Mike French was the star of the great Cornell teams of the mid 1970’s. He was a three time All-American (1974, 1975 and 1976) earning First-Team All-American honors in the latter two years. French set the NCAA Division I All-Time Career Scoring mark with 296 points in just three years. He was named both Ivy League Player of the Year and College Player of the Year in 1976 when Cornell went undefeated and won the NCAA Championship.

Mike also played on three Canadian National Teams (1974, 1978 and 1982) and was a big part of the Canadian World Championship in 1978, when Canada defeated the United States for the first time ever. Mike won the Kinderman Trophy as the “Best and Fairest Player” for his efforts in the 1978 Tournament. He is currently a partner in a well known global financial services firm and is based in Philadelphia...

Mike spoke with LAXnews recently and correctly predicted the Canadian World Championship in 2006, saying in an interview before the games began that if there “was ever a chance for Canada to win another Championship, it is 2006.” What follows is an interview that I had with Mike.

James Land: Thank you very much for speaking with me today. I remember reading about you as a kid and also watching great lacrosse at Cornell. Where did you start playing lacrosse and how did you come to play at Cornell ?

Mike French: I grew up playing box lacrosse in Canada. I played for a bunch of youth teams in both Niagara-on-the-Lake and St. Catherine’s Ontario and was ultimately recruited by a several Division 1 schools in the United States. I chose to play for Richie Moran at Cornell

JL:Which players did you watch growing up and who influenced your game ?

MF: Back then we did not have the benefit of games on TV and, coming from a relatively rural area we generally were most influenced by older players we played with in not only lacrosse, but in my case also basketball and hockey. I guess the one person who would stand out would be Ted Grieves who was two years older. We played basketball and lacrosse together. Ted accepted a football and lacrosse scholarship to Ithaca College.

Back then, there was no big push to go to college to play sports as there is now. In addition, Canadian Universities did not focus on sports as much. However, there were some Canadian Hockey players who went to play hockey at Cornell and that had some influence on me as well.

JL: Which teammates stood out for you ? Which opponents ?

MF: At Cornell, my teammates Eamon McEneaney and John Levine played attack with me and they were both absolutely great players. Eamon was a year behind me and led Cornell to another undefeated season and NCAA Championship in 1977. As you probably know, my dear friend Eamon was a victim of the terrorist attack on 9/11.

Some of our midfielders like Bob Hendrickson, Tommy Marino and Billy Marino were outstanding as well. We also received great goaltending from Dan Mackesey and had a great face-off specialist in Brian Lasda as well as a number of unsung defensive midfielders.

As for opponents, Hopkins had two great players--Mike O’Neill on offense and Mark Greenberg, Rick Kowalachuk, and Dave Huntley being the first to come to mind on defense.

JL: Was Greenberg the best defenseman you played against?

MF: Greenberg was a great defenseman, and I remember playing against him in the World Games also. However, and probably somewhat surprisingly, I would have to say the toughest defenseman I faced (in college) was probably Dom DelGorno who was a very athletic defender at the University of Pennsylvania.

Other than that, I would say that my Cornell teammates, Dave Devine and Chris Kane (to name just two) were both outstanding. I ended up facing them in the World Games when they played for the USA, and I was playing for Canada.

JL: What were some of your best wins and worst losses?

MF: Well, we won a lot and did not have all that many losses. There was one really bad loss and that was against Navy in 1975. We had beaten them 16 to 7 in the regular season, but lost to them in the playoffs. We were the #2 seed and were playing at home when we faced Navy. I felt we outplayed them, but we still lost 14 to 12. That was my junior year and I firmly believe that we should have contended for the title that year.

We did go undefeated and win it all in 1976, so that made up for it a bit. But I would have liked to have had two NCAA Championships under my belt.

JL: Both Hopkins and Virginia had undefeated championship seasons in the last two years like Cornell did in 1976. Do these teams remind you of Cornell in 1976?

MF: Both do, but in different ways. I like both teams. I do believe that we were probably closer to Virginia. They are opportunistic yet disciplined. Cornell was a run and gun team but also disciplined.

JL: Besides the similarities in the game from now to thirty years ago, there have been a lot of changes in lacrosse. What
do you think the biggest changes are in the 30 years since you were a college player ? (Such as equipment, style of play, rules, numbers of fans…)

MF: First, the athletes are much better today. They are bigger and stronger and they train year round. Weight training is huge now and there was much less of that going on in the 1970s. Also, the skill level is better overall now. I used to shoot and pass behind the back and people thought it was the best play ever. Now, stick skills have all improved to the point where everyone is shooting and passing that way.

A close second to the players being better is that the equipment is much better now too. Gloves, pads and sticks are all lighter and allow for much more mobility and comfort. I grew up using a wooden stick and switched to a plastic stick with a wooden handle in college. Today, stick handles are made out of titanium and are less than half the weight of the old sticks. When your gloves got wet back then in the rain they weighed about 10 pounds each. Now they are weather resistant, lighter, more comfortable and provide better protection.

After those two changes, I think specialization has been a huge change for the sport. In the 1970’s players stayed on the field longer and were more multi-dimensional. Midfielders played both offense and defense and attackmen sometimes switched with them and ran back on defense when the middies were tired. Also, on offense we did not pick out a short stick and try to dodge on him like I see teams doing now. Offensive plays at Cornell, tended to originate with the attack and there was much more cutting without the ball by midfielders off of picks and screens.

Another difference was the NCAA had a rule that freshman could not play varsity lacrosse (at least in the Ivy League.) So I missed a year of varsity lacrosse and had to play on the freshman team. It did help me learn the field game since I was used to box lacrosse, which was a plus. However, I would have loved to have another year of Varsity lacrosse …so put an asterisk beside my name.

On the other hand, school was challenging and I was pleased to be able to graduate in four years and then continue on and get my masters at Cornell.

The best games for the very talented freshman team we had at Cornell in 1973 were against Community Colleges on Long Island--Nassau and Farmingdale. Cornell had an undefeated freshman team in 1973.

JL: What is not as good about the game now ?

MF: I think the specialization of players is sometimes a negative and hurts the transition elements of the game. The “keep it in the box rule” concerns me. Especially when a team that is winning, is in the box and calls time out to avoid a double team. Out of the time out, they avoid another double team by calling their second time out. I would like to see something down there.

JL: What changes would you make to the outdoor game ?

MF: I think the indoor game has some advantages over outdoor game. I like the shot clock, and I would bring that to the outdoor game. I think it works well in the MLL. I
would also make a rule that there is a backboard on the end line of the
field so shots that miss the net hit it and rebound, staying in play. I know this is a very “bold” suggestion, but it would lead to fewer stoppages in play and more fast breaks the other way.