Hold onto your hats because this is where the potential lineups series starts to get really, really weird.
The Gymnastics East Conference is a new eight-member conference that merges the ECAC-I (minus Temple, which switched to the EAGL this year) with the three former ECAC-II teams. Since the level of competition has long been roughly equal between the Division I and Division II teams in the ECAC, this is a sensible move that could bring us a very exciting conference championship in April. There’s a twist, though, and it’s that only one of these eight teams even competed in 2021. We can’t wait to see them all back in action, but it’s going to make their outlooks this season much harder to predict.
We’re getting back into the groove of things and returning to the status quo for the 2022 season (as much as we can at least!). That means it’s time for our annual potential lineups analysis! With preseason training in full swing for most teams, we’re breaking it all down and taking a look at every squad’s prospects for the upcoming season—from who’s expected to contribute, holes that need to be filled and exciting upgrades fans should look out for.
Brown
Brown had a perfectly adequate 2020 season prior to the COVID shutdown, but it doesn’t take a genius to see that it has a LOT more manpower heading into 2022. Several Bears, including Alyssa Gardner and Lauren McKeown, even took 2021 off to avoid the Ivy League’s restrictive redshirt rules. In sum, the Bears only lose seven lineup routines.
| Losses: | Rose Domonoske, Emma Hansen, Erin Howell, Caroline Warren | |||
| Gains: | Asta-Sollilja Farrell, Charlotte Introcaso, Lauren Kramer, Ali Lowe, Paige Richter, Lara Swords, McKenna Weiner, Angela Xing, Julia Bedell, Maya Davis, Addie Liebhardt, Taylor Schulze, Sophia Sokolowsky | |||
Vault
Potential Contributors: Alyssa Gardner (9.730), Mei Li Costa (9.625), Lauren Lazaro (9.560), Ella Poley (9.515), Jasmine Lee (9.490), Sophia Petrillo (9.335), Abby Contello (avg. 9.467), Angela Xing, Asta Farrell, Ali Lowe, Julia Bedell
How It Looked Before: Brown typically vaults a mixture of Yurchenko layouts and Yurchenko fulls and scores close to 48.000 most weeks with the ability to top out at 48.500 at its best. Very little has been lost here, and Brown could field a whole lineup of returners if necessary.
How It Looks Now: Fifth-year Alyssa Gardner has held the lineup down for years and likely will do it again. The sophomores bring the most options here, with Angela Xing and Asta Farrell both competing Yurchenko fulls at least sometimes in the past. Ali Lowe is a front handspring vaulter who has several options between a front tuck and a front pike half. Freshman Julia Bedell, Xing’s teammate from Brestyan’s, might have the single best incoming vault and could join Gardner at the end of the lineup with her Yurchenko full.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? Trending up, potentially by quite a bit. There’s enough depth in this lineup that Brown might not have to vault any Yurchenko layouts, which would be a very big deal.
Bars
Potential Contributors: Mei Li Costa (9.825), Sophia Petrillo (9.715), Jasmine Lee (9.625), Ella Poley (avg. 9.65), Alyssa Gardner (avg. 9.508), Paige Richter, Asta Farrell, Taylor Schulze, Sophia Sokolowsky
How It Looked Before: Led by Mei Li Costa, bars was Brown’s strongest event in 2020 with rotation scores as high as 48.850.
How It Looks Now: Three NQS routines returning isn’t bad, but Brown will definitely be looking for new options here. Colorado’s Paige Richter is a frontrunner, though her double pike dismount has caused her some trouble in the past. Fellow sophomore Asta Farrell was one of the most consistent in level 10, freshman Taylor Schulze has a great piked Jaeger and Sophia Sokolowsky has great form and her class’s best bars career high.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? Trending down…for now. There’s plenty of talent here, but it might take a little while for the newcomers to settle in and match the level of the 2020 squad.
Beam
Potential Contributors: Lauren Lazaro (9.725), Mei Li Costa (9.670), Sophia Petrillo (9.505), Jasmine Lee (9.375), Abby Walsh (avg. 9.325), Abby Contello (avg. 9.088), Carolanne van Zandt (avg. 8.125), Asta Farrell, Julia Bedell, Taylor Schulze, Sophia Sokolowsky
How It Looked Before: Brown is one of those teams where almost everyone does beam sometimes. This was a talented, if slightly inconsistent, squad in 2020 that soared as high as 48.775 in the middle of the season.
How It Looks Now: Beam is a hot-and-cold event for the sophomores, though Asta Farrell is once again the most reliable. For the freshman, though, there’s serious potential. Beddell, Schulze and Sokolowsky all have career highs over 9.500, and that’s plenty to put them in the conversation for a lineup spot.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? Likely about the same. The excellence of Lazaro and Costa should keep anything too wild from happening, and there are plenty of possible routines, just like in 2020.
Floor
Potential Contributors: Lauren Lazaro (9.760), Alyssa Gardner (9.685), Abby Walsh (avg. 9.460), Carolanne van Zandt (avg. 9.433), Jasmine Lee (avg. 9.425), Sophia Petrillo (avg. 9.313), Ali Lowe, Julia Bedell, Taylor Schulze, Lara Swords, Angela Xing
How It Looked Before: Floor wasn’t Brown’s highest-scoring event in 2020, but it was very consistent, slowly creeping up over the course of the season to finish above 48.500 for the first time in the final week. Like beam, there was a lot of lineup turnover. All four graduates from the 2020 squad did floor at least once.
How It Looks Now: Sophomore Lowe is an exciting prospect on this event: She never scored below 9.000 on in level 10. The freshmen bring slightly bigger numbers here, though. Bedell regularly nails a massive full-in first pass, and Schulze is a big-time twister. Lara Swords and Angela Xing are the next tier of options.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? About the same. The newcomers on floor are great, but this is also the event where they have the biggest shoes to fill.
Overall Outlook
There’s a lot to love about Brown’s depth this year. Prior to the COVID shutdown, Brown was routinely right on the edge of team qualification to USAG nationals, and the Bears definitely have the raw materials to make it this year. The biggest questions at this point are about lineup turnover. Even in March 2020, it seemed like the Bears hadn’t really settled on who their best options were on each event, and with a much larger roster now, the turnover could be even higher. With so many inexperienced gymnasts, having settled lineups earlier in the season might be what makes the difference in how quickly they settle into college competition.
Cornell
From 2019 to 2020, Cornell didn’t see any drastic changes in scoring. It had a rocky start with bars in the 2020 season, but with such a large incoming group, it has a lot of play within its lineups.
| Losses: | Jessica Aman, Emily Carr, Claire Haklik, Isabel Herczeg, Amy Shen, Madison Smith, Olivia Tometich | |||
| Gains: | Cali Brady, Eva Phair, Alexandra Quiana, Melanie Stone, Caitlyn Walsh, Regina Walton, Adabelle Wright, Rachel Zun, Sydney Beers, Sky Knox, Savannah Kokaly, Laura MacKenzie, Kate Michelini, Maddie Sakalosky, Anthea Spirko, Maddie Wolf | |||
Vault
Potential Contributors: Amy Krueger (9.605), Miranda Lund (9.435), Sara Maughan (avg. 9.385), Imani Telesford (avg. 9.312), Donna Webster (avg. 9.212)
How It Looked Before: Despite vault being a high-scoring event, Cornell struggled to go above a 48 more than twice. But having only lost two of its consistent vaulters, it can definitely come back in a big way.
How It Looks Now: Incoming freshman Sydney Beers is bringing in a fairly consistent Yurchenko full, as well as sophomore Regina Walton. Maddie Sakalosky brings a clean Yurchenko layout to the table that could boost the lineup with some upgrades. Savannah Kokaly brings an unusual vaut, Yurchenko full-on tuck, that will make a run at the top six, too.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? Overall, trending up. It’ll be interesting to see what Cornell does with such a deep pool to choose from.
Bars
Potential Contributors: Darby Kent (9.150), Donna Webster (avg. 8.925), Miranda Lund (avg. 8.894), Katie Fitzpatrick (avg. 8.394)
How It Looked Before: Bars hasn’t always been the best of events for Cornell. Over the past two seasons where it actually competed, it scored between a 42.900 and a 48.700. In 2019, the Big Red was regularly within the 48 range, but the 2020 season proved to be rough.
How It Looks Now: Sydney Beers has been throwing some double layouts during practice, which would certainly help give the lineup a boost, and sophomore Melanie Stone has been training some pirouette connections. Madison Sakalasky is eyeing a straddle Jaeger to shoot-over connection, as well. Any added difficulty or bonus to the existing lineup will add critical tenths to the overall event score as the season progresses.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? Too early to say, but likely trending up. Cornell has a good chance at having a better time on bars this year.
Beam
Potential Contributors: Miranda Lund (9.730), Victoria DeMeo (9.420), Valerie Aubley (9.180), Darby Kent (avg. 9.125), Maddie Watson (avg. 8.833)
How It Looked Before: Beam has been a bit inconsistent. When the Big Red can hit, it hits, with its best scores above a 9.800. On bad days, things can get a bit messy.
How It Looks Now: Miranda Lund is already looking cool and calm on beam, and sophomore Adabelle Wright has a packed leap series with a switch to switch half to sissone. Stone’s unique round-off to layout step-out will be a fun series to watch for throughout the season, as well as the flexibility and extension of Katharine Michelini’s leaps.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? Consistency and confidence will be key to Cornell hitting beam over the season, but with a strong senior class at the helm and a finely tuned underclass, I think Cornell will trend up.
Floor
Potential Contributors: Victoria DeMeo (9.625), Miranda Lund (9.400), Sara Maughan (9.200)
How It Looked Before: Cornell is more than capable of hitting and delivering high scores on floor. Maybe it’s the endless hills and stairs around campus that contribute to the gymnasts’ Itha-calves and quads, giving them that bonus boost of power.
How It Looks Now: Cornell is bringing some powerful tumbling into the mix. Walton has started to upgrade some tumbling including a full-in, and Stone’s front layout to front full brims with power. Sakalosky and Rachel Zun both bring a tidy front-full to front layout that could easily have some bonus tossed in to really push those scores up. Plus, Beers brings an incredible front tuck step-out through a double pike that will absolutely soar as the season continues.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? Despite a few missteps and low scoring in 2020, it’s an event that Cornell can easily return to form with. The potential is there to stay the course or trend up.
Overall Outlook
Overall, Cornell is gaining 16 potential contributors and losing just seven routines. Although the underclassmen won’t have any collegiate competition experience under their belt, the routines and skills that they continue to develop, along with the veterans, can really help Cornell return to its best form. The fun part now is playing around with the top six to maximize potential. With very little of the best bar and floor lineups returning, there’s nowhere for Cornell to go but up.
Penn
Penn has been moving up in the world in recent years, with an Ivy League title in 2020 and a program record in 2019, but the team could still be even better. Now, several years of great recruiting have resulted in a massively deep talent pool. The Quakers are the favorites to repeat as the Ivy League champions and are a frontrunner for the inaugural GEC title.
| Losses: | Allison Frommer, Rose Hoffman, Jordyn Mannino, Darcy Matsuda, Darby Nelson, Ava Caravela (became team manager) | |||
| Gains: | Sophia Restaino (rejoined team), Kiersten Belkoff, Rose Debarberie (rejoined team), Connie Hsu, Ana Kenefick, Sara Kenefick, Kristen Kuhn, Campbell Marr, Emma Davies, Isabella Garrett, Marigold Garrett, Zara Gazdak, Isabel Song, Olivia VanHorn | |||
| Returning From Injury: | Sarah Penuela Wermers | |||
Vault
Potential Contributors: Sydney Kraez (9.770), Lauren Joost (9.590), Rebekah Lashley (9.590), Edie Noor Graber (9.495), Campbell Marr, Ariyana Agarwala, Rose DeBarberie, Connie Hsu
How It Looked Before: Vault was one of Penn’s lower-scoring events in 2020, with lower SVs and strict scoring combining to keep this event short of 48.000 many weeks.
How It Looks Now: Penn might be able to field a shocking total of four 10.0 SV vaults this year. Freshman Isabel Song competed a reliable Yurchenko one and a half in level 10 while senior Sydney Kraez is working on upgrading her reliable full to a tucked one and a half. Meanwhile, Campbell Marr and Ariyana Agarwala have solid Yurchenko full-on, tuck off vaults. Rose DeBarberie and Connie Hsu have featured heavily in training updates recently with Yurchenko fulls, as has Kiersten Belkoff with her Arabian.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? Trending up. By a lot.
Bars
Potential Contributors: McCaleigh Marr (9.740), Sydney Kraez (9.655), Najah Curtis (avg. 8.938), Sarah Penuela Wermers, Sophia Reistano, Connie Hsu, Isabel Song, Sara Kenefick, Emma Davies.
How It Looked Before: Bars had a lot of potential in 2020, dropping below 48.000 just twice. It’s also an event where a lot of key contributors graduated, though.
How It Looks Now: There’s a ton of incoming talent on this event, led by Kristen Kuhn’s great handstands and uncanny landings. All around threats Connie Hsu and Isabel Song are likely here too. Upperclassmen Sophia Reistano and Sarah Penuela-Wermers look good on bars after extended injury absences, Emma Davies looks reliable and Sara Kenefick’s blind full to double twist dismount combo is a highlight.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? Trending up. It’s easy to imagine four new routines joining Marr and Kraez, bringing this lineup close to 49.000 in 2022.
Beam
Potential Contributors: McCaleigh Marr (9.715), Sydney Kraez (9.685), Rebekah Lashley (9.685), Natalie Yang (9.555), Lauren Joost (avg. 9.355), Kiersten Belkoff, Isabella Garrett, Marigold Garrett, Sara Kenefick, Kristen Kuhn, Isabel Song, Connie Hsu
How It Looked Before: Beam can be a real strength for Penn, and don’t let Natalie Yang’s slight inconsistency distract from her huge potential in the anchor spot either.
How It Looks Now: There’s a lot of style in the incoming Quakers’ beam group, but only a few new contributors are necessary to keep this lineup looking comfortable. Sophomore Belkoff leads the newcomers based on level 10 scores. The Garrett twins, Isabella and Marigold, follow close behind but haven’t been prominent in training updates yet this year. The team’s second set of twins, the Keneficks, have featured more heavily. Previous comments about Kuhn’s great form also apply on beam, and Song and Hsu are strong here as well.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? Too early to tell. There’s lots of talent here, but it takes more than depth to make a great beam lineup. Success might be down to the new coaching staff instead.
Floor
Potential Contributors: Rebekah Lashley (9.79), Sydney Kraez (9.755), Edie Noor Graber (avg. 9.617), Ali Karpousis (avg. 9.15)
How It Looked Before: Floor is arguably Penn’s second strongest event after beam, but once again, the graduated routines will be missed.
How It Looks Now: Luckily, a very utilitarian group of floor gymnasts are joining the Quakers this year: No fewer than nine freshman and sophomores have scored over 9.600 in level 10. Sara Kenefick is the scoring frontrunner, but past that it’s many of the usual suspects. Ana Kenefick, Belkoff, Marr, Hsu, Song, Davies and the Garrett sisters (if healthy) could all factor here, and we don’t have enough training footage yet to sort out who’s most likely.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? About the same. Like beam, the depth is more than adequate, but we’ll have to wait and see if any extraordinary routines emerge to take this lineup from 48.500 to 49.000.
Overall Outlook
Penn is a much better team than it was before COVID hit; it’s just a question of how much better. A program record seems almost a given when the current mark is only 195.075, but with so many new players and a new coaching staff, there might be a few growing pains to start 2022.
William & Mary
William and Mary is the only GEC team that competed in 2021, but it didn’t get a great deal of joy out of a schedule so bumpy that only three meets were ultimately contested. Still, it gives us a better idea about where the Tribe stands in terms of routine availability.
| Losses: | Mary Graceyn Gordon, Hailey Haycox, Katie Waldman, Lauren Winkler | |||
| Gains: | Catherine Bare, Avery Bernier, Caroline Blatchford, Sophie Chandler, Anne Marie Kuebler, Sarah Kuper, Katelyn Nels, Sarah Wozniak | |||
Vault
Potential Contributors: Chloe Campbell (avg. 9.608), Grace Costello (9.600), Emma Wiley (9.575), Anne Marie Kuebler, Katelyn Nels, Sophie Chandler, Caroline Blatchford
How It Looked Before: The steady, reliable 2021 vault lineup was led by graduates Mary Graceyn Gordon and Katie Waldman, so there’s some work to do.
How It Looks Now: Most of the newcomers vault Yurchenko layouts. Among the group, Anne Marie Kuebler, Katelyn Nels and Sophie Chandler have the best scoring history. Caroline Blatchford’s tuck full is a strong option too.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? This one will likely drop a few tenths in 2022 unless there’s a little more difficulty hiding on the roster.
Bars
Potential Contributors: Amanda Jackson (avg. 9.308), Keaghan Schafer (avg. 8.650), Grace Costello (avg. 8.575), Emma Wiley (avg. 8.525), Caileigh Gulotta (avg. 8.150), Sarah Wozniak, Catherine Bare, Caroline Blatchford
How It Looked Before: Bars was a challenge for the 2021 Tribe, and as on vault, Gordon and Waldman took the two best routines with them when they graduated.
How It Looks Now: The obvious frontrunner among the new routines is Legacy Elite alumna Sarah Wozniak. Catherine Bare is the next strongest in terms of scoring history, and Caroline Blatchford made major improvements in 2021.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? While the 2022 bar lineup might not be the deepest, it should be able to improve substantially on the 2021 group that never had time to settle in and crack 47.000.
Beam
Potential Contributors: Grace Costello (avg. 9.713), Emma Wiley (avg. 9.433), Abby Carpenter (avg. 9.417), Chloe Campbell (avg. 9.225), Keaghan Schafer (avg. 8.600), Annie Marie Kuebler, Sophie Chandler
How It Looked Before: Beam was inconsistent but had plenty of potential. This event was also hit less hard by graduating routines than some of the others.
How It Looks Now: None of the newcomers have huge track records from level 10 beam, but Kuebler and Chandler are the most convincing.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? Likely about the same.
Floor
Potential Contributors: Grace Costello (avg. 9.738), Chloe Campbell (avg. 9.717), Keaghan Schafer (avg. 9.6), Abby Carpenter (avg. 9.558), Amanda Jackson (avg. 9.450), Anne Marie Kuebler, Caroline Blatchford
How It Looked Before: Floor has been a strength for the Tribe in recent years, and luckily most of the top routines are sticking around.
How It Looks Now: Kuebler has been the most consistent on floor in the past, and Blatchford is another frontrunner with a slightly higher peak and very clean twisting.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? As with beam, the new routines aren’t game-changing, but they are good enough to fill the gaps and keep the lineup on a positive trajectory.
Overall Outlook
There’s no doubt William & Mary will miss its graduated seniors, but this team has one major advantage that the 2021 group didn’t. It’s simply not possible to settle into a season that’s only three meets long, so this year will be the Tribe’s first fair shot at showing what it can do after surviving an attempt to end the program.
Yale
Yale heads into this season with a few obstacles and unexpected changes. With the loss of head coach Barbara Tonry, the underclassmen will look to be guided by the experienced juniors and seniors. Overall, however, there’s an equal amount of routines lost and gained in 2022.
| Losses: | Jacey Baldovino, Charlotte Cooperman, Alyssa Firth, Isabelle Lee, Rowan Palmer, Cassie Clement (medical retirement) | |||
| Gains: | Alexa Berezowitz, Emma Mangiacapre, Sherry Wang, Sarah Wilson, Oren Aviad, Emma David, Nadia Drutau, Claire Qu | |||
Vault
Potential Contributors: Aimee Titche (9.755), Nadia Drutau, Emma David, Sherry Wang, Alexa Berezowitz, Claire Qu, Sherry Wang, Emma Mangiacapre
How It Looked Before: Vault has been pretty consistent, in 2019 they stayed within a 0.650 margin throughout the year, in 2020 they stayed with 0.800. Consistency isn’t an issue, fine-tuning for those small details for tenths is where it’s at for them.
How It Looks Now: WELP. Buckle up. With the only returning member of the lineup being Titche, the bad news is there’s going to be some growing pains, but the good news is there’s going to be quite a bit of play within the top six without the pressure of living up to previous seasons. Freshman Nadia Drutau and Emma David bring a clean Yurchenko layout that could easily help contribute with an upgrade (or even without one). Sophomore Sherry Wang will bring a powerful and clean Yurchenko full, which easily has the potential to make the top six as well. Sophomore Alexa Berezowitz has two different vaults in her pocket, a tuck and layout Yurchenko full, that could be valuable to the Yale lineup as the season starts off. Vault could be anyone’s game with the right form.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? Too early to tell, but it’ll for sure be an event to watch through the season to see how it progresses.
Bars
Potential Contributors: Lindsay Chia (9.530), Raegan Walker (9.515), Caitlin Henry (9.325), Aimee Titche (9.035), Sarah Wilson, Nadia Drutau, Claire Qu, Sherry Wang
How It Looked Before: Much like vault, Yale kept its consistency fairly tight over the past two seasons, with a difference of just 0.975 in 2019. But 2020 proved a little different, with an unusually low 46.250 to start off and another uncharacteristic 47.125.
How It Looks Now: Yale will look to its returning members to get the lineup going. Lindsay Chia, a healthy Reagan Walker and Caitlin Henry have all scored 9.675 or higher. If they can end the rotation with those scores, Yale will have some breathing room to play around with the other three. Aimee Titche is an option, and Sarah Wilson could be a critical addition, with her solid, clean bar routine.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? Overall, Yale will return to its consistent ways on bars, but it’ll be a puzzle of finding the best fit at first.
Beam
Potential Contributors: Lindsay Chia (9.795), Riley Meeks (avg. 9.537), Alexa Berezowitz, Emma Mangiacapre, Sherry Wang, Sarah Wilson, Nadia Drutau, Claire Qu
How It Looked Before: Beam was a little all over the place for Yale in 2022, going from 47.150 to 49.200 during the season. At its best, it can bring in scores above a 9.825. Consistency and confidence for Yale have been key.
How It Looks Now: The Bulldogs lost four of their five highest beam scores from 2019, so they’ll want to see the veterans and newcomers alike to step up and rise to the occasion. Sophomores Alexa Berezowitz, Emma Mangiacapre and Wang all have impressive routines, but the scores need to translate with consistent sets. Lindsay Chia has a gorgeous and clean routine, and Riley Meeks capable of hitting a 9.650. With a little more experience under the contenders’ belts, this lineup may ultimately end up being difficult to crack.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? Too early to tell. With so many key routines lost, Yale’s beam success could go either way.
Floor
Potential Contributors: Sherry Wang, Sarah Wilson, Emma Mangiacapre, Alexa Berezowitz, Emma David, Claire Qu
How It Looked Before: Yale lost its entire high-scoring lineup from the 2020 season. With the floor rotation regularly turning in scores between 48.750 and 48.950, the Bulldogs’ consistency shined.
How It Looks Now: It’s both a pro and a con that the floor top six is anyone’s game to make. Wang comes in with strong floor scores from level 10. Wilson, Mangiacapre, and Berezowitz all have a solid level 10 floor start value that could help to rebuild their floor program. David could also be a contender with a few upgrades to further bolster her scores. But beyond that there are so many closely clustered options that it may take a while of mixing and matching to start the season to find a solid, ideal top six.
Trending up, down or too early to tell? Too early to tell. Based on Yale’s previous success, though, the potential is there to still trend up.
Overall Outlook
Yale feels like a question mark with so much having changed and shifted over the past few years. Despite the nearly equal amounts of routines lost and gained, it’ll be a season of fine-tuning, finessing and discovering the new rhythm of how to work through everything. All that remains is for Yale to stay healthy and not get in its own way.
READ THIS NEXT: Potential Lineups: Big Ten Part II
Article by Allison Freeman and Rebecca Scally
Like what you see? Consider donating to support our efforts throughout the year! [wpedon id=”13158″]
One comment