[
SIDELINE CHATTER
] QUESTION OF THE MONTH
What’s your take on the Tewaaraton Award race?
Hold on a second. Before we just hand the
Tewaaraton Award to potential repeaters Steele Stanwick and Shannon Smith, shouldn’t we take a long, hard look at the field?
For instance, will this be the year a non-Division I player gets serious consideration? Or is there a player from a non-championship caliber team that perhaps deserves more recognition? (The Tewaaraton has developed a tradition of going to players from teams that win it all.) Who’s your dark horse? What would you — lovers and haters alike — do to uphold the prestige of our sport’s Heisman Trophy?
For this installment of “Sideline Chatter,” Lacrosse Magazine wants to know: What’s your take on this year’s Tewaaraton Award race?
MAGAZINE
laxmagazine.com/sidelinechatter
TOM MASTO Baltimore
Mike Sawyer led Steele Stanwick in points [early in the season] and came out of nowhere to look like a legit contender for the Tewey!
DYLAN DESANTIS Dunkirk, Md.
I think Joe Cummings should win it. So many good players go under the Tewaaraton radar. Stanwick shouldn’t have won it last year. It needs to be a senior who has played hard for four years — not a fancy pants junior who was shut off in the championship game.
STEVE BOBOTAS Bedford, N.H.
The name I haven’t seen on the list is CJ Costabile from Duke. He does it all for the Blue Devils.
30 LACROSSE MAGAZINE May 2012>>
TIM GREEN Wantagh, N.Y.
Sarah Boucher, midfielder, Queens College Knights. Sarah was the ECC Rookie of the Year in 2010 (Queens’ first year), ECC 1st team all- conference midfielder 2011. In 2012 she is one of the top midfielders in DII with her team 5-1 (at press). Sarah is obviously overlooked because of the program she plays for, but she is forcing teams and the rest of DII to notice her and the team. Sarah does not compete for herself; she competes for her team and for the love of the game.
GREG BOLDT Miami It’s a close race between Rob Pannell and Steele Stanwick. Go Cornell!
GEORGE JOHNSON Bedford, N.Y.
Pierce Bassett, goalie, Johns Hopkins University.
ERIN OOR Uxbridge, Ontario
If a DII or DIII player is lights-out the best player in the nation, or if a non- championship player is on fire for a season, they should be in the mix.
FILOMENA VERNACE New Jersey
The best players are not always on winning teams. There are better players on non-winning teams who contribute much more and are not recognized because they aren’t on a championship team. Look at the NCAA stats. You will see those ranked higher than those on championship teams. Do your homework and select those that are truly worthy and work hard.
HANNAH BAKKE York, Pa. Northwestern’s Taylor Thornton has what it takes to win. She has the girl power to support her team in any time, even when Northwestern lost in 2010
HANK FURNBACH Freedom, N.H.
Fergus Campbell, goalie, Dartmouth College
EMORY SMITH Cornwall on Hudson, N.Y. Garrett Thul of Army. Look at his numbers.
facebook.com/lacrossemagazine AL FRANYO
My prediction from before the season hasn’t changed. Virginia’s Steele Stanwick will repeat as the winner.
ALAN MCLIVERTY Kiel “Moose” Matisz from
Robert Morris. Best two-way middie in the country. Go Bobby Mo!
PETER M. CAREY Steele Stanwick may indeed win it again, but any number of people could step up and have a huge impact on their team. The other thing that will count against Stanwick is the depth and breadth of the scoring at UVA. It is highly likely that Colin Briggs may end up with nearly as many points as Steele Stanwick.
>> THIS MONTH’S WINNER Tony Dunbar PURCELVILLE, VA.
It’s about time that a player besides a Division I athlete gets some recognition, especially if he has been an important part of his team making it to the championship multiple times — Sam Bradman.
Tony will receive the Harrow Koncept head, which is designed with the most competitive player in mind. The Koncept has the most aggressive offset and maximum sidewall depth allowed.
• Available in white, black, Carolina blue, and royal • Available strung and unstrung • Meets NCAA and NFHS standards
A Publication of US Lacrosse
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84