~Salisbury 2023~

[kramerica.inc]

How do the Gulls look heading into the spring? How did the fall go?

Any news/reports/info from the Eastern Shore?

What does the '23 lineup look like? Schedule?

[ShoreThingMD]

Roster is up (not sure if it's final yet, but it's live)
https://suseagulls.com/sports/mens-lacrosse/roster/2023

Schedule too
https://suseagulls.com/sports/mens-lacr ... edule/2023

Very early depth chart, maybe?

Goalie: Shahin
Defense: Timmons, Ballard,Gilfillan
DM: Woodward, Glushakow
LSM: DeFazio
Midfield: Nestor, White, Dowd, Bromwell
Attack: Ferrara, Brown, Carozza/Thrasher
FO: McPartland + another Malamphy

Transfers (in): Brown (St. Mary's), Soundan (UMass-Lowell)

Big losses: Posner, Jarrett Bromwell, Saulino.

[youthathletics]

NO SMCM. Wanted to see Brown play his old squad.

[Jumbo]

NO SMCM. Wanted to see Brown play his old squad.

Scrimmage in Feb?

[LaxDad1967]

Roster is up (not sure if it's final yet, but it's live)
https://suseagulls.com/sports/mens-lacrosse/roster/2023

Schedule too
https://suseagulls.com/sports/mens-lacr ... edule/2023

Very early depth chart, maybe?

Goalie: Shahin
Defense: Timmons, Ballard,Gilfillan
DM: Woodward, Glushakow
LSM: DeFazio
Midfield: Nestor, White, Dowd, Bromwell
Attack: Ferrara, Brown, Carozza/Thrasher
FO: McPartland + another Malamphy

Transfers (in): Brown (St. Mary's), Soundan (UMass-Lowell)

Big losses: Posner, Jarrett Bromwell, Saulino.

Cross has to be over 30 years old at this point. Hope he’s getting his doctorate with how long he’s been in school

[youthathletics]

[DeepPocket]

The game is a lot better when the best players are in it. I wish more of the greats were able to/chose to stick around longer, across the board.

[richard]

I absolutely disagree. Six years is two too many within the parameters of college lacrosse. If a guy is 19 or 20 when he is in his freshman year then he’s 23-24 his senior year. Two extra years on top is not good. 26 year olds vs 18 year olds is not even close to being fun. If you are worth your salt move on to the next level. This is not good for the college game no matter if it is Salisbury, RIT, Cabrini or Cobbleskill.

[Jumbo]

I absolutely disagree. Six years is two too many within the parameters of college lacrosse. If a guy is 19 or 20 when he is in his freshman year then he’s 23-24 his senior year. Two extra years on top is not good. 26 year olds vs 18 year olds is not even close to being fun. If you are worth your salt move on to the next level. This is not good for the college game no matter if it is Salisbury, RIT, Cabrini or Cobbleskill.

RIT and the national championship disagree.

But I agree with you. Ncaa screwed up. And it is too late to correct it.

[DeepPocket]

I absolutely disagree. Six years is two too many within the parameters of college lacrosse. If a guy is 19 or 20 when he is in his freshman year then he’s 23-24 his senior year. Two extra years on top is not good. 26 year olds vs 18 year olds is not even close to being fun. If you are worth your salt move on to the next level. This is not good for the college game no matter if it is Salisbury, RIT, Cabrini or Cobbleskill.

My position is that the quality of the game on the field is better with the best players playing it. And while I think you’ve argued separate or different concerns, I’ll go ahead and bite, because I disagree with those positions you’ve taken as well.

You can prognosticate that it’s not good for the college game, heck you can even argue that it might not be good long term for the pro game (players coming in with as much as two less years of average career span remaining). But factually, the entity who sets the “parameters of college lacrosse” has decided that 6 is not too many years.

And furthermore, York had a Freshman start at attack against some of the toughest teams in the country, who also sported 5th and 6th year players. He broke the team’s single season scoring record, and looked to me like he was having some fun doing it. How about, if a freshman is worth his salt, he can earn time and compete at this level.

Additional eligibility didn’t just start either. Pre-COVID, Malamphy was something like 26 when he was dominating the faceoff circle. He just needed his coach and school to go to bat for him on medical reasoning, and for them to have enough pull to make it happen. Was he bad for Salisbury/the game? You can’t tell me if he rolled right into a pro career, that he wouldn’t have been effective. He was absolutely worth his salt, but being a part-time pro lacrosse player isn’t for everyone.

[Laxwatch2007]

I have heard from a couple of different people that Cross may be moving to midfield for the 2023 season. Can anyone confirm?

[Gullible]

I have heard from a couple of different people that Cross may be moving to midfield for the 2023 season. Can anyone confirm?

It wouldn't surprise me if he played some midfield along with attack- There is some precedent for players playing both positions during games (i.e., Kyler Berkman, Josh Melton) - I'd guess the Gulls are trying to find a way to get Carozza and Thrasher on the field at the same time.

[kramerica.inc]

I have heard from a couple of different people that Cross may be moving to midfield for the 2023 season. Can anyone confirm?

I can tell you that Brown is now at attack.
Gotta make room.

[Laxguy703]

I have heard from a couple of different people that Cross may be moving to midfield for the 2023 season. Can anyone confirm?

It wouldn't surprise me if he played some midfield along with attack- There is some precedent for players playing both positions during games (i.e., Kyler Berkman, Josh Melton) - I'd guess the Gulls are trying to find a way to get Carozza and Thrasher on the field at the same time.

Although it would be very fun to watch, I really don’t understand the purpose of having him there. He’s the best player on the gulls and putting him at midfield would mean that he would be off the field during some possessions. He’s too good of a player to not be on the field at all times. Plus they would be losing him on fast breaks and all transition plays.

It really comes down to what the gulls think would be more productive.

An offense of:
A: Brown, Ferrera, Thrasher/Carozza
M: Dowd, Nestor, Bromwell/White

Or

A: Brown, Thrasher, Carozza
M: Dowd, Ferrara, Nestor/White/Bromwell

Teams would definitely double pole option B because Thrasher and Carozza aren’t much of a dodging threat and you just can’t give Dowd or Ferrera a shortie.

I personally think the cons outweigh the pros of having cross at midfield. Thoughts?

[kramerica.inc]

Pick your poison. Gonna be some goals scored this year.
Even by Salisbury standards.

[RamsFan]

I absolutely disagree. Six years is two too many within the parameters of college lacrosse. If a guy is 19 or 20 when he is in his freshman year then he’s 23-24 his senior year. Two extra years on top is not good. 26 year olds vs 18 year olds is not even close to being fun. If you are worth your salt move on to the next level. This is not good for the college game no matter if it is Salisbury, RIT, Cabrini or Cobbleskill.

The kids in several of these classes got screwed out of one entire season, and a good part of a second....while i agree 6 years is a long time, given what an overall crappy college experience they had, I feel like its a small benefit to help the kids who have been dealt a bad hand. And if they choose to use the eligibility at the same school for whatever reason rather than moving on (Up to D1?) somewhere else, that should be their prerogative. These kids are playing for the love of the game at d3 since they certainly arent doing it for the money (or even scholarship $)

Biggest downside is that it can be to the detriment to some of the current frosh and soph players who are competing against "older" players who are staying longer than expected. Not optimal, but there are still many youngsters who are getting playing time, even with the tougher competition. And when they made their school choices, its something that certainly the current freshman should have taken into consideration since the eligibility rules were known.

and as far as 18 vs 25 yr olds not being fun....there were a number of freshman I saw compete very well with 5th year players last season

[Jumbo]

I absolutely disagree. Six years is two too many within the parameters of college lacrosse. If a guy is 19 or 20 when he is in his freshman year then he’s 23-24 his senior year. Two extra years on top is not good. 26 year olds vs 18 year olds is not even close to being fun. If you are worth your salt move on to the next level. This is not good for the college game no matter if it is Salisbury, RIT, Cabrini or Cobbleskill.

The kids in several of these classes got screwed out of one entire season, and a good part of a second....while i agree 6 years is a long time, given what an overall crappy college experience they had, I feel like its a small benefit to help the kids who have been dealt a bad hand. And if they choose to use the eligibility at the same school for whatever reason rather than moving on (Up to D1?) somewhere else, that should be their prerogative. These kids are playing for the love of the game at d3 since they certainly arent doing it for the money (or even scholarship $)

Biggest downside is that it can be to the detriment to some of the current frosh and soph players who are competing against "older" players who are staying longer than expected. Not optimal, but there are still many youngsters who are getting playing time, even with the tougher competition. And when they made their school choices, its something that certainly the current freshman should have taken into consideration since the eligibility rules were known.

and as far as 18 vs 25 yr olds not being fun....there were a number of freshman I saw compete very well with 5th year players last season

Not to attack you and your comments about college players being screwed by missing parts of a season. I just get tired of hearing that excuse. Everyone got screwed. But those kids that are freshman and sophomores in college now, got screwed the most. All high school kids (except the deep South) missed an entire 2020 season and most kids only got 1/2 of the 2021 season. College kids at the time all got part of the 2020 season and 3/4 of the 2021 season (except a handful of northern teams). Now those freshman and sophomores in college have to compete with upper class that get two extra years to play. While the fresh and sophomores don’t get any extra years. Maybe I take offense to the comments because I have a college freshman that missed out on several opportunities. He missed his sophomore and 1/2 junior year which caused him to miss so much from his HS years.

Nothing we can do about it now. But the NCAA allowing 2 extra years is a slap in the face to more kids, then it helped.

[smoova]

Not to attack you and your comments about college players being screwed by missing parts of a season. I just get tired of hearing that excuse. Everyone got screwed. But those kids that are freshman and sophomores in college now, got screwed the most. All high school kids (except the deep South) missed an entire 2020 season and most kids only got 1/2 of the 2021 season. College kids at the time all got part of the 2020 season and 3/4 of the 2021 season (except a handful of northern teams). Now those freshman and sophomores in college have to compete with upper class that get two extra years to play. While the fresh and sophomores don’t get any extra years. Maybe I take offense to the comments because I have a college freshman that missed out on several opportunities. He missed his sophomore and 1/2 junior year which caused him to miss so much from his HS years.

Nothing we can do about it now. But the NCAA allowing 2 extra years is a slap in the face to more kids, then it helped.

Preach Brother!

[laxdad1434]

Not to attack you and your comments about college players being screwed by missing parts of a season. I just get tired of hearing that excuse. Everyone got screwed. But those kids that are freshman and sophomores in college now, got screwed the most. All high school kids (except the deep South) missed an entire 2020 season and most kids only got 1/2 of the 2021 season. College kids at the time all got part of the 2020 season and 3/4 of the 2021 season (except a handful of northern teams). Now those freshman and sophomores in college have to compete with upper class that get two extra years to play. While the fresh and sophomores don’t get any extra years. Maybe I take offense to the comments because I have a college freshman that missed out on several opportunities. He missed his sophomore and 1/2 junior year which caused him to miss so much from his HS years.

Nothing we can do about it now. But the NCAA allowing 2 extra years is a slap in the face to more kids, then it helped.

Preach Brother!

Yep

[Asgot]

I absolutely disagree. Six years is two too many within the parameters of college lacrosse. If a guy is 19 or 20 when he is in his freshman year then he’s 23-24 his senior year. Two extra years on top is not good. 26 year olds vs 18 year olds is not even close to being fun. If you are worth your salt move on to the next level. This is not good for the college game no matter if it is Salisbury, RIT, Cabrini or Cobbleskill.

The kids in several of these classes got screwed out of one entire season, and a good part of a second....while i agree 6 years is a long time, given what an overall crappy college experience they had, I feel like its a small benefit to help the kids who have been dealt a bad hand. And if they choose to use the eligibility at the same school for whatever reason rather than moving on (Up to D1?) somewhere else, that should be their prerogative. These kids are playing for the love of the game at d3 since they certainly arent doing it for the money (or even scholarship $)

Biggest downside is that it can be to the detriment to some of the current frosh and soph players who are competing against "older" players who are staying longer than expected. Not optimal, but there are still many youngsters who are getting playing time, even with the tougher competition. And when they made their school choices, its something that certainly the current freshman should have taken into consideration since the eligibility rules were known.

and as far as 18 vs 25 yr olds not being fun....there were a number of freshman I saw compete very well with 5th year players last season

Not to attack you and your comments about college players being screwed by missing parts of a season. I just get tired of hearing that excuse. Everyone got screwed. But those kids that are freshman and sophomores in college now, got screwed the most. All high school kids (except the deep South) missed an entire 2020 season and most kids only got 1/2 of the 2021 season. College kids at the time all got part of the 2020 season and 3/4 of the 2021 season (except a handful of northern teams). Now those freshman and sophomores in college have to compete with upper class that get two extra years to play. While the fresh and sophomores don’t get any extra years. Maybe I take offense to the comments because I have a college freshman that missed out on several opportunities. He missed his sophomore and 1/2 junior year which caused him to miss so much from his HS years.

Nothing we can do about it now. But the NCAA allowing 2 extra years is a slap in the face to more kids, then it helped.

completely agree here. Sophomores in college now will play their entire career with kids who will be afforded extra years in college while they will get nothing all while losing an entire year of HS, in the middle of the recruiting process which became an absolute crap shoot. If you were in the recruiting process in 2020 whether you were a 2021 or 2022 it was incredibly stressful.