80s this way and rarely lost. My son will do the same. His college coach is not at all concerned, his scholarship is intact and will sign his letter shortly for a substatial amt of money to a great school. I feel sorry for all the jealous haters that are hoping good hardworking kids fail. Like all bullies, you need to address the underlying issues that would make you say negative things about the sacrifices families and kids have made to excell at something they love. My kid is practicing right now, where is yours?

Personally, I'm bummed about this. The petition was a waste of time. My son has gotten very good at the pinch and pop and he's bummed too. The training dollars have also been a significant amount for our family budget and we don't have tremendous means. Ugh. Very disappointing any way you look at it, like moving the goal posts in the middle of a game.

You're thinking wrong. High school always lags a year behind college. HS already announced their rule changes for the coming year and this is not one of them.

FOGOs are and always will be the kings of ground balls!

What about the Catholics?

You can pinch and pop, you can't carry...

HS will use this rule next year. not this year. There will be no more pinch and pop . clamp and push the ball out to the wings behind or in front Ground balls middies
it is a shame all the $ and time kids devoted to fogo..

The FOGO kids will adapt. They are all great athletes. They learned a specific skill set that differentiates them from other players. That specific learning ability will allow them to overcome the impending challenges of the new rules.

I have faith that all of them will continue to succeed as they have aptly demonstrated thus far.

From A Dad of a D player who respects the skills of the FOGO kids.

Same here. Many people commenting don't realize the sacrifices many families have made. Sad that it can be taken away so easily. Guess that's life. Get screwed and try to overcome.

You can't pinch and pop because once you stand up with the ball in the back of the stick it is illegal. The ball must be immediately moved so that means before the player stands up.

The new rule is poorly written and ambiguous. I'm not sure how the referees will interpret it and not sure if the players really know what they can and can't do during a FO. I know many here will scoff and say it is clear, but it isn't.
In one sentence the rule says, ball cannot be carried or lifted in the back of the stick. Then, to clamp the ball in the back of the stick is still legal but the ball must be moved, raked or directed immediately.
What constitutes a carry? Does the fogo have to take a step? What constitutes a lift as opposed to a clamped ball being directed? If the ball is clamped in the back of the stick and the fogo is rotating his body around the stick while forcing the ball down on the ground looking for an opportunity to direct, the ball is moving, it that illegal?
Only time will tell, but personally, the fall may be an officiating nightmare and the players have no real direction.

They are not getting rid of faceoffs! So you cannot pinch and pop, so what? Learn another technique. Faceoffs wont be any less important you just need to adjust to comply with the rules.

Apologies to all. I didn't realize the change would become offical so quickly. I never got around to signing the petition and really think my sig would of been the difference maker. Next time I will take these internet petitions way more seriously.

I agree with this totally.
Changing the rules may force new techniques, but if the rules committee thinks they will make the FOGO less dominant they are mistaken, there will always be someone who is the best and wins 65-70%. It may be a different crop of players, it may be the same that adapt, but there will always be a "best" and be dominant.

Glad you get pleasure mocking kids that are upset and feel let down by the "system". Might be funny to you now, but one day something like this might affect you. So consider the remarks that you make are not at all amusing. Karma can be a real [lacrosse]!!

this looks interesting...

http://t.co/ouVOaDdpyu

Anything to not have to compete within the intended rules of the face off I guess......pretty pathetic

You mean the way you intended the rules? Thinking outside the box is what makes great competitors. This is totally legal so go scratch! And kudos to the problem solver!

Actually I meant the way the rules committee intended the rules. Great fogo's will still be great playing within the rules without the pinch and pop. The others will have to learn to play the full game of lacrosse.

pretty funny except that the ball would still be in the back of the stick and an infraction -

I think it is a good rule. So yes I take pleasure in the passing of it. I also take pleasure in the repeatedly proven futility of the almighty internet petition. I really hope the upset kids and karma don't gang up on me.

They'll just outlaw that too if it's not in the spirit of the game.

If this gets out of control, they'll just mandate that every head and mesh, stringing etc. be exactly uniform no matter what position except Goalie.

Why should the goalie not conform to the same rules as everyone else? Because they spend $$$ on training to learn techniques that help them excell? I say we go after the goalies next. Get rid of them, they slow the game down!

String the heads backwards. There is no rule against it. Frankly, the rule makers and governing bodies of lacrosse are such idiots and slow to move to react, it will be a year before they address it.

Nobody cares what you think d-bag loser

There is no rule against stringing the head backwards, the rule is about picking up the ball in the back of the stick. Regardless of how it's strung, the back of the head is the back of the stick. No official is going to fall for that trick.

IMHO. Carrying the ball in the back of the stick, and having to forcefully shake the stick, once, to get the ball out is unfair. Would it be legal in the front of the stick???? No.

Get rid of the motocycle grip. Go back to old school.

Unless STX or Brine comes up with a completely symmetrical head, not offset, where one can't determine the front or the back...and the stringing holes are directly in the center of the side wall (between top and bottom rails).

Wow, you seem really upset by my post. You can't possibly be so enraged by my support of the NCAA rule change. My guess is that you have a vested financial interest in gopetition.com

I agree 100%, goalies should use the same sticks as field players and the the chest protector is a super unfair advantage, how 'bout those over sized gloves with the wimpy thumb protectors? I do disagree that they slow up the game, without them scoring would "probably" increase and add to the number of faceoffs an thus increase the importance of the non-lacrosse playing fogos.

No just think you are a d-bag with a benchboy for a son, who comes on here trying to stir things up cause you have no life

Look at this two fathers with egos much bigger then their kids. you make it sound like you are losing the scholarship not your son. You both sound like 2 year olds. The rules are the rules. Move on.

Wow! you are angry. Just one question: are you using the red solo cup at home in the middle of the afternoon or do you go straight from the bottle?

Like I said not angry at the rules, just don't like the attitude of the d-dag who feels the need but in with stupid comments. Go find another thread to insult people on.

Nobody is losing any scholarships, all offers stay, confirmed today, letter signed in a few weeks BAM!! Rules don't change the great athletes, as silly and useless as they are. Now get to work on your own kids scholarship but don't count on too mush $ cause that was given to my son!

I read about stringing a lacrosse head backwards as an idea, but think that is still going to be deemed playing in the back of the stick. My idea, and I am not a FOGO parent or lacrosse expert, is why not design a flat head? One curved to a rounded point equally on both sides at the top of the head, and no one way curved rails. Pinch down on the side strung for play and carry. There is no rules on stringing a stick, and if a stick head is cut to have no true "side" kind of like an uncurved hockey stick, then you have a ubiquitous head.

Just an idea. Have no idea if it sounds stupid or not to the FOGO gurus here, but hopefully it can work for you guys. Good luck.

Geez and I thought you would at least say your son earned it and it wasn't just given to him because you made a nice donation to the school. Thanks for the laugh

I heard that, interesting.

I also have a question:

Why not just change the rule so the boys face-off using the front of the stick to clamp, not the back. Would that not eliminate the need for the back of stick discussion all together, while keeping the same skill set intact? Or am I missing something?

I think that is a pretty cool idea - thank you for thinking outside the "X"

Same poster again...my guess is that it would be hard for a fogo to pinch and hold a ball in the front of a stringed up curved head with curved rails. I am guessing that for the pinch and carry to be practical to apply, you'd need a flat head that is a ubiquitous design on both sides. If I kid goes to X with a head that cannot be distinguished on either side, there is no "back of the stick" for this design to disqualify the pinch and carry move. Again, just my guess and take with pounds of salt but it may be worth a try. Maybe try a crude attempt at home to take an old head, clip off the rails and melt the stick to a straight shape and have your sons give a try.

I was thinking along these lines as well. Head with no "front" or "back". Here is the question, what denotes the front of the head? Is it the shape? Which your suggestion would solve, or the stringing? If it's the stringing, then any head strung has a denoted front and back deemed by the stringing. Too many amibiguities in the rule change and really no answers.

I have changed my position on online internet petitions and apologize for my comments earlier making fun of them.

This article from USA today helped prove to me the power and usefulness of online petitions:

USA Today article

After hearing the devestating news about the SWR football player dying following a head collision yesterday, I can't help but wonder if the new face-off rules are putting our face off athletes at an increased risk of these types of injuries. SCARY! Nice job rules committee looking after the safety of our sons!

You are a self centered JERK

If you have a serious concern about this than you must be in favor of eliminating the face off.

Wow a new low, using something like this, to promote yor cause.

I don't understand the correlation?

Promoting safety of the players and trying to "use" a terrible trajedy to promote safer practices. You are a complete [lacrosse] for even suggesting anything else!

wow, not cool at all trying to tie the two together. Absolute tragedy just occurred keep those affected in your thoughts.

It's called head to head collision. Will certainly increase under new rules. Would hate to see a kid injured due to a rule change.

Tasteless attempt to tie these two unrelated issues together. A new low.

And not helping prevent future injuries like this is not cool to you either? Safety rules in all HS Sports need to be re-examined so tragedies like this can be avoided.

Thoughts and prayers to the family and SWR community

Thing is, they are related. I cried when I heard what happened, The worst possible thing that could ever happen to a family. I'm sure HS football will look for ways to prevent these type of tragedies in the future. I also immediately thought of how my son has been put into a position of increased risk with respect to this type of injury, So yes I am very concerned, as should the parents of all face off specialists as well as middies. as the risk of head injury will now be increased. Sorry you are so angry at fogos to suggest anything else!

How can you possibly connect the two? You're just shameless trying to further your cause after this unrelated tragedy... If i recall correctly in a lacrosse face off the two opponents are not charging at each other like rams at high speed...Please don't disrespect the community of SWR and even speak of the two in the same sentence. Pay your respects and be on your way

"Creating this groundball scenario can generate a dangerous situation. It will promote more open field collisions which, in turn, mean more injuries and concussions at a time where safety amongst players is of the utmost concern. The ball that is indiscriminately rolled out produces a scenario where the faceoff man and the opposing wing are running at full speed to win the groundball for their team. The result of this situation will include violent collisions which will produce a higher percentage of high impact injuries. Such open field collisions will be similar in nature to the hit that James Pannell of UVA laid on Hopkins’ LSM Michael Pellegrino on March 22, 2014 where they were both running at full speed for the groundball at midfield. The result of this vicious hit was Michael Pellegrino being helped off the field by trainers. Again, the safety of the student-athlete should be of the highest priority and this rule will promote unnecessary collisions that compromise the safety of the player."

Hey tool bag, you didn't write the post based on safety, you wrote the post because you think your face off specialist kid is getting screwed. Not nice man, period.

So now you claim to know my motives? I can't be concerned about a rule that could increase my son's chance of concussion. I can't be pro active and look for ways to avoid concussion for my son and other boys? Did you know research has shown that concussions lead to increase chance of dementia later in life? Did you know this was the third HS boy to die this season due to head trauma? Sounds like you are the toolbag! We should not promote rules that increase risk of injury. PERIOD.

I think we may be getting way off topic. The rule basically re-instituted what was the existing rule up until 3 years ago. The rules never expected someone carrying the ball while stuck in the back of their stick (not cradling). No one else on field is allowed to do that. Why should we expect a faceoff to be allowed to do it? Because they got good at it doesn't mean it was right and the reason they were taught it was not because of less injury but because there was no rule against it. Was their a huge amount of concussions caused by this for the last 25 years (up until three years ago)? Is the risk same or more than someone catching a pass and turning and getting coma slide hit in crease? There are plenty of areas in lacrosse where collisions occur.

But would you agree that returning to do called "old ways" does increase the risk of head collisions? Don't we have an obligation to minimize this risk if we can? Of course head collisions can and will happen in contact sports. Just think we should not change rules to increase this risk. If that makes me a toolbag, so be it.

Well thought out note. I agree with all oyour points except I thought the topic was internet petitions and their ability to shape future legislative decisions in lacrosse.

You gave the example of Panell hitting Pelligrino in the open field going after GB. Not even close to a faceoff situation. Please give it a rest already......

Genius, can't give a specific example of a collision due to the change in rules, yet. Guess why?

Now go in backyard and teach your kid to cradle, dodge, shoot, get GB's, play defense run up and down the field... and guess what ??????????? You will have yourself a full fledged lacrosse player !!!!

Hahahaha sorry you are so jealous! My son does all that plus excels at new rules, old rules, makes no diff because He is naturally talented and puts the time in. Probably explains his full ride to a top program. You should stop complaining and whining here and get your son some more training.

I know u are but what am I...

I don't think you're a toolbag. And I Hate the use of that word/phrase, especially in this anonymous field of BS.

That said, prior to 3 or 4 years ago, when the NCAA approved the new stick design technology, NOBODY, could pinch/pop&cradle the ball backwards! Not just face off guys, but now any player can "pinch & scoop" with the new technology, thereby eliminating the ground ball scrum. One of, if not THE greatest battles in the game of lacrosse.

For all of those young face off kids (even the ones being recruited), DO NOT worry. Keep perfecting your craft.

Show me the evidence of "old school" face-off guys getting a boatload of concussions and then I will start believing the argument.

Until then, which is probably never, you just come off as ignorant and self-centered.

The face-off moves to clamp & rake, or rake right away, or to slide & clamp, or to pop it when facing a great clamper, were all moves in the "traditional" face-off players arsenal.

The ONLY thing that changed in the last few years has been the stick technology that allows players to "pinch & pop" and then cradle the ball "backwards". This was NEVER the intention of the rules committee.

The "old rules" are still the rules. You cannot hit a face-off player coming in off of the wing position if the player is still scrumming for the ball.

Here we go with the full ride nonsense again. People this is not football or basketball. Truthfully...your son did not get a FULL ride admit it. It's ok to be proud of some athletic $ but don't say full ride for lax. It does not happen. Especially to face off kids.

Ok, we have to pay room and board. Other schools have offered to top this but he is happy with choice and will sign letter shortly. FACT. Whether you want to believe it or not. I know other top kids getting same.

But you are getting academic money correct ?

Another FULL RIDE......Yea ok.

But you never really answered the question. Will the rule change inctease the risk of head collisions? If the answer is yes, there is nothing left to debate!

If there is such a thing as a lacrosse dad on the sidelines of events or on message boards who is not letting everyone know his kid is on a full ride, I have not met him yet.

I really think you are all missing the point so I went back and pulled the above from the first page of this thread. Clearly the original intent of this discussion was to engage in a frank discourse over the strengths and merits of internet petitions. The 2nd poster above articulates a clear message that 1,000 electonic signatures had be fostered. He implies this act of signature gathering will inflict tears of pain upon the first poster. I have tried to point out repeatedly that internet petitions are not quite so powerful as to bring a grown man to tears. This was of course until I read the laser cat article from USA Today.

All these years and I don't know anyone with a full ride for lax. I know plenty that when they combined the athletic $, the merit $ and the need based aid, they didn't have to pay anything to go to school. If that is considered a full ride by you, fine and congratulations. When the rest of the sports world hears full ride, the think all the $ is athletic only.

If you are lucky enough to have received a full ride for athletics, congratulations but it is far from normal.

NOPE, All money is athletic, part of the reason we chose school

Right 30 kids on the team and you are getting a full? And paying room and board on a $40k school would mean he got .75. That would still be high but could be possible

What school? Suppose you can share that as we don't know your name or kids year so you can still be anonymous, but the info would certainly help in my negotiations.

I can promise you my post is legit and the school is ranked in top 50. Other than that I would like keep details Anonymous. I may be biased but my son is considered a very special player by many. Works extremely hard! Good luck to all the boys

My understanding is you can combine academic and need based or you can combine academic and athletic but you can not combine any need based with athletic. I have heard of "full rides" being offered but it was always get what you can in academic and they will make up the balance with athletic and it is usually a lower rung team not a top 25.

As it was explained to us, If a school combines athletic and need based the need based part of the package will work against the total dollars allowed by the team so if a kid gets $10,000 Athletic and $10,000 need based the athletic department only pays $10,000 but $20,000 works against their cap of total scholarship dollars.

This is why a school will have you do financials and you might be eligible for more need based money then the school would have been able to offer you in athletic money

Whole thing is crazy if you ask me. If you don't make enough $ and qualify for need, good for you.

For mine, no need based possible which is ok. But then you get offered a 20% athletic to a $60k school and there is no merit money. Your kid is thrilled and the local lax community thinks you hit it big...

So now you have to pay $48k per year to say you went to blah blah school. What if parent can only pay half of the 48, is it reasonable to allow your kid to borrow $100k to attend blah blah school. Not in my mind, much better to focus on schools with merit money, sorry patriot league.

Fair enough and congratulations to your boy. Of course you are biased, we all are, but you should be proud.

So my question is why would you come on this site and boast your son got a full ride? Is there something wrong with saying your son got his tuition paid for with an athletic scholarship? When you lie it opens this up to people to criticize. I've been around this a very long time, trust me, hardly anyone ever gets a full ride. Most kids don't come close to getting what your son is getting. Stop telling people you are getting something you are not. Be proud of the truth. It's a great job by your son.

Any NO ONE EVER TALKS ABOUT THE $5,000+ per year they paid into lacrosse since the 3rd grade! That could be about $50,000 over those 10 years. If you break the $50,000 over the 4 years of college now your $48,000 school is $50,000!

Fair enough. Just one question. If a kid has 100% tuition and lives home, is it a "full ride"? Does a true full ride cover 100% of every campus expense? One of my son's finds claims to have that

A 100% full ride includes tuition+room+board+books+university fees. If he is living at home, tuition and board were not included in his scholarship. Therefore it is not a full ride. Is he going to that school for free? Maybe but that is only cause he chose to live at home. If he chose to live at school he would have had to pay for room and board.

At what level is the new rule being implemented?

New rule applies to NCAA starting this season.

"Full ride"; as my brother and I were fortunate enough to gain (in non lax sports)
Consisted of the following including the recruiting aspects:

Airline tickets to and from the school for official visit with hotel paid for (but ended up crashing with other players after crazy partying)

Full room board tuition and fees and books and meal plan

Monthly cash "stipend" of $300 first two years and $500 last two years at my school. (Was told to "not ask questions, son; just take the $"

Was allowed to use dorm $ for off campus apartment after 2nd year but had to piney up the difference.

Booster supplied cars as "loaners" for stud players

Not sure if it's that way anymore except in FB and BB maybe; but is was a great advantage to come out of school debt free.

Ok so nothing changes at the youth level?

No that was stated many times. HS rules stay in place for the 2015 season. Boys need to be aware that certain tournaments could use College rules. Happy pinching and popping!

Been to two college prospect days. At one, college rules, at the other old rules. depends on the coach i guess..

One of the complaints about new rules is a higher risk of injury. The colleges are a few weeks into fall ball. Is anyone aware of a higher injury rate on facoffs?

With several prospect/showcase events following NCAA rules, has anyone noted impact beyond what was intended?

No but on a recent school visit my 2020 M/FO kid who came along for the ride was told by the coach to take up MMA if he wants to be of value at the X

you joke, but many of the top FOGOs are wrestlers already

MY son attended two prospect camps this past weekend and faced-off using the new rules. I think the injury thing is blown way of way out of proportion. The skilled face-off boys will adjust and prevail. What I can tell you is that they are looking for Middies that can play on offense and defense. Being a FOGO only at this point time is not what they are looking for.

Are 2017 families finding the prospect days as fall season sophs is helpful?

Interesting. My experience is different. Also attended a prospect day and that coach made it clear that he is looking for a fogo...Maybe different coaches have different thoughts on your point about having fogos play o and d...

When putting highlight video together do you include face-off losses or just wins?
Is the coach supposed to assume you win 100% of the time?
How your losses impact your team are very important, especially under the new rules where I'd expect closer to 50/50.

Great question! My son only included wins. We all know they will lose, but why show it. Highlights should be of the best examples. I would suggest grouping many wins from the same games against the best competitors. Any decent F/O will have a good record against less skilled opponents, and we all know who the top guys are.

Include losses, coaches like to see how you react. Do you chase? Do you check and get the ball back? It's not always about the W

Only include "Sunday Best" there is a reason you can't see the bottom of a meat package in the store. Only show a loss if it is a battle and then followed by a great play to get the ball back or if you "win" the draw but the wing misses the GB and you go and get it. If a fogo controls a draw and the wing misses the GB i would still consider that a win.

Would you suggest putting an internet petition together to convince the coach your son deserves a shot? Afterall this thread is also about internet petitions.

Don't need one, already have a commitment to a top program with a 50% of total scholarship. Maybe you should try the petition angle for your kid.

Of course he did.

Watched some of the best fogos play with new rules this weekend. All I can say is that the best kids are still the best. The adapted quick. Very impressed! All hate the new rules, but even the pinch and pop masters have shown they are some of the fastest to learn, athletic players on that field. GREAT JOB!

Completely agree. Watched a bunch of games at Terapin event in MD yesterday. The kids we knew to be the best before the rule change, were still the best.

Still think it takes a bunch away from the game although there are more ground balls, the kids that can clamp and pop out to the wing are very successful even with the new rule.

The biggest problem I saw was with the ball placement. Depending on the ref, those kids are down there kneeling in their stance for far too long. When you have a really good kid going against a lesser kid, it seems the lesser kid jumps more because he is down there longer...

Was at Legacy super 8 and have to agree. Refs were terrible with ball placement and playing with wistle, the well known guys were quick to adjust.

Anyone attend the faceoff competition this weekend? Seems like the best known kids went there.

One of the problematic things in lacrosse now is the financial and motivational disinclination of committed kids to keep grinding away at events like this. I can't find a fault in families who want to stop the financial slam downs of constant showcases and events like this face-off academy. The residual is the next line of kids getting their ink and hype from the lacrosse social media journalists, which is good for them I suppose.

I find it disturbing that everything in this sport now seems to line up toward being all in for the money grab in 7th grade and 8th grade, and then resting on U-15 age laurels when committed. If this was a big time face-off event and most or all of the committed kids passed, that just reiterates the real morass that has taken over this sport. These two one to three day hit-and-run events are how clubs, MLL players, college coaches and events guys are now all trying to make their livings at once and the sheer volume of it is comedic, and the quality of it only goes down when better players have no incentive to subscribe.

I agree, the top kids were not there. It cost over 450$ for two days. Somebody made over 60,000. Insane! And everyone knows it doesn't matter how you do in these competitions, it how you play in a game!

I agree, the top kids were not there. It cost over 450$ for two days. Somebody made over 60,000. Insane! And everyone knows it doesn't matter how you do in these competitions, it how you play in a game! [/quote]

Hard to convince the kids of that at this point. It seems all about getting Twittered by Ty Xanders for some face-off clinic contest. I concur that the real test of FOGO play is in game situations with wing play. Anyone also noticing how the slope keeps slipping and Ty and Casey Vock now hype out 2019 kids who light it up and will make waves next year? Those are 7th graders.

2020 is 7th grade. 2019 is 8th.

2019 kids are in 8th grade now. no different than the hype we heard last year about 2018

In the fall of 8th grade? You must be kidding.

2 of the committed 2018 fogos not there. Can't blame the families for not spending the $500

So, basically the win is meaningless when the competition is weak. Like playing in a B level tournament. Organizers are laughing all the way to the bank!

I wasn't there but I know the 2018 kids that were in the finals. They are both very good. Can't speak for the rest of the 2018 field but both of those kids are near same level as the committed boys.

2018 outlaws /sweetlax kid is great, committed to JH
Terps kid is about the same and committed to Penn state

I have seen those kids fighting it out for years.

91 extreme kid right there

NH tomahawks kid also very strong

those four plus a kid from garden city that I think plays fl$ also strong.

Long pole from express North can also compete.

And some people thought FOGO would go away...Kids learned real fast how to play in new rule environment.

HS will stay old rules for this year.

So, the new face off rules are working out just fine for most of the boys doing them at tournaments. Just weird watching the biggest cheer leader f/o changes. Plays for Lizards, watching him run around with the ball in the back of his stick after saying this is not the way to play.