When I first started going down to the UA, the underclass games were small. Ten regional teams for all underclass players. All games were played on those two adjacent grass fields at Towson. Easy to walk back and forth between the two fields. Walk across the street for the senior game at Johnny U. You could see all teams play at least once if you wanted to. You could watch the good Balto and LI teams more. I could watch all the NJ games. The event and the venue were small and informal. Easy to chat with just about anyone.wlaxphan20 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 31, 2022 9:17 pm
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. I did think yesterday's game was perhaps a bit sloppier than some other years, though I noticed a number of stellar individual plays which was fun.That's not what made me think the Senior AA game isn't what it used to be.
Thinking about this some more, I didn't have any players to really root for in this year's game which I am sure impacted my interest level. Last year there was a player from the HS I follow plus a number of other Jersey girls I'd seen play quite a bit and was fans of, including the girl named MVP (who is in your pic). (One of my all-time favs is in your 2017 pic. . No, not she who shall not be named.) In 2019 my HS had three girls in the game.
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 see what you mean, but didn't really notice that as I watched the game. By far the most important thing to me is being able to read the numbers. Sometimes you can't read the jersey nos. in this game, particularly if you are in the stands. That is infuriating to me. 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. From talking to kids and parents, it seems the kids love, I mean LOVE, the swag. Don't know how the swag was this year. They also love getting to meet, practice, and play with their peers who are the cream of the crop of their class.
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. "Property of Ocean City Beach Patrol." 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?). I thought UA was getting out of lacrosse, but maybe I've understood that incorrectly.
It may just be because of personal experience. I helped run a travel sports program for 6+ years. We grew from 1 team to 8, and one of my responsibilities was designing and ordering jerseys. 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. Wow. When Booker gets to work tomorrow, the first thing he'll hear is, "Lee wants to see you." For many years, that is pre-American Select, it didn't seem that playing underclass was critical to being named to the senior game. As the years have gone by, though, I've come to wonder about that more and more. At least last year, after the underclass games were over, the underclass coaches were supposed to submit names of players to be put on the Senior Game Watch List (a ridiculous thing to have IMHO) for the following year. If the UA senior game continues, I really hope they can objectively select deserving seniors whether or not they played UA or AS underclass. To get into the Senior Game it is very helpful to get on the Watch List. Plus you are advised to get as many recommendations as you can from HS coaches and (I think) club directors. I know someone on the selection committee. She's fair and objective, but I do wonder if the powers that be will favor UA underclass kids. I'm too lazy to check to see how many of this year's UA seniors played UA underclass last year, though I have the raw data to do so. 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.
You'd get a chance to see a big name player from another part of the country you'd heard about. Olivia Ferrucci (back then) had committed very early to UNC (as a frosh as I recall). This was big news. I'd never seen her play. When I did at the UA, I saw immediately what all the fuss was about.
In the early years, Balto and LI always met in the final, and the game was invariably very exciting. In one of them, I saw Syd Pirreca sprint down the right alley and fire a laser past Megan Taylor. Then she did it again. Wow, was she fast. Tried it a third time, and Taylor had figured her out.
Then UA added a younger class division to the underclass games so there were then an older and a younger girls division of the underclass games. The main purpose was to put more money in the organizers' pockets. Oops, I mean it was to give the younger kids a chance to play. But now there were too many teams to see everyone at least once. And they added fields, still at Towson, but a half mile or so away so that it was tough to go back and forth between them.
Then UA added what they called the "uncommitted" games for kids who tried out for, but didn't make, regional teams. In truth, it was just another money grab for the organizers. I remember once talking to the grandfather of a kid from Syracuse area who said his grandson touched the ball once in his one uncommitted game. After a few years, the organizers realized the pejorative connotation of calling them "uncommitted" games and changed the name to "spotlight." Different name, same money grab.
And now the underclass talent is split between AS and UA. Can both survive? Don't know.
I know Booker has signed up as a FanLax member so perhaps he'll read this, but I don't care for his color commentary. As you say, he shills for the UA event. Plus he comes from the men's side and has all the shortcomings men's side commentators usually have (always talking about the boy's/men's game and comparing girls/women's to boys/men's). But at least he ain't Stugotz.