US Lacrosse Community Forum Forums NORTHEAST LACROSSE BOTC MAIN FORUM (LI, CT, WC) Girls High School Lax

Once again this is a swipe by a bitter person trying to diminish the players who get ranked, make Under Armour, go to the top programs etc... They will go to great lengths to try and elevate their daughter all the while trying to tear down others who have received more recognition.

JMU had a great year and they have always been a good program that plays a very competitive schedule but they are not consistently in the Top 20. Maybe that will change going forward.

Nobody on any list for anything since the beginning of time has admitted it was because of politics. Nobody left off a list since the beginning of time has ever said it was because I didn't deserve it. My point is just move on.

It's a team game...

I am so proud of my child and it was well deserved and you can't take that away! Sorry. It means a lot to be ranked no matter how hard you try to diminish it that's the fact!!

I am so proud of my child and it was well deserved and you can't take that away! Sorry. It means a lot to be ranked no matter how hard you try to diminish it that's the fact!!
Rankings have nothing to do with team ...its individual achievement being recognized.

We can only move on until the next ranking, or list, or team or next big time commit comes out. Because at that time one of the haters will come on here with a bitter negative post. Happens every time .

I am more proud of my kid because I know she is ranked higher than your kid and I guarantee she got a bigger scholorship than yours . Is what it is .

Got to love the NY parents. I forgot how much fun it is to come on your forums and read your chest poundings. I sure hope your daughter isn’t a gem like yourself.

Love it...! "All are still playing" and kicking butt I will add.

Doesn't exactly jibe with the narrative that some would like us to believe.

Just curious , at what point do the haters stop with their BS?

Could not find that list for the 2015 class but did find the 2015 class top 30 incoming freshmen .Being equally familiar I would say many have not come even close to living up to expectations while several have exceeded expectations. Some have now been passed over by younger players and several have been set back by injuries.

Here we go again... more of the same BS. No facts just a bunch of S#!% with nothing to back it up.

If you could not find The Young Gun Senior Girls list it is because your did not look.

There is no Inside Lacrosse Top 30 Incoming Freshmen list for 2015. The Freshmen list was Top 50 that year with an additional 30 players on the Watch List.

Here are Some Facts:

Of the 30 Young Gun Seniors (from the HS class of 15') 19 were also listed in the Top 30 as Incoming Freshmen.

10 of the 11 players that dropped out of the Top 30 as freshmen were still listed on the freshmen list just not in the Top 30. One player was no longer listed.

11 players jumped into the Top 30. Eight of those 11 players start and or play every game for their teams and would be considered major contributors with some receiving post season honors.

Here we go again.... The original 30 Young Gun Seniors plus the 11 players who moved into the Top 30 as Incoming Freshmen.

6 to UNC
6 to Maryland
5 to Syracuse
4 to Notre Dame
2 to Boston College
2 to Florida
2 to Princeton
2 to Northwestern
2 to Duke
2 to Georgetown
1 to Stanford
1 to Hopkins
1 to USC
1 to Loyola
1 to Penn
1 to UVA
1 to PSU
1 to Liberty (transferred to another school) Also Was not on the incoming freshmen list.

That list above gives you 40 of the most highly regarded players coming out of HS into their freshmen year (41 including the player who went to Liberty and then transferred and was not listed on the Incoming Freshmen List).

37 of the 40 were also 2015 Under Armour All-Americans.

12 made the US U19 National Team.

At least 35 of the 40 Are major contributors to their teams and are obviously still playing.

Maybe a few have stopped playing which is a far cry from the nonsense spewed on this site.

They do not stop playing and they do not disappear. They go on to play and excel ant the best schools and programs.

Those are the facts.

Here is another fact... Haters gonna hate... Players gonna play.

Because you seem like such a hammerhead I will respond. You want to state facts but you use 35 of 40 are major contributors , like that's a fact. Major contributors by whose definition. You apparently think just getting into the majority of the games makes a player a major contributor, then here is an actual fact for you, those players on the list in the top 30 make up less than 1.3 % of the major contributors in women"s NCAA lacrosse. Have yet to see anyone say the top players do not continue to play for the most part ,what they do say is many girls find other interests and stop playing to pursue those interests but you have to make everything about you and your top 30 kid. The fact that over 30% of the so called top 30 rising seniors dropped out of the top 30 prior to ever playing a college game should tell you these lists are just nonsense. Both my girls have been on those lists and honestly their college coaches never cared , here is another fact for you , you will always look like a lost when trying to justify your kid being in the top 30 simply put because you must be so desperate to [ChillLaxin] its true .

Not the person that you are responding to but will chime in. I have read on this site many times over the years that the players on the Inside Lacrosse lists, Under Armour , the ones who get recruited by the top programs etc... It's all political ,they Will Not do well in college, will never see the field, will major in basket weaving, will disappear , will quit playing and a lot of othe negative things all trying to diminish the top players.

I would say any player starting in every game is a major contributor to their team . Especially since the players in question are competing for the top programs in the country.

You sound very bitter. For years I have read the bitter comments . Now someone points out that the majority of the top players in HS ( as defined by top college coaches, Under Armour, Inside Lacrosse etc..) do actually go on to do well in college and you go on the attack. Why?

Go back and check, every time accolades come out or "All Star" Teams are selected some bitter a€£ h@/% comes on and starts attacking the players. Never have I seen someone come on and tout . The argument is always started by the jealous parent.

you have WAY TOO MUCH time on your hands

You are the exact reason that I must seem bitter because dealing with dense people is annoying. First whether you believe it or not my two kids were essentially on every list prior o entering college so I am not bitter.
Please go back and copy for us the posters saying these top thirty type kids will disappear in college and quit playing , you can’t because it just does not happen .
As far as majors , the kid that is a major contributor on the top teams that has a difficult major is the exception not the rule .
Lastly your point about what you consider a major contributor is comical and shows you are ignorant of college lacrosse.If we use your definition I would say probably about 6 kids from the top 30 list wold be considered major contributors .
If you think politics have nothing to do with these lists you are just blind.

Will chime in too. Yes you do see pretty much the same selection of girls to all the Inside Lacrosse lists, Under Armour All American select teams, US Lacrosse national teams. And yes these girls(and boys) are the who’s who of lacrosse in high school and go on to become The who’s Who of lacrosse in college. You think that all the many,many different selection committees and all the college coaches who will identify players as worthy over and over, are all wrong? Sorry your kid got overlooked, but putting down other deserving players makes you look very bitter and childish.

There are countless posts on this site that try to diminish players, teams, coaches, lists, positions,schools, divisions, majors, parents etc...

I feel for you, it must me very difficult going through life as you. Hope that you have not passed your angry, bitter attitude on to your two Top 30 children. Try and smile today and wish someone well.

Will chime in too. Yes you do see pretty much the same selection of girls to all the Inside Lacrosse lists, Under Armour All American select teams, US Lacrosse national teams. And yes these girls(and boys) are the who’s who of lacrosse in high school and go on to become The who’s Who of lacrosse in college. You think that all the many,many different selection committees and all the college coaches who will identify players as worthy over and over, are all wrong? Sorry your kid got overlooked, but putting down other deserving players makes you look very bitter and childish.

Again you just make nonsense up. There are many who make the Inside Lacrosse list who do not make the top US Lacrosse national teams, or UA teams. Explain exactly how none of the NCAA D1 first team AA players made the U19 in the past. How is it that 11 of the 30 players dropped off the top 30 list from one year to the next if its essentially the same selection of girls. Do you really think NW has done the best job at identifying talent the last several years , if you look at the u19 roster you would have to say yes , if you look at their results you would have to say no, I wonder if politics had anything to do with that.

Does anyone think its odd that not one girl from the 2018 YJ A team ( arguably the best team in that class) made the team. If I am not mistaken only 1 girl from the 2018 M & D top team made the team, but all those NW and Mass elite girls made it, yeah there is no politics involved

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 .

My neighbors daughter graduated college in May. She just started a job at Microsoft starting at $125k + stock options, and moving expenses She was an average high school athlete and didn't play in college. Guess what.... she wins ladies and gentlemen. Focus on what's important people you're kid will thank you later.

For those going through the recruiting process below is a post I found from a couple of years ago that could be helpful:

"What are the grades that a kid actually needs to get into certain schools?"


- It all depends on where the coach has the player ranked on their recruiting list. The #1 recruit on the list will not have the same requirements as the # 8.

The Ivy's work off of an "academic index" there are minimum requirements for each individual. However, the average for the recruiting class is significantly higher than the minimum therefore if a priority recruit is close to the minimum the coach will take a less qualified player if they have better grades (in order to pull the class average up).

Other Highly Competitive Schools such as Duke, Georgetown, BC, ND etc... have what are known as "Slots". The coach has the ability to get a certain number of players into the school. In general, those students must have very good grades but the requirements are less than a regular student would need to get into the school. For a recruited athlete the coach would like to see 90+ avg and a minimum of 1200 on the SAT and 27 ACT. Anything less would be cause for concern. Again, the coach will have more flexibility with their top recruits.

From what I have been told, Northwestern does not have a cap on admission slots but they follow similar guideline as to who they choose to get into the school.

Remember, the coaches want the kids to be successful both on the field and in the classroom. Coaches will only take so many chances with players who do not demonstrate that they have the ability to succeed in the classroom.

As far as scholarship dollars go, don't listen to anyone. Each individual case is different. The Top recruits at fully funded schools are offered significant $$. The #1 recruit might get 75% or more, the #5 might get 25-30% and the #9 or #10 might be offered an admission slot and no athletic scholarship.
Each case is different.

If finances and cost are your biggest concern explore all options. If your daughter is a good student and a good lacrosse player you should be able to find a school that will be able to make it work financially.

If your daughter is a great student and a great lacrosse player she can write her own ticked to any school she wants. if your daughter is great student and an ok lacrosse player she can fide a school that will give her a lot of academic $$. If your daughter is a great lacrosse player and an average student she will be just fine as well, some really good schools will give plenty of athletic $$.

Ivy's do not offer athletic scholarships. (they have very generous need based aid).

Schools like Northwestens, Georgetown, Hopkins, ND, BC also offer generous need based aid packages. (they also offer athletic scholarships)

To the best of my knowledge you can not combine Athletic $$ and Need Based Aid. You can however combine Academic $$ and Athletic $$.

If your daughter is being recruited and offered a spot at North Carolina, Maryland, Penn State and Syracuse but not being offered a lot of $$ you can drop down a notch and be offered a lot more $$. It works the same way on the Academic side. If your daughter has the grades to be recruited and offered a spot and an Ivy you can drop down a bit academically and pick up significant academic $$.

DII and DIII have different rules than DI.

[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)

No. Not odd at all.

How is it that JMU was able to win a National Championship with only one returning All American? None of the players who played in the championship game were All Americans in 2016 or 2015 either, how is that possible? Does anyone find that odd?

Good for her.

What is your point exactly? Average athletes in HS who do not play a sport in College do better than great HS athletes who do go on to play in college?

How about this, worry about your own daughter and what is important to her.

It is possible to be a good HS athlete, compete in college, get a great job and lead a successful , happy life.

What the what? Seriously are you mental ,either you are clueless or no one knows what you are saying .

I get it. A team can be greater than the sum of its parts. Just because the team is "arguably the best team in that class" doesn't mean that all of the players are the best in that class.

Curious about " buyers remorse" as none of the kids affected by the rule change are in college yet.

The early recruiting started a many years ago, I believe the poster is referring to some that are now in college and are not the standouts they may have been when recruited back in 8th grade. And there still can be remorse as these coaches come watch current early commits that still play summer and school ball. Many of the current 10-12 graders have been committed for 1-4 years now. Not all finish their high school careers strong much less enter freshman D1 in the pecking order they were recruited in. Coaches are very happy the early recruiting crap shoot is over.

I do not think the UNC , MD , BC coaches are happy .

"Coaches are very happy the early recruiting crap shoot is over. "

Really?

Really.

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?

Great job. And to tie it back and come full circle, these top 3-4 recruits are typically the same players that make the select teams, the same players that make the select lists and the same players that receive the awards.

Couple of things that show how foolish you are .First you claim to state facts but your top 3 or 4 recruits do pan out is not based in fact it’s your opinion. Second your numbers are based on 4 age classes being represented when in actuality at many of these schools it is 5 class years as many red shirt due to various reasons so In reality you have more dropping off the team than your total numbers indicate . Fact is your numbers are just useless ,much like your opinion.

Last I heard only 11 kids at a time are actually playing... What are the other 20-25 doing? I see you only listed the 2 freshman when it fit your narrative (that's how fake news works, lies by omission is a big part of it) there are plenty of teams with 9-11 freshman on 2019 rosters and plenty of teams with less than 7 seniors. Can you guess why the freshman classes are bigger? The junior and senior classes shrink because they don't play. Bald Bear has posted here many times that roughly 50% will be on a team for all four years

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.

What "2" freshmen are you talking about?

Go check the rosters at the most competitive programs. They do not bring in 12 "recruited" freshmen. The numbers are 7 - 9 "recruited" players.

Most teams play 17 or 18 players in games. In very competitive games more like 15 players see action. Off course not every player on the team becomes a starter. I will guess that you never played a team sport at a competitive level. Not everyone quits because they are not starting.

"Bald Bear has posted here many times that roughly 50% will be on a team for all four years". BB is not talking about the "Top Players" at the Division I level. Closer to 90% of the top[ players continue to play. Some stop due to injury very few quit.