Maryland 2022

[wlaxphan20]

I agree, basketball translates very well to lacrosse

ice hockey & field hockey as well

Yes definitely

[jff97]

Except for one slip up against JMU, Maryland has passed every test thrown its way this season. Since that loss, the Terps have beaten their opponents by 8.33 goals per game. Now I know they didn't have the non-con matchups against UNC and Syracuse they usually have, but to my untrained eye this team has the pieces in place to make a deep run. Cordingley is one of the best attackers in the country. Leubecker is a stud, and definitely has some of that Caroline Steele moxie. May is a strong finisher, and Clevenger has quietly had a breakout sophomore year. The defense hasn't allowed more than nine goals since the JMU loss, plays incredibly well as a unit, and Sterling is a brick wall in the goal when on.
So what could hold this team back? Obviously we don't know how they stack up against the ACC's best, but I'm pretty sure the coaching staff will have them prepared for any team they face. Maryland also isn't great on the draw, but won it 37-16 in the two B1G tournament games. That helped offset a below average weekend for Sterling. They sometimes get a little hesitant on offense, but that's nit-picking as they average15.8 goals per game on 47 percent shooting. I think to beat Maryland, you have to be aggressive and can't let them dictate the game. Once they get on a roll, they just get more confident on both ends of the field. It's also an untested group postseason wise, but this is the time of year you come to Maryland for.
Do I think they'll win it all? No. It feels like UNC's year as they have a ton of talent and experience. But I'm pretty sure the Terps will be a tough out for whoever they face.
Also, this is my first post after lurking for a long time, so be nice just this once

[Maryland75]

I think you make excellent points. Maryland has been underrated all year and the one loss to JMU is looking more and more like a fluke. The schedule that Maryland played this year was not an easy schedule by any means and they truly did have an outstanding regular season. I also wouldn’t rule out Northwestern with KAH calling the shots.

[jff97]

Well Northwestern being at home until the FF if they advance is certainly an advantage. I just feel like a team whose MO is outscore everyone has its limits.

[jff97]

Well, it was a tough ending but it's safe to say it was a successful season for the Terps. It's funny to look back at some of the threads over the past year and see how much Maryland exceeded expectations and grew throughout the year. Clearly Cathy Reese still knows what she's doing.
The Terps lose some key players in Cordingley, Griffin and Barretta, but should be loaded again next year. Before all the portal craziness takes place, I see MD and BC as the top 2 teams heading into next year. The offense will still be excellent with 60 goal scorers Leubecker and May returning, Clevenger behind the cage, and Lipkin looks like a star in the making. Griffin will be hard to replace both on and off the field, though on the field Smith and Ahearn both were good in the midfield. Defensively, if Bosco is back and they add Donovan, they could be the best defense in the country. The incoming freshman class looks strong too, though I don't think there will be many minutes for them.
The biggest thing, though, is where this team will start next fall compared to last fall. In postgame interviews, several players talked about how much it meant to get to the Final Four and keep the program's legacy going. Now they know what it takes to get that far and have the extra motivation for how this year ended. I'll be interested to see how recruiting goes this fall, since it will be for 2024 and MD could graduate a large class if a lot of rising seniors use their COVID years.
It's a long time until next season, but there's plenty to look forward to.

[Old Bay addict]

Terps have their swagger back…..lose Griffin & Cordingly, but a lot of young talent returns…..IMO, final 4 bound again 2023

[wlaxphan20]

Terps have their swagger back…..lose Griffin & Cordingly, but a lot of young talent returns…..IMO, final 4 bound again 2023

Yup, I agree. I don't think Reese goes about trying to replace Cordingly the same way that Levy didn't go looking for a new Hoeg, and I don't think she needs to. Both coaches are good enough to look at what they have and find a way to maximize everyones strengths while countering weaknesses. Excited to see some of the underclassmen on all teams make more of a name for themselves in 2023. Fingers crossed & knock on wood we don't get any bad injury news this fall or winter.

[jff97]

Astroturf will remain, but still a much needed upgrade to the facility.
https://twitter.com/MarylandWLax/status ... 8808350722

[wlaxphan20]

Astroturf will remain, but still a much needed upgrade to the facility.
https://twitter.com/MarylandWLax/status ... 8808350722

As long as they are sharing with field hockey, I think the astroturf is a given

[Essexfenwick]

Astroturf will remain, but still a much needed upgrade to the facility.
https://twitter.com/MarylandWLax/status ... 8808350722

I don’t think there’s enough room in the building for all the national championship trophy’s.

https://www.ncaa.com/video/lacrosse-wom ... s-lacrosse

[Matnum PI]

Maryland Women's Lacrosse @MarylandWLax
Good luck to our incoming Terps competing in the @UnderArmour All-American game tomorrow, the most of any school!

Kori Edmonson
Emma Muchnick
Jaylen Rosga
Maggie Weisman
Mae Marshall
Olivia Rockstroh

[Kleizaster]

Maryland Women's Lacrosse @MarylandWLax
Good luck to our incoming Terps competing in the @UnderArmour All-American game tomorrow, the most of any school!

Kori Edmonson
Emma Muchnick
Jaylen Rosga
Maggie Weisman
Mae Marshall
Olivia Rockstroh

Actually tied with UNC, who also has 6. but yes

[wlaxphan20]

Maryland Women's Lacrosse @MarylandWLax
Good luck to our incoming Terps competing in the @UnderArmour All-American game tomorrow, the most of any school!

Kori Edmonson
Emma Muchnick
Jaylen Rosga
Maggie Weisman
Mae Marshall
Olivia Rockstroh

I might be misremembering, but this event seems like it’s not what it used to be?

[Mrs@inthe8m]

Maryland Women's Lacrosse @MarylandWLax
Good luck to our incoming Terps competing in the @UnderArmour All-American game tomorrow, the most of any school!

Kori Edmonson
Emma Muchnick
Jaylen Rosga
Maggie Weisman
Mae Marshall
Olivia Rockstroh

I might be misremembering, but this event seems like it’s not what it used to be?

I don’t think you are, I just said the same thing.

[njbill]

I'm wondering what your reasons are for this, wlaxphan and mrs. You might be on to something, or it could just be a temporary dip in interest.

I have long been a big fan of the UA senior game and have attended most of them over the years. Wasn't there yesterday, though. I have found them very fun games to watch. The players are playing against better competition than they have seen in HS or club so it is great to see them test themselves against the best players in their class.

Over the years, I think they have done a very good selecting the attendees, though this year they clearly whiffed on one I've posted about. Another (NJ POY) seems to have been blackballed due to American Select involvement, or so I have been told. Last year there was some concern that AS participants would be blackballed from the UA senior game this year, but that doesn't seem to have been the case (with one exception).

Though I've seen probably a quarter of this year's participants in HS to one extent or another, I'm not a big enough fan of any of them to make the trip down to Balto. Also not as interested in the underclass now that the talent is split between UA and AS.

So for me I was less interested in this year's senior game than some in the past, but I attribute that mainly to a relative lack of interest in the participants.

The AS underclass event is taking players away from UA underclass, but AS (so far at least) doesn't have a senior game so I don't think the quality of the UA senior game has really suffered.

So circling back, what then is the reason the UA senior game may have lost some luster, if it has? Maybe the game still hasn't recovered from COVID, which I think is true of HS. Maybe it's the lack of interregional play which helps to fuel interest in players from around the country. In 2021 there was essentially no interregional play. Even in-state play was restricted to a degree. There were nowhere nearly as many interregional games this year as pre-pandemic which makes national rankings tough. When it is hard to rank teams, perhaps there is less interest in the game on a national level and correspondingly less interest in the UA?

[wlaxphan20]

I'm wondering what your reasons are for this, wlaxphan and mrs. You might be on to something, or it could just be a temporary dip in interest.

I have long been a big fan of the UA senior game and have attended most of them over the years. Wasn't there yesterday, though. I have found them very fun games to watch. The players are playing against better competition than they have seen in HS or club so it is great to see them test themselves against the best players in their class.

Over the years, I think they have done a very good selecting the attendees, though this year they clearly whiffed on one I've posted about. Another (NJ POY) seems to have been blackballed due to American Select involvement, or so I have been told. Last year there was some concern that AS participants would be blackballed from the UA senior game this year, but that doesn't seem to have been the case (with one exception).

Though I've seen probably a quarter of this year's participants in HS to one extent or another, I'm not a big enough fan of any of them to make the trip down to Balto. Also not as interested in the underclass now that the talent is split between UA and AS.

So for me I was less interested in this year's senior game than some in the past, but I attribute that mainly to a relative lack of interest in the participants.

The AS underclass event is taking players away from UA underclass, but AS (so far at least) doesn't have a senior game so I don't think the quality of the UA senior game has really suffered.

So circling back, what then is the reason the UA senior game may have lost some luster, if it has? Maybe the game still hasn't recovered from COVID, which I think is true of HS. Maybe it's the lack of interregional play which helps to fuel interest in players from around the country. In 2021 there was essentially no interregional play. Even in-state play was restricted to a degree. There were nowhere nearly as many interregional games this year as pre-pandemic which makes national rankings tough. When it is hard to rank teams, perhaps there is less interest in the game on a national level and correspondingly less interest in the UA?

Surely - my observation had to do with pretty much everything except quality of play/attendees/the on-field product. I thought that was fine. There have definitely been closer games. This may seem counterintuitive, because there is always discussion about how much more skilled younger players are now than in the past, but I actually feel that the lacrosse played in the Senior AA games was better in the mid-early 2010s, but I'm probably just being biased. That's not what made me think the Senior AA game isn't what it used to be.

Outside of the actual lacrosse being played, it seemed to me like the tournament directors (whether that is CSE or UA) cut some corners cost-wise and it showed. The biggest thing that jumped out to me were the uniforms. They were generic, base-model, stock uniforms with no customization or names on the back. I know that seems like a weak thing to point out but when you look at the uniforms from 2012-2021 there's a huge difference. I know in the grand scheme of things it's not a big deal, but I feel like that is a sizable part of the experience for the senior athletes. The event set the bar for itself for years, and I felt this 2022 version was way below it.

Secondly, this new logo that the tournament has been running with, that oval:


I think from a graphic design standpoint it's awful. It looks like something I'd get at It's a Breeze/Breezin Up/any other iteration of that store from the Jersey Shore or OBX. Cute for beach town names, but not for the UA Senior All-American game. I don't know if the logo changed because CSE has taken on a larger role or taken it over completely (even though I thought I saw it still being called the UA Senior AA Game?).

It may just be because of personal experience. I helped run a travel sports program for 6+ years and ordered hundreds of uniforms. Funnily enough, we used Under Armour. Each kid got 2-3 jerseys and we ordered both custom and stock ones. The difference jumped out to me almost immediately.

I get that these are all very surface-level and shallow things to point out, and there is probably an explanation for it - inflation, supply chain, possibly new tournament directors, etc., but they stood out to me.

JFF here are just some examples of past uniforms (sorry for the shoddy quality):

2013:


2014:


2015:


2017:


2021:


And it's actually funny you mention black-balling/whiffing/etc. - I was watching the girl's Highlight Division championship today and most of the broadcast was just Booker giving a sales pitch for the Under Armour All-America Underclass games and he specifically said one of the fastest ways to ensure you don't get selected as an Senior All-American is skipping out on the underclass games. He also mentioned a specific upcoming tournament players should play in in order to get "seen" for the Senior AA game. I think it was a tournament sponsored by New Balance/Brine, I'm not sure.

[Mrs@inthe8m]

I agree with wlaxphan that uniforms and branding are not the same quality. The event is now the All-American Games, not UA All-American, since UA got out of the lax equipment business for financial reasons. UA still makes lacrosse uniforms but my understanding is UA is no longer a sponsor, thus not part of the event name or logo. The 2 or 3 games prior to Covid I remember as being competitive throughout. If I recall all three went to OT. The 2 games since Covid pretty lopsided and I did not think the level of play top to bottom matched pre-Covid. It's also underwhelming at this stage having so many players representing the same college programs. Almost half the players are headed to four schools. No doubt those programs attract better players, but there are schools that are consistently top 15 lately with little to no representation this year. For example, Loyola, Florida, JMU, Denver, Stony Brook, and Princeton had a grand total of 3 players in this year's senior game. There should not be quotas, but come on. I find it hard to believe 3/4 of UNC and UMD's 2022 classes and 1/2 of BC and Stanford's 2022 classes are better than all but 3 players headed to those 6 schools.

[wlaxphan20]

I agree with wlaxphan that uniforms and branding are not the same quality. The event is now the All-American Games, not UA All-American, since UA got out of the lax equipment business for financial reasons. UA still makes lacrosse uniforms but my understanding is UA is no longer a sponsor, thus not part of the event name or logo. The 2 or 3 games prior to Covid I remember as being competitive throughout. If I recall all three went to OT. The 2 games since Covid pretty lopsided and I did not think the level of play top to bottom matched pre-Covid. It's also underwhelming at this stage having so many players representing the same college programs. Almost half the players are headed to four schools. No doubt those programs attract better players, but there are schools that are consistently top 15 lately with little to no representation this year. For example, Loyola, Florida, JMU, Denver, Stony Brook, and Princeton had a grand total of 3 players in this year's senior game. There should not be quotas, but come on. I find it hard to believe 3/4 of UNC and UMD's 2022 classes and 1/2 of BC and Stanford's 2022 classes are better than all but 3 players headed to those 6 schools.

Thanks for confirming that. I had a feeling the tournament directors had changed, but I think I just kept seeing it referenced as UA All-American on social media from other people saying it out of habit. That would explain a lot of what I saw.

[Mrs@inthe8m]

I agree with wlaxphan that uniforms and branding are not the same quality. The event is now the All-American Games, not UA All-American, since UA got out of the lax equipment business for financial reasons. UA still makes lacrosse uniforms but my understanding is UA is no longer a sponsor, thus not part of the event name or logo. The 2 or 3 games prior to Covid I remember as being competitive throughout. If I recall all three went to OT. The 2 games since Covid pretty lopsided and I did not think the level of play top to bottom matched pre-Covid. It's also underwhelming at this stage having so many players representing the same college programs. Almost half the players are headed to four schools. No doubt those programs attract better players, but there are schools that are consistently top 15 lately with little to no representation this year. For example, Loyola, Florida, JMU, Denver, Stony Brook, and Princeton had a grand total of 3 players in this year's senior game. There should not be quotas, but come on. I find it hard to believe 3/4 of UNC and UMD's 2022 classes and 1/2 of BC and Stanford's 2022 classes are better than all but 3 players headed to those 6 schools.

Thanks for confirming that. I had a feeling the tournament directors had changed, but I think I just kept seeing it referenced as UA All-American on social media from other people saying it out of habit. That would explain a lot of what I saw.

CSE has always run it, that part has not changed. I'm not sure if UA provided financial support beyond unis, sticks, goggles, etc. but I'm guessing they covered all the (very nice) gear. The watch list is something new because there are now other events competing for players. There was also the fallout between CSE and IWLCA about cancelling tournaments that CSE ran when Covid hit. IWLCA and CSE parted ways and CSE now uses the watch list to entice players to go to their tournaments and events.

[wlaxphan20]

I agree with wlaxphan that uniforms and branding are not the same quality. The event is now the All-American Games, not UA All-American, since UA got out of the lax equipment business for financial reasons. UA still makes lacrosse uniforms but my understanding is UA is no longer a sponsor, thus not part of the event name or logo. The 2 or 3 games prior to Covid I remember as being competitive throughout. If I recall all three went to OT. The 2 games since Covid pretty lopsided and I did not think the level of play top to bottom matched pre-Covid. It's also underwhelming at this stage having so many players representing the same college programs. Almost half the players are headed to four schools. No doubt those programs attract better players, but there are schools that are consistently top 15 lately with little to no representation this year. For example, Loyola, Florida, JMU, Denver, Stony Brook, and Princeton had a grand total of 3 players in this year's senior game. There should not be quotas, but come on. I find it hard to believe 3/4 of UNC and UMD's 2022 classes and 1/2 of BC and Stanford's 2022 classes are better than all but 3 players headed to those 6 schools.

Thanks for confirming that. I had a feeling the tournament directors had changed, but I think I just kept seeing it referenced as UA All-American on social media from other people saying it out of habit. That would explain a lot of what I saw.

CSE has always run it, that part has not changed. I'm not sure if UA provided financial support beyond unis, sticks, goggles, etc. but I'm guessing they covered all the (very nice) gear. The watch list is something new because there are now other events competing for players. There was also the fallout between CSE and IWLCA about cancelling tournaments that CSE ran when Covid hit. IWLCA and CSE parted ways and CSE now uses the watch list to entice players to go to their tournaments and events.

Thank you for the info! Definitely a lot more players in the tournament & showcase field than there were 10 years ago.