BOTC - US Lacrosse Community Forum Forums NORTHEAST LACROSSE BOTC MAIN FORUM (LI, CT, WC) NLF Rankings VS Inside Lacrosse

Not even close .....not a s2s dad but nice try Matt . Have fun with your B team filled event . Lipstick on a pig is still a pig .

Is Matt paying rent for all that space in your head he is taking up? Granted it is clearly a small space shared with some concerning thoughts. He didnt rate your kid and doesnt rate your program. You should probably get over it. Give us one good, Good day to be an Outlaw and then get back to your B team tournaments.

Of the 2025s committed 70% of them from NLF teams.

2032 dad, thank you for posting. As we start the club process posts like this make it worth while to check this site out. Want to spend wisely and NLF seems place to spend it.

Current recruiting environment favors those programs who recruit their tails off vs the lazy ones. Sure, it's easy to follow the crowd: primarily watch NLF teams, primarily talk to NLF club directors, look at IL rankings, and call it a day. But "fools gold" is at an all time high. Many NLF players who are hyped up rarely work out (and many obviously do). At the same time, there are many great players out there at non-NLF clubs without the hype and have incredible college careers at high level college programs.

More kids are playing lacrosse at a high level than ever before - and a lot of those kids don't play for NLF clubs (and many do). But IMO, the "70% of recruits from NLF Clubs" stat (factual or not) would have me drooling more than ever if I was one of the programs who has found success in the past from taking a broader approach to recruiting.

The old needle in a haystack strategy. That is a strategy!

Drooling ? Lol....matt you're too much . Funny how your post on IG says "70% NLF and affiliates ".....so now even if a team isn't part of your NLF group but you invited them to an NLF tournament they are an " affiliate " and you include them in your statistics . You're dumber than I thought and that's pretty dense . Keep grinding matt ....too many people can see what you're up to with your watered down NLF then you now have to include " affiliates " loo

It's funny how Matt likes to spew statistics based on how own NLF rankings ...here is a fact to digest . One of the biggest showcases has an application process which akas for a coaches recommendation. It also makes a point to say ....no club team necessary......high school name and high school coach recommendation required. So not only does the NLF mean nothing anymore but some kids don't even play club and do just fine with the recruiting process if they choose to go to the next level . Stop with the nonsense.

The 70% seems pretty accurate based on some light research. For the 25 class about 70% of the teams in the top 25 are NLF affiliates. The non NLF teams in the top 25 seem to be doing just as well as the NLF teams with 8-10 D1 recruits each. The takeaway seems to be that a lot of the top teams are NLF and the top teams have the top recruits. Not surprising. What would be surprising would be to see highly successful non NLF teams WITHOUT a bunch of commitments. Clearly the non NLF clubs are doing just fine getting their kids exposure.

Alliance Lacrosse League, blahahhahhahhaha.
70% of players come from NLF invited teams. Whats interesting is, a large portion of the 30% not NLF then come from Prep or private school. Public + Non NLF is another strategy for you to look at.

Can you share some recent commitments who did not play club?

Funny.Had two already go through the process successfully. In our experience the recruit process was not easy even and agree important to try and stack the deck as much as you can in a process there is little control of. We played it safe and went the top NLF Island program, well known private school with awesome history which the club helped get them into, brand name coach who placed a lot of former successful college players with our NLF team. Got to be friendly over the years with his college coaches. What they shared is that it helps playing against the best and being tested under fire against the best. Uniformally coaches know that is NLF. Remember these schools also have a long lacrosse schedule so it is hard to see the kids outside of summer. Colleges dont have resources and cant come to a lot of high school games.So our theory was make it count in the summer. One of ours got seen at the first NLF one and another at the bigger late NLF summer one. Both club and high school coach got our kids seen for the summer tournaments and the coaches were at those tournaments.What I mean by seen is they would reach out before the summer and try to get interest in each kid before the summer season and try to get our kids on the rights schools lists to be seen that summer. Other tournaments they told us they attended were crabs one in baltimore, nlf img one, and a few summer showcases NLF helps with. Had friends who went the less traditional routes and they had a much harder time and ended up spending a lot more money. All the kids were good players so looking back and for youngest following the same route. The NLF club coach really helped us know who was interested in each kid and narrow it down. We did not do much prospect days with money and travel needed.One of ours was on the NLF rankiungs which really helped. He was a great athlete so that is that. But if we hadnt done NLF I wonder if there would have been such substantial interest the whole way. Thinking no as a friends kid who was athletic and big got very few looks and friends story was disappointment sadly. For the less athletic one but had great skills, his process was different. Club coach and high school coach narrowed his recommendations to programs looking for his skills. That really helped and got a lot more interest and success. He went to a solid college program that was really good academically so that really paid off. After the process was over both got named to IL which was fun but that did not help the process. Showcase thing we spent a lot of money and still not sure it paid off. My advice is go to a coach and NLF team that has put loads of kids into college. Getting $ for colleges is a whole other game and we didnt try to go down that road but will be working to 90 to pay the bills. Hope this was helpful.

Thanks for this post.Occasionally find that kernel of experienced knowledge that really helps. Got to think there is a silent majority of us out here looking for help.

In the end it depends what your goal is. If you want to play at a high level in college the NLF clubs do well. The reason they will continue to do well is as time goes and colleges continue to draw from the “NLF well”, the more they will rely on that trusted pipeline because they have developed that connection. Can you get there from a non NLF club? Absolutely but it’s because those clubs have also established a very nice pipeline (2way jumps to mind in this area)

It’s not as important if your kid doesn’t want to play at a high level because those connections don’t matter as much. Some schools are so desperate for players they don’t care about your pedigree.

But in the end NLF is successful because the produce a known product. When colleges are evaluating 2 players that are exactly the same, they are more likely to go with the known club. Do you want to buy your Mac from Apple or from Joes Apple Products on the dark web. When it comes to club, buyer beware. Do your due diligence when researching clubs. Don’t look at a clubs splashy commits by of which they may only have 1-2 but look at all of their commits and what were they over time.

Some NLF clubs are very different from each other. For ex, some NLF clubs are run like a showcase team vs others who keep a consistent roster throughout the year. Some NLF clubs monetize their NLF affiliation in a major way (which leads to much higher costs for families), some NLF club directors are much better at helping their players get recruited vs others. So even w/in the NLF world, there are major differences amongst some of the NLF clubs. Just depends on where you live.

Bottom line..NLF or not, much of the decision making when choosing a club is 1. Who are the club directors and do they have broad relationships amongst all the D1 schools (this usually comes packaged with directors who have played and/or coached at the highest level), 2. the quality of play and the club teams ability to compete with anyone (no one cares who wins summer games), and 3. the club's history of placing kids at the right college program. The most misleading aspect can be the later given some clubs have no conscience on claiming rights for getting kids recruited (played in one game or one tournament with that club - yet he makes their commitment list).

The incentive of getting kids recruited is shared by all clubs - this is what they are selling. So they need to deliver. Otherwise they don't have a sustainable business. But like any business, the current state today will not be the current state in a few years and the structure of recruiting will be different. New big time clubs and events will emerge as competition is getting more fierce than ever (big changes already percolating). So the younger families will need to stay in tune to the ever changing landscape (as we know they will).

Matt chandick is nothing more than a " social media darling "...his rankings and ig posts mean nothing ..he's the Kardashians of youth lacrosse

Show us on the doll where he hurt you, clown.

i will tell you what is wrong with nlf rankings at least this year , Chandick put kids on the list that are not playing for NLF teams. the kid from BBL stands out. now I ask you , if you can get ranked by the NLF and still not play on an NLF team, doesn't that send a bad message?

Seek help!

let me spin it this way , If you joined a country club, paid 50k in initiation, and then they let in the public, what would be the point of you paying the initiation?

Does everyone realize that only the kids and parents care about these rankings anyway? Coaches sure don't.

I think your wrong, I do think coaches make their own determinations, but when a college recruiting class has 5 - 5 stars, 4 -4 stars and 3 - 3 stars, that is a benchmark on the recruiting class, I have seen kids get moved from 3 to 4 stars and then bang suddenly they are going to Hopkins the next day . let me at least say this, its not the bible, but i think having 4 stars or higher is helpful . I am in no way implying that its anywhere near perfect or not completely corrupt

If kids "bang suddenly" are going to top schools, it's because those top schools already had them high on their own lists.

I'm not wrong. These coaches trust themselves way more than they trust any third party.

With a simple multi-factored regression analysis, with years of data from open sources, it is clear the NLF Ranking is the most successful analysis on the market. Data and resulting correlation suggest almost a one for one match on results. Mr. Chandik seems to be using a factor analysis for his work. It would be helpful if he would publish his source code. Of course, there are other candidates taken not on the NLF list for early recruiting. However the NLF list mathematically is the most accurate according to the data. However, there could be internal data from various universities that is not openly presented that has higher success results. IL lacrosse is more of a reported after the fact issue. Much like a newspaper. Seems to use produced results and a qualitative aspect. That analysis has use like a newspaper has use and is a central data repository. But the IL data here is inconsistent due to inconsistent inputs and authors of the data. For NLF is appears the work is organically collected. Please chime in if there are flaws in this analysis or changes that need to be made to the assumptions herein.

But when the AD walks in at the end of the season and says you were 4-10 This year. The college coach can say. “ we had a banner recruiting class 40’stars etc etc etc. what more can I do. it’s like job security.

Also point of the comment above was this. These schools are getting these kids from 3-4 stars prior to the commitment.


“Hey Ty Xander give this kid 4 stars instead of 3”.

The rankings problem it sways to the kids that play the most tournaments and showcases because seen the most. Every kid ranked high did a lot of showcases.

Math is not my area so if I am not understanding what you wrote right please tell were wrong. Your post and the other two since, are saying NLF rank is used to recruit the players? You are saying that as the math says NLF ranks get recruited and after the ranking is out? IL gives the stars after the recruiting done, that about right? And interested to hear parents takes on this if already done if you can.

I'm not saying that there isn't any merit in the NLF rankings. I'm saying that college coaches don't care nearly as much as NLF-aligned parents do.

He’s trying to come off smart using ChatGPT to write him something. Both rankings are based on eyes and ears. What do the evaluators see and how is it backed up by the coaches they speak to. My son was ranked in both and i know for a fact several evaluators watched him play, talked to his club coach and other coaches about him. I can also tell you I asked two college coaches that recruited my son if the rankings mattered. They cited them as another source of information but not a bible. They check them, are aware but follow up on their own. IL seems to align with coaches view as pretty much all their 5 and 4 and most stars are committed. One of the coaches i discussed this with also said Chandick rankings were too early to see if they are any good because they are relatively new.

Depends on which college coach you ask. Some coaches are fine with sharing information with the 2 evaluators at IL, but other coaches have no interest in sharing their evaluations and opinions on recruits with IL. My son is a senior in college. He was ranked a 3 star and has had a successful career thus far. Several 4 and 5 stars on his team don't play. It was a heavily touted class measure by the star ratings - but it meant nothing with regards to the projection of the team. Surprised to see nothing has changed with the HS player ranking system in lacrosse. Seeing how many good players are out there and the lack of credibility the current ranking systems pose, it's easy to imagine someone stepping in and creating an unbiased accurate ranking system.

IL isnt worth $ imo. Evals are all biased and have conflicts like owning a club. Why NLF and Chandik ate their lunch gooble gooble.

Yes, very biased rankings based on different factors. NLF tied in with IL and the showcases so unless you do both or at least one hard to get the stars.

where is TY Xanders headed ?

Curious to see how quickly NLF stops ranking players/clubs that are now apart of ALL. NLF only ranks their own and IL gives a participation ribbon (i.e. 3 star) to every player. Hopefully Ty ranks players outside his backyard in his new gig.

Agreed .... absolutely absurd that chandick who is paid by dynamic who owns team 91 and runs the NLF (common knowledge by now ) cools have a hand in any player rankings . Biased isn't even the word to be used .... outrageous is more like it .

It is pretty easy to see its one guy on here posting.Nobody fooled by your antics.

No antics ....everyone can connect the dots . You're not fooling anyone Matty boy . And dynamic doesn't fool anyone either . It's all on the websites for anyone to see how you're all paid by dynamic and team 91 runs everywhere including NLF

If you pay for showcases you will get ranked higher it is that simple, but college coaches do seem to follow the rankings and stars.

No they don't. At least not most of them. They trust their own eyes. That's why it can be worth investing in at least a few of the bigger showcases.

NLF has become a biased joke . What do you get when you allow all teams to compete ....go look at the NAL this weekend ...it has become the biggest tournament of them all both in the spring and fall. And why is that ? Because it allows any team to enter as it should be . No blocking teams etc....