|
Forums20
Topics3,799
Posts399,654
Members2,638
| |
Most Online62,980
Feb 6th, 2020
|
|
 Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
[quote=Anonymous]Waaa waaa waaa ... It's all politics, the players will not do well in college... None will be 1st Team All Americans (therefore they are not major contributors) other players will surpass them... bla Bla bla... The lists mean nothing, school girls is a joke, Under Armour is all political, u19 is political, Northwestern is terrible , how can a team be picked without yellow jackets... You people are insane . [/quot
I think its been stated many times on here that its simple math - 8-12 kids per class for the top 25 programs is 200+ kids, i'll bet most if not all were the best on their HS team,all state, all county, ua/Nike whatever else you want to throw in, the reality is half of them will not play any significant roll on at the college level, half the roster doesn't see the field in any meaningful way - simple math and if
your not getting money (Ivy's) or money isn't an issue they don't stay for more than two years if they're not playing - three current Ivy rosters have only 4 seniors on them.. there was plenty of buyers remorse for programs racing to get 13-14 year old kids committed before the rule change (not speculation, was told this by several coaches) Fake News. You are repeating the lies that are constantly posted on this site. - "I think its been stated many times on here that its simple math - 8-12 kids per class" - Just because it has been stated many times does not make it true. - Few if any teams bring in 12 "recruited" freshmen. The reality is 8 or 9. You may get one or two kids that get into school on their own and walk on but very few competitive teams recruit more than 8 or 9 players. Here are the facts. Boston College 2016: - 9 Freshmen. 27 players on the roster. 2019: - 8 Seniors. 28 players on the roster. North Carolina 2016: - 8 Freshmen. 34 players on the roster. 2019: - 8 Seniors. 35 players on the roster. Maryland 2016: - 9 Freshmen. 31 players on the roster. 2019: - 9 Seniors. 38 players on the roster. Princeton 2016: - 7 Freshmen. 28 players on the roster. 2019: - 8 Seniors. 30 players on the roster. Penn 2016: - 6 Freshmen. 27 players on the roster. 2019: - 4 Seniors. 34 players on the roster. Some players stop playing, some get injured, some transfer, some redshirt etc.. but the vast majority continue to play. The top 3 or 4 recruits at the top programs do in fact "pan out" and are usually the starters on the team. Not every recruit is a top player, the number 1 recruit is usually stronger than the number 8. The top players go to the top programs, they continue to play and they do very well. How dare you interject with truth and facts? Seriously you both are just clueless , “ the top 3 or 4 recruits ...” is not a fact it’s your opinion . Of the final four teams this year only UNC had any of their top freshmen as starters and if you took their top 4 of that class only 1 was a starter and essentially zero freshmen top recruits started on the other final four teams . Your other nonsense is semi factual it’s just when an uneducated poster like you see these numbers you make horribly wrong assumptions .You based your numbers on 4 class years when many of the programs you mention have a lot of players who have red shirted for various reasons so those numbers more realistically should be based on 5 class years plus you have transfers from other programs.That said the poster you are rebutting is as clueless as you ,but if you think that being ranked top 20 coming in to one of the top programs means you have a better than not chance at being a starter , think again. Why certain people so desperately want to continue to misinform on this site is beyond me. Also, I really can't understand why so many of you want the rest of us to believe that the "top players" (as defined by top college coaches, Inside Lacrosse, Under Armour, US Lacrosse, etc... and NOT by me or anyone else on this site) coming out of high school disappear , stop playing, ride the bench and generally do not pan out in college. "jealousy"? * I will take your points one at a time: “ the top 3 or 4 recruits ... is not a fact it’s your opinion". No it is not my opinion. It is the college coaches opinion. Every coach has a "Depth Chart" and not all players are equal. Their (the coaches) top 3 or 4 recruits usually do pan out and become starters. * I never said anything about last years Final Four Teams. What I said was "The top 3 or 4 recruits at the top programs do in fact "pan out" and are usually the starters on the team". I should have said "become starters on the team" they do not all start as freshmen but most do in fact become starters major contributors. I also stated: "The top players go to the top programs, they continue to play and they do very well." I was not insinuating that they would be superstars as freshmen. * As for your reference to "Five" classes as opposed to "Four".... My point was to illustrate that the top players at the top programs are pretty much All still playing four years later. 50% do not quit, 50% of the "Top Players" coming out of HS do not ride the bench. I will point out the reality to you in a bit. * I stated: "Some players stop playing, some get injured, some transfer, some redshirt etc.. but the vast majority continue to play." * Here is your quote: "but if you think that being ranked top 20 coming in to one of the top programs means you have a better than not chance at being a starter , think again". I am not sure w Here we go again: - Boston College: Freshmen Class of 2016 - Eight of the Nine are still on the roster. One Player transferred to Brown and is still playing and doing very very well. All 9 are still playing. - North Carolina: Freshmen Class of 2016 - Seven of the Eight are still on the roster. One player off roster has battled injury and illness. 7 of 8 still playing. - Maryland: Freshmen Class of 2016 - All Nine are still on the roster. There are an additional two seniors who transferred in who are AA's. One player is RS JR. ... All 9 are still playing. - Princeton: Freshmen Class of 2016 - All Seven are still on the roster. There is an additional Senior who came over from Field Hockey and plays both. All 7 are still playing. - Penn: Freshmen Class of 2016 - Four of the Six are still on the roster. 4 of the 6 are still playing. Some will carry on about having too much time on my hands... Reality is this doesn't take very long at all. I picked this class because I am very familiar with them and know most of the players off the top of my head. As for the Teams selected, I choose them because I believe Maryland, Boston College and UNC are the top 3 "Programs" over the past few years. I used Princeton and Penn because the post I was responding to mentioned The Ivy's... and Princeton and Penn are the top Ivy programs. You can continue to knock the Top Players and the Top Programs but you can't change the facts. You can wish ill upon players and you can try to tear them down or diminish them but the reality is that the players who are identified by the top college programs as the top players generally go on to have very successful college careers. To make it simple for you: 36 of the 39 players from the five schools listed who were freshmen in 2016 are still playing four years later. Don't waste your time with these people. They hate the fact that some players are recognized ahead of their daughters. They hate all the lists and All-Star teams. They hate the fact that their daughter was not offered a spot at any of the programs that you listed. They hate the fact that the majority of top players coming out of high school continue to play and do very well at the best college programs. They will continue to lie and spew their nonsense. The facts paint a very different picture from the one painted by the haters. 36 of 39 still playing four years later.... Wow. What happened to only 50%? How are those players doing? I assume many of them were Top 30 players as seniors in HS.
|
Like
 Reply
 Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
being on the team and playing are two different things. Did you take playing time into account?
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
being on the team and playing are two different things. Did you take playing time into account? I do not know if they checked playing time. However, I have read on here over and over that 50% of the players will not be playing by their senior year. The posts above show very accurately that at many top programs (which is where many of the top players go) the overwhelming majority of players continue to play through their senior year. 36 of 39 were still on the roster four years later. The three players not playing stopped due to injury. The poster mentioned that at Ivy schools many only have 4 seniors on the roster. It was then pointed out that All 7 players at Princeton who came in as freshmen in 2016 are still playing now as seniors. True that at Penn there are only 4 seniors on the current roster that class started out with only 6 players not 12. Big difference going from 6 to 4 then going from 12 to 4 as the other poster would have us believe. Who expects every player to see significant playing time. It is not PAL we are talking about the top division I teams. 30 players on the roster , obviously everyone can't start or play equal time. My guess is that 0 - 3 start as freshmen, 2 or 3 work their way into the lineup over the next few years and 1 or 2 never get much playing time in many cases due to injury. That is significantly different then what is portrayed on this site.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
being on the team and playing are two different things. Did you take playing time into account? I do not know if they checked playing time. However, I have read on here over and over that 50% of the players will not be playing by their senior year. The posts above show very accurately that at many top programs (which is where many of the top players go) the overwhelming majority of players continue to play through their senior year. 36 of 39 were still on the roster four years later. The three players not playing stopped due to injury. The poster mentioned that at Ivy schools many only have 4 seniors on the roster. It was then pointed out that All 7 players at Princeton who came in as freshmen in 2016 are still playing now as seniors. True that at Penn there are only 4 seniors on the current roster that class started out with only 6 players not 12. Big difference going from 6 to 4 then going from 12 to 4 as the other poster would have us believe. Who expects every player to see significant playing time. It is not PAL we are talking about the top division I teams. 30 players on the roster , obviously everyone can't start or play equal time. My guess is that 0 - 3 start as freshmen, 2 or 3 work their way into the lineup over the next few years and 1 or 2 never get much playing time in many cases due to injury. That is significantly different then what is portrayed on this site. Okay, just did a little checking. 12 of the Inside Lacrosse HS Top 30 Seniors for this class went to the Five schools listed. I did not check the watch list, just the Top 30. 5 to UNC 4 to Maryland 2 to BC 2 to Princeton 0 to Penn Just about all of the 12 have done very well. I think 5 All-Americans. The Tewarraton Award Winner. I'm sure some All-Conference. BC - 8 of the 9 players start just about every game. one player started many games. All are playing a ton. NC - 4 of the 8 are regular starters when healthy. 2 play in most games.1 off roster injury. 1 (goalie) played 60% of the time. MD - 7 of the 9 are regular starters. One plays in every game. One is a reserve. Pton - 5 of the 7 would be considered starters. 1 doesn't seem to start but gets time in every game and plays a lot. 1 player was out last season due to injury. Penn - 2 of the 6 are regular starters. 1 is a reserve player. 3 are out due to injury. This is all before their Senior Season. Up until this point in their careers most seam to become starters. Many others play a significant amount and only a few do not play very much and most of the time that is due to injury. The top programs do appear to bring in between 7 and 9 recruits many of which are highly touted. These players do go on to have very good college careers and many become the top players in the game. Sorry but I had to look for myself.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
being on the team and playing are two different things. Did you take playing time into account? I do not know if they checked playing time. However, I have read on here over and over that 50% of the players will not be playing by their senior year. The posts above show very accurately that at many top programs (which is where many of the top players go) the overwhelming majority of players continue to play through their senior year. 36 of 39 were still on the roster four years later. The three players not playing stopped due to injury. The poster mentioned that at Ivy schools many only have 4 seniors on the roster. It was then pointed out that All 7 players at Princeton who came in as freshmen in 2016 are still playing now as seniors. True that at Penn there are only 4 seniors on the current roster that class started out with only 6 players not 12. Big difference going from 6 to 4 then going from 12 to 4 as the other poster would have us believe. Who expects every player to see significant playing time. It is not PAL we are talking about the top division I teams. 30 players on the roster , obviously everyone can't start or play equal time. My guess is that 0 - 3 start as freshmen, 2 or 3 work their way into the lineup over the next few years and 1 or 2 never get much playing time in many cases due to injury. That is significantly different then what is portrayed on this site. Okay, just did a little checking. 12 of the Inside Lacrosse HS Top 30 Seniors for this class went to the Five schools listed. I did not check the watch list, just the Top 30. 5 to UNC 4 to Maryland 2 to BC 2 to Princeton 0 to Penn Just about all of the 12 have done very well. I think 5 All-Americans. The Tewarraton Award Winner. I'm sure some All-Conference. BC - 8 of the 9 players start just about every game. one player started many games. All are playing a ton. NC - 4 of the 8 are regular starters when healthy. 2 play in most games.1 off roster injury. 1 (goalie) played 60% of the time. MD - 7 of the 9 are regular starters. One plays in every game. One is a reserve. Pton - 5 of the 7 would be considered starters. 1 doesn't seem to start but gets time in every game and plays a lot. 1 player was out last season due to injury. Penn - 2 of the 6 are regular starters. 1 is a reserve player. 3 are out due to injury. This is all before their Senior Season. Up until this point in their careers most seam to become starters. Many others play a significant amount and only a few do not play very much and most of the time that is due to injury. The top programs do appear to bring in between 7 and 9 recruits many of which are highly touted. These players do go on to have very good college careers and many become the top players in the game. Sorry but I had to look for myself. So in other words, betting on the same players who... make UA select teams, who make the US lax select team, s, who garner the attention of Inside Lacrosse and make the lists and get recognized by the coaches at the top programs..... is like money in the bank. No surprise here. 99% of the parents who’s daughters don’t make the list are realistic and agree with this. A couple delusional parents just can’t accept their kids didn’t make these accolades, and feel the need to try to discredit the kids who did. Reality is there are many deserving kids who may have been left out behind, is what it is, but don’t try to tear down the deserving kids who are recognized, you sound ridiculous.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
being on the team and playing are two different things. Did you take playing time into account? I do not know if they checked playing time. However, I have read on here over and over that 50% of the players will not be playing by their senior year. The posts above show very accurately that at many top programs (which is where many of the top players go) the overwhelming majority of players continue to play through their senior year. 36 of 39 were still on the roster four years later. The three players not playing stopped due to injury. The poster mentioned that at Ivy schools many only have 4 seniors on the roster. It was then pointed out that All 7 players at Princeton who came in as freshmen in 2016 are still playing now as seniors. True that at Penn there are only 4 seniors on the current roster that class started out with only 6 players not 12. Big difference going from 6 to 4 then going from 12 to 4 as the other poster would have us believe. Who expects every player to see significant playing time. It is not PAL we are talking about the top division I teams. 30 players on the roster , obviously everyone can't start or play equal time. My guess is that 0 - 3 start as freshmen, 2 or 3 work their way into the lineup over the next few years and 1 or 2 never get much playing time in many cases due to injury. That is significantly different then what is portrayed on this site. Okay, just did a little checking. 12 of the Inside Lacrosse HS Top 30 Seniors for this class went to the Five schools listed. I did not check the watch list, just the Top 30. 5 to UNC 4 to Maryland 2 to BC 2 to Princeton 0 to Penn Just about all of the 12 have done very well. I think 5 All-Americans. The Tewarraton Award Winner. I'm sure some All-Conference. BC - 8 of the 9 players start just about every game. one player started many games. All are playing a ton. NC - 4 of the 8 are regular starters when healthy. 2 play in most games.1 off roster injury. 1 (goalie) played 60% of the time. MD - 7 of the 9 are regular starters. One plays in every game. One is a reserve. Pton - 5 of the 7 would be considered starters. 1 doesn't seem to start but gets time in every game and plays a lot. 1 player was out last season due to injury. Penn - 2 of the 6 are regular starters. 1 is a reserve player. 3 are out due to injury. This is all before their Senior Season. Up until this point in their careers most seam to become starters. Many others play a significant amount and only a few do not play very much and most of the time that is due to injury. The top programs do appear to bring in between 7 and 9 recruits many of which are highly touted. These players do go on to have very good college careers and many become the top players in the game. Sorry but I had to look for myself. So in other words, betting on the same players who... make UA select teams, who make the US lax select team, s, who garner the attention of Inside Lacrosse and make the lists and get recognized by the coaches at the top programs..... is like money in the bank. No surprise here. 99% of the parents who’s daughters don’t make the list are realistic and agree with this. A couple delusional parents just can’t accept their kids didn’t make these accolades, and feel the need to try to discredit the kids who did. Reality is there are many deserving kids who may have been left out behind, is what it is, but don’t try to tear down the deserving kids who are recognized, you sound ridiculous. From what I have read over the years I think we are talking about many more than a few delusional parents.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Great tournament at LIU today! Some of the younger girls are looking really good!
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Great tournament at LIU today! Some of the younger girls are looking really good! Who won, or went undefeated?
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
being on the team and playing are two different things. Did you take playing time into account? I do not know if they checked playing time. However, I have read on here over and over that 50% of the players will not be playing by their senior year. The posts above show very accurately that at many top programs (which is where many of the top players go) the overwhelming majority of players continue to play through their senior year. 36 of 39 were still on the roster four years later. The three players not playing stopped due to injury. The poster mentioned that at Ivy schools many only have 4 seniors on the roster. It was then pointed out that All 7 players at Princeton who came in as freshmen in 2016 are still playing now as seniors. True that at Penn there are only 4 seniors on the current roster that class started out with only 6 players not 12. Big difference going from 6 to 4 then going from 12 to 4 as the other poster would have us believe. Who expects every player to see significant playing time. It is not PAL we are talking about the top division I teams. 30 players on the roster , obviously everyone can't start or play equal time. My guess is that 0 - 3 start as freshmen, 2 or 3 work their way into the lineup over the next few years and 1 or 2 never get much playing time in many cases due to injury. That is significantly different then what is portrayed on this site. Okay, just did a little checking. 12 of the Inside Lacrosse HS Top 30 Seniors for this class went to the Five schools listed. I did not check the watch list, just the Top 30. 5 to UNC 4 to Maryland 2 to BC 2 to Princeton 0 to Penn Just about all of the 12 have done very well. I think 5 All-Americans. The Tewarraton Award Winner. I'm sure some All-Conference. BC - 8 of the 9 players start just about every game. one player started many games. All are playing a ton. NC - 4 of the 8 are regular starters when healthy. 2 play in most games.1 off roster injury. 1 (goalie) played 60% of the time. MD - 7 of the 9 are regular starters. One plays in every game. One is a reserve. Pton - 5 of the 7 would be considered starters. 1 doesn't seem to start but gets time in every game and plays a lot. 1 player was out last season due to injury. Penn - 2 of the 6 are regular starters. 1 is a reserve player. 3 are out due to injury. This is all before their Senior Season. Up until this point in their careers most seam to become starters. Many others play a significant amount and only a few do not play very much and most of the time that is due to injury. The top programs do appear to bring in between 7 and 9 recruits many of which are highly touted. These players do go on to have very good college careers and many become the top players in the game. Sorry but I had to look for myself. being on the team and playing are two different things. Did you take playing time into account? I do not know if they checked playing time. However, I have read on here over and over that 50% of the players will not be playing by their senior year. The posts above show very accurately that at many top programs (which is where many of the top players go) the overwhelming majority of players continue to play through their senior year. 36 of 39 were still on the roster four years later. The three players not playing stopped due to injury. The poster mentioned that at Ivy schools many only have 4 seniors on the roster. It was then pointed out that All 7 players at Princeton who came in as freshmen in 2016 are still playing now as seniors. True that at Penn there are only 4 seniors on the current roster that class started out with only 6 players not 12. Big difference going from 6 to 4 then going from 12 to 4 as the other poster would have us believe. Who expects every player to see significant playing time. It is not PAL we are talking about the top division I teams. 30 players on the roster , obviously everyone can't start or play equal time. My guess is that 0 - 3 start as freshmen, 2 or 3 work their way into the lineup over the next few years and 1 or 2 never get much playing time in many cases due to injury. That is significantly different then what is portrayed on this site. Okay, just did a little checking. 12 of the Inside Lacrosse HS Top 30 Seniors for this class went to the Five schools listed. I did not check the watch list, just the Top 30. 5 to UNC 4 to Maryland 2 to BC 2 to Princeton 0 to Penn Just about all of the 12 have done very well. I think 5 All-Americans. The Tewarraton Award Winner. I'm sure some All-Conference. BC - 8 of the 9 players start just about every game. one player started many games. All are playing a ton. NC - 4 of the 8 are regular starters when healthy. 2 play in most games.1 off roster injury. 1 (goalie) played 60% of the time. MD - 7 of the 9 are regular starters. One plays in every game. One is a reserve. Pton - 5 of the 7 would be considered starters. 1 doesn't seem to start but gets time in every game and plays a lot. 1 player was out last season due to injury. Penn - 2 of the 6 are regular starters. 1 is a reserve player. 3 are out due to injury. This is all before their Senior Season. Up until this point in their careers most seam to become starters. Many others play a significant amount and only a few do not play very much and most of the time that is due to injury. The top programs do appear to bring in between 7 and 9 recruits many of which are highly touted. These players do go on to have very good college careers and many become the top players in the game. Sorry but I had to look for myself. This is why you get the clueless posters like myself responding to this nonsense. No one posts on these boards that the so called to 30 players stop playing the sport, its just some fake news you dopes like to resond to. Then you use your facts to back up the success of these kids problem is your facts are not facts at all.Lets take the top rated recruiting class of the 2015 from UNC .Of the 8, 4 are no longer with this graduating class, 1 is no longer playing . Last season 3-4 would have been considered starters ,5 of the 8 played in every game they were available for, none were named as IWLCA all americans. So yes they are successful as a group contributing to a very good program but as has been stated if you think coming into a top program as a highly ranked Inside Lacrosse player is some guarantee of playing time, AA status etc you are sadly mistaken. I am sure your " facts " are just as suspect with all the programs but honestly who wants to waste that much time looking up this nonsense.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
being on the team and playing are two different things. Did you take playing time into account? I do not know if they checked playing time. However, I have read on here over and over that 50% of the players will not be playing by their senior year. The posts above show very accurately that at many top programs (which is where many of the top players go) the overwhelming majority of players continue to play through their senior year. 36 of 39 were still on the roster four years later. The three players not playing stopped due to injury. The poster mentioned that at Ivy schools many only have 4 seniors on the roster. It was then pointed out that All 7 players at Princeton who came in as freshmen in 2016 are still playing now as seniors. True that at Penn there are only 4 seniors on the current roster that class started out with only 6 players not 12. Big difference going from 6 to 4 then going from 12 to 4 as the other poster would have us believe. Who expects every player to see significant playing time. It is not PAL we are talking about the top division I teams. 30 players on the roster , obviously everyone can't start or play equal time. My guess is that 0 - 3 start as freshmen, 2 or 3 work their way into the lineup over the next few years and 1 or 2 never get much playing time in many cases due to injury. That is significantly different then what is portrayed on this site. Okay, just did a little checking. 12 of the Inside Lacrosse HS Top 30 Seniors for this class went to the Five schools listed. I did not check the watch list, just the Top 30. 5 to UNC 4 to Maryland 2 to BC 2 to Princeton 0 to Penn Just about all of the 12 have done very well. I think 5 All-Americans. The Tewarraton Award Winner. I'm sure some All-Conference. BC - 8 of the 9 players start just about every game. one player started many games. All are playing a ton. NC - 4 of the 8 are regular starters when healthy. 2 play in most games.1 off roster injury. 1 (goalie) played 60% of the time. MD - 7 of the 9 are regular starters. One plays in every game. One is a reserve. Pton - 5 of the 7 would be considered starters. 1 doesn't seem to start but gets time in every game and plays a lot. 1 player was out last season due to injury. Penn - 2 of the 6 are regular starters. 1 is a reserve player. 3 are out due to injury. This is all before their Senior Season. Up until this point in their careers most seam to become starters. Many others play a significant amount and only a few do not play very much and most of the time that is due to injury. The top programs do appear to bring in between 7 and 9 recruits many of which are highly touted. These players do go on to have very good college careers and many become the top players in the game. Sorry but I had to look for myself. being on the team and playing are two different things. Did you take playing time into account? I do not know if they checked playing time. However, I have read on here over and over that 50% of the players will not be playing by their senior year. The posts above show very accurately that at many top programs (which is where many of the top players go) the overwhelming majority of players continue to play through their senior year. 36 of 39 were still on the roster four years later. The three players not playing stopped due to injury. The poster mentioned that at Ivy schools many only have 4 seniors on the roster. It was then pointed out that All 7 players at Princeton who came in as freshmen in 2016 are still playing now as seniors. True that at Penn there are only 4 seniors on the current roster that class started out with only 6 players not 12. Big difference going from 6 to 4 then going from 12 to 4 as the other poster would have us believe. Who expects every player to see significant playing time. It is not PAL we are talking about the top division I teams. 30 players on the roster , obviously everyone can't start or play equal time. My guess is that 0 - 3 start as freshmen, 2 or 3 work their way into the lineup over the next few years and 1 or 2 never get much playing time in many cases due to injury. That is significantly different then what is portrayed on this site. Okay, just did a little checking. 12 of the Inside Lacrosse HS Top 30 Seniors for this class went to the Five schools listed. I did not check the watch list, just the Top 30. 5 to UNC 4 to Maryland 2 to BC 2 to Princeton 0 to Penn Just about all of the 12 have done very well. I think 5 All-Americans. The Tewarraton Award Winner. I'm sure some All-Conference. BC - 8 of the 9 players start just about every game. one player started many games. All are playing a ton. NC - 4 of the 8 are regular starters when healthy. 2 play in most games.1 off roster injury. 1 (goalie) played 60% of the time. MD - 7 of the 9 are regular starters. One plays in every game. One is a reserve. Pton - 5 of the 7 would be considered starters. 1 doesn't seem to start but gets time in every game and plays a lot. 1 player was out last season due to injury. Penn - 2 of the 6 are regular starters. 1 is a reserve player. 3 are out due to injury. This is all before their Senior Season. Up until this point in their careers most seam to become starters. Many others play a significant amount and only a few do not play very much and most of the time that is due to injury. The top programs do appear to bring in between 7 and 9 recruits many of which are highly touted. These players do go on to have very good college careers and many become the top players in the game. Sorry but I had to look for myself. This is why you get the clueless posters like myself responding to this nonsense. No one posts on these boards that the so called to 30 players stop playing the sport, its just some fake news you dopes like to resond to. Then you use your facts to back up the success of these kids problem is your facts are not facts at all.Lets take the top rated recruiting class of the 2015 from UNC .Of the 8, 4 are no longer with this graduating class, 1 is no longer playing . Last season 3-4 would have been considered starters ,5 of the 8 played in every game they were available for, none were named as IWLCA all americans. So yes they are successful as a group contributing to a very good program but as has been stated if you think coming into a top program as a highly ranked Inside Lacrosse player is some guarantee of playing time, AA status etc you are sadly mistaken. I am sure your " facts " are just as suspect with all the programs but honestly who wants to waste that much time looking up this nonsense. There have been many posts on this site over the years where people insinuate that the players who go to the top programs, make UA, are recognized as a "top player" by inside lacrosse etc... Will not pan out, will never see the field, will major in basket weaving , will not be on the team in four years etc.... I have never read on here a post saying that being recognized as a top player in HS will guarantee a player anything let alone guarantee being named college AA. I have read several posts rebutting the posts saying the top HS players will not do well in college. You seem bent on moving the goal post with your arguments. It looks like a few posters have layed out some facts in order to dispel some myths that have been put on this site. I have also noticed that since some light has been shed on reality certain posters want to move the goal post. Example : it is no longer an accomplishment or a major contribution to start and or play in every game for a top program. To some (maybe to you) anything less than First Team All American means the top HS player did not pan out.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
It is now official, the first boy and the first girl to have committed from the class of 2020 "both as 8th graders" have changed their commitment. The boy from Penn State to Duke and the girl from Syracuse to North Carolina. On the surface it looks like the early committing worked out for both of these players.
My question is: Will this cause a domino effect?
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
It is now official, the first boy and the first girl to have committed from the class of 2020 "both as 8th graders" have changed their commitment. The boy from Penn State to Duke and the girl from Syracuse to North Carolina. On the surface it looks like the early committing worked out for both of these players.
My question is: Will this cause a domino effect?
Goes to show that the new junior year restrictions are a very good thing. Committing 5 years outs leaves lots of things that all need to pan out, players, programs, coaches. Too much to meet all expectations when things come together five years down the road. As far as a domino effect, probably won’t see too much of this going on. It is a very tough deal to be switching programs now as a 2020, All the top programs are done or close to done with this recruiting class. Some have ability to jockey obviously, but player options are certainly narrower with much less $$ available. This bailing out on verbals is yet another danger of early recruiting that the coaches are happy to have gone!
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Is it true Carol Rose has found a way to bring in one of the most talented players on Long Island to her High School team? That can't make a lot of people happy. Thoughts?
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Is it true Carol Rose has found a way to bring in one of the most talented players on Long Island to her High School team? That can't make a lot of people happy. Thoughts? Spit it out. Stop with the cryptic nonsense and just spill the beans. What gives?
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Is it true Carol Rose has found a way to bring in one of the most talented players on Long Island to her High School team? That can't make a lot of people happy. Thoughts? One of the most talented is questionable, how would you know the kid has not played in years . Found a way , well if you get kicked out of multiple schools you have to go somewhere .Not the first player to fake residence somewhere in order to go to a different school.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Is it true Carol Rose has found a way to bring in one of the most talented players on Long Island to her High School team? That can't make a lot of people happy. Thoughts? Spit it out. Stop with the cryptic nonsense and just spill the beans. What gives? . Most talented according to whom??CR?? She’s running out of schools.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
It is now official, the first boy and the first girl to have committed from the class of 2020 "both as 8th graders" have changed their commitment. The boy from Penn State to Duke and the girl from Syracuse to North Carolina. On the surface it looks like the early committing worked out for both of these players.
My question is: Will this cause a domino effect?
Goes to show that the new junior year restrictions are a very good thing. Committing 5 years outs leaves lots of things that all need to pan out, players, programs, coaches. Too much to meet all expectations when things come together five years down the road. As far as a domino effect, probably won’t see too much of this going on. It is a very tough deal to be switching programs now as a 2020, All the top programs are done or close to done with this recruiting class. Some have ability to jockey obviously, but player options are certainly narrower with much less $$ available. This bailing out on verbals is yet another danger of early recruiting that the coaches are happy to have gone! How does this show the jr year restrictions is a good thing. This now limits the players. If a player wants to get committed earlier who cares, so what if they de-commit or change their minds. For goodness sake the coaches have no problem changing their minds. I say good for both of these student athletes that they had the foresight to commit and then to take advantage of a better offer. Now, the colleges have more power. They get to see the players as more mature players and students. all the recruits have to do is make the grades and the ACT/SAT marks. NO simple task at these schools. Understanding the top players dont play by the same rules as others, but these schools boast some high SAT ranges. Now the real proof will be 15 years from now, to see if it sticks, or will we see (like i suspect) a cyclical process of early recruiting lasting a few years only to change back to a Jr year commit schedule for a few years. Schools always said they would pouch kids if there was an early recruiting process or not, so who cares. If you are good enough, you will always get the calls/feelers from the better schools what have you until the day you sign, if your student is smart enough to attend why wouldnt you entertain that option.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
It is now official, the first boy and the first girl to have committed from the class of 2020 "both as 8th graders" have changed their commitment. The boy from Penn State to Duke and the girl from Syracuse to North Carolina. On the surface it looks like the early committing worked out for both of these players.
My question is: Will this cause a domino effect?
Goes to show that the new junior year restrictions are a very good thing. Committing 5 years outs leaves lots of things that all need to pan out, players, programs, coaches. Too much to meet all expectations when things come together five years down the road. As far as a domino effect, probably won’t see too much of this going on. It is a very tough deal to be switching programs now as a 2020, All the top programs are done or close to done with this recruiting class. Some have ability to jockey obviously, but player options are certainly narrower with much less $$ available. This bailing out on verbals is yet another danger of early recruiting that the coaches are happy to have gone! How does this show the jr year restrictions is a good thing. This now limits the players. If a player wants to get committed earlier who cares, so what if they de-commit or change their minds. For goodness sake the coaches have no problem changing their minds. I say good for both of these student athletes that they had the foresight to commit and then to take advantage of a better offer. Now, the colleges have more power. They get to see the players as more mature players and students. all the recruits have to do is make the grades and the ACT/SAT marks. NO simple task at these schools. Understanding the top players dont play by the same rules as others, but these schools boast some high SAT ranges. Now the real proof will be 15 years from now, to see if it sticks, or will we see (like i suspect) a cyclical process of early recruiting lasting a few years only to change back to a Jr year commit schedule for a few years. Schools always said they would pouch kids if there was an early recruiting process or not, so who cares. If you are good enough, you will always get the calls/feelers from the better schools what have you until the day you sign, if your student is smart enough to attend why wouldnt you entertain that option. Because tying up money on kid's who aren't in High School was a JOKE. Plus these middle schoolers don't have a clue as to what they want to do in life and haven't even taken a HS class yet. How about in middle school we let them get the grades up and then if they are still great players in 11th grade it will work out a lot better for both coach and student.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Is it true Carol Rose has found a way to bring in one of the most talented players on Long Island to her High School team? That can't make a lot of people happy. Thoughts? I'm not sure who you are talking about but do know that CR as well as most college coaches try and rehabilitate players all the time LOLOLOLOLOLOL if it means it will help the coach and program win and ultimitly pad their pocket books
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
There has been several kids moving districts lately , seems they do not investigate actual residency very well as the few I know do not actually live in the district they attend.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
There has been several kids moving districts lately , seems they do not investigate actual residency very well as the few I know do not actually live in the district they attend. WESTHAMPTON
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
What happened at WestHampton
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Is it true Carol Rose has found a way to bring in one of the most talented players on Long Island to her High School team? That can't make a lot of people happy. Thoughts? Spit it out. Stop with the cryptic nonsense and just spill the beans. What gives? . Most talented according to whom??CR?? She’s running out of schools. Thought it was Farmingdale with Tracey
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
What happened at WestHampton Go back to page 246-247 that's where it mentions a kid using a fake address to play in WH
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Well maybe she will win this year!!! She has not been to the finals in years!!! Also will help very much that wi is not in her league they have moved to Div 2
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Well maybe she will win this year!!! She has not been to the finals in years!!! Also will help very much that wi is not in her league they have moved to Div 2 Finals of what
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
It is now official, the first boy and the first girl to have committed from the class of 2020 "both as 8th graders" have changed their commitment. The boy from Penn State to Duke and the girl from Syracuse to North Carolina. On the surface it looks like the early committing worked out for both of these players.
My question is: Will this cause a domino effect?
Goes to show that the new junior year restrictions are a very good thing. Committing 5 years outs leaves lots of things that all need to pan out, players, programs, coaches. Too much to meet all expectations when things come together five years down the road. As far as a domino effect, probably won’t see too much of this going on. It is a very tough deal to be switching programs now as a 2020, All the top programs are done or close to done with this recruiting class. Some have ability to jockey obviously, but player options are certainly narrower with much less $$ available. This bailing out on verbals is yet another danger of early recruiting that the coaches are happy to have gone! How does this show the jr year restrictions is a good thing. This now limits the players. If a player wants to get committed earlier who cares, so what if they de-commit or change their minds. For goodness sake the coaches have no problem changing their minds. I say good for both of these student athletes that they had the foresight to commit and then to take advantage of a better offer. Now, the colleges have more power. They get to see the players as more mature players and students. all the recruits have to do is make the grades and the ACT/SAT marks. NO simple task at these schools. Understanding the top players dont play by the same rules as others, but these schools boast some high SAT ranges. Now the real proof will be 15 years from now, to see if it sticks, or will we see (like i suspect) a cyclical process of early recruiting lasting a few years only to change back to a Jr year commit schedule for a few years. Schools always said they would pouch kids if there was an early recruiting process or not, so who cares. If you are good enough, you will always get the calls/feelers from the better schools what have you until the day you sign, if your student is smart enough to attend why wouldnt you entertain that option. Because tying up money on kid's who aren't in High School was a JOKE. Plus these middle schoolers don't have a clue as to what they want to do in life and haven't even taken a HS class yet. How about in middle school we let them get the grades up and then if they are still great players in 11th grade it will work out a lot better for both coach and student. Silly, the rule is / was / will always only benefits schools/coaches not athletes. How many HSers do you know that know what they want, sure more than MSers but not many.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
It is now official, the first boy and the first girl to have committed from the class of 2020 "both as 8th graders" have changed their commitment. The boy from Penn State to Duke and the girl from Syracuse to North Carolina. On the surface it looks like the early committing worked out for both of these players.
My question is: Will this cause a domino effect?
Goes to show that the new junior year restrictions are a very good thing. Committing 5 years outs leaves lots of things that all need to pan out, players, programs, coaches. Too much to meet all expectations when things come together five years down the road. As far as a domino effect, probably won’t see too much of this going on. It is a very tough deal to be switching programs now as a 2020, All the top programs are done or close to done with this recruiting class. Some have ability to jockey obviously, but player options are certainly narrower with much less $$ available. This bailing out on verbals is yet another danger of early recruiting that the coaches are happy to have gone! How does this show the jr year restrictions is a good thing. This now limits the players. If a player wants to get committed earlier who cares, so what if they de-commit or change their minds. For goodness sake the coaches have no problem changing their minds. I say good for both of these student athletes that they had the foresight to commit and then to take advantage of a better offer. Now, the colleges have more power. They get to see the players as more mature players and students. all the recruits have to do is make the grades and the ACT/SAT marks. NO simple task at these schools. Understanding the top players dont play by the same rules as others, but these schools boast some high SAT ranges. Now the real proof will be 15 years from now, to see if it sticks, or will we see (like i suspect) a cyclical process of early recruiting lasting a few years only to change back to a Jr year commit schedule for a few years. Schools always said they would pouch kids if there was an early recruiting process or not, so who cares. If you are good enough, you will always get the calls/feelers from the better schools what have you until the day you sign, if your student is smart enough to attend why wouldnt you entertain that option. Because tying up money on kid's who aren't in High School was a JOKE. Plus these middle schoolers don't have a clue as to what they want to do in life and haven't even taken a HS class yet. How about in middle school we let them get the grades up and then if they are still great players in 11th grade it will work out a lot better for both coach and student. Silly, the rule is / was / will always only benefits schools/coaches not athletes. How many HSers do you know that know what they want, sure more than MSers but not many. Not sure it benefitted coaches. Betting on 8th graders and tying up scholarship money was like buying a lottery ticket
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
"Not sure it benefitted coaches. Betting on 8th graders and tying up scholarship money was like buying a lottery ticket"
Yet the to schools were still better at identifying talent
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
"Not sure it benefitted coaches. Betting on 8th graders and tying up scholarship money was like buying a lottery ticket"
Yet the to schools were still better at identifying talent Most of the coaches can identify talent. Not all coaches can convince the talent they want to go to their school. Do you think the coaches at schools that are constantly outside the top 25 - 30 are there because they can't identify the talent? No, they are not top programs because for the most part the top talent choses to go to the top programs. The other teams have to take the players that are left over or find a compelling reason for s top prospect to choose a lesser program. Look at the programs that are Top 20 just about every year. Maryland, North Carolina, Boston College, Northwestern, Virginia, Duke, Notre Dame, Princeton, Penn, Syracuse, Penn State, Stony Brook Florida, Stanford, USC throw in Georgetown, Hopkins, Loyola and Even JMU who may not have been as consistent but has always been competitive and plays tough shedule. For the Top Prospects that is a great list of schools to choose from. The bottom line is the best players can chose the right fit academically, socially, financially, Geographically etc... The players that recieve offers from the above list will usually choose one of those schools.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
ND ,Duke, UVA and Georgetown are not elite programs anymore. Fantastic academic schools
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
ND ,Duke, UVA and Georgetown are not elite programs anymore. Fantastic academic schools Depends on your definition of elite. They are all typically in the top 20. Combined with their academic prowess that's a pretty appealing offer. You can throw Penn and Princeton in that list too. Not like they are winning championships these days.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
ND ,Duke, UVA and Georgetown are not elite programs anymore. Fantastic academic schools Then your ill informed list of elite programs must be a list of 1, Maryland with possibly a 2 UNC. Exactly which teams do you consider elite.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
ND ,Duke, UVA and Georgetown are not elite programs anymore. Fantastic academic schools Depends on your definition of elite. They are all typically in the top 20. Combined with their academic prowess that's a pretty appealing offer. You can throw Penn and Princeton in that list too. Not like they are winning championships these days. I am not the person that you are responding to but IMHO any team that has been ranked in the Top 20 at the end of the season for the past five years would be considered elite (teams must remain competitive in order to stay relavent). We all know that Winning The National Championship (especially recently) puts you in elite company but there are a handful of other elite programs. 11 Programs have finished the season in top 20 in each of the past five years. (I would bet most a bit longer than 5 yrs) Maryland UNC BC Syracuse Stony Brook Penn State Florida Princeton Penn Northwestern Virginia ND , Louisville - 4 times . JMU Loyola, Duke,Stanford , UMass and Hopkins 3 times.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
ND ,Duke, UVA and Georgetown are not elite programs anymore. Fantastic academic schools Depends on your definition of elite. They are all typically in the top 20. Combined with their academic prowess that's a pretty appealing offer. You can throw Penn and Princeton in that list too. Not like they are winning championships these days. I am not the person that you are responding to but IMHO any team that has been ranked in the Top 20 at the end of the season for the past five years would be considered elite (teams must remain competitive in order to stay relavent). We all know that Winning The National Championship (especially recently) puts you in elite company but there are a handful of other elite programs. 11 Programs have finished the season in top 20 in each of the past five years. (I would bet most a bit longer than 5 yrs) Maryland UNC BC Syracuse Stony Brook Penn State Florida Princeton Penn Northwestern Virginia ND , Louisville - 4 times . JMU Loyola, Duke,Stanford , UMass and Hopkins 3 times. I would agree with this. each and every school mentioned here I would consider an elite lacrosse school, and academically I dont think theres a bad school in the bunch. Winning a championship is hard, only one team wins every year. The elite are the schools you can almost expect to finish in the top 20-25 every year, conference champs and NCAA bid contenders. That's just my opinion. I'd be thrilled if my daughter played for and attended any of those schools.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
ND ,Duke, UVA and Georgetown are not elite programs anymore. Fantastic academic schools Depends on your definition of elite. They are all typically in the top 20. Combined with their academic prowess that's a pretty appealing offer. You can throw Penn and Princeton in that list too. Not like they are winning championships these days. I am not the person that you are responding to but IMHO any team that has been ranked in the Top 20 at the end of the season for the past five years would be considered elite (teams must remain competitive in order to stay relavent). We all know that Winning The National Championship (especially recently) puts you in elite company but there are a handful of other elite programs. 11 Programs have finished the season in top 20 in each of the past five years. (I would bet most a bit longer than 5 yrs) Maryland UNC BC Syracuse Stony Brook Penn State Florida Princeton Penn Northwestern Virginia ND , Louisville - 4 times . JMU Loyola, Duke,Stanford , UMass and Hopkins 3 times. That is an absolute burn of the original I’ll informed poster
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
ND ,Duke, UVA and Georgetown are not elite programs anymore. Fantastic academic schools Depends on your definition of elite. They are all typically in the top 20. Combined with their academic prowess that's a pretty appealing offer. You can throw Penn and Princeton in that list too. Not like they are winning championships these days. I am not the person that you are responding to but IMHO any team that has been ranked in the Top 20 at the end of the season for the past five years would be considered elite (teams must remain competitive in order to stay relavent). We all know that Winning The National Championship (especially recently) puts you in elite company but there are a handful of other elite programs. 11 Programs have finished the season in top 20 in each of the past five years. (I would bet most a bit longer than 5 yrs) Maryland UNC BC Syracuse Stony Brook Penn State Florida Princeton Penn Northwestern Virginia ND , Louisville - 4 times . JMU Loyola, Duke,Stanford , UMass and Hopkins 3 times. I would agree with this. each and every school mentioned here I would consider an elite lacrosse school, and academically I dont think theres a bad school in the bunch. Winning a championship is hard, only one team wins every year. The elite are the schools you can almost expect to finish in the top 20-25 every year, conference champs and NCAA bid contenders. That's just my opinion. I'd be thrilled if my daughter played for and attended any of those schools. I personally dont think that MD, Florida, Syracuse, Penn State, etc. can be mentioned academically when you are comparing them to Penn, Princeton and some others. They are ok academically and have good lax programs but they are not in that category. I know kids going to MD that are just average students.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
ND ,Duke, UVA and Georgetown are not elite programs anymore. Fantastic academic schools Depends on your definition of elite. They are all typically in the top 20. Combined with their academic prowess that's a pretty appealing offer. You can throw Penn and Princeton in that list too. Not like they are winning championships these days. I am not the person that you are responding to but IMHO any team that has been ranked in the Top 20 at the end of the season for the past five years would be considered elite (teams must remain competitive in order to stay relavent). We all know that Winning The National Championship (especially recently) puts you in elite company but there are a handful of other elite programs. 11 Programs have finished the season in top 20 in each of the past five years. (I would bet most a bit longer than 5 yrs) Maryland UNC BC Syracuse Stony Brook Penn State Florida Princeton Penn Northwestern Virginia ND , Louisville - 4 times . JMU Loyola, Duke,Stanford , UMass and Hopkins 3 times. I would agree with this. each and every school mentioned here I would consider an elite lacrosse school, and academically I dont think theres a bad school in the bunch. Winning a championship is hard, only one team wins every year. The elite are the schools you can almost expect to finish in the top 20-25 every year, conference champs and NCAA bid contenders. That's just my opinion. I'd be thrilled if my daughter played for and attended any of those schools. I personally dont think that MD, Florida, Syracuse, Penn State, etc. can be mentioned academically when you are comparing them to Penn, Princeton and some others. They are ok academically and have good lax programs but they are not in that category. I know kids going to MD that are just average students. Go on each schools website and look at the acceptance rate numbers and that will give you a better indication of how competitive they are academically. Also factor in that state schools get applicants from virtually every kid in the state due to the financial component of being an in-state resident
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
ND ,Duke, UVA and Georgetown are not elite programs anymore. Fantastic academic schools Depends on your definition of elite. They are all typically in the top 20. Combined with their academic prowess that's a pretty appealing offer. You can throw Penn and Princeton in that list too. Not like they are winning championships these days. I am not the person that you are responding to but IMHO any team that has been ranked in the Top 20 at the end of the season for the past five years would be considered elite (teams must remain competitive in order to stay relavent). We all know that Winning The National Championship (especially recently) puts you in elite company but there are a handful of other elite programs. 11 Programs have finished the season in top 20 in each of the past five years. (I would bet most a bit longer than 5 yrs) Maryland UNC BC Syracuse Stony Brook Penn State Florida Princeton Penn Northwestern Virginia ND , Louisville - 4 times . JMU Loyola, Duke,Stanford , UMass and Hopkins 3 times. I would agree with this. each and every school mentioned here I would consider an elite lacrosse school, and academically I dont think theres a bad school in the bunch. Winning a championship is hard, only one team wins every year. The elite are the schools you can almost expect to finish in the top 20-25 every year, conference champs and NCAA bid contenders. That's just my opinion. I'd be thrilled if my daughter played for and attended any of those schools. I personally dont think that MD, Florida, Syracuse, Penn State, etc. can be mentioned academically when you are comparing them to Penn, Princeton and some others. They are ok academically and have good lax programs but they are not in that category. I know kids going to MD that are just average students. Go on each schools website and look at the acceptance rate numbers and that will give you a better indication of how competitive they are academically. Also factor in that state schools get applicants from virtually every kid in the state due to the financial component of being an in-state resident Acceptance rate is extremely subjective. It is a rate of acceptance of those who have applied. For instance, only kids in the top 5% of their HS class would bother even applying to Penn. the top 50% of a HS class will apply to Penn State. Huge difference in the incoming pool of applicants. You can not compare one schools acceptance rate to anothers unless the incoming pool of applicants are similar. Therefore you can not go to a schools website and look at the acceptance rate numbers to see how competitive they are, unless you are familiar with typical applicants. Standardized testing scores, incoming student class rankings etc... are a much better bench mark to see where you stand.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Girls High School Lax
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Exactly, when you have in state schools like MD, Florida, Penn State, Stony Brook , UVA, UMASS, UNC the amount of applicants are astronomical. Yes, they have a lot of students enrolled , but nearly every in state kid applies. Still great educations that I see no reason to knock because your Sally goes to Penn, Princeton, or Duke. Like I said earlier, I'd be thrilled if my daughter was able to get an education from one of those state schools while having the opportunity to have a competitive lax career. Not sure why people have to always "one up" one another here.
|
|
Like
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Moderated by A1Laxer, Abclax123, America's Game, Annoy., Anonymous 1, baldbear, Bearded_Kaos, BiggLax, BOTC_EVENTS, botc_ne, clax422, CP@BOTC, cp_botc, Gremelin, HammerOfJustice, hatimd80, JimSection1, Ladylaxer2609, lax516, Laxers412, LaxMomma, Liam Kassl, LILax15, MomOf6, Team BOTC, The Hop, TheBackOfTheCage, Thirdy@BOTC, TM@BOTC |
|
