Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
For all the haters on UA Senior Team selections there are 65 UA All-Americans playing this weekend. Maybe they do know what they are doing after all....

In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is.

I'm not the original poster... But here you go, for what it is worth.... cut and paste...

Listed below are the Top 10 Teams in terms of how many Under Armour All-Americans the program brought in from 2016 - 2020 (current freshman - 5th year)

1 - North Carolina - 23

2 - Maryland - 20

3 - Syracuse - 18

4 - Florida - 14
5 - Notre Dame - 14

6 - Northwestern - 12
7 - Virginia - 12

8 - Boston College - 11

9 - Duke - 10
10 - Stanford - 10


Listed below is the 2021 Final Top 10 Ranking (coaches poll).


1 - Boston College

2 - Syracuse

3 - North Carolina

4 - Northwestern

5 - Stony Brook

6 - Notre Dame

7 - Florida

8 - Duke

9 - Loyola Maryland

10 - Maryland

Eight of the Final Top 10 teams just happen to be teams that were in the Top 10 for bringing in UA All-Americans....

Also worth noting, Loyola who finished the year ranked 9th in the Poll brought in 9 UA AA's which put them at #11 in terms of AA's.

Virginia who was also in the Top 10 with UA All-Americans finished the season Ranked 11th in the coaches poll.

In other words, UNC and Maryland can easily field their starting lineups with only UAAAs and still not win a NC or even conference in Maryland's case. BC did it pulling in only half the number UAAAs. JMU won in 2018 with I'm guessing zero UAAAs. Stony Brook has come so close to making the final four with hardly any UAAAs. Notre Dame sure didn't look good post season for a team with all those UAAAs! Penn State and USC get their fair share of UAAAs yet unranked or barely ranked by end of this season. Denver beat Stanford in the tournament with zero UAAAs.

Thanks for taking the time to research and prove the point every reasonable wlax fan has tried to make: yes, almost all the players named UAAA are very good and deserving but some other very good players get overlooked (case in point this year, Emma Ward) and it's possible to be a top program without many or even any UAAAs.

I do not think anyone said that a program can not be competitive (or a top program) without UA players nor did anyone say that there are not very good players who get overlooked. The guy (or girl) was just pointing out that just maybe the folks who select the players for the UA Senior Game do know what they are doing.

Whenever a "team" or "ranking" comes out there are always people who want to knock it. They do it with Under Armour, UA Underclass, Team USA, IL recruit rankings etc.... Most of the time it's sour grapes.

The second to the top quote says, "In most cases, there is a direct correlation between the number of Under Armour All-Americans a team brings in and how competitive the team is." The numbers presented says otherwise, but everyone is entitled to their own interpretation.