How hard is it going to be recruited if its your first time on an 'A' team ever? and were a nobody before?
If you are big, fast and hustle you will be recruited. Where you get recruited is a different story, the ACC teams are already filled. But get yourself a nice education in the Patriot League, and any one of those teams can win a title. Just see Loyola a couple of years ago.
This early recruiting crap, and the geographical spread will create parity at the next level. Just wait and see. LATE BLOOMERS will be the new trend, five years from now.
It will be great for NCAA lacrosse.
At this stage, better to go to a high end D3 than a low end D1. Don't hope to be "discovered" by a high end D1 - Unless your name is "Bubba" it won't happen and you'll be sorry you didn't respond to the better D3 programs that may have been interested. Respond to everything - the worst is when you have to crawl back to a program you were only lukewarm on because you had a fantasy of somewhere else that didn't work out. It happened to my son and he missed on some other great opportunities that he regrets passing on the first time around. Just as importantly, go see a D3 fall practice, it might open your eyes about the high quality of competition and will surprise you how good these D3 guys are. It's a phenomenal quality of lacrosse and many current D1 hopefuls that are not yet recruited may be surprised that they're not even good enough for many of the high end D3 programs. Many of the high end D3s could easily beat the middle to lower tier D1s.
Yes and no. The decommit trend is just starting to hit its stride and the result is spots and $ opening up, even at big lax schools. UNC just had 3 2016 decommits and this opened up a spot and $ for an under the radar 2017 only a couple of days ago. ND has been hit with multiple commits opting for football over the last few years. Agreed, this is defintely the exception, not the rule, but if your kid is a legit, grew to 6'4" over the summer, type of late bloomer, then spots will be made available even at the big lax schools. But if your kid is playing A for the first time only because the committed kids decided to skip club, and your kid is the last kid on the depth chart, the above advice is spot on. Better to concentrate on the best D3's then worst D1's. You aren't missing out on your shot at an NFL type contract, you need to find the best school to get your son the best paying career. You just need to be honest with yourselves about where your kid sits. Best person to talk to is your HS coach, presumably he has dealt with this a lot and should be able to tell you what level your kid is sitting at.
Why does height always need to be the primary reason for a commit? How about be a stand out player. Recent UNC commit you speak of is 5' 10" not 6'4" He was also never an under the radar player, just maybe jumped too early at the first offer, he has been a stand out for years and knew he could demand better offers than he could as a freshman.
The kid I'm talking about is a 6'4" Canadian heading into grade 12 and having to do a PG. For a school like UNC, I would say he fits the bill as under the radar. Height doesn't always need to be the primary reason, but when talking about a kid flying under the radar and getting scooped up by a big conference school late in the game, it's often because the kid came into his own physically, whether in height or weight or both. Why do you think so many people are double reclassing their kids now? Their size advantage sticks out and college coaches love it. Like it or not, it's the first thing they look for, even before skill.
Not True. Stick Skills and ability to play at high speed is what coaches are looking at. Large Defenders can be exploited by small attackers if they don't have great footwork and mobility.